(e.palazzo) history of liturgical books

7/29/2019 (E.palazzo) History of Liturgical Books

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/epalazzo-history-of-liturgical-books 1/287



E r ic P a la z z o

A HISTORY

OF LITURGICAL BOOKS

from the B eg in n in g

to the Thirteenth Century

T r a n s l a t e d b y M a d e l e i n e B e a u m o n t

A P U E B L O B O O K



This book was initially published in French under the title i e Moyi’tt Age: Dcs

origincs au XWtone $i$c!e © 1993 by BEAUCHUSN'E BDITKUR.

A Pueblo Book published by The Liturgical Press

Design by Frank Kacmarcik, Obl.S.B. Co ver illustration: manuscript, Gospel

Book dedication page, H ildcsheim, ca. 10 15 , A PI,.

© 1998 by The Order of St. Benedict, Inc., Collegeville, Minnesota. A ll rights

reserved. N'o part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any

means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping,

or any retrieval system, without the written permission o f The liturg icalPress, Collegeville, Minnesota 56321. Printed in the United States of America.

Library ot Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Palazzo, Eric.

IMoyen Age. Englishl

A history o f liturgical books from the beginning to the thirteenthcentury / Eric Palazzo ; translated by Madeleine Beaumont,

p. cm.

"A Pueblo book."

Includes bibliographical references (p. ) and indexes.

ISBN 0-8146-6167-X (alk. paper)

t Catholic Church— Liturgy— Texts— History and criticism



For Claudia



Contents

List o f Bibliographical A bb reviation s xiiiPreface by Pierre-Marie Gy, O.P. xvi i

Preface to the En glish L an gu age Kdition xix

A cknow ledgm ents xxi

The Liturgical Year: H istory and D efinition xxiii

Introduction xxv

P A R T O N E : H I S T O R I O G R A P H Y O F

T H E R E S E A R C H O N L I T U R G I C A L B O O K S 1

I. T HE SCIEN CE OF THK LIT U R G Y 3

1. Precursors (Seventeenth to Nineteenth Cen turies) 3

2. L iturgical Rene wal in the Tw entieth Cen tury 4

3. Liturgica l Stu dies after Vatican II 5

II. S T U D IE S O N L I T U R G I C A L B O O K S 7

t. H istoric R ev iew of the Research 7

2. Research on Latin Liturgical Books of the Middle

A ges in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centurie s

A Rapid R eview o f the Research on Different Books

Theoreticians and N ew Orientations of Research 15

P A R T T W O : T H E B O O K S O F T H E M A S S 19



The Calend ar 23

The Ordo Missae 24

M ass Formularies (Temporal, Sanctoral,

Com mon of Saints, Votive Masses) 24The "Ritual Ordiucs" 26

The Blessings 27

2. Ancient and Modern Nam es for the Sacramentar)' 27

References in Liturgical and Other Texts 28

3. History of the Sacramentarles o f the High M iddle A ges 35The Sacram entarles before the Sacramentarles:

A t the Dawn of Liturgical Books 36

The Liturgical Libelli 37

The Leonine Sacramentary 38

History o f the Book 39

Nature o f the Book 40Origin and Date 40

Descendants of the Book 41The Gelasian Sacramentarles 42

The Old Gelasian (after Vat. Regin. 316 ) 42


Nature o f the Book and Date o f Com position 45

Content o f the Book 45Descendants and Historical Importance o f the Book 45

The Kighth-Century Gelasian or Frankish Gelasian 46


Origin and Date o f the Archetype 47

Nature and Content of the Book 48

The Gregorian Sacramentarles 48

History SoNature and Origin of the Book 51The Gregorian o f the Hadriiwum Type 51

The Type 2 Gregorian (PnduMisc) 54

Th e Pre-Hadrianic Gregorian 54

Evolution o f the Main Types o f Sacramentarles between



II. THE BOOKS OF CH AN T 63

1. History of Liturgical Chant in the I ligh M iddle Ages 63

2. The Ch ants of the Roman M ass 65The Chan ts o f die Proper 65

The Chants o f the Ordinary 66Enrichment of the Chant at M ass 67

Liturgical and Cod icological Preliminaries 68

3. The Antiphonal o f the M ass or Grad ual 69

History 70Nature and Content of the Book 70

Origin, Date of Com position, and Kvolution 71

Historical Importance of the Antiphonal of the M ass 72

4. The Gradual O utside the Gradual (or Antiphonal of the

Mass) 73

5. The Cantatorium 74

6. The Troper 75

7. Other Forms o f Books 78

8. Illustration o f the Chant Books o f the H igh Midd le Age s 79

III. T H E BOOKS OF REA D ING S 831. History of the Liturgical Readings for the M ass 83

2. The Lists of Pericopes before the Books of Readings 86

3. The Early Forms o f the Books of Read ings 87

4. The Lists of Pericopes or Capitularies 89

5. The Book of Go spels with the Capitulare F.vangelionwi:

the Evangeiiary 91

Content of the Cap itularies and Evange liaries 94

6. The Capituhre l.ectiomun and Epistolary 97



P A R T T H R E E : T H E B O O K S O F TH K O F F IC E i n

! . HIST ORY A ND F U NCT ION OF T HE OF F ICE IN

T HE W EST 1 1 3

1 . Recalling Som e Historical Facts 1 1 3

O rigins of the Prayer o f the H ours 1 1 3

O rigins o f the Office in the West (Fourth to Sixth Cen tim es) 1 15

Th e Rom an O ffice in the M iddle A ges (Sixth lo Fifteenth

Centuries) 117

2. Rites, Spirituality, and Structure of the Office 11 9

The Rites an d Officiants 120

Structure and Spirituality of the flo u rs 12 2

Simplified Structure of the Content of the H o l u s of

the Rom an M ona stic Office (Benedictine Form ) 124

Definitions o f the Principal Elem ents o f the O ffice 125

II. CH AN T AT THE O FFICE 129

1. Th e Psalter 129

The M anuscripts 130

Decoration o f the Psalter 1 32

2. The An tiphona l of the O ffice 134

Content o f the An tiphon al 13 5The M anuscript Tradition 136

Historical Importance o f the A ntiph onal o f the Office 139

3. The Hym nal 14 1

History, Forms, and Functions of H ym ns 14 1

The H ym n Repertories 142

Th e M anu script Tradition 143

II I. PRA Y ER A T T HE O F F ICE: T HE CO LLEC T A K 14 5

N ature and Content of the Book 145

The M anuscript Tradition J47



3. The H agiographic Read ings and Their Books 156

4. The Lection ary o f the Office 158

V. TH E BO O KS OF TH E O FF IC E OF P R IM E 16 1

1. The Office in C hap ter after Prime 162

2. Th e Ch apter Book 164

3. Th e M artyrology 165

4. Th e N ecrolog y and O bituary t66

V I. G E N E S IS AN I> D E V E L O P M E N T O F T H E B R E V IA R Y

P A R T F O U R : T H E H O O KS O F

S A C R A M E N T S A N D R IT E S 173

I. THE O R D i N E S R O M A N I 175

x. History of the Ordines Romani 176

2. Nature of the Ordines Romani 17 7

3. The Ordines Romani in the M anu scripts 17 7

4. H istory and Content o f the Co llections of

Ordines Romani and Other Ordines 179

5. Th e Rom an Collection or Collection A 182

6. Th e G allicanized Collection or Collection B 183

7. Th e G allican Co llections 184

II. TH E RIT U AL S 187

1. Definition and Function o f the M ediev al Ritual 188

2. The Ritual in the Libelti: Form s and Functions 189

3. The Co m posite Rituals 19 1

4. Th e M edieva l Designations o f the Ritual 192

III THE PO N TIFIC A L THE BOOK OF TH E BISHO P 195



3- Th« Ro m ano -Gc rm anic Pontifical 201

N ature and Content of the RG P 201

Th e M anu script Tradition 203O rigin, D ate, and H istorical Circum stanccs of

the Crea tion of the RG P 204

4. The Rom an and N on-Rom an Pontificals 207

5. Illustration o f the Pontifical 209

IV. T HE CU ST O M A R IES 2 13

1. H istory o f the M edieval Cu stom aries 2 14

2. N ature and Conten t of the C ustom aries 2 1 5

y. Historical and Liturgical Interest o f the C usto m aries 2 18

V. T H E O R D IN A R IE S 221

1. H istory of the O rdinary and Attempt at Typ ology 222

2. Historical an d Liturgical Interest o f tine O rdin aries 226

V I. TH E P R O C E SSIO N A L S 229

Content and History o f the Processional 229

V II. TH E C E R E M O N IA L S 233

Conclusion 237

Selected B ibliogra ph y 241

Index of Persons 245

Index o f Places 249

Index o f Liturgical Pieces 253

index o f M anuscripts 255



List of Bibliographical Abbreviations

A ndrieu , OR = M. Andrieu. Les "Ord ines romani” du haul Moyen Age. Spicilegium sacrum lovaniense ï i , 23, 24, 28,29. Louvain, 1931-

1961.

A ndrieu , Port/j/fart/ = M. A ndrieu , Le pontifical romain <tu Moyen Age.

Vol. 1 , Le pontifical romain du X IIe siècle. Vol. 2, Le pontifical romain

de la Curie romaine au XIIe siècle. Vol. 3, Le pontifical de Guillaume

Duraud. Vol. 4, Tables alphabétiques. Stud i e Testi 86 -88 ,99 . VaticanCity , 1938-1940, 1941 .

Baroffio, "Man oscritti lilu rg ici" = " l manoscritti liturg ici." Guida a mut

descrizione uniforme dei manoscritti e al loro cettsimenfo. Ed. V. Jem olo

and M. Morelli, 145-200. Rome, 1990.

Becker, Catabgie = C. Bccker. Catalogi Biblioihecarum Anliqui. Bonn,

1885.

Bischofr, Schatzverzcicfinisse = B. Bischoff. Mitlela llerliche Schatzverze-

ichnisse. Vol. 1, Von der Zcit Karts des Grossen bis zur M itle des 13 .

jahrlninderts. Munich, »967.

Brommer, Cap. Ep. = Capitula Episcopontm. Vol 1. M GH . Ed. P Brommer.

Hannover, 1984.

C C Sl. = C orpu s C hristianorum : Séries latina. Tum hout.

Ch avasse, "Ev an gé liaire" = A . C ha vasse. "Eva n géliairc, épistolier, an-

tiphonaire et sacramentaire: Les livres romains de la messe aux

VIIe et V l i r siècles." Ecclesia Orans 6 (1989) 177-225.

C N R S = Centre National d e Recherches Scientifiques [National Cen ter



Minn., 1986-1987 |A.-G. Martimort, ed. L'Eglise en Prière. Vol. 1,

Principes de la lil tirgie. Vol. 2 , L'Eucharistie. Vol. 3, Les sacrements.

Vol. 4, La liturgie et le temps. Paris, 1983-1984].

CRME = Centre de Recherche sur le Manuscrit Enluminé [Center for

Research on Illuminated ManuscriptsJ.

Deshusses, Grégorien = J. Deshusses. I.e sacramentaire grégorien: Sea

principales fo rmes d'après ies plus anciens manuscrits. With bibliogra

ph y and historiograph y o f the research. Vol. i y \ j >sacramentaire, le

supplément d'Aniane. Vol. 2, Textes complémentaires pour lu messe.

Vol. 3 ,Textes complémentaires dmers. Spicilegium friburgense 16, 24,28. Fribourg, 1971 , 1979/19^2.

Ebner, M issale Romanutn = A . Ebner. Quellen und Forschungen zur

Geschichte und Kunstgeschichte des Missale Romanum hn Mittelaller:

Iter italicum. Freiburg, 1896.

Ekenberg, C ur canlaltir = A. Ekenberg. Cur canlatur? Die Funktionen

des liturgischen Gesanges nach den Autoren de r karolingerzeil. Stockholm, 1987.

Fiala and Irtenkauf, Liturgische Nomenklatur = V. Fiala and W. Irlenkauf.

"Versuch einer Liturgischen Nomenklatur." Z u r Kotabgiesierung

Mittelalterlicher und Neuerer Handschriften, Zeitschrift für Biblio

thekswesen un d Bibliographie, special issue (Frankfurt am Main,

1 9 6 3 ) 1 0 5 - 1 3 7 -Gamber, CLLA = K. Gamber. Calices liturgici latini antiipiiores. 2 vois.

Spicilegii friburgensis Subsidia i (Fribourg, 1963, 1964). Supple-

mentum, Ergänzungs- und Registerhand. Spicilegii friburgensis Sub-

sidia lA . Fribou rg, 1988.

Gy, "Collectaire" = P.-M. Gy. "Collectaire, rituel, processionnal."

Revue des Sciences philosophiques et Ihéologiques 44 (i960) 441-469 .rpt. in La liturgie dans l'histoire, 9 1-12 6 . Paris , 1990.

Hesbert, A M S » R.-J. Hesbert. Antiphonaie Missarum Sextuplex, accord

ing to the G rad ua l of M on/a and the An tiphona ries o f Rheinau,

Mont-Blandin, Compiègne, Corbie, and Senlis. Brussels, 1935.



Huglo, Livres de chant = M. Huglo. Les livres de chant liturgique. Ty

pologie de s sources du M oyen A g e occidental, fast:. 52. Turnhout,

1988.

Jungm ann, M S = J.- A . Jungm ann. Missarum sollemnia: Explication géné

tique de la messe romaine, 3 Vols. Théologie 19 -2 1. Paris, 1950 -195 3

[Jungm ann, J. A. The Mass o f the Roman Rite: îts Origine und Devel

opment. Trans. K A. Brunner. 2 vols. Westminster, Md., 1951-1955].

Klauser, Capitulare evangelionun - Th. Klauser. Das römische Capitulare

evangeliorum. Vol. 1, Typen. LU urgiewissenschaftliche Q uellen und

Forschungen 28. Münster, 1935.

Leroquais, Bréviaires = V. Leroquais. Les bréviaires manuscrits des biblio

thèques publiques de France. 6 vois. Taris, 1934.

I .croq uais, Livres d'Heures = V. Leroquais. Les livres d'Heures manu

scrits de. la Bibliothèque national. 3 Vols. Paris, 1927. Supplément aux

livres d'heures manuscrits de la Bibliothèque national, acquisitions récentes et donation Smith-Lesouëf. Paris 1943.

U'roquais , Pontificaux = V. Leroquais. Les pontificaux manuscrits des

bibliothèques publiques de France. 4 vols. Paris, 1937.

Leroquais, Psautiers = V. Leroquais. Les psautiers manuscrits latins des

bibliothèques publiques de France. 3 vols. Mâeon, 1940-1941.

Lcroquais, Sacramenlaires - V. Leroquais. U>s sacramentaires et les mis

sels manuscrits des bibliothèques publiques de France. 3 vols, and allas.

Paris, 1924.

Liturgica Vaticana = Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana: Liturgie und Andacht

int Mittelalter. Ed. J. M. Plotzek and U. Surmann. Issued by Ihe

archepiscopal m uséum of Co logne. Stuttgart, 1992.

LQ F * Liturgiewissenschaftliche Quellen und Forschungen. Münster.

Martimort, Lectures liturgiques = A .-G . M artimort. Les lectures litur

giques et leurs livres. Typologie des sources du M oyen A ge occi

dental, fasc. 64. Tumhout, 1992.

Martimort M arlène A G M artimort l a documentation liturgique de



Martimort, Ordines = A.-G. M artimort. Les “Ordine*," les ordinaires et

les cérémonieux. Typologie des sources du M oyen A g e occidental,

fasc. 56. Tumhout, 1991.

M GH s M onumenta Cerm aniac Historica: Studien und Texte.H anover and other places.

M GI I, Ep. = Epistolarum tomus. 8 Vols.

MGH, Sc. = Scriptorum tomus. 32 Vols.

M G H , Po. = Poetarum lœtinorum medii aevi tomus. 6 Vols.

Pfaff, Medieval Latin Liturgy = R. W. Pfaff. M edieval Latin Liturgy: A Select Bibliography. Toronto Medieval Bibliographies 9. Toronto,

1982.

PL - J.-P. Migne, ed. Patrologiae cu rsus completus. Series Latina. Paris,

1844- 1891 .

Rasmussen, Pontificaux = N. K. Rasmussen. Les Pontificaux du haut

Moyen Age: Genèse du livre liturgique de l'évêque. SpiciHgiumsacrum lovaniense. Louvain, in press.

Salmon, Office divin - P. Salmon. L'office divin au M oyen Age: Histoire

de la formation du bréviaire du IX e au X V Ie siècle. Lcx o rand i 43.

Paris, 1967.

SC = Sources chrétiennes. Paris.

Tail, Liturgie o f the Hours = R, F. Taft. The Liturgy o f the Hours in Easl and West: The Origins o f the Divine Office and Us Mean ing fo r Today.

Collegeville, Minn., 1.986.

Thiel, l.iturgische Bûcher = E. J. Thiel. "Die liturgischen Bûcher des

Mittelalters." Borsenblatl fiir den Deutsche)} Buchhandel. Frankfurter

A usgabc, vol. 23 (October 17 ,19 6 7 ) 2379-2395.

Van Dijk, Origins - S.J.P. Van Dijk and J. H. Walker. The Origins o f the

Modern Roman Liturgy: The Liturgy o f the Papal Court and the Fran

ciscan Order in the Thirteenth Century. London, i960.

Vogel, Introduction = C. Vogel. M edieval Liturgy: A n Introduction to the

Sources. Trans, and rev. W. G. Storey and N. K. Rasmussen. Wash



Preface

Kric Palazzo went from art history to (he study of medieval liturgi

cal sources, into which he now initiate» liturgisl-apprentices and me

die va l ist-a ppren tices. In a dd ition, he h as seen in m an y m ediev alists

both a stron g interest in the liturgy and the place it occ up ies in m e

dieval life, and the fear of a little-known domain and one apparently

difficult to explore. Hence the purpose of the present work.

Th is boo k is akin, even after a lapse of thirty ye ars, to Introduction

aux sources du culte chrétien du Moyen A ge by C yr ille V ogel, the last

edition of which was translated into Hnglish in 1986 by William G.

Storey and Niels K. Rasmussen. In his time, Vogel was a pioneer in

the collaboration betw een liturgists and m ed ievalists; since then, this

collaboration has grow n and o bliges us to adopt new perspectives.

There is also the fact that Vogel, ou r colleagu e in Strasbou rg, no w de ceased, had deliberately limited his study to certain liturgical books

and as a consequence left gaps that needed filling. Finally, Vogel was

interested principally in the transition between late antiquit)'' and the

H igh M iddle A ge s; this left the field op en for w ha t seem s to me to be

Palazzo's purpose: a presentation of liturgical sources centered on the

Carolingian and Ottoman periods—which are essential as regards

liturgical sources— but also com plemen ted by app rop riate attentionto the subsequ ent dev elopm ent o f me dieva l liturgy.

Since its topic is m ed ieval liturgical sources, Pala/.zo's bo ok also

takes its place next to the series "Typ ologie de s sources du M oyen

A g e occid ental," som e fascic le s o f w hic h have been published w hile

others are to be published un de r the ausp ices of the Institute o f M e



specialized studies of the series. 1 think that it offers students the

basic m anu al they need for their w ork.

To me, this book seems fundamental in several ways. First it sup

plies serious overalL information on the liturgical books, both in thecategories the auth or has person ally studied (the un derstand ing of

w hich he advances in several cases) and in those published by other

researchers.

Second , Palaz zo seem s to practice naturally the essential giv e and

take w ith the history o f civilization , of wh ich M.-D. C hen u g av e a re

m arkable exa m ple and w hich, J. Le G o ff had the kind ness to say,

characterizes my work on the liturgy in history. Palazzo does this in

two w ay s: b y sho w ing an attentive respect for the religious qu ality

prop er to the liturgy— a respect I deem essential—a nd by ack no w l

ed gin g the place of the liturg y w ithin the larger fram ew ork of history

as w ell as the interactions in wh ich the liturgical practice is invo lved .

In addition, Palazzo exhibits a q ua lity for w hich m ost liturgists (1

am on g them), en v y him, that is, his competencc in matters o f paleograp hy and codicology. A s I w rite this, I rem em ber a remark the mas

ter paleo grap her B. Bischoff mad e to me one day, "I ha ve the highest

esteem for the liturgical science althou gh I m yse lf am not a liturgist.

F. Wormald, for his part, has the tw ofold com petence ." Such a tw ofold

competence is w ha t w c need.

Finally, this book is a v ery goo d e xam ple o f the prope r attention to

the w ay liturgical books w ere used in the celebration an d pastoralpractice of the M iddle A ges, which I had the opportunity of studying

in the course of the ye ars in m y con versations w ith M. H ug lo and N .

K. Rasm ussen: one must lake into account sim ultaneo usly the m eas

ure of oral usa ge in liturgical practice,1 the com plem entarity o f boo ks

in a com m on celebration (as rediscovered in the liturgy after Vatican

II), the m odest significance o f librfii composed for a specific occasion,

and the compact bcx>ks (breviaries, for instance). Palazzo excellently

applies himself to all this.

Pierre-M arie G y, O.P.

Raster 1993



Preface to the English Language Edition

A lm ost throe years have elapsed sin ce th is book w a s published in

the original French and The Liturgical Press offered to make an Eng

lish translation, a proposal which makes me feel honored. First of all,

f w ish to exp ress m y m ost sincere thanks to this pub lishing hou se as

w ell as to the translator, M adele in e Beaum ont, fo r the w ork that has

been done.

Th is book contains the version o f 1993, without an y revisions. Indeed , at no time did the opp ortunity arise to review an y part of the

initial text, an u nd ertaking w hich w ou ld ha ve required a labor out of

proportion with the purpose of the translation. Therefore, 1 have l im

ited m ys elf to correcting the unfortuna te errors which had crept into

the text and which I had regrettably overlooked. I have also estab

lished a list, by no m eans exhau stive, o f bibliographical additions

containing those references wh ich h ave become available since 199 3and also those wh ich, though alread y ex isting at that date, had es

caped me.

Since its publication , this bo ok h as been the subject of rev iew s in

various in ternational jo urnals and in several languages; <imong the

review ers were em inent spec ialists of the liturgy an d its books. Some

o f these writers— to w hom I am d eep ly grateful— hav e gone even

dee per into the m atter and given their own personal op inions on

some question concerning the history of the liturgy or on a precise

point o f the history o f one or the other o f its books. Th e personal

character o f these rem arks, m y firm de cision not to rewrite entire

pa ssages, as w ell a s a certain form o f intellectual honesty, have led

me to refer the readers directly to the reviews themselves Thus I



35 /36 (1993/^994) 256-258; A.-G . Martimort, /.tf/lmfim*£c,dt<$/rtstiijMt? (1994) 256-258; H. B. M eyer, '/xitschrift ftir katolisehe The-

ologie 116 (1994) 372-373; R. Pfaff, Ecclesiastical History 46 (1995) 356;

j . Pierce, Worship 68/5 (1994) 478-480.Finally, in a m ore person al way, 1 wish to thank all the colleagues,

students, and friends who thoughtfully—often on the occasion o f in

formal exchanges— told me that m y book had been of help to them at

som e point in their research.

Eric PalazzoOrleans, France

M ay 20,1996



Acknowledgments

This book w as bom during m y stay in Gottingen at Ihc French Historical Mission in Ge rm any during the academic year 199 0-19 91.

Michel Parisse, then director of the M ission, had suggested that 1 take

advantage of my year in Germ any to prepare a manual of introduc

tion to the liturgical books of the Middle Ages in order to answer the

historians' grow ing dem and in this domain. The excellent working

conditions enjoyed by the mem bers of the French H istorical M ission

made it possible for me to gather and organize the needed docum entation. The sessions o f the introductory course to the liturgical

sources of the Middle Ages, for which I am responsible at the Supe

rior Institute of Liturgy, gave me the opportunity to test the chapters

of the book with the students. My connection with the liturgical sec

tion of the Institute of Research and History of Texts (part of CNRS)allow ed me to com plete the writing o f the book un der the best pos

sible conditions.In this enterprise, I received the help of many friends. Among them,

1 ha ve the pleasure of thanking—for their encouragement as w ell as

their critical reading of my text—Fr. Anselme Davril, Fr. Paul De

Clerck, my master, Fr. Pierre-Marie Gy, François Héber-Suffrin, Do

minique Iogna-Prat, Guy Lobrichon, and Michel Parisse. I am also

grateful to Mile. M onique Cadic for having agreed to publish this w ork at Beauchesne Publishing House.

Finally, nothing could h ave been done without C lau dia's attentive

reading, unflagging support, and affection day in day out.



The Liturgical Year: History and Definition

Th e liturgical yea r as w e kno w it toda y is the result of a n um ber of

suc cessive transforma tions that tor the most part took place in the

course of the first centuries of Christianity.1 Discounting the variations

and changes in details that have occurred as time w en t on, one can a f

firm that by the ye ar 600, the structure o f the liturgical y ea r ha s been

establishe d, at least in its main features. Th e pe op le o f the M idd le

A ges w ere living according to a rhythm com bin in g seasonal activitiesand the Christianization of time, in the fram ew ork o f a liturgical cycle

com posed o f large periods.1

The liturgical calendar is divided into:

—the Temporal Cycle, that is, the feasts determined by the events

o f the life o f C hrist and the ferias (ordin ary day s);

— the Sanctoral C ycle, com prising the feasts of saints p lus the

comm on of saints (of m artyrs, virgins, and so on). For diecom m on of saints, no precise attribution is foreseen.

G E N E R A L S T RU C T U R E OF T H E L IT U R G I C A L Y E A R ’

Advent

—4 w eek s before Ch ristm as, punctuated by the 4 Su n da ys of

A dvent

1. See the fundamental work o f T. Talley, The Origins of the Liturgical Ytwr (New York, 1986); R. Taft, "The I-iturgic.il Year: Studies, Prospects, Reflections," Worship (1981) 2-23.

2. On the notioa^ of liturgical year and liturgical cycle, see M. Met/.ger, "Année,ou bien cycle, liturgique?'’ /towi* des Sciences relig ieux 67 (1993) 85-96.



— December 25: Nativity o f Christ— Octave of the Nativity

—Janu ary 6: Epiphany

Ordinary Time (1)

—6 w eeks punctuated b y 6 Sun da ys after Kpiphany (the feast of

the Annunciation is on March 25)

Paschal Cycle

—Septuagésima: 70 days before Easter, marked by Septuagésima

Sunday —Sexagésima: 60 days before Easter, marked by Sexagésima

Sunday

—Quinquagesima: 50 da ys before Easter, marked by Q uinquages-

ima Sunday

tent

— Ash Wednesday, Quadragesima: 40 d ay s before Baster

Paschal Time

— Holy Week:

— Palm Sun da y (entrance of Christ into Jerusalem)

— H oly Thursday, Good Friday, H oly Saturday, Easter Sund ay

(Resurrection)—Ascension: 40 da ys after Easter

— Pentecost: 50 d ays after Easter

Ordinary Time (2)

—25 to )2 week s after Pentecost, punctuated by the Sund ays afterPentecost



Introduction

"In my opinion, this book stresses remarkably the importance forboth the historian and the liturgist of a history of the liturgy anchored

in history at large, or rather constituting a domain of this history, per

haps one o f the most secret, but also one of the most im portant." So

writes Jacques Le G off in his preface to a collection o f artic les by P.-

M. Gy.* H owever, the relationships between history and liturgy have

tor a long time been characterized by a profound misunderstanding

and even by a reciprocal ignorance on the part o f the practitioners of

Hie two disciplines. In our day, this attitude is yie ldin g to an ever

growing interdisciplinary closeness, hi order to understand this evo

lution in western Europe and especially France, one must go back to

the beginn ing o f this century.

The separation of Church and state in France in 1905 and the

dechristianization o f western society as a whole have left their unmistakable mark on academic traditions, especially among historians

and ecclesiastical circles. In the universities, the teaching of religious

history has been completely amputated of one of its essential com po

nents, the history of Christian w orship. Conversely, this disciplineflourished only in the restricted circles o f religious and clergy, often

w oefully ignorant o f the im portant stages o f the evolution of histori

cal sciences.The recent history of the Catholic Church, the Council of Vatican II in particular, has given birth to a new generation of litur-

gists, people w ho are historians and are also actively engaged in w or

ship.2 One of the foundations of Vatican II was the rediscovery of the

tradition o f the Church, and for that reason, it has given rise to innu

merable works on the history of the liturgy. Sensitized by the acute



historical sense o f the great precursors, such as Fr. M arie-D om inique

C he nu ,3 the participan ts in the Co un cil ha ve m ade, in a ve ry short

period o f time, great strides in adv an cing our k n ow ledg e in that

field. To moke this possible, the investigation o f liturgical sources hasbeen singled out. Guided by such masters of the first half of the

twentieth century a s Bishop Duchesne,4 the historians of the liturgy

have rediscovered the importance of these sources (and especially

that of the liturgical books) for the reconstruction of the ancient litur

gies which would supply the basis for today's reform. Because this

reform ha s utilized the texts desc ribing liturgical p ractice, the task

has consisted in large m easure in researching the origin of the differ

ent books used in wo rship. For ev ery kind of book, people have

striven to disco ve r the archetypc, the original state o f the texts of

missal, gradual, lectionary, and so on. Aware of being heirs to the

Roman liturgy, the liturgists have endeavored to find the origins of

the practices and texts in use in Rome between the fourth and eighth

centuries. Endowed with a new historical sensibility, the researchersat the sam e time have exam ined m ore exactly and tempered the role

Rom e playe d in the past in the com pletion and d iffusion o f a model

liturgy, and they have uncovered forgotten liturgical traditions.

Fo llowing the exam ple of the scho lars at the end the nineteenth

century,5 the Vatican II liturgists and , before them , those w orkin g b e

tween the World W ars, have w ide ly exp lored the sources o f the history

o f the liturgy, that is, the liturgical bo oks, these "fres h do cum en ts/'acco rding to Fr. Ch en u 's felicitous expression.6 Their red iscove ry has

been accompanied by a new fascination with the liturgical manu

scripts w hich h ave transmitted the sacred texts. The gigantic w or k on

liturgical manuscripts undertaken by several scholars in this century

pro duced a concrete result: the com pletion o f catalogu es.7 In certain

cases, these catalogues have fostered the formulation of a general tv-

3. From the monumental corpus «I Nt.-D. Chenu 's work. 1 shall only mentionhere a book whose history was so turbulent, Uni* 1rcoU' de théologie: U‘ Sutiichoir (Paris, 1937; 2nd etl. 1985). It is a true pleading for the renewal in the study of theology and the history of the Church.

4. See the Part 1 of this manual.



polog y of the liturgical books of the M iddle Ag es on wh ich modern

research still relies.*

A m on g historians o f I he litu rgy, som e have taken into account the

specificity o f these docum ents, espec ially from the view po int o f thecodicologic and p aleogra ph ic aspects of the m anuscripts. Other

scho lars hav e restricted Ihem selves to the stu d y o f the text (for in

stance by establishing its archetype), often facilitated by new discov

eries of m odem science, such as m icrofilm .

Th is period of great fru itfulness fo r the history of the liturgy, in

w hich w e are still liv in g today fo r the large part, has not yet led into

a real ope nin g to historical sciences and to the different m ovem entsthat have left their imprint on them since World War II. Notions as

inn ov ative for the historian as the "lon g d uratio n ,"5*social history, the

history of w orld view s and ideas, anthropo logy hav e m ade but small

inroads into the restricted circle of the specialists in the liturgy; they

hav e failed to app reciate the richness that their studies on the books

an d the practices of the Ch ristian cult co uld b ring to the historian o f

w o rld view s and the anthropolo gist.

Non etheless, it is w ell kn ow n that the in-depth stu dy of liturgical

book s ha s transform ed ou r view' of certain parts of the history o f the

M iddle Ages. For instance, this new approach has converge d w ith,

confirmed, and refined what we know about the Church's institu

tions and the ecclesiology in the M iddle A ge s.1” These book s are also

precious witnesses, in m any w ay s, o f the political an d social history o f an tiquity an d the M iddle A g e s." A p roo f of this is the interest that

historians and liturgists ha ve show n for the w ork s of E. Kantoro-

8. See in particular the work of V. Loroqunis, I j s »«¿ihhsctîîs liturgiques latins i!u haut Mouen Age à la Renaissance, Hit* opening lecture at the Ecole pratique desHautes Etudes (section of Religious Sciences) on November 30, 19 3 1, 16 pages;

Th. Ktauser, "Rqwrtorium ¡tiurgiann und Liturgischcr Spezialkatalog, Vorschliigezum Problem der liturgischen Handschriitcn," Zcntralblntt fü r BibUoth,-k ,̂iv<.e>i 53( 1936) (lex! reprinted in G&Minweltc Arbeitan 1 nr l.iturgiegcschichte, Kirclwttge- schkhie ¡nut christliclur Arrhiiviogie, lahrbuch für Antike und Christentum Hrgan-zungsband 3 (Münster, 1974] 82-93); K. Camber, CLLA.

9. See the basic article of K Braudel, "La longue (Jurée," Annales ESC (1958)125-153 (rpt. ill Etr/fa sur l'histoire (Paris, kj<kjJ 43-83).



w ic z .12 S o m e tim e s, th e h is to rian o f the M id d le A g e s n e e d s to u n d e r

s tand l iturg ica l r ites in ord er to she d l ight on the w a y a g iven sôcia)

ca te g o ry o f pe rs on s i s con s t itu te d . Fo r e xa m pl e , the ri te s o f e n t ran ce

in to k n ig hth oo d , the du bb i n g in par t icu l a r , ha v e i m p or tan t li n k s w ithl iturg ica l r i tes an d the ir texts ( such as the ordines o f coron at i on ) .1 '

F o r a fe w y e a r s , th e h i s to r y o f th e li tu r g y h a s b e n e f i t e d fr o m th e

a b u n d a n t c o n t rib u t io n s o f a n th r o p o lo g y a n d th e o p e n in g o f n e w a v

e n u e s o f f e re d b y it s m e thods . The pr i n c i p le o f the con s t ruc t ion o f

a n a n t h r o p o l o g y o f C h r is tia n rite s a n d w o r sh i p — w h i c h in a n y c a s e is

n ot n e w — g i v e s h i stor ian s o f the li turg y a w i de r v is ta on the ob je c t o f

their s tudy.*5

Las t ly , le t u s reca l l the conn ect ion s , c lose a l tho ug h d i ff icu l t to p in

po int , that ex i s t betw een l iturg ica l source s , ar t h i s tory , and arch eo l

og y . T he i con og rap hi e i n te rpre ta ti on o f a pa i n t i n g o r o f the p l an o f a

chu rch n o l on g e r in e x i s te n ce i s o f te n e n han ce d w h e n the h i s tory o f

the l i turgy plays i ts part in i t . 16

12. E. K. Kantorowicz.. iuinds regiae: A Studu in Liturgical Acclamations and Me

dieval Ruler Worship (Berkeley-Los Angeles. 1946).13. See j. Le Go ff, "L e rituel symbolique de la vassalité," Simboii e simbologia 11W-

l'idio Medioevit (Spoleto, 1976) (>79-788 (rpt. in Pour un autre Mown Age: Tem)», tra-

îmjï rf ru/fuir en Occident, ¡8 essais (Paris, 1977) 349-420: J. Hori, "Ch eva lerie etliturgie: Remis** des armes el vocabulaire 'chevaleresque' dans les sources litur

giques du IXr au XIVe siècle," Le Moyen Age 84 {1978) 245-278, 400-442.

14. The bibliography on the anthropology o f the liturgy is too abundant lo bepresented here in ils entirety; let us sim ply refer readers to the work of F. Isom-bert, Rites et efficacité symbolique (Paris, 1979), and «»specially to that of J.-Y. I lame-line, "Eléments d'anthropologie, de sociologie historique et de musicologie du

culte chrétien/' Recherches de. Sciences religieuses 78 (1990) 297-424. See also Traité

d'iinthwfwbgie du sacré, vol. 1: Les origines et le problème de T"honto rcligktsus," «d.

j, Ries (Paris, 1992).15. See for example the .study ol J.-C. Schmitt, La raison di"S gtttes dans /' Occident

m&liévat (Paris, 1990), in particular chapters 3,8, and 9.16. In the domain of architecture, see the pioneering work o f C. I lertz. Recherches

sur les rapports entre architecture et liturgie à l ' é l u e carolingienne (Paris. 1963), andthe comprehensive article of S. de Blaauw, "Architecture and Liturgy in the Late

Antique and the Middle Ages: Traditions and Trends in Modem Scholarship/' Archix1 fur Liturgieu'issenschafi 33 (1991) 1-34. In the domain of the decoration of

manuscripts and in that of monumental art, let us mention, among numerous



In an increasingly interdisciplinary context, the need for a history

and a typo logy of liturgical books is acutely felt. Th is book w as con

ceived to answ er this need. A prelim inary wo rd o f caution is neces

sary: readers will not find here a history o f the liturgy, ' 7 but rather ahistory of the liturgical books, though som e facts concerning the history

of the M ass, of the chant, and of the sacraments are mentioned. This

information is not meant of course to replace the classical books on

these questions.18

Fa r from being the first manual since the beginning of this century

to be devoted to liturgical books,'9 the present work takes its place

between the classical book o f Cyr ille Vogel3“ and the "abstracts" of the scries "Typologie des sources du M oycn A ge occiden tal" from

L ou va in /' It differs from those in its perspective and its concerns.

scnscluift 34 (1992) 102-120. On the relationship between liturgy and archeology,

see the recent studies o f J.-Ch. Picard, "C e que les textes nous apprennent sur leséquipements et le mobilier liturgique nécessaire pur le baptême dans le sud de la

i'.aule et l’Italie du Nord," Acte* du X F Congrès international d'Archéologie diréii- <71 w , Lyon. Vienne, Gre/u)ble, Gcn hv, et Aosta. n - x S Stjttemluv t 986 {Rome. 1989)2:1451-1454; V. Saxer, "L'utilisation pour la liturgie de l'espace urbain et suburbain, l'exemple de Rom e dans l'Antiquité et le haut Moyen Age," ibid., 9 17 -1 0 3 1.

17. See in particular, C P and Gottesdienst der Kirche: Handbuch der Liturgiewissen* schuft, 8 vols. (Regensburg, 1983- }. Sut» B. Neunheuser, "Handbücher derLiturgiewissenschaft, in den grossen europäischen Sprachen, 25 Jahre nach SC,

der Liturgiekonstitution des 2. Vatikanums," F a xlesin Qrans 6 {1989) 89-103. See

also the book—too little known—of l.-H. Dalmais, Initiation à (a liturgie (Paris,»958): (I.-H. Dalmais, Introduction io the Liturgy, trans. R. Cape! (Baltimore, 1961))-For an overall rev iew of the manuals of liturgy, set' B. Botte, "A propos deft

manuels de liturgie," Question? liturgiques et iwroissiales 33 (1952) 117 -12 4 . See alsothe very useful bibliography in Piatt, Mediciwl LUin Liturgy.

t8 .1 am thinking especially of Jungmatm, MS. a history of the Roman Mass.19. We shall mention P. Cabrol, /.<•>' livre* de lu liturgie latine (Paris, 1930); (P

Cabrol, The Books of the LUin Liturgy. trans. Benedictines of Stanbrook (St. Umis,

[ 1932DI; L. C. Sheppard, Ute Liturgical Books (New York, 1962); A. Hughes, Me- di<n\il Manuscripts for «Mass and Office: A Guide ¡0 Their Organization and Terminology (Toronto, 1982) (essentially focused on musicology). For additional references, see

Vogel, Introduction, t-29.20. The title of Vogel’s book in the French edition is Introduction aux sources de

l'histoire du culte chrétien au Moyen Age (Spoleto, t<)66), with a reprint prefaced bv B B (S l ) Th h b k l d i E li h d i l



especially in the study of the crucial passage from oral practice to the written document; in a special attention to I he process that form ed

each of the liturgical books; by a fresh look at what the know ledge of

codices, paleography, and iconography bring to the study of manu*scripls; and also in an interest in the medieval terminology used to

designate the different books. Fina lly and ab ove all, the leading char

acteristic o f the book is an awareness, a s far-reaching as possible, of

the historical dimension of liturgical books, their significance for the

history of the Church, the history o f wo rldview s, and social history.

Th is synthesis o f over one millennium of western liturgical sources

aim s at being at the same time an introductory m anual to their study.One section is devoted to each type of book, each type specifically

des igned for a g iven form o f celebration (Mass, Office, sacraments,

and rituals) and destined for a clearly identified liturgical agent

(pope, bishop, deacon, monastic, and so on).

This w ork focuses on the sources of the tjftin liturgy, and therefore

on a fundamental aspect o f the religious life of (he m edieval West,

between the fourth and thirteenth centuries. With the Fourth LateranCouncil (1215), a new period in the history of liturgical books begins

which will last until the Tridentine reform . There are occasional allu

sions to books of particular rites (Ambrosian, Mozarabic, Celtic), andreaders will benefit from consulting the passages which Vogel devotes

to these. A historiographic sum m ary o f the discipline o f research on

liturgical books, from the scholars of the sixteenth and seventeenth

centuries dow n to ou r day, w ill serve as an introduction.



Part One

Historiography of the Researchon Liturgical Books



I. The Science of the Liturgy

i . P R E C U R S O R S ( S E V E N T E E N T HTO N I N E T E E N T H C E N T U R IE S )

Since paleo-C hristian times, liturgists h av e occ upied a central place

among the great figures in the history of Christianity. Often they are

at the sam e time officiants w ho se active p art in the celebrations giv es

life to the liturgists' reflections on the meaning of the celebration in

tine Chu rch ; they are also theo logians w ho liv e the ir faith th rough the

liturgy in w hich they participate. Theologian-Uturgists ha ve a connection w ith m ystag og y because they explain the m ysteries o f the very

celebration and lead others to contemplate them.’ From the Carolin-

gia n p eriod to about the fifteenth century, the Uturgists of the M iddle

A ges w orked for both a better understanding o f li turgical actio ns and

the creation of liturgical books and particular feasts, often by com

posing entirely new pra yers and song s.2

In the sixteenth century, w he n the proce ss o f liturgical codification w as for the most part com ple ted, the science o f the liturgy began to

appear, and then progressively developed, particularly in the seven

teenth century. The labo rs o f seve ral sch olars from that perio d becam e

the scientific found ations o f the m od em history of the liturgy. Whereas

the medieval liturgists favored the allegorizing interpretation of the

rituals,5 the liturgists of the sixteenth an d seventeenth centu ries we re

1. Sec the reflections of P.-M. Gy, "La tâche du liturgiste (Homélie prononcéepour le vingt-cinquième anniversaire de l'Institut supérieur de Liturgie)/’ (homilv given at the twenty-fifth anniversary' of the Institut supérieur do Liturgie], Li iilnrgw dans (Paris, 1991) 321-324.

2. See the list of medieval liturgists and their works published by Vogel, Ittlm-



above all historians whose work helped their readers discover the

imp ortance of tradition in the C hu rch , the me an ing of rituals and

prayers, the origin o f the treasury o f pra yers, in a w ord , ail that con

tributes to a living kn ow led ge o f the liturg y through history'.The extent of the field covered by these pioneers of liturgical sci

ence is impressive. Several among them not only gathered an impor

tant documentation but also w rote com m entaries, som e of w hich are

still ind ispensable today.4 We m ust note that m an y am on g the writ

ings o f this period de al precisely w ith the liturgical b ooks, their h is

tory, their typo logy, and ab ov e all the stand ard edition o f the texts.

During most of the eighteenth century, this interest in the history of the liturgy, especially the study of its sources, continued to grow'.

I low ever, the political and cultura l turn taken by h istory at the end

o f the eighteenth century greatly slow ed do w n this trend. It w as not

before the m idd le o f the nineteenth century, with the birth o f the

"Liturg ical M ove m en t," that the history of the liturgy and the stud y

of its sources made a fresh start.5 This Liturgical Movement, which

view ed the li turgy as a socia l fact, granted a specia l pla ce to archeol

ogy in the widest possible sense of this word, in sum, all that more or

less conce rns historical sources in gene ral. Several o f the protagonists

and leaders of this movem ent w ere great historians o f the Chu rch,

some even were well acquainted with liturgical sources. As an ex

ample, let it suffice to cite the uncommon itinerary of Bishop L. M.

Duchesne (184 3-19 22 ), wh o for twenty-seven yea rs w as the directorof the Ecole Française de Rome, and whose scientific work strongly

contributed to the future orientations o f the liturgical science/’

2. L I T U R G I C A L R E N E W A L I N T H E T W E N T I E TH C E N T U R Y

Th e theological and liturgical ren ew al o f the first h alf of the twenti

eth century, who se fulfillment was Vatican II, had its roots in the L itur

gical M ovem ent o f the nineteenth century. In fact, the form er w as anextensive prolongation of the latter—whose first concrete result was a

better formation of clergy, monastics, and lay people. Here again his

tory played a prominent role, now shedding light on contemporary



liturgical practices and fostering new orientations in pastoral minis

try, now justifying decisions favorable to a liturgical reform.7

The d ecad es o f the twentieth cen tury p receding V atican II were the

chronological fram ew ork in wh ich som e of the inspirers of the council,and so m e of its actors, we re formed. There are man y liturgists and theo

logians—sometimes theologian-Iilurgists—who distinguished them

selve s du ring this period o f great intellectual fecundity for the Church.8

It is enough to mention the nam es of Â . Baum stark (18 72-19 48 ), who se

method of com parative an alysis of the Eastern and W estern liturgies

in the Church opened vast horizons to liturgists;9 ). A. Jtm gmann

(188 9 -197 5);" ’ and 13. Hotte (18 9 3- 19 8 0 )" to measure the am plitud eand diversity of the progress made in the course of this century.

3 . r .I T L K C lC A I . S T U m i- S A F T F R V A T IC A N II

By defining in the Constitution Sacrosançtum Conciliant on the holy

liturgy, promulgated December 4, 1963, the general principles, the

restoration, and the development of the liturgy, together with its "na

ture and im portance in the life o f the C hu rch ," the council pro vok ed arenewed enthusiasm for the historical science and the teaching of the

liturgy. In G erm an y especially, the historical science of the liturgy be

cam e the object o f adv an ced theoretical reflections aim ed at d efining

in dep th its ends, its interaction with othe r disciplines of the hum an

sciences, its theological postulate, its effect on pastoral ministry.14

7. See A. Haquin. "H istoire do In liturgie et Renouveau liturgique,” Li Maison- Dieu 181 (1990) 99*118 ; see also CP, 1:72-84.

8. For research on the bibliography and/o r career of such and such a liturgist,one should consult the helpful lists established by Rasmussen, "Some Bibliographies of Liturgists," Archivfiir Liturgieivissenachaft it (1969) ¿14-218; 15 (>973)

168-171; 20 (1978) 134-139: 25 <«983) 34—-14*9. A. Baumstark, Liturgie. comparée: Principes et méthodes pour l'étude historique des

liturgies chrétiennes, 3rd éd., rev. B. Botte {Chevetogne, 1953); {A. Baumstark, Com parative Liturgy, rev. B. Botto, ed. K L. Cross (Westminster, Mil., 1958)!. The bibliography of Baumstark is fourni in Epliïmeridcs liturgiaie (S3 (1949) 187-207.

10. Know n especially for his important work, Mfcsarum Sollenntia; see the obituary by P-M. Gy, “L'oeuvro liturgique do Joseph Andreas Jtmgmann/' Li liturgie dans l'histoire {Paris, 1990) 308-315.

11 . See especially by this author his book of memories. I f moiH.vment liturgique: Té i l t i (P i ) O hi lif d i tifi k h i



Tod ay the history o f the liturgy is gen erally adm itted am on g his

torical sciences; neverthe less, it rem ains confined w ithin restricted ec

clesiastical circles, prim arily be cause it is insufficiently taught. H ence

the necessity of a real effort on the part o f lay peo ple w ho w an t to be

initiated or even to become spe cialists in this discipline.



II. Studies on Liturgical Books

j . H IS T O R IC R E V IE W OH T H E R E S E A R C H

Se ve ral fam ou s nam es in litUrgical science hav e m arked the re

search on Ihe history of liturgical books. We must again go back to

the sixteenth, seventeen th, and eighteenth centuries to m eet those

w ho established the fo undations, and even som etim es m ore than the

foundations, of the historical investigation of liturgical books.*3

Who is the histo rian w h o has not one d a y in the course o f his or

her research encoun tered one o f the Benedictine scholars of the Con

gregation o f Saint-M aur? J. M abiilon ( 1 632- 1 70 7) and E. Martene

(16 54 -17 39 ) are in effect, the true forerunn ers, am ong other things, of

the m ode rn research on liturgical books. On the essential points, their

w orks arc still authoritative and rem ain the requisite basis for this or

that particular research. We are ind ebted to Ma biilon for the ind ispensable De liturgia galikana libri I r e s '4 and also, in collaboration

w ith M. Germ ain, the Museum itaficum sen colleclio veterum scriptorum

ex bibliothecis italicis eruti,1* in w hich several m ajor man uscripts of the

Hi git M iddle A ge s, such as the fam ou s M issal o f Bobbio, are edited

and presented. B esides the printed boo ks w e ow e to Mabiilon, w e not

infrequen tly find notes written in his ow n hand on the end p ag e o f a

m anu script, for he, like Mart&ne, spent a large pa rt o f his life con sulting the collections o f ancient m ona stic libraries.

13. A s far a s we know, to date there exists no overall historiographic study on



The major w ork of M arlen e/6 a p up il and disciple of Mabillon in

Saint-Germain-des-Prés, is De antiquis Ecclesiae ritibu$.17 Th is w ork is

the result of thorough research on cu stomaries, ordina ries, rituals, and

other liturgical books preserved in several ancient holdings. Martène,gu ided and prom pted by M abillon, elaborates on each o f the subjects

treated in these docu m ents, exp lains the rituals, and desc ribes them

exa ctly as he finds them in the sources he uses.

Bent on retrieving the m ediev al tradition of earlier mon asticism for

the benefit o f their Congreg ation o f Saint-Maur, M abillon, M artène,

and others who followed their example58 had as their principal pur

pose the writin g of the history of Benedictine monachism, particu larly through liturgical rituals and practices. To this end, they regarde d the

liturgical m anu scripts of the prestigious pa st of the ord er as p riv i

leged sources lha l m ust be thorou ghly studied, in ad dition to these

investigations—historical in character and justified by reasons exter

nal to the stud y o f the sources them selves— there w as a new aw are

ness o f the criticism o f written sou rces per se. M abillon 's rem arks on

individual m edieval m anuscripts already dem onstrate a rigorous

process o f scientific ana lysis, rare at the time. Th e sam e is true o f the

descriptions of liturgical objects an d eve n o f architectural vestiges of

the Middle Ages found in Voyrt^t’ littéraire de de.ux religieux bénédictins

de h Congrégation de Snitii-Maur, w ritten by M artène and U. Durand."*

The m otives that prom pted the research o f M abillon and M artène

cau sed them to become acqu ainted w ith the oldest docum ents o f the

16. On the life, work, and personality of Marline, see J. Daoust, Doin Martène: Un gémit tie l'érudition bénédictine. Figures monastiques {Rouen, 1947).

17. Published for the first time in Rouen in 1700-1702, the four volumes of thesecond edition {Antwerp. 1736 -1738} are more frequently used; there has been ¿1reprint (Hildesheim, 1967-1969). On the genesis ol the work and the study of the

sources Martène used, see the remarkable work of A.-G. Martimort, hi documentation liturgique de dom Edmond Martène, Studi eTesti 279 (Vatican Citv, 1978), com pleted by his "Additions et correctiojus à la documentation liturgique de domEdmond M artène," Eccfesia Orans 3 (1986) 81-105. S®** <dso B. Darragon, Répertoire de* pièces ctichohgiifues dans le "De antiquis Ecclesiae ritibus" de dom Martène. Biblio-theca "Ephemeridcs liturgicae," Subsidia 57 (Rome, 1991).

18. See the thorough article of R. McKitterick, “The Study of Frankish History



m edieval past. Ho w ever, their pu rpo se w as not to edit and classify

ancient m anu scripts, in contrast to seve ral other learned liturgists,

their contem poraries, w ho se w ork w as focused on the search for the

original, and secondarily on the elaboration oí a typology of medievalliturgical documents.20 In a certain way, as will be seen in the follow

ing section, these objectives were also those o f the scholars o f the

nineteenth and twentieth centuries.

The name of Jacques de Joign y de Pamèle { i 536 -1587)— Pamclius

being the better kno w n form — is intimately linked w ith the stud y of

leclionaries, antipho na ls, and sacram entaries.21 H e w as the first to

pub lish the G regorian Sacram entary, a task w hich A. Rocca and esp e

cially H. Menard (d. 1644) successfully continued.“

A contem porary o f M abillon, J. 'Ibm asi (d. 17 13 ) w a s one o f the p io

neers in the publication of western liturgical sources.25 He researched

the earliest m anu scripts, bul he did not neglect the present because,

aw are of the imperfections o f the liturgical books prom ulgated by P ius

V, he saw him self as a reform er. His Codices sacranienlorum nongentia amiis veimiiores (Rom e, 1680) places in the lim elight fou r m anu scripts

of prime importance for the study of sacramentaries, in particular the

Vat. Regin . 3 16 . A m ong other thin gs, w e are also in debted to Tomasi

for the pub lication of docu m ents ind ispen sable to the reconstitution

of the earliest forms of the lectionary of the Mass and the antiphonal

of the Office; here again, we find that he used manuscripts which

w ere to be the basis o f the w ork o f schola rs in the tw entieth century .24 A s regards the research on and the publicatio n of the sacram entary,

the nam e o f L. A . M uratori (d. 1750) m ust be taken into consideration.

His Liturgia roimna veins2* deals with Roman and Gallican documents.

ao. See the lisl in Vogel, hti>x>duclion, 17-20.

21 . See especially his work, Lilurgiii lutinùrum, 2 vols. (Cologne, 1571).

22. The work of Ménard, D/tv Gregorii papae Ubcr xtcraniettloritm nunc deittum corrector el locupletior editu* r* ttussali M&. S. Eligii bibUothccae Corbciensis (Paris,1642) |ms. »2051 of the l.atin collertton of the Bibliothèque nationale} was the edition of the ('ire^orian Sacramentar.' in use down to the twentieth century and theone found in PI. 78, cols. 25-263.

23. See K Sound, "Saint fiweph-Maric Tomasi," la Mai-nm-Dieu i b j (1986) 14 7-

151.



Finally, lei us mention the wo rk o f F. A . Za ccaria (d. 1795) w ho se Bib-

liothcca rituniis26 is replete w ith stim ulating reflections, pa rticularly in

the dom ain o f the typo logy o f books.

2. R E S E A R C H O N LA T IN L IT U R G IC A L B O O K S

O F T H E M ID D L E A G E S IN T H F N I N E T E E N T H

A N D T W E N T IE T H C E N I U R I E S

T he sp ecialists in liturgical books o f the late nineteenth and twen ti

eth centuries follow ed , for the most part, the paths explored by their

predecessors. The three principal do m ains w here this research w as

most vigo rou sly pu rsued are: the publication o f the m ajor texts de al

ing w ith the histo ry o f the liturgy, m ost notab ly the quest for their ea r

liest form, the h istory o f the books, and their typology. O vera ll, these

three end eav ors ha ve g reatly benefited from the contribution of disci

plines that are necessary for liturgists, such a s paleograp hy, codicol-

ogy, and even the history of illumination. Indeed, the publication of a

text and the establishm ent o f its critical app aratu s, o r else the determination o f the typ olog y of a specific liturgical book necessarily re

quires the handling of the "fresh documents"—as the sorely missed

M.-D. C hen u17 delighted in calling them— that m edieval m anuscripts

are. Th is aw arene ss of the dem an ds o f serious scientific research has

not, how ever, transform ed ev ery liturgist into a specialist o f me dieval

paleo grap hy or the ancient art of bo okbinding,38 bu t it has indubitably

aw aken ed a m ore discernin g approach to the docum ent itself. A. VVilmart ( 18 7 6 -19 4 1),29 whose catalo gue o f the m anuscripts in

the Re ginen sis of the Vatican Libr ary is a m ode l,30 rem ains an exc ep

tion; a prom inent liturgist, he is also con sidered o ne of the best paleo

grap hers of this century as w ell as a conn oisseur o f all aspects of

26. Published in Rome between 1776 and 1781, it was reprinted (New York, 1963).

27. M.-D. Chenu, lhw école tie théologie: leSaulchoir, 1st ed {Paris, 1937; 2nd ed.,1985)124.

28. The use of microfilm has favored a certain distancing o f the lilurgists, along with other specialists o f ancient texts, from the manuscripts themselves; occasionally, this distancing has been at the root of gross errors in the establishment of the history of the text, precisely because of faulty codicologieal or paleographicevaluations



m edieval m anuscripts. A large pa rt of his output (articles, books, and

catalogues) has decisively contributed to the progress of the research

on liturgical books, for either the typ olo gy or the h istory o f the texts.

V. l.eroquais ((875-19 4 6 ),*l w hose catalogues o f liturgical m anuscripts in the public libraries of France are consulted by all medieval

ists, w as a kindred sp irit o f Wilmart: neither one w a s a specialist in

one sing le liturgical book, but both k new them all. B esides, it is prob

ably no exaggeration to say that Leroquais is the undisputed master

of the typology of liturgical books. Between 1924 and 1946, fie succes

sive ly published the descriptions of sacramen tarles and m issals, bre

viaries, pontificals , psalters, and books o f H ours (this last on ly from

the m anu scripts o f the Bibiiotheque nationaie). The de scriptions con

tained in h is different catalogu es, which w e w ill ha ve occasion to

mention again, very rarely end without his making a judgment, sug

gesting an idea, or stating a new opinion on the type o f books to

w hich a given m anuscrip t belongs, as a conclusion to a paleographic ,

iconographic, and stylistic an alysis, even if ve ry brief. A lon g the samelines, it is worth m entioning that h is ope nin g lecture at the Division

of R eligiou s Sciences at the Ecole pratique d es H autes E tudes on

N ovem ber 1 3 ,1 9 3 1 , com m ands adm iration for being truly a little trea

tise* on liturgical typo logy. A ll, or almost all, the important qu estions

arc broached: definition of the liturgical books, their diversity, their

history, their role in the celebration, the ancien t terminology. Lastly, it

presen ts m ethodo logical orientations that are still valid today. Lero-qu ais joined a thorough kn ow ledg e o f constitutive elem ents of the

liturgy (orations, chants, and so on) and their history to his ceaseless

pro bin g of the "fresh do cum ent." H is personal notebooks, kept in the

Bibliothéque nationaie,33 contain treasures that make possible the

identification o f the liturgical u sages o f the boo ks o f Hours.

T his last point leads us to mention G. Beyssac (187 7- 196 5),” a litur-

gist w ho se pub lished w ork w as m inimal but w hose files of notes arean inestima bly rich mine for the historian o f liturgical texts. H avin g

spent h is life porin g o ver ancient m anu scripts an d printed b ooks, he

labored m ostly in the fields o f the history o f the con stitutive elements

3 1. See the eulogies given by F. Combalii/.ter, liphetneruies U lur gh w 19 (1946)



o f the liturgy. Furtherm ore, w ith his gifts as a paleogra pher, he dec i

phered d ifficult texts and reconstructed the history o f man y offices,

w ithout, for aJl that, becom in g a specia list in m anuscrip ts.

In contrast to the liturgists w ho became pa leograp hers, fe w scholarsconversant with medieval documents became liturgists. Only one

person is an exception: I,. Delisle (1826-1910). A forerunner in the

stu d y o f m ed ieval manuscripts,-54 he co m pose d an e xcellent book, on

sacramcntarics which encompasses the definition of the type of these

m anu scripts as we ll as their history, w riting, and décoration.-'5

A Rapid R eview o f the Research on D if fe w ttl Books

In the dom ain of sacram entarles, several auth ors distingu ished

them selves; som e o f them focused their w ork on the history of the

book , the search for and the establishm ent of the earliest texts; others

stud ied the m anu script sourc es, their orig in, their date, even their il

lustrat ion. The pioneering w ork o f A. Ebner ( i S ó i - ^ S ) 56 is, along

w ith D elis le 's , the true poin t o f departure fo r m odern research on

sacramentarles. Ebner had undertaken to trace the history of the

m issal on the ba sis of the ancient sacramentarles preserved in the

rich collections o f Italian libraries. Th e valid po ints of his bo ok are,

even today, the stud y of each m anu script, an attempt at a syn thesis of

the history of the book, and his ideas on the illustration o f the sacra

m éntanos and , later on, the m issals. The catalog ue o f the sacram én

tanos kept in the French libraries, the first of the series written by Leroq uais, is to be placed next to Eb ner's w ork.*7 For the establish

m ent o f the texts o f the different fam ilies o f sacram entaries as w ell as

for the history o f the sacram en tary and the attribution o f the var iou s

pieces, one should consult the wo rk of A. Sluiber ( 19 12 -19 8 1) and

even more, those o f E. Bourqu e, J. Deshusses, lo wh om w e are in

debted for the best studies on the Grego rian Sacram entary ,^ and A .

Chavasse, whose competence in the field of the reconstitution of

34. On the life and work oí Leopold Delisle, who was the director of the Department of Manuscripts at the Bibliothèque nationale, see his "Souvenirs de jeunesse," published m the beginning of his book entitled Rfdii’rdjfs sur fu MrfliVii*tic Oniric* V (Paris, 1907) i:Xl-XXVU.



liturgical boo ks h as spre ad into olh cr fie lds .59 We m ust also mention

K. G am ber (19 19 -19 8 9 ),40 w ho dev oted a largo part of his w ork to

sacramentaries. I lis Codices Lilurgici Latini Antufuiores are without

equal to this da y; they offer a n early com plete catalogue o f all the

m anuscript w itnesses o f the High M iddle A ge s through the eleventh

century, all type s of book s indiscrim inately listed, but w ith reflections

and proposals on typology.11

The bo oks of readings w ere studied princip ally by W. H. Frere

(18 63- 19 38 ),42 T. K lauser, a great historian o f the liturgy,43 and

C ha vasse. While Frere w as interested on ly in the history o f the differ

ent books of readings, Klau ser and C ha vasse have pondered the ear

liest w itnesse s in orde r lo reconstitute the lists o f pericop es used in

Rom e between the sixth an d eighth cen turies44 an d to follow their

evo lution do w n to their definitive form in the lectionaries du ring the

period from the ninth to eleventh centuries.

A s regards the books o f chant, the research w a s accom panie d by a

redisco very of G regorian Ch ant,45 by the Benedictine m onk s of Soles-m es in particular, am on g w hom are som e o f Ihe best specialists in

m edieval m usicology and w ho have been pub lishing the important

39. On thy life and career of A. Chavasse, see Rrvue des Sciences religieuses 58,Hommage à M. k» Pr Chavasse (1984) in particular pp. 3-5 ; fur his main works onthe subject of sacramentaries, see the bibliography.

40. Camber is the undisputed master of the German school o f research on liturgical bonks. The part devoted to the high Middle Ages in the catalogue of the exhibit, Liturgie im Risium Regensburg zwi den Anfängen Ms zur C.egetnixir! (Regensburg,1989), is the summation of nearly forty years of research doix* by (¡am ber on llteearliest witnesses of the liturgy from southwestern Germany. On thus catalogueand the w o rk - often the object o f controversy—o f this liturgist, see the note in P-M. Gy "Bulletin de liturgie." Keywf des Sciences religieuses et théologiques 74 (1990)1 14- 1 15 .

41. This work was published in two volumes in the Subsidia of the series Spici- legnitu Friimrgense (1963 and 196$) with one volume of supplements (1988).

42. See C. S. Philipps, W. H. I 'rere (London, 1947) particularly pp. 204-213.43. For the multifaceted work of this liturgist, see Arbeiten zur Utur-

giegeschichle. Kirchengeschichte und christlichen Archäologie, Jahrbuch liir Antike undChristentum, supp. 3 (Münster, 1974), where one finds his article on catalogues of litufgica) manuscripts, based on the works of Leroqiiais, DeJislc, and Hbner among



Paleographic musicaie since 1889.^ The m ain historian of books of

liturgical chant is M. H uglo, wh ose competence covers m any disci

plines: the reconstitution o f the m elodies, the history o f ma nu scripts

(especially under their codicologica! aspoct), musical paleography (notation), and finally the genera l history o f the liturgy.47 For his part,

R.-J. Hesbert has established, also on the basis of the earliest m anu

script sources,4* the texts o f the antip ho na ls of the M ass an d Office.

A ll th ese w ritings have becom e indispensable in strum ents for any re

search on this type o f book.

The w ork M. An drieu (188 6-19 56 )^ devoted to the ordina* and then

to the pontifical takes its place am on g the most rem arkable stud ies

on liturgical books.50 His five v o lum es on the Ordine* Romani art? up

to da te on the ma nu script sources and the textual tradition o f each

ordo. The critical edition of the Romano-Germanic Pontifical of the

tenth century by C. V ogel and R. E lze continues A nd rieu 's onlines.*'

The link between the two preceding works is found in the work of N.

K. Rasmussen (d. 1987) on the pontificals of the High Middle Ages;54it is a study o f the ge ne sis of the b ish o p's liturgical book , in other

w ords, o f the old est form s o f the pontifical before the Ottoman com

pilation in the tenth century. A s an ed itor of texts and a historian o f

the liturgy, Rasmussen has chiefly contributed to the advancement of

research concerning the typolog y o f the bish op 's book.

We ow e our kn ow ledge o f other books o f the Latin liturgy to litur-

gists like J. D ubo is (d. 19 9 1), w ho se nam e is intim ately associated

46. Originally intended to justify the return to Gregorian chant, the Pahvtgrapfiic musicaie gradually became one of the major published works o f modern musicology, in particular for its contributions to the history o f the liturgy. See J. Kroger,"l.'&lition critique de I'Antiphonnle Missarum romain par les moinesdeSolesmes,”Eludes xrtyorienites 1 (1954) 15 1- 15 7 , «inti "The Critical Edition o f the Roman Gradual by the Monks of Solesmes," ¡ounial o f the Plainsong <w<i Meilianwt Music Society

10 (1987) 1-14.47. His contribution to the Louvain scries of fascicles on typology, devoted to

the books of chant, is the authoritative reference book in this field.4#. See Hesbert, CAO and /IMS.49. On the life and career of this great scholar, see Revue ties Sciences retigicuses

31, Melanges en 1'honneur de Mgr Michel Andrieu (Strasbourg, 1957) pp. v-ix; J.-M. Fabre and A.-G- Martimort, "M onseigneur Michel Andrieu/' Atouiles de ¡ LI-



w ith research 011 the Rom an M artyrolo gy,53 as w ell as H. Barre O905--

1968) an d R. Grcg oire for their stu dies on m ed ieval hom il¡arios.54 F-‘or

the h istory o f the breviary, vve m ust mention P. Batiffol (i 8 6 i- i9 2 9 )55

and P. Salmon (1896-1982).** Other scholars will be named in the fol

low ing parts. But let us note here that all, or almost a ll, wo rke d in

different deg rees, depe nd ing on the periods and the schools they be

longed to, on m anu scripts in order to elaborate a typology, to w rite the

histo ry o f their docum ents, and to furnish a critical edition o f them.

Theoreticians and N ew Orientations o f ResearchOther scholars are important as "theoreticians" of liturgical science

and research on books. H ighly repu table historians o f the liturg y they

hav e labored un ceasingly to bring about a renewal in the method s o f

appro ach and reflection proper to the stu d y of books. Taking their

place betw een technicians and historians, A .-C . M artimort,57 P.-M.

Gy,5® Vogel (1919-1982),w and S. Van Dijk (1909-1971),60 to cite only a

few, h av e built brid ge s betw een liturgists and m edievalists— wh etherhistorians, historians o f art, or specialists in m anu scripts. Often, they

ha ve m ad e it possible for these last to ha ve an ea sier access to the

53. See the collection of articles recently published, Mnrturologci. d’Usuard ou marl i/rotoge romim (Abbeville?, 1990).

54. On Barré, see the article in Revue des Etude* ougusliniennes 15 (1969) 3-8.

555. See 1\ Cabrol, ed., Diclionnuired'Archcologie chrétietuu* el de liturgie (DACLj(Paris) vol. 9, pt. 2. cols. 1744-1749.

56. Salmon, Office divin; he is also the author of the five catalogues of the* liturgical manuscripts in the Vatican Library which replace the catalogue of 11.F.hrensberger; see the eulogy in Notitiac 10 (1982) 3H6-387.

57. See the introductions to his volum e of articles, Mm* amcordet woci: Pour Mgr/l.-G. Martimort t'i ¡ ’occasion e a s années d'enseignemenl ei des viugl «rtí de (aconstitution Sacro&mchm concilium (Paris, 1983). We ow e to this great scholar and

theologian, an active participant m the liturgical reform oí Vatican II, a recentbook on the ordines. the ordinaries, and the ceremonials, part of the series Typolo-gie des sources du Moven A ge occidental from Louvain, as well as a book on theliturgical readings and their books.

58. See the preface of Y. Congar in Rtluels: Melanges ojfert* mi P. Gy (Paris, 1990)9 - 1 1. G y has for many years been particularly interested in rituals, see Gy, "Col-lectaire '' and the section which is devoted to them in this book (Part 3 111)



m anu script sou rces of the liturgy, their history, som etime s even their

ecclesiology and theology. The rcccnt collection o f articles w ritten by

G y 6’ illustrates this prod uctive ap proac h to liturgical sources regarde d

as elemen ts o f a "to ta l" history o f the liturgy. For his part, Vogel, whom w e h ave already mentioned in the general in troduction, re

m ains to this da y the author of the sole com pen dium accessible to all

medievalists on the subject of medieval liturgical books studied in

their historical and e cd esio log ical contexts.

A fter having published the m ajor texts necessary to the sh ady of

the liturgy, restored Iheir original state, and written their history, the

liturgists ha ve turn ed to a kind o f stu d y that greatly interests histori

ans in the wider sense. Two recent articles seem to me indicative of

this new orientation; both concern liturgical books, the first, directly,

the second , m ore peripherally.

Rasm ussen approaches in a new w ay the problem o f the typolog y

o f liturgical book s and its im plications for the different form s of ce le

bration du ring the H igh M iddle A ge s.62 Taking his point of departurefrom several m edieval m anuscripts, the autho r attem pts to find a sy s

tematic approa ch to these accord ing to a sim ple principle: the content

and material aspect of a manuscript reveal what its use was. Therefore,

there are as m any forms of célébration as there are types of docum ents.

For instance, sacram entaries w ere in use in m onasteries an d p arishes

as w ell as in ep iscop al ceremon ies: in each o f these cases, the external

form an d the content of the m anu scripts are different. This approachpermits us to establish the connection between the medieval liturgi

cal book and the setting for which it was intended, and thus to deter

mine the control it had on the liturgical practices of the monk, the

pa rish priest, and the bishop. W hat is sought here is a true reconstitu

tion o f the l iving framew ork of the liturgy o f the H igh M iddle Ag es,

a difficult undertaking for which the documentation is fragmentary.6*

Van Dijk, Origin*; see the eulogy in Archivttm f'rmciscanum hxtorianii 64 (1071)

W -S 97-61. hi liturgie dan* i’hbloin'. preface by J. \ j >CUrff (Paris, 1990).62. See N. K. Rasmussen. "QW'bration épiscopale et célébration presbytérale,

un essai de typologie." Signie riii wlfo chtesa altotnedin\ile occidentale, Settimane Ji



Th an ks to the contribution o f va riou s sources (literary texts, liturgi

cal texts, archeological confirmations), V. Saxer has produced a stimu

lating stud y on the liturgical usa ges and fashions in Rom e in antiquity

and the H igh M iddle A ge s.64 Altho ug h he d oes not deal directly withliturgical book s, Sax er com bines his sourc es in such a w a y that they

shed a different light on his subject.

For a long time, liturgists stressed the importance, for the typology of

the books, o f labeling a ny m anuscript as precisely as p ossible; this ap

plies equa lly to the m edieva l and m ode rn names. With few exceptions,

this requirement received scant respect on the part of researchers.05

N ow ad ay s, w o p ay close attention to the term inology used in the

M iddle A ges to designate the books, a term inology often v ariable

and fluctuating. But a whole field is open to research in this direction.

The m edieva l library catalogues and the inventories o f church trea

suries p rove extrem ely rich, a w ealth co m pletely ignored up to now.

A prelim in ary inquiry on the term s used in m edie val catalo gues to

de signa te the liturgical HMli** ga ve us an inkling of how beneficial it w ou ld be to extend th is sort of study to all other liturgical hooks. In

order to really profit from these catalogues and inventories, one must

be attentive to the evolution of the meaning of each and every term

as w ell as to the mixing o f mean ing between the wo rd s that de sig

nate the book as an intellectual un it an d those w hich de scribe the

books in codicological terms.**7

A t the sam e tim e, the "c lassical" approaches (publication o f thebooks, elaboration of a typology) continue and seek to perfect their

methods. Increasing attention given to codicological, paleographic,

64. V. Saxer, "{.’utilisation par la Jiturgie de I'espace urbain et suburbain: L'ex*omple de Rome dans {'Antiquity el le haul M oyen Age ," tin 1 \e CongrH »1-ttrniilnntiil d ’Ar ch ivh gie chrftiennc, I.yon, Vienne, Grenoble, G en h v, el Anuta, 2 1- 2 8

seplrmbrc 1986 (Rome, 1989) 2:917-1031.65. Concerning the names given to ihc different liturgical books, Gy has

stressed lhat it was an insufficiently studied question, "Le vocabulaire liturgiquelatin du Moyen Age," I j i lexicographic itu latin tned imil et sts rapport* avee le*

recherche? acluelles $ur la civilisation du Moyen Age, Colloque international duCNRS [Centre national de recherche scientifique] (Paris. 1981) 295-301.

66 .!:. I’alaz/o, "L e role des HMli dans la pratique lituigique du haul Moyen



an d artistic da ta, characterizes a go od nu m ber of the studies (espe

cially those on the catalogues o f m anuscripts) un dertaken b y litur-

g ists, specialists in cultic boo ks. To cite bu t one e xam ple, the

ordinaries are extremely useful to the archeologist—because the plano f a given bu ilding a nd its even tual repairs and restorations are de

scribed there— and to the topog rap he r of the cities and villag es o f the

M iddle A ge s— because the nam es of the streets and various places

are sometimes mentioned in these books.68



Part Two

The Books of the Mass

S T R U C T U R E O F T H E C E L E B R A T I O N O F A M A S S

— Introit antipho n (cantor an d schola cantorum. antiphonal)

—Kyr i e

—Gloria in Excelsis (celebrant and schola caiiiorunt, sacramentarv and antiphonal)

— First oration :1 collect (celebrant, sacram entarv)

— Rea ding o f the epistle (subdeacon, epistolary o r lectionary)

—G rad ua l response and alleluia (cantor and schola cantonuu,

antiphonal and cantatorium

— Rea ding of the gosp el (deacon, evangeliary, book o f Gospels,o r lectionary)

— O ffertory antiphon (cantor, schola cantorum, antiphonal)

—Second oration: secret (secrefa or su per obtain) (celebrant,

sacramentary)

— Preface

—Sanctus (celebrant and schola canlorum, sacramentary and

antiphonal)

i. [In this book, the word "oration” refers to several sorts of prayers in the formof the Roman "collect" (front oral to ad colteclam, "prayer upon assembly"), which



— Ca no n of the M ass (celebrant, sacramen tary)

—Our Father

— A gn us Dei (Cantor and schoin cantorum, antiphonal)

—Communion antiphon (cantor and schola cantorum, antiphonal)

— Third oration: p ostcom m union (celebrant, sacram entary)



I. The Sacramentary, the Book of the Celebrant

D uring the High M iddle A ge s, the principal book for the celebra

tion of the M ass is the sacram entary.2 It con tains all the texts o f ora

tions and p ray ers n eede d by the celebrant, wh ether a p arish p riest, a

bishop, or the pope, for eve ry d ay of the liturgical year. This material

com prises an un chan ging part {the canon of the Mass) and a part that

varies from one d a y to the next (the form ula rie s o f the Tem poral and

Sanctoral Cycles, as w ell as votive Masses).

i . C O N T E N T O F T H E S A C R A M E N T A R Y

Besides the canon o f tine M ass an d orations gro up ed in form ularies

for each M ass, the sacram entaries ha ve often a calendar, an ordo inis-

sue, ordincs (rituals of baptism, funerals, penance, and so on), and

blessings, these last in general for monastic use.

The Canon o f Ihe MassThe canon o f the M ass (today called the "Eu ch aristic P ray er") is

m ade up o f all the pr ay ers wh ich the priest sa ys at each cucharistic

celebration; it goe s from the dia log ue prece ding Ihe preface to the

O ur Father.3 For its main part, the cano n had in all likelihood been

de velop ed b y ihe fourth century since St. Am brose, bishop o f Milan

(374-397 ), alread y q uotes som e p assa ge s from it.'1 From the pontifi

cate o f G reg ory the Great {590-604) on, one is on firm er groun d for

reconstructing its text. By then, it had already received various

2. For the history of the Eucharist, see Jungmann, M S; CP, 2; anti especially H. B.Meyer, F.uduitistw: CeschicMe, Theologie. Pashmil, Gottesdienst der Kirche: Hnnd-buch der l.iturgiewissenschaft 4 (Rtigeiisburg. 1989). See the critical review of this



complements, of which the most important is the Sa net us, borrow ed

from the Hast—Jerusalem, perhaps—about the first third of the fifth

century.5 The variable pray ers o f the canon are also believed to have

been written in the fifth and sixth centuries. Am on g these «ire theCommunicantes6 and the Hmtc igitur,7 In which the references to saints

differ from one manuscript to the other, as do those in the Nobis

quoque and the Libera nos. Th e study o f these references directly con

cerns that o f the sacram entary and enables researchers to determine

in certain cases the origin of the manuscript and the place where it

w as used, ft is therefore necessary to take into account the additionsand corrections made to the original text. From the Carolingian pe

riod on, the text of the canon is usually placed in the beginning of the

manuscripts, after the calendar, or else, in the missals of the second

half of the M idd le Ages, it is inserted in the body o f the book in the

vic in ity o f the feast o f Easter.

i fere fo llows the overall structure of the canon o f the Mass:

—dialogue of introduction (Per omnia secuia secuhnnn. Dominus vo- biscum) follow ed by the common preface Vere digmim and the

singing o f the Sanctus;

— pray er o f intercession (Te igitur)?

—prayer for the living (Memento);

—prayer of intercession with the saints [Communicantes, in which

the Virgin, the twelve apostles, and the twelve Roman martyrs

are alw ays mentioned);— pray er for the acceptance of the offering (Hanc igitur and Quant

oblationem);9

—story of the institution of the Eucharist (Qui pridie.w Unde et

memores);** anamnesis;

5. See P.-M. Gy, "L e Sanctuc romain et les anaphores orientales," Mélange*

liturgiques offerts au R. P. >tom Bernant Botte (Louvain, 1972} 167-174; B. D. Spinks,The Sancfus in the Eucharistie Prayer (Nft*vv York, 1991).

6. lî. ttotte, "Communicantes/’ Questions liturgiques et paroissiales 38 (1957) 119 -12 3 .7. V. t.. Kennedy, "The Prc-Orcgorian Hattc igitur." Epltemerides Uturgicae 50

(1936) 349-358, and The Saiul* of the Canon of the Mas* (Rome, 1938); J. Dubois and

l.-L. Lemaitre, Source* et méthodes de ¡ ’hagiographie médiétmle (Paris, 1993) 59-101.

8 L Kizenhôfer ' l e ignur und Ccmmunicantes ” Sacris Brudiri S (1956) 14 75



— prayer for sanctification (Supra quae/ 1 Suppiices);

— pray er for fellow ship with the saints (Memento of the dead , Nobis

quoque):

—concluding prayers (Per quern haec omnia. Pater nosier,') Libera nos).

The Calen da r14

A great number o f sacramentaries o f the High M iddle A ges have a

calendar, usually placed in the beginning of the manuscript.'5 Men

tioned in it are the universal feasts and the commemorations of the

saints de ar to a given comm unity— this being a clue to the place where

the manuscript wa s w ritten or the place for which it was destined—

com mem orations which do not necessar ily entail a M ass in the Sanc-

toral. It is important to ascertain that the calendar is part of the

original manuscript and is not an addition (verification of the codico-

logical and paleographic unity of the manuscript). Afterwards, one

must exam ine whether the calendar and the Sanctoral of the sacra-

mentary agree, for it frequently happens that they do not completely coincide. P. Jounel has righ tly draw n attention to the fact that the cal

endars inserted in sacramentaries of the High M iddle A ges are some

times only sum maries of the m arlyrologies.16 Prudence is therefore in

12. B. Bagatti, "L'origine gerosolimitana della prcghiera S»;wii quae del Canone

Romano." BeO 21 (1979) 101-108.

13. J. A. Jungmann, "D as Paler twsler im Kommunionritus/' 7 .cil$chrift fiir Kalholische theologic 58 (1934) 552-5 71.14. Concerning the visual organization and composition o f calendars (ides, cal

ends, nones), see Hughes, Mass Office, pp. 275-279, and Dubois and Lomaitre,

Sori imrt mfthodcs. p. 48. n. 5, pp. 85-S6 and 135- 16 0 . The calends alw ays fall on

the first day of the month whose name they bear (Kalendis iunii - June 1); thenones fall of the fifth day o f the month (or the seventh in March, M ay, July, andOctober). Between the calends and the nones, the days are counted backwards:

Pritiif nonas iunii = June 4; lerlio nonas ¡tout = June 3, tV tumu$ iunii = June 2. Theides fall on the thirteenth day oi the month (on the fifteenth in March, May, July,and October). Between the nones and the ides, the day s are counted backwards:

Pruiie iduf iunii - June 12, f// id. inn. = June 11 , W/f id. iun. - June 6. Between theides <md the calends, the days are also counted backwards: PrUie kalendif jitiii =

Ju ne 30, /// kal. ini. - June 29, XVIII lull, in i = June 14.15. Calen dars began to be integrated into liturgical documents as early as the



order when it comes to using the calendar to determ ine the place o f

orig in of a manuscript, even though the calendar often lends to re

constructing Ihc history o f the m an usc ript thanks especially to the

addition o f obituaries (listings o f dead persons, cither contem porary with the manuscript or of a later period).

The O r d o M i s s a e

It is in the Carolingian and particularly the Ottoman periods that

the ordo missae developed in an important way; it contains all the

prayers said b y the priest during M ass, in general before the Eucharis-lic Prayer, in order to prepare h imself to consecrate the bread and the

wine. These prayers, variable in number according to the different

m anuscripts, are set in the beginning o f the sacramentary, after the

canon , or else at the end {and som etimes as additions). Rather than

develop ing a true theology of the Eucharist,*7 these prayers d w ell on

the repentance for sins in the priest's personal prayer, so that he may

be purified before celebrating the eucharistic mystery. Besides its interest for the theology of prayer, the study o f the ordo missae often un

covers the liturgical geography proper to a specific sacramentary,

demonstrating liturgical exchanges between important monasteries,

as happened in the course o f the ninth and tenth centuries.,s

The Mass Formularies (Temporal, Sanctoral,C.ommon of Saints, Votive Masses) 19

Each M ass formulary, corresponding to one day o f the year, com

prises at least three orations (sometimes more when it is an important

feast for which peop le want to "preserve" all the pray ers related to

17. See P.-M. Gy, "L a doctrine eucharistique dan s la liturgie romaine du haul

Moyen Age," La liturgi? dan* I'hialoire (Paris, 1991) 187-204, and especially 189-190.t8. On this topic, see 13. Luykx, "D er L’rsprung dor gleichbleibenden Teile der

Hciligeft Messe," { ffurgiV imrf Mondtitim 2 9(19 61) 7 2 - 11 9 , which wnw ins thebasic article on the onto «i/asijc. Many studies on particular points have since then

completed and enriched I.tiyckx's conclusions. See especially J. O. Bragan<p, "O'Ordo Missae' di* Reichenau," Didntkalia 1 (1971) 137-162; B. Barolito anil F. Dt*l-

I’Oro, " 1/ 'Ordo missae' del vescovo Warmondo d'lvre s," S/uif/ Mt'tlitnwli 16/2



it3°), to which is added a proper preface replacing the comm on préf

ace of the canon o f the Mass. The collect, the first thing the celebrant

sa ys in the course of the ceremony, concludes the rite of entrance; after

an address to God, it announces the theme of the day.*' The secret2*(also tijJJed secrela or super oblntn) is placed at Ihe end of the procession

with the offerings. Terse in form, it asks G od to accept and sanctify

Ihe offerings just brought to the altar.2* The preface, whether proper

or common, as Ihe introduction to the canon of Ihe Mass, is the rich

est piece from the literary point of v iew and the enunciation of the

liturgical theology of a feast; it is often the place when.» a position on

20. The specialists disagree on Hie meaning lo be given to the fact that Ihe num

ber of orations in a given formulary varies in the sacramentaries of the HighMiddle Ages. In the case of series of uütic ("others") appended to the formulary, we are seeing in all likelihood the desire to preserve Ihe treasury o f Ihe Church'sprayers by w riting them down, without im plying that Hie pries! should choose

among Ihe numerous orations set dow n in Ihe book. The number of orations before the Sujk'r obiaia (one, two, or three) is of much greater importance because it

leads us bark to the origins o f the Roman liturgy {fourth lo sixth centuries) and tothe distinctions between the papal liturgy (one oration) and the priestly liturgy

(two or three orations), a distinction which became meaningless when the Romanliturgical texts were adapted for Gallic use. See A . Massimo Martelli, "1 formularidella messa con due o Ire orazioni prima della segrela ne» sacramentari romani,"Stadia Patnvina 19 (1972) 539-579.

21. Ihe wort! collecta, rarely found in the sacramentaries of the High Middle

Ages, designated the place where people gathered before departing for the Romanstational liturgy; then the meaning was extended and applied to the oration pro

nounced at the time when the whole assembly is gathered. See K. Camber “Oralto ad colfectam: Hin Beitrag zur römischen Stationsliturgie," Ephmerides Uturgiaw 82

(1968) 45-47: V. Saxer, "1 .’utilisation par la liturgie de l'espace urbain et suburbain:1.'exem ple de Rom e dans l'Antiquité et le haut Moyen A ge ," A c te tin it ' Congrès

international ¿ ’Archéologie chrétienne, Lyon, Vienne, Grenoble, Gcmi’îv, et Aosta. 21-28 septembre 1986, 2 vols. (Rome, 1989) 2:9 17 -1031, especially 952-958. In the oldest

sacramentaries w e still have (seventh to ninth centuries), the names of stations inthe rubrics of ihe form ulary (ad sanctum lauwnlii/m. ad ¡v?nctam maruvn mnjorcm.

and so on) recall the topography of the Roman liturgy. As these references are worthless outside of Rome, they were progressively eliminated from the manuscripts o f most of the western churches. Concerning the organization of the litur

gical stations elsewhere than in Rome, see P. Saint-Roch, "I/utilisation liturgiquede l'espace urbain et suburbain: l.'exemple de quatre villes de France," Actes du



a d ogm atic or d octrinal54 question is m ade e xp ress ly clear. In certain

cases, such as the feasts o f saints, the proface takes on the tone o f a

hagiographic panegyric. During Kent, it becomes a real catechesis,

penitential in character. The postcommunion (jws/ cottmtuniom’tii or ad complcudum) w hich concludes the celebration, is less a p ray er of

thanksgiving than a request for the fruitfulness in the believer's lives

o f the Com m union and the eucharistic action in general.

Th is lypical form ulary, va lid for the Temporal as w ell as the Sane-

toral and the Co m m on of Saints (undeterm ined form ularies adapted

to local circumstances) can be augmented, in particular during Lent,,

by an oration ov er the people (super populum), a sort o f final blessing,

penitential in character.*5 Th e form ularies fo r the vo tive M asses fol

low the sam e pattern as those of other M asses. The m ultiplication of

votive M asses from the C arolingian perio d on is the consequence o f

the developm ent o f the practice of private M asses and of ihe new

m ona stic spirituality, strong ly penitential, that arises at the beginn ing

of the ninth century.26

The '‘Ritual Ordines"27

In the High M iddle Ag es, the sacramen taries contained ve ry few

liturgical texts u sed in the perform ance o f ritual acts, w hich today w e

call sacram ents and sacramentals. It is on ly from the second h alf of

the ninth cenliirv (hat complete texts of ordines (rubrics and orations)

for the different sacram ents beg in to be a regular p art of the sac ramentaries. These ordines concerned a small number of rites, not re

served for bishops, which the priests could perform in their parishes

w ith the help o f th eir sacram entaries: penance, baptism al scrutin ies

24. See L. Moeller, Corpus Praefationuni, CCSL 159 {Tumhout, 1981), and the reviewof this work by A. Nocent, "L'cdition critique des profaces latines dans le 'Corpus

Christianorum,"' ftawe bénCítktine 9-1 (1984) 245-256.25. J, A, Jungmann, "Oratfo super yopuiion und altchristJiche Büssersegnung,"

Ephemerutes litúrgica? 52 (1938) 77-96.26. See the basic study by A. Angcnendt, "Mis*? speaalis: Zugleich ein Beitrag

/.ur F.ntstehung der Privalmessen," Friihmittclaltcrliche Stinlicn 17 {1983) 153- 221.See also C. Vogel, " 1-a multiplication dcs messes solitaires au Moyen Agí:: Hssaide stalistiqui*," ¡/cs Sciences reliftteuses 55 {198 1) 206-213, and "La vie quoti-



and baptism, anointing of the sick, funerals. In the manuscripts, the

texts for baptism and penance are placed at the point when they are

list'd in the liturgical year.

77/r Blessings

Blessings are short pieces proclaimed in connection w ith the ritual

acts that occur in the cou rse o f M asses or other liturgical celebrations

(consecration o f a church, ordination to the priesthoo d, and so on).

There are comp lete series o f them in the monastic sacram entaries

(blessings of all the pa rts of the m onastery) or in the ma nu scripts

used by bishops (episcopal ben edictionals w ere often joined to pon

tificals)28 in orde r to en able the bisho ps to bless the perso ns, places,

and objects they had just consecrated. D uring the High M iddle Ages,

the benedictionals w ere dissem inated particularly in Germ anic coun

tries, and e ven m ore pa rticula rly in mona steries.29 In the m anu

scripts, these series o f pieces are usu ally placed at the en d o f the

book.

2 . A N C I E N T A N D M O D E R N N A M E S

FOR T H E S A C R A M E N T A R Y

In the contem porary typ olog y o f liturgical book s, the sacram entary

no long er exists as such bec ause it is p art o f the m issal. D uring the

High Middle Ages, the progressive transition from sacramentary to

m issal, espec ially from the eleventh c entu ry on,30 in no w a y causedthe total disapp eara nc e o f the form er in fav o r o f the latter. The terms

used by people o f the M iddle A ges to designa te either boo k reflect in

large m easure this typological evolution o f the celebrant's book.

From the paleo-Christian period until the end of the Middle Ages,

the term s or nam es w hich are perm anen tly encountered are Liber

¿¡acrantentorum, sacramentarium (sacramentorium), ntissaie. O f course,

the term inology v aries w ith the period and esp ecially w ith the type

o f docu m ents in w hich the book is m entioned; this is w ha t w e are

abo ut to ve rify through an exploration, rapid and not exh au stive, of

diverse medieval texts.



References in Liturgical and Other Texts A s n pre lim in ary, gen eral rem ark , few are the liturg ical texts o f th e

I l igh M iddle A g es that contain informat ion on the nam es of books.

O nly the titles and the rubrics, in particular the practical reg ulation s

given in the onlines, occ asional ly su p p ly this type o f reference. A s re

ga rd s the sacrame ntary , w e n ote first of al l the t it le give n to the G re

gor ian Sacram entary at the end of the e ighth ce ntu ry :11 In nomine Domini ¡tic sacramentorum de circula anni exposito a mincto Gregorio papa Romano editunt. Ex authenlico libro bibliolhecae cubiculi scriptum ["In the

nam e o f the Lord . Th is sacram entary arrange d according to the year ly

cycle w as pu bl ished b y P op e St . Grego r\ ’. Th is copy w as w r it ten in a

room of the library from the authentic bo ok "! .*2 A ga in in the G reg o

rian, the preface o f the Su pp lem en t33 ad ds , Hucusque praecedens sacra- mentorinn libellus [ "Here end s the preceding sacram en tary" ! .34

Lik ew ise in the O ld G elasian Sacram entary ,35 the end o f the book is

clearly indicated: ExpJirif liber Mcranientorwn. Deo Gratias [ "H e r e e n d s

the Sacramen tary. Th an ks be to G o d "] .36 In three different p laces of ms. Paris, B. N., lat . 9433 (Sacramentary of Echternach, end of ninth

century),37 the scribe has written the following references respectively

at the beginning a nd end o f a part o f the sacram entary , Indpif sacra-

mentormn liber [ "H ere beg ins Ihe sacram en tary "! ( canon o f the M ass

and the Temporal) , Explicit secundus sacramentorum liber [ "H e r e e n d s

the second book of the sacra m en tary" ! (Sanctoral and C om m on of

Saints), In honore sanclae Trinitatis incipit sacramentorum liber terI ins ("Inhon or o f the H oly Trinity , here begins the third bo ok o f the sacram en

tar y" ] (vo t ive M asse s and onimcs) . Th ese references identi fy not only

the type o f the boo k but also un derl ine w hat i ts contents are. In the

twelfth, thirteenth, and fourteenth centuries, inscriptions were placed

on or ins ide the b inding o f a few m anu scr ipts from the H igh M iddle

A g e s ; som e o f these in scrip tion s d o not correspo n d to the actual con

tents of the sac ram en tary. This is tine ca se for the sa cra m en tary from

31. For the history o f this bttok, see the section on the Gregorian below.

32. Deshusses, Crcty'rim, 1 $ 5 .

33. For the supplement to the Gregorian Sacramentary, see pp. 52-54.

34 Deshusses Grt^oneM 1:351



R he im s (P aris, B. N ., lat. 229 4,-'B ninth cen tury, w h ich <tn insc ription o f

the twe lfth o r thirteenth centu ry (fol . 12 ) d es ign ate s as a collectar,39

probably because it does effectively contain collects.-*0 In most ordines

o f the H igh M iddle A ge s, w here ihc occasion presents itsel f, the sacram entary is also cal led fiber sncrnm entorum {or a variant o f this). A s an

exa m ple am on g m any, let us s ing le oul the blessing o f sacrc d objects

<it the t im e o f the dc dical ion o f a church excerpted f rom the Kom ano-

G erm an ic Pontif ical of the tenth century, in w hich a large n um ber of

o lder ordines are collected: benedicat ea pontifex sicut in sacramentario

conlinetur ["let the bishop bless these objects in the manner pre

scribed in the sac ram en tary "].41 It is clear that du rin g the H igh

Middle Ages, the l i turgical texts designate the sacramentary by I Jber

sacrameulonnu, a des ignat ion wh ich grad u a l ly wi l l d i sap pe ar wi th the

d isuse o f the sacram entarv in favo r o f the m issal, called mis.wle41

The references found in va riou s texts o f the H igh M idd le Ag es or

even late antiquity confirm the testimony found in the l iturgical books

conce rning the nam e of the sacram entary . A t the en d o f the f if th cen tury o r beg innin g o f the sixth, G en n ad ius o f M arsei lles ( fl. 470) , in a

description of the w ork s com posed by the priest M usa eu s (d. ca. 460),

w rites, C.omposuit t'tuim nacnnnentorunt egregiunt el non p urvu m volumen

[ "H e also w rote a rem arkable sacram entary , and not a s l im vo lum e"] ;43

in the sam e text, the au tho r attributes to Pau l inu s, bisho p o f Nola

(409-431 ) , the com posit ion o f a sacram entary and hym nal (fecit $acra-

menlorutn et hymtuiriuitt).*4 A little later, in the ninth century—a key per iod for the history of the sacram entary— A gn el lus o f Ravenna

(805-C.846) states that Bishop Maximianus (sixth century) had written

a m issal w ith the M asses for the entire yea rly cyc le and all the feasts

o f sa ints , as w el l as for ord inary d ay s and Lent.45 U nfortunate ly , w e

38. See l.eroquais, .Wmiiifu/iiircs, 1:69-71.

>9. For this type of book, set* Part 3, on the Office, III.40. The same sort of thing happened to St. Gall, Stiftsbibl. cod. *48: in the fif

teenth century, someone wrote on the cover CoUixtariuw veiustum-1». Vbgel ami Flze, PRG 1:87; see also 1:173, 2:12-55 - »48.155; all these or-

times are also found in the volumes of Andrieu, OR.4 2 .1« the pontificals, the I w o terms coexist; see Andricu, Pont/firal 1:221 and

275, where the word sacramentam is maintained; 2:549, 354, 365,400,440, 467,



d o n ot k n ow w he the r i n th i s cas e the book is «1 s ac ram e n tary o r a

m is s a l, tw o bo ok s w i th d i ff e re n t con ten ts. I l ow e v e r , a l on g w i th the

w r it in g s o f A lc u in (7 35 -8 0 4 ) , w e p o sse ss re fe re n ce s c o n te m p o ra ry

w ith A g n e llu s ' te s tim o n y ; th ey le a v e n o d o u b t th at it w a s a sacra-m e n ta r y a n d n o t a m issa l.46 In a le tter sen t lo the m o n k s o f S t . V aast

in A r r a s , in w lii ch h e d e s c r ib e s a s e r ie s o f v o t i v e M a s s e s h e h im s e lf

c o m p o s e d , A l c u i n s t ip u l a te s t h at t h e y a r e e x c e r p t e d f ro m h i s o w n

m i s s a l (mi&as (¡noque alienas de nostro tuli missalc | ' i a ls o t o o k s o m e

m as s e s f rom o u r ow n m i s s ar ' } ) .47 In fac t, w e k n ow tod ay tha t A l cu i n

h a d w r it te n a re m o d e l e d s a c r a m e n t a r y w it h m i x e d co n t en t s ( G r e g o

r ia n a n d G e l a s i o n ) . 1* T h e c a t a l o g u e o f th e li b r a r y o f th e A b b e y o f S t.

R iquier (8 3 1 ) a t tes ts to th i s: M issa l is greg orian as ei gelasian us moderni*

tcmporibu* ab A icuino ordinatus / [ " O n e G r e g o r ia n a n d G e l a s ia n M is s al

a r r a n g e d b y A lc u i n f o r o u r m o d e m t im e s " ].49 M o r e o v e r , in a n o t h e r

le tter, A lcu in es tab l ishe s c lea r ly the d i s t inct ion betw een th e ! ¡bell i m is-

»arum, s m a ll b o o k s o f w h ic h c e r ta in o n e s a r e " e m b r y o s " o f (o r at

te m pts a t) m i s sa l s , an d the s acram e n tar l e s , w hi ch a re m u ch m ore

e xte n s i v e .5® A t the s am e pe r i od , the le t te r o f P o pe H adr i an 1

( 7 7 2 -7 9 5 ) , a c c o m p a n y in g th e s a c ra m e n t a ry , c a l le d G r e g o r i a n , h e w a s

s e n d in g to C h a r le m a g n e ( r eig n e d 8 6 8 - 8 1 4 ) , s p e c i fie s , de sacramentarlo

vero [" f ro m the au then tic sa cr am en tar y" ] .55 A l it t le later , in the ninth

century , W ala fr id Strab o (0 .808-849) con f irm s the at t ribut ion o f the

b o o k to G r e g o r y a n d in s is ts h e (G r e g o r y ) w r o t e a b o o k c a lle d s a c r a

mentary as is indicated L>y its title.52

rifum pertittet, omnia ibi sbm dubio {"He published mass formularies for the whole

yearly cycle and all the sain ts ' feasts; there are also the form ularies fo r w eekdays

and the time of Lent; without any doubt, everything that pertains to the rites of the Church is included here"].

46. See especially 11, itavbe and J. Deshusses, "A la recherche du missel d'Al-

cuin," Ephcmeridt's liturgicae 82 5-44.47. Ep. 296, in MGH, fc;»., 4:455.

48. Concerning these two families of sacramentaries, s w pp. 42-55.49. Becker, Gtla/o£t, n. 11.

50. De ordiwtioni' ct dispositioncm mi«$ali$ liM li »eseio cur demendusli: numquid non hnbes mulatto ordinatos Utxtios xtcntlortos abumkinter? Halvs quotfue cl tvleris consuelu-

dinte suffieienter sacrammaria majont ["I don 't know w hy you are inquiring about the



In o th e r te x t s o f t h e H ig h M id d l e A g e s , su c h a s e p is c o p a l c a p i tu l a r

ie s an d m on as t ic cus tom ar i e s , am on g othe rs, the re a re a l s o a ll us i on s

w h ic h d e m o n stra te that the sa c ra m e n ta ry w a s m o st o ften ca lle d liber

sacramentorutn, a n d s o m e tim e s m i d d l e . G i v e n th e p e r io d u n d e r c o n s ide ra t i on , the t e rm n e v e r m e an s a t rue m i ss a l com pl e te w ith

the s u n g pa r t s an d the re ad i n g s o f the M as s in ad d i t ion to the ora

t ion s . T h i s is am p l y con f irm e d by the e x i s te n ce o f ¡¡b e lli m is s a n m —

pro bab l y ca lle d tuhiHilid — du r i n g the n i n th an d ten th ce n tur i e s an d

st il l m ore b y the re ferences , fo un d in cap i tu lar ies for ins tance , to the

a n t ip h o n a l o r e v a n g e l ia r y ( or e v e n le c tio n a r y ) p l a c e d s i d e b y s id e

w ith the missi le . In the ep iscop al cap i tu lar ies , w h ich are col lect ions of ru l in gs a p p ly in g to the d io cese ,55 thea ’ a re s om e t im e s l is ts o f the

l it u rg ic a l b o o k s e v e r y p r ie s t w a s s u p p o s e d to p o s s e s s; o n e e n c o u n

ters the terms l iber sa cranienlorunt** sacramentarium,** bu t m os t o ften

missale.**1 On the con trary, the term " li twr sacram entorum " p r e d o m i

n ate s in the m on as t ic cu s tom ar i e s o f the H i g h M i dd l e A g e s . T h is

w o rd d e s ig n a te s w ith o u t a n y a m b ig u ity — the litu rg ica l a n d textu al

c o n t e xt l e a v e n o d o u b t o n t h is p o in t — th e s a c ra m e n t a ry , u b i q u i to u s

in the* H igh M idd le A ge s , that i s, the boo k o f the ce lebrant , con ta in

ing al l the orations for the l iturgical year.57 It is interesting to note

that ev en in the m on ast ic cu s tom aries , the t rans i t ion f rom the sacra

m e n tary to the m i ss a l i s pe rce pti b le . I n de e d , in the cus tom ar i e s o f the

e leven th to th ir teenth cen tur ies , an d ev en m ore in those o f the th ir

teenth and fourteenth cen tur ies , the term missaie, w h i c h b y th e n d e s

ign ates rea l m issa l s, takes ov er the term l iber sacram enloruin w h i c h , a s

a s e pa ra te book , prac t ica l l y d i s ap p e a rs from the typ o l og y .58

¡iinirdi'drtm/ur. . ["I have written a book which is called a sacramentar)', as is

most clearly indicated by ils litio") (PL 11 4 , col. 946).53. Urommer, G»/>. P.p.

54. Capitulary of Waitcaud oí Liège, ca. 8 12 -8 14 . ibid.. 47-48.

55. Cap itular)' o f Haito o f Basel, ca. 6i 3, ibid., 2 1 1 and 223.56. Capitulary of Gherbald o f Liège, ca. 809, ibid., 39; Capitulary 0/ Rutger of

Trier, between 915 and 939, ibid., 63; Capitulary o f Gautier of Orléans, ca. 869-879,ibid., 189; Capitulary of I lildegar of Meaux. dated 868, ibid., 198; Capitulary of

Ralph of Bourges, between 853 and 866, ibid., 237.S f l h f d f h Ubi T iU i i



Final ly , the m ed ieval l ibrary catalogu es59 and inven tories of church

treasuries*’0 also reflect this evo lution o f the b oo k o f the celebran t from

the sacra m en tary to the m issal. In both cases, it u su ally h ea ds the list

o f l iturgical book s. Som etime s, esp ecial ly in the inven tories of churchtreasuries, w he re the m ost precious b ooks are kept, informa tion is

g iven on the richness o f the b ind ing (gold w ork, ivory) or the su m p

tuo us gold ca lligrap hy .6' In gen eral, the cata log ue s of the eighth an d

ninth cen turies prefer to use liber s/tcramentorum (or just sffcw w uto-

m w ).62 Som etim es, they sp ecify the type o f sacram en tary (Grego rian,

G elasian, or the com bination o f the two) and in v er y rare eases, spea k

about the contents of the manuscripts (sacramentary with a lectionary pa rt,6-*o r w ith b les sin g s pro p er to the bisho p).64 D etails on the co n

tents o f the sacram entary w ere , for these per iods , in no w a y neces

sary , s ince— sav e som e rare except ions— eve rybo dy knew that th is

book contained on ly orat ions , and eventual ly , b less ing s and ordines.

S ide by s ide w ith num erous m entions o f liber sacromentoriim in the

catalogu es of the eighth and ninth centuries, one f ind s som e niissalin,

w h ich co u ld d es ign ate e ither i ibrll i m issaruw or the f irst beg inning s of

m issa ls (with juxtaposed parts?) more de velop ed than the libellif** In

a go od num ber o f cases, the precise contents are specif ied (missal xvith

lectionary; m issal with lectionary an d antiphonal). Th e l ibrary cata

logu es from Ihe tenth and eleventh centu ries— the period of grad ua l

passag e from sacram entary to m issal— sh ow a d ist inct predom inance

o f missithi o v e r liber sacntmentomm, w hich d i sappe ars a lm ost corn-

59. Concerning these documents, see A. Derolez, Les catalogues de bibliathtyuefi, Typologie des sources du Moyen Age occidental 31 (Turnhout, 1979).

60. Sec BisvcUofl, SduitewrcciYhnfesi*.61. Tor instance, in the inventory of the Abbey of Priim (1003): missalem 1 cum

astro rf gemmis ["one missal adorned with gold and precious stones"] (Bischoff,Schatzverzeichnisse, no. 74). See also in the same book, rio.7 (second quarter of the

twelfth century), liber Micramcntorum 1 ebure et argcnto onuttu* ("one sacramentary adorned with ivory and silver"], and nos. 5, 26, 56,127.

62. See Becker, Catalogi, nos. 4. 5, 6, 7, and 16.63. Ibid., no. 16 (Cologne, ninth century).64. Ufcntw ¿ncmmrofonmr in quo continentur ivt.rdicHmux ixciwtie et bcnedicUotie*

sacrorttm ordimim et cetera omnia quae ad ipsunt mimaieriuni episcopt pertinent |"A Sacramentary in which are contained the blessings (for the consecration) of a



pletely. A sign of the internal evolution of the book is that from now

on, the contents are i temized w ith exactn ess in the m ajority o f cases

(missal that contains, or with, the su n g picce s and the reading s, missal

with ep istles, go sp els, an d g rad u ais, and so on).66 A fter the eleven thcentury, the u se o f the term mtssale becom es gen eral ,67 eve n though

no w and then, one notes a liber sacnunentorutn, probably referring to

sacram entaries o f the eighth and ninth cen turies preserv ed in l ibraries

but no longer in use for the actual liturgical celebrations.68

In contradistinction to the l ibrary ca talog ue s, the reference s to sac

ram en taries in the inv en tories o f church treasu ries d o not reflect the

evo lut ion o i the boo k througho ut the centuries. A s e arly as the ninthcentury, on e frequen tly and reg ularly encou nters the term niissaie (with

out its bein g accom panied by liber sacrameniorum) in the first place in a

l ist enu m erat ing the gra d ua l , ant ipho nal , eva n gel iary , an d epistolary ,

am on g others.69 Th is lead s us to su pp ose that the "m issa ls" in qu es

t ion are rath er sacram entaries (except in case s w he re the contents are

described w ith exactitude) . Indeed, from the t im e wh en the com plete

missals become the rule, their mention in the inventories of treasuries

is no lon ger acco m pan ied by that o f othe r l iturgical books, w hich are

now incorporated into the missal . This uncertainty is st i l l noticeable

in the tenth and eleventh centuries in the earliest references in Kng-

l ish and G erm an, w here the sacram entary is ca l led "M as s bo ok ."70

66. Sec Becker, Catalog, nos. 32, 36, 37, 42, 44, 48, 5«, 51, 52, 58, 66, 69. 72, 74. 75.These specifications are important for the understanding of the history and formation of the missal. See section IV of this part.

67. See, for instance, nos. 87,91, i<»6,120, 122, 128, 132 in Becker's listing.68. The library catalogues of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries are full of ref

erences like liber fiacmincntorunt and ntisaale, which no doubt refer to ancientmanuscripts no longer in use.

69. See Bischoff, SchalzverzeiehnKss. nos. 1 .5 , 6 ,1 2 ,1 3 ,1 4 ,1 5 , 19 ,2t, 22, 26, 34,36,40,44,47,49,50, 58,60,63,68,70,73,74,78,89,95,97,103, 106,110, and *27.These references are important because they help scholars get a better knowledgeof the history of the missal. See section IV of this part; see also the rare mentionsof itber $acr(imenlo>w», m nos. 7,108. anti 111 in Bischoff.

70. Moi'tachoe ("Mass book"! appears in the Anglo-Saxon manuscripts of thetenth century. See H. Gneuss, "Liturgical books in Anglo-Saxon England and l'hoir

(



W e m u s l co m p le te th is o v e r v ie w w ith an a llu s io n io th e te rm in o l

o g y u s e d b y r e se a r c h e rs o f th e m o d e r n p e r io d to d e s ig n a t e t h e sa cra *

m e n tary . F i r st o í a l l, w e m u s t po i n t out that s cho l a r s o f the s ix te e n th

an d f o l low i n g ce n tur i e s had a l re a d y e s tab li she d a c l e a r d is tin c t ionb e t w e e n m is s a l a n d s a c r a m e n t a ry . T h is is n o t e w o r t h y b e c a u s e c o n f u

s ion s ti ll a ffects certa in con tem po rary au thors . For ins tance , abou t

P ar i s , A rs e n a l , m s . 6 1 0 ( R c i che n au , e n d o f te n th ce n tury) , M ab i Uon ,

p u z z le d b y it s u n u s u a l co n t e n ts , w o n d e r s w h e t h e r th is "m a n u s c r ip t

. . . i s a pa rt o f the sacra m en tary or a m is s a l . . in fact , it i s a libel-

¡u s m issae, a c o m p l e t e ly d i ff e re n t d o c u m e n t w it h i ts o w n c h a r a c t e r / 2

A ll e d ito rs o f the sa c ra m e n ta ry b e tw e e n the six te e n th an d the e ig h t

e e n th ce n tur i e s h av e ch os e n to m e n t ion in the t it le s o f the i r w ork s

l iber sacramentorum , codex sacramentorum, o r tria sacram entaría, a dec i

s i on de m on s t ra t in g the ir h is tor ic se n s e an d the i r f am i li a r it y w ith

m an u s cr ip t s .7* O n l y M arténc*, w h o in an y e v e n t w a s n ot an e d i tor o f

the s acram e n tary , se e m s to h av e m ad e s om e m i stak e s “-1 in h i s D e an-

tiquis Ecciesiae ri i ibu s. But ov e ra l l , he s e e m s to cor re c t ly de s i g n ate

m a n u s c ri p ts t h at a r e k n o w n fo r ce r ta in to b e e it h e r s a c r a m é n t a n o s o r

m issa ls .75

7 1. Note in M abillon's own hand on the flyleaf o f the manuscript, February 1,1707.

7 2. See N. K. Rasmussen and I:. Palazzo, "Messe?» privées, livre liturgique et ar-chiUx’ture: A pro pos du ms. Paris, Arsenal 610 i»t de l'ég lise abbatiale de Re-¡ehi'naii-Mittob'ell," Kirwir tit's Sciences philosophiques et Ihéolùgiyues 72 ( 1988) 77-^7.

73. Pamclius in 1571, Rocca in 1593, Ménard in 1642, Tom^si in 1680, Mabillon



3 . H I S T O R Y O F T H E S A C R A M F .N T A K I IsS

O F T H E H IG H M ID D L E A G K S

Roman Libelli

5 6 «) - V i * «

7 0 -

8 o -

9 0 - - 9 0

6 0 0 -

J O — 0 8

2 0

~ » 5

3 0 -

- 2 5

4 0 -” 3 6

~ 4 -

6 5 0 - - 4 9

6 0 - - 5 7

7 0 -- 7 *

8 0 -

9 0 -- 8 7

7 < x > - “ O X

1 0 -

2 0 -- * 5

3 < * - - v

4 0 - - 4 1

7 5 o -

6 0 —

7 0 -“ 7 *

8 0 -

y o -

8 o o -- 9 J

1 0 -

2 0 -

j o -

4 0 -

8 5 0 -

G « $ o r y J

B o m f a c e T

H o n t it tu f .

Theodor«

V l t a l u n

St. Gregory f* %̂

Gallican Libelh

(Pre-Gelasian)

Gregorian <i(Lateran)

G ary 's feasts i

Gregorian"(Type II)(Vatican)

f. + Onto Missae—S t George y ' ] St. Peter's chains

feigiu»! f " di + Mary's teas» 2St. Gregory, St. Leo Agnus bei

<îtvgorv II

ÎG r e g o r y 1)1

e. + Thursdays in Lent

ll.-idn.in k I Indmmvim

\Corrected Hadr.

S a l z b u r g------

Cambrai ifu

Trent

Suppl. Aniane

GallicanizedGdasian

RggiP-3lfr

Frankish Getasian(Gelasian of the 8th c.)

' , y Gotlopp

Padua D .#

Sk’?Hf?ii7of Sacramcntary Families <after A. Dtwril)



General BibliographyH. Bourque. HUule sur les sacrainentaires romains. 3 vols. Rome-Qucbec, 1949-

1958.

A. Chavasse. "Evangêliaire, épistolier, antiphonaire cl sacramentairc: Lx?slivres romains de la messe aux VU' et VIIIe siècles," Ecdesia Orans 6

O989) 177-225.

!.. Delisle. "Mémoires sur d'anciens ^acr<imentaires." Mémoires,de ïAcadémie

des Inscriptions et Bdles-ldtres 32 {1886) 57-423.

J. Deshusses. "Les sacramentaires: Etat actuel de la recherche." Arch iv fiir

L/iHrjfi««sseiischii/l 24 (1982) 19-46.

J. Deshusses and B. Darragon. Concordances et tableaux pour Vcludc de* grands

tacramenlaires. 6 vois. Fribourg, 1982-1983,

K. Camber. Sakramcntartypeyt. Beuron, 1958.

V. Croquais. U s sacramentaires et les missels manuscrits des bibliothèques pub

liques de France. 3 vols, ami atlas. Paris. 1924.

The Srtt'Ttfmmiiflrii's before the Sacramenfuries: A t the Dawn o f Liturgical Books

Liturgical b ooks w ere not born overnight. In the ea rly d ay s o f C hris

tianity, before the pro gressive codification o f texts occurred, im pro vi

sation w a s the rule.7** Seve ral factors contributed to this, each on e in

its own measure.77 In the first place, we must mention that orthodoxy

w as defined through liturgical texts, especially orations. Very early,

church leaders felt the need to check the contents of the pray ers "im p rov ised " b y the priests, particularly in North Africa during the fourth

an d fifth centuries.78 In the second place, it w as not long before the ec

clesiastical authorities (most notably Augustine, bishop of Hippo

I396-430I), foun d fault w ith the qu ality of the cle rg y's im prov isations;

as a result, a selection o f pieces draw n from the "treas u ry " o f prayers

w as assem ble d in order to preserve the best ones as regards both

76. Set? C Hanson, “The Liberty of the Bishop to Improvise Prayer in the Eucharist," Vigitiae Christiana? 15 (1969) 173-176; L. Bouyer, "L'improvisation liturgique dam I'Kglise ancienne," Lt Maison-Dieu 1 11 (1972) 7-19.

77. P. Do Clerck, "Improvisation et livres liturgiques: leçons d'une histoire,"C té* t lit i 60 {197$) 109 126



qu ality and orthodoxy.79 Th e a dvent o f liturgical books cannot be

und erstood w ithout taking into account the cultural m utation effected

in th e West by the em ergence of th e book in general. The passage

from the volume», the scroll, to the codex, the book as w e k no w it, is indeed one o f the major cultural pheno m ena o f the first m illennium ; it

had a considerable impact on the conditions of the oral culture then

prevalent, esp ecially in the liturgical dom ain.®0 Here, the book o ffers

an important advantage over oral transmission, by fixing in a tangible

and du rable m anner through its texts the m em ory of a culture, of a

w ay o f worship, o f the liturgy. Finally, the advent o f the liturgical

book dem onstrates an increasing codification o f usages between the

fifth and sixth centuries; it is part of a w hole trend o f that period : the

selling do w n in w riting of traditions and kn ow ledge in m any areas

other than the liturgy, law for instance. In the stu d y o f the liturgical

m anuscripts o f the High M iddle Ag es, one must alw ay s remem ber

that they attest to on ly a m inuscule part of the antique oral treasury

from w hich the most beau tiful p ieces have been chosen (in general at

tributed to prestigious authors) an d assem bled into a stable corpus.

The Liturgical LibelliSl

1'he liturgical JibeUus is the intermediary link in the evolution from

the period of improvisation to the liturgical book properly so called.

The Ubelli are small boo ks, pam ph lets w ith on ly a few pa ges, contain

ing som e liturgical texts: form ularies for one o r several M asses, a selection o f var iou s orations, the nee ded texts for a specific action (rituals,

ordines), In m any cases, the first liturgical b ooks are n othing but the

gathering of several Ubelli form erly indepen dent from one another,

w hich m ust be organized into a book w ith a m ore hom ogeneous

content. Thu s, libelli p lay an essential part in the elaboration of the

79. A. Botiley, Fmw Fnwfoni ¡0 Formula: the Evolution o f the Euchahslic Prayer from Ora/ Improvisation to Written Texts, SfadiVs in (.Juislirtn Antiquity 21 (Washington,D.C, 1981).

80- See the unpublished doctoral thesis of Th. Elich, U context? oral dc la liturgia

mciliemlc et I? role dtt text? tvrit, 3 vols. (Paris: Paris lV-Sorbonne and instihit catluv-lique do Paris, 1988); summary in 1. Pierce, “Using Liturgical Texts in the Middle



different medieval liturgical books; they are die ancestors of the sacra-

mentary, Ihe books of chant, the pontifical, am on g others. Furthermore,

throughout the whole M iddle Ag es, the libelii were used to diffuse the

text of a ne w office or M ass formulary. Th ey w ill be found also inbooks o f the "secon d gen eration" such as the missal. We must em

ph asize that the typo logy o f the ¡¡belli shed s n ew light on the differ

ent forms of Christian w orsh ip because there are as m any types of

libelii as forms of celebration.82

The Leonine Sacramentaiy

A p r i l :Scclion VUI: (the beginning is m issing) som e forty M asses for

m artyrs ( 1 - 168 ) .

M a y :

Section IX: Ascen sion (7 formularies, 169 -186).

Section X: Vigil of Pentecost (6 formularies, 187-214).

Section XI: Pentecost (3 formu laries, 215 -2 25 ).Section XII: Jun e fast (1 formulary, 22 6-2 31).

J u n e :

Section XIII: St. John the Baptist (5 formularies, 232-256).

Section XIV: Sts. John and Paul (8 formularies, 257-279).

Sections XV and XV I: Sts. P eter and Paul (28 form ularies, 280-379).

J u l y :Section XV II: The Sev en M artyrs (9 formu laries, 380-412).

Section XVIll: Orationes el preces diurnae {45 form ularies, 413-6 70 ).

A u g u s t :

Section XIX: St. Stephen (9 formularies, 671-703).

Section XX: Sts. Sixtus, Felicissim us, and A ga pitu s (8 form ularies,

704-738).Section XXI: St. Lawrence (14 formularies, 739-789).

Section XXII: Sis. Hippolytus and Pontianus (1 formulary, 790-799).

Scction XXIII: Sts. Adauctus and Felix (6 formularies and one

Preface of the Apo stles, 800-823).

S e p t e m b e r :



Section X XV I: Dedication o f the Basilica o f St. M ichael (5 form ula

ries, 844-859).

Section XXVII: September fast and various Masses (15 formularies,

860-941).Section XXVIII: Ordination of bishops, deacons, and priests

(942-954).

Section XXIX: Episcopal anniversaries and various Masses (25

form ularies , 95 5-110 2).

Section XXX: Consecration of virgin s (110 3 -110 4 ).

Section XXXI: Velalio nuptialis ( 1 1 0 5 - 1 1 1 0 ) .

O c t o b e r :

Section XXXII: Masses ad diversa (for va riou s intentions, 137).

Scction XXXIII: M asses for the dea d (5 formularies, 1 13 8 -11 6 3 ).

Section XXXIV: St. Sy lves ter (2 pieces plu s one o ration for Pope

Simpl ic ius, 1 16 1 - 1 16 3 ) .

N o v b m b ju k :

Scction XXXV: The Fou r Crow ned M artyrs (2 formularies, 116 4 -117 0 ).

Section XXXVI: St. Cecil ia (5 formularies, 1171-1187).

Section XXXV II: Sts. Clem ent and Felicity (7 formularies, 11 8 8 -1 2 13 ).

Section XXXVIII : Sts. Chrysogonu s and Gregory (12 14 -12 18 ),

Section XXXIX: St. A nd rew (4 form ularies, 1219 -12 3 8 ).

D e c e m b e r :

Section X L: Ch ristm as (9 formu laries, 123 9 -127 2).Section XL.I: St. John the E van gelist (2 form ularies, 12 73 -12 8 3) .

Section XLII: H oly Innocents (2 form ularies, 128 4-12 9 3).

Section XLII 1: December fast (5 formularies) and blessing of the

baptismal water ( 129 4-13 31) .

History o f the Hook

Pub lished for the first time in 17 3 5 by G . Blanchini, it w as imm ediately attributed to Pope Leo I (440-461); this first edition was entitled

C.odex sacrainentormn vetus Romanae ecclesiae a sancto Leone papa / confer.-

tus ["Old Sacramentary o f the Roman Church Com posed by Pope St.

l.eo I" |. In 1749, J. Assem an i rectified the errone ous title b y ca lling his

edition SrtiTrtMtenfrtrwm veronense jSacram entary o f Verona] because



codicological analy sis of this man uscript, m ade by I.. C. M ohlberg lor

his edition, clearly sh ow ed that a large portion o f the beg inning of

the text is m issing and that all visib le traces o f the collection o f libelti,

the origin o f the book, h ave d isapp ear ed.83

Nature o f the Book

Erroneously attributed to Pope Leo the Great,84 this book is not an

official one but a collection o f Rom an HMii, kept in the Lateran arc hives

and later on adapted from papal to presbyterial use. The 1331 pieces

(orations and prefaces) that com prise it are not org an ized to be used

directly in the liturgical celebration. The plan of the book, if one cansp ea k o f plan for such a com posite collection, follow s the civil calendar

w ithout takin g li turgic al time into account. Each month (see the table

above) is div ided into sections w hich often include several form ula

ries for the sam e feast. Tine boo k h as the earm ark o f a careless com pi

lation o f ¡¡belli; seve ral authors have detected tw o pha ses in this w ork

o f compilation: (i) the gath ering o f the form ularies into collections; (2)

the combination of these collections into a book. The m ed ieva l usersof this wo rk ha ve v isibly found it ill-suited to actual w orship. The

Verona m anuscript has m argin al notes—w ritten d urin g the tenth and

eleventh centuries— that ma ke it possible to put together new formu

laries out of pieces d raw n from several disjointed formu laries.8̂

Origin and Date

A ll authors agree on the Rom an and pap al origin o f the book. Thelim ited Sanctoral {on ly twen ty-two saints ha ve a feast, each w ith se v

eral form ularies) is exclusively Rom an an d g ive s a p articular place to

Sts. Peter and Paul, as well as to St. Lawrence. According to Cha-

vasse 's 86 research, the book w as com posed at the time o f Pope John

83.1.. C. Mohlberg, cd., Sairamentartutii Verotiensr (Rome, 1955); sec also A. Stuiber,

I.¡belli Mcrameniorum n»iuini (Bonn, 1950), and the facsimile. Sacramentariwn leoni- anntn. in I rod F. Sauer (Graz, i960).84. Concerning the liturgical work of St. Leo, see the numerous contributions of

A. I wing and the article summarizing them by J. Pinell i Pons, " ‘Ifcologia « liturgianegli scritti S. Leono Magno," Ecr/rsi/? Oratts 8 (1991) 137 -181.

85. The system of lowercase letters in red was worked out at the time; whenread in order, they compose a "real" formulary; see the examples used by



Ill (56 1-574)*" from tw o docum ents dating from the fifth an d sixth

centuries. C ha va sse dem onstrated eq ua lly w ell that the joining of

those tw o initial collections®* occurred abo ut 54 5-5 55 , at the lime of

Pope V igilius (5 37-5 55), wh o, m oreover, is believed to be the authorof certain formu laries. By com paring different sources (liber pontifi-

a il is, accounts of con tem po rary historians, liturgical texts, an d so on),

Chavassc has determined, with strong probability, the historical cir

cum stances that led P op e Vigilius to com pose form ularies for Su nd ay

Masses especially (Section XVIII). He reused certain pieces composed

by on e of his prestigious p redecessors, Pop e G elasius (492-496),89

and w orked principally du ring the siege of Rom e by Ihc Ostrogoths,

un der the leade rship o f Witiges, from Ju ly 5 37 lo March 538.90 Other

researchers have show n that Fo rm ulary 13 (pieces 932 -937) o f Section

X X V ff (Septem ber fast and various M asses) often allude s directly to

the famine, variou s gr av e situations, the blockad e of the port of

Rome, the consequences of the Goths taking the city.91

Descendants o f llte Book

The fact that there is on ly one m anu script o f the Leon ine Sacra

ment ary pro ves that this type o f sacram entary d id n ot hav e an y d i

rect descendants. This remark does not come as a surprise since the

Leon ine Sacram en tary w as not a useful boo k for Ihc actual celebra

tion of the liturgy an d since it w as to be ra pidly replaced by w orks

carefully and thoug htfully organized, the G elasian an d the Grego rian. H ow ever, this d oe s not detract from the historical and liturgical

interest of the Leonine Sacramentary, first, because of the light it

sh ed s on the history o f the city o f Rom e, and second , becau se it is the

only material witness we have of the passage from liturgical improvi

sation lo codification through b ooks.

87. Fteven saints oui o f twenty-two had lived in an area outside the walls of Rome, when1 John 111 resided for some years.88. lhat is Section XVIII (45 formularies), aratioucs ef prcces dtvcr$ac, ¿md the

block of Sections XXVII to XXXIV (varia filttrgtca l"various liturgical services")).89. B. Capeilc. "Retouches gélasiennes dans Je sacramentaire l6onien." Ran«*

¿VHiWrVfi»e61 {>951)3- 14; Célasc* Jrf, lettres contre les lupt?rcni&. Oix-huit »its,sesdu ¿acramcntain.’ .Verni'«, «il. Ci. Pomarês, SC 65 (1959)-



Nevertheless, we can detcct an indirect lineage of the Leonine since

the greater part oí its contents w as found ag ain— differently arran ged —

in other type s of sacram éntanos w ho se beg innings are perceptible

about the period John Il l 's com pilation w as written do w n but whosecompletion was to be realized only in the seventh century.93 Lastly,

let us observe that certain "pro po sition s" for formu laries, noted in

the Verona manuscript on the basis of marginal notations, were re

peated in other m anuscripts of the tenth and eleventh centuries.

Vie Celasian Sacramentarle*

The Old Gelasian (after Vat. Regin. 316)

15ook 1: The Temporali-3 Vig il o f the Nativity, i - j6 (3 formularies).

4-5 The Nativity, 17-29.

6-8 St. Steph en, St. John , H oly Innocents, 30-47.

9- 10 Octave of the Nativity, 48-56.1 1 - 1 2 V ig il o f th e Epip hany, Epiphany, 57-68.

13-17 Septuag ésim a, Sexagésim a, Quinq uagesima, 69-88.

18 First week in !x»nt, 104-133.

19 Fast o f the first month (March), 134 -13 9 .

20-24 Ordination of priests and deacons, 146-162.

25 Second week in Lent, 163-192.

26 Third w eek in Lent, 193-22 4.27 Fourth w eek in I.ent, 225 -253 .

28 Fifth week in I.ent, 254-282.

29-36 Pre-baptismal scrutinies, 283-328.

37 Palm Sunday, Passion of the Lord, 329-333; Monday,

Tuesday, and W ednesday o f H oly Week, 334-348.

3S-40 Holy Thursday, 349-394.

4 t Good Friday, Passion of the Lord, 395-418.

4 2-4 5 Ho ly Saturd ay , Easte r V ig il, 4 19-4 62 .

46 Easter Su nd ay, 463-467.

47-52 Week m albis (in white], 468-498.

53 Octave of Easter, 499-503.



54 A nnolinc Easier,93 504-509.

55 Easter in parishes, 5 10 -5 14 .

56 Orations for Eastertide, 516 -54 0.

57-62 6 Sunday« after Easter, 5 4 1-5 7 1 .63-65 Ascension and Sun day after Ascension, 57 2-5 9 1.

66-79 Vigil o f Pentecost; occasional rites of baptism , 592-636.

80 -81 Pentecost Sund ay, 63 7-6 51.

82 An nou ncem ent of the fasts o f the fourth, seve nth , and tenth

months, 652-653.

83 Hast o f the fourth month, 654 -675 .

84 Sund ay, O ctave o f Pentecost, 676-682.

85 -8 7 Reconciliation of heretics, 683-688.

88 G allican rile o f the ded ication o f a church, 689-702.

89 -93 5 M asses for the dedication of a church, 703-729.

94 Dedication o f a baptistery, 730 -736.

95-9 6 O rdination of candidates to m inor orders, 737-7 56.

97-9# Ordination M asses o f a deacon, o f a priest, 757-765.99 Con secration o f a bishop, 766-77 3.

t o o M ass for the ann iversary o f the ordination of a bishop,

774-778.

10 1- 10 2 M ass for the ann iversary of the ordination of a bishop, of a

priest, 779-786.

10 3- 10 4 Consecration o f a virgin, 787-792.

10 5- 10 6 3 M asses for the anniversary of the consecration o f a virgin,793-803.

B o o k 2 : O r/ W u v e s e t p r c c c s d f n a t a u t i i s s a n c t o r u m

1 An nou ncem ent o f the feast o f a saint, 804-805.

2-5 9 Feasts o f the saints from January' 14 to Septem ber 29 ,806-103 6.

60 Fast o f the seventh month, 103 7- 105 2.

6 1- 7 1 Feasts of the saints from October 7 to December 2 1,10 53 -10 9 0 .

72-79 Co mmo n o f M a rtyrs, 10 9 1 - 1 1 19 .

80-84 5 M asses and orations for Ad ven t, 1 12 0 -1 15 6 .

85 Fast of the tenth month, 11 5 7 - 11 7 7 .



Book 3: Ojmt/cwes fcT PRICES c u m c a NONE PF.R DOMINICK DIF.bu s

1 - 1 6 16 form ularies for Su ndays, 1 17 8 - 12 14 .

17 Can on o f the M ass, 124 2-12 6 0; postcomm union and A blessings, 1261-1287. f

18-23 6 dai ly M asses , 128 8 -1312 .

2 4-5 1 V arious M asses an d orations, 13 13 - 14 4 2 .

52 M ass and blessing for w edd ings. 14 43 -1455 .

53 M ass for birthda ys, 1456-146 0.

54 M ass for a barren w om an, 146 1-147 0.

55Blessing of a w idow, 14 7 1 .

56-90 Various M asses and oratio ns, 1472-16 06 .

91 Office for funerals. 1607-1627.

9 2 - 10 5 M a sse s fo r the d ea d, 16 2 8-16 9 5.

106 M a ss for the salva tio n o f the liv in g, 16 96 -17 00 .

107 Ordo for the reconciliation o f a sinner, 17 0 1-1 7 0 4 .

History o f the Book

Th is type o f sacramentary a pp ears to be the first true liturgical bookorganized as such, together with evangeliaries (see III, 5, o f this part). Its

attribution to Pop e G eiasiu s (492-496), author o f certain pieces in the

Leon ine, goes back to the hea ding of the Liber Pontificaiis dedicated to

the pope : fecit Micramentorum praeftUiones et orationes canto scrntone l"he

composed a sacram entary with carefully w orded prefaces and o ra

tions"). Since then, w e h ave learned that orations com posed by G eia

sius have been preserved in sacramentaries but that he is not the

auth or o f the typ e that bears h is name.** Published for the first time

in 1680 by Cardin al Tom asi, the O ld Ge lasian h as since then been the

object of num erous translations, ¿ill o f them from the un ique witness

of this type, the Regin. 316 of the Vatican Library (245 folios plus two

sections no w inserted in Paris, B. N ., lat. 719 3; fols. 41-5 6 ). This m an u

script w as w ritten in the eighth century in the scriptorium o f Ch elles.95

94. In his important work, S{ikrame»tarhf}H-n, C am be r though t ho could attribute

the Gelasian to Maximianus o f R avenna; this h ypothesis, along with m any others

proposed by the Germ an scholar, has not withstood criticism. See in particular

the review o f Cam ber's. w ork b v B. Bolte. Heime d'Hisloire ecctcsMatique 55 (i960)5 1 6 - 5 1 7 .



Nature o f the Book and Date o f Composition

The G elasian is a liturgical bo ok in Ihc full sense of the term and it

ap pe ars to be Rom an through and through. Its title, liber sacra-

mentorum romanae ecclesiae ordinis an ni d rc u li ["Mere beg ins the sacramentar)' o f the Rom an Ch urch ordered according to the ye arly cycle"],

and its Sanctoral con firm this origin. (There are vigils for the feasts of

Sts. G erva sc and Frotase, John and Paul, Cecilia; octavos for the feasts

of Sts. L aw rence an d And rew.) We are in presence of a sacram entary

of the presbyterial typ e because it contains everyth ing n eeded b y a

priest in charge o f a "titula r" church [one o f the older churches of

Rome] or a pa rish church and on ly that m aterial. C ha va sse sup po ses

that the archetype of this book could have been written for the church

o f St. Peter in Ch ains in Rom e. In all likelihood it w as w ritten in the

m idd le of the seventh century, beca use it features m odifications intro*

duce d by Gregory7 the G reat (590-604) in the canon o f the M ass (no

tably the insertion of the pra ye r Hanc igitur), but does not yet contain

either the Masses for the Thursdays in Lent added by Gregory 11(7 15 -7 3 1) or the A gn us Dei mad e official by Sergius I (687-701).

Content of the Book

T he 1704 pieces o f the Old G elasia n are dividen! into three distinct

books (or sections). The first book co m prises the celebrations of the

Temporal from the Nativity to Pentecost. The second is devoted to

the Sanctoral and one C om m on o f Saints, as w ell as to the Adve nt

Masses. The third comprises the Masses for ordinary Sundays, the

cano n of the M ass, and a series o f vo tive Ma sses. The typical form u

lary o f this sacram entary is m ade up o f tw o collects, on e secret, a

prop er preface, a postcomm un ion, and o ne oration ad poptdutn (or

super yopulum, "o v e r the peo ple"); the two collects in the beginn ing

of the formu lar)' arc traces o f the presbyterial u sag e in the O ld G ela

sian because the second one serves as a conclusion to the general intercessions, that is, a con clusion before the canon.1*

Descendants and Historical Importance of the Book

The G elasian Sacramentary appears a s the earliest agent o f the romani-

/ation of the Frankish liturgy before the reform of Pepin the Short (7 51—

768) It w as in use in the presbyterial chu rches o f Rom e in the seventh



eighth century through the interme diary o f pilgrims returning from a

visit to the Eternal City. Once received beyond the A lps, it w as galli-

cani/.ed b y the insertion o f five se ctions which are Frankish in origin;

these are attested in the w riting s docum enting the liturgy in G au l before the introduction o f the Rom an books. These five sections form

com pact blocks easy to detect within the structure o f the Old G elasian.

They concern the ritual for ordinations (derived from a com plete Ro-

mano -Gallican ritual for ordinations), the ritual for the consecration o f

virgins (same origin as the preceding), the ritual for the dedication o f a

church (essentially focused on the dedication of the altar, in contradis

tinction to the Roman usage), the ritual for the blessing of the lustral

water, and the ritual for funerals. The descendants o f this book can be

prop erly evaluated only i f one takes its "succ esso r" into account.

The Eighth-Century Gelnsian or Frankish Gelasian

History o f the Book

For a long time historians o f the liturgy con tused the O ld G elasiansand the Eighth-Century Gelasians (also called Frankish), which the

M idd le A ge s did not distinguish, as can be seen b y en tries in library

catalogues. Modern scholars have distinguished the two types of

G elasian s, an d w e ow e to the English liturgist E. Bishop the ex pre s

sion "Ro m an Sacramen tary of King Pepin" to designate the Eighth-

C en tury Gelasians. There exist a dozen m anuscript w itnesses, all of

Fran kish orig in, reflecting in different d eg ree s the archetyp e nowlost. However, this archetype can be recovered through its most faith

ful witness, the book called the Cellone Sacramentary (Paris, 15. N.f

lat. 12048), written about 790-800, perh ap s in M eaux.97 The othe r

Eighth-C entury G elasian s arc the result of a system atic revision o f

the Gellone Sacramentary. Their history is well known today, thanks

espec ially to the w ork of Ch ava sse.9®

97. A. Dumas and J. Deshusses, eds., fiber sacmmentorunt Gdfaiwn&s, CCS1.159-159A (1981)- Two other important witnesses of the Eighth-Century Gelasian<m> St. Gail, StiftsbibL, cod. 348 {c<v 795-796; L. C. Mohlberg, ed., Dasfrfitikischc

'Saotnacr.tariunt Gekttiannni in altwmmsdur QtMrUeferung, 2nd ed. |Munster, 1939!),and Paris, B. N., lat. 816. from Angouleme (P. Saint-Roch, ¡A far sacram'ntarum F.»1-

golfemensb. CCSL 159c [1987I).



Origin and Dole o f the Archrtype

Th e m onastic connections of the Kighth-Century G elasians are be

yond doubt. M any rites for the m onastic s' exclusive use are fo und in

them; St. B ened ict is ca lled patronua in the form ulary for his least da y M ass on Ju ly ti (the da te of the transfer of his relics to Fleury, toda y

St.-Benoît-sur-l.oire) and his nam e ap pe ars in the pra ye rs o f the canon

of the M ass together with sa ints o f the Frankish w orld (Hilary, Martin).

Several clues p rove the Frankish or igin o f the archetype: the Sanctoral,

overall identical with that of the Old Gelasian, makes room for Galli

can saints (M ass of St. Prix, bisho p o f Clerm ont, d. 674); there arc

m entions of specifically Ga llican custom s, such as the Rogation D ays

(sections 131-136), established by St. Mamert, bishop of Vienne (or

Clermont) in 470, and extended to the whole of Gaul by the Council

o f O rléans in 5 1 1 . It is probable that the com pilation w as undertaken

by m onk s at the prom pting of K ing Pepin. Op inions con verg e to lo

calize the execution o f this project in the mo nastery o f Flav ign y (in

Burgundy), founded in 742 in memory' of St. Prix, whose relics weretransferred to Fla vig n y in 760. Pepin the Short w ou ld ha ve w anted to

exem plify the ambitious movem ent of liturgical unification in lus king

dom by the com position of a sacram entary intended for use through

out its territory. The nu m ber of copies that ha ve su rv ive d pro ves the

rap id success o f this book, with local ad aptation s, and its suitability

for serv ing the kin g's unification p rogram . H ow ever, the success w as

short-lived because this new sacramentary, probably completed about760-770, w as almost imm ediately supp lanted by the Gregorian Sacra-

m entarv wh ich Charlem agn e— w ith the sam e intention as that of his

father—obtained directly from Rome (see p. 30). Nevertheless, it re

m ains true that the E ighth-Cen tury G elasia n is the first m ajor attempt

at liturgical unification undertaken by royal authority. The Gelasian

failed to gain authority for two reasons: first Pepin's enterprise, con

trary to C ha rlem agn e's, w as not accom pan ied by a po licy of liturgical

unification vigorous enough to impose the book; second, even though

the contents of this sacram en tary reveal the serious w ork of a team of

competent liturgists,9* the Gelasian lacked the prestige of a famed



author like P ope G reg ory for the sacram entary that bears his name.

I lowover, the Kighth-Century G elasian w ill hav e im portant descen

dan ts since it w ill be used in the first dec ad es o f the ninth century to

remedy the deficiencies of the Gregorian (see pp. 52-54).

Nature and Content o f the Book

The structure of the Kighth-Century Gelasian reveals a meticulous

and w ell-thought-out w ork on the part of the liturgist-m onks. Th ey

used the two typ es of Roman sacram entaries which w ere in circula

tion in Ga u l since the first half of the eighth century: the Old G ela

sian and the Type 2 Greg orian (Paditewae, see p. 54), that is, a papalsacram entary m odified for presbyterial use. The Eighth-Ce ntury

G elasian is the result o f the fusion of these tw o typ es w ith the ad di

tion o f G allican sources. Th e an aly sis o f the contents (in p articular

w hen w ork ing w ith the G ello ne Sacram entary, perhaps executed for

the cathedral of Cam brai at the tim e of Bishop H ildoa rd an d later on

used iii G ellone— St.-Guilhem -le-Désert—a s ea rly as 80410°) b etrays a

basic fram e that is Type 2 Greg orian and a structure o f form ulariespro per to the O ld G elasian (two collects, one secret, one p roper préf

acé, one postcomm union, and on e oration super populum in Lent). The

G allican sources are visible in the episcopal blessings, the v otive

M asses placed after the Co m m on o f Saints, and the Ga llican prefaces

absent from the Ro m an books. The Gellone Sacram entary comp rises

3,024 pieces divided into two parts: part 1 (sections 1-328), the sacra

m entary pro pe rly so called in w hich the Tem poral and Sanctoral are

arranged into one series, according to the Gregorian type (the canon

o f the M ass is placed at Easter), instead of three books; part z, rituals

and ''pontifical/' episcopal blessings, orations for monastic use, the

ordo of baptism, the "pontifical" (picces for the exclusive use of the

bishop), and the summary of the Hieronymian Martyrology.

What w e have here is a ve ry rich book that m arks the onset o f the

"era of the com plote liturgical b ooks."

The Gregorian Sacramentaries

Content (Hadrianum and Pnduensc types); Temporal and Sanctoral

comb ined. Th e parts comm on to the tw o boo ks are in bold type.



Ordo of the Roman Mass.

Blessing o f a bishop.

O rdinations of the priest and deacon.

Form ularies from the V igil of the N ativity to the octave of theLord (January i).

Orations for Sundays.

Epiphany, fo l low ed by the Sun day s af ter Epiphany.

Feasts of the saints from January 14 to March 25.

Septuagés ima, Sexagés ima, and Quincuagés ima.

Daily Masses from Ash Wednesday to Wednesday in Holy Week.

Form ularies from i lo ly Th ursday to the Su nd ay fo l low ing the

octave of Easter.

Feasts o f sa ints from A pri l 14 to M ay 13 .

Su n d ay s after tine octa ve o f Easter.

A scen sio n , fo llo w ed by the Su n d a y after A scension .

Form ularies from the Vigil o f Pentecost to the first Su n d ay a fter

Pentecost.Feasts of the saints from Jun e 1 to Septem ber 16.

Form ularies for the five Su n da ys after Pentecost.

Form ularies for the six Su n da ys after the octave o f the A postles

|Sts. Peter and Paul[.

Form ularies for the five S u n da ys after the feast o f St. Law rence.

W eek o f th e Em b er D ays o f Septem ber.

Feasts of the saints from Septem ber 2 7 to N ove m ber 30.Form ularies for the nine Su nd ays after the H oly A n ge l ISt. M ichaell.

First and second Sundays of Advent.

Third and fourth Su nd ays o f Ad vent .

O rations for Ad vent.

Various M asses.

M ass o f the ordination of a po pe an d a priest.

Blessing for a w edd ing.

O rations for I the forg iven ess o il sins.

D aily orations.

Com m on of Saints .

D aily M asses, votive Masses.

Morning and e ening orations



Orations for the funeral of a bishop and other deceased persons.

Oration for the ordination o f a pope.

History

The peo ple of the M iddle Ag es w ere aw are o f the distinction be

tween the G elasian an d Greg orian types of sacram entaries, as the ti

tles given to those bo oks in library cata logu es attest. The attribution

o f a sacram entary to Pope G reg ory rested on a sou n der tradition than

that concerning Gelasius. A letter from Kgberl of York, about 735-

7 36 /01 attributes the authorsh ip of the sacram en tary and the anti-

pho nal then in use in the British Isles to Pop e G rego ry. R espon dingto C harlem agn e’s request for a sacramentary (sec pp. 51-5 4 ), Pope

H adrian assures him that he is sen din g a co py of the book compo sed

by his predecessor Gregory. The title of the book that was going to be

disseminated opens with an attestation of authenticity, hi nomine Do

mini. Hie sacramenlorum de circula anni expostto a auncto Gregorio papa

mrnano editum. Ex aulhenfico libro bibliolhecae cubia tli scriptum ["In the

nam e of the Lord. This sacram entary arrang ed according to the ye arly cycle w as published b y Pope St. Gregory. This copy w as w rit

ten in a room of the library from the authentic book"]. Since 1571, the

date of the first edition of the Greg orian by Pam elius, a good num ber

of scholars hav e believed that they could retrieve the ve ry text w rit

ten by Gregory, but most often through documents that did not favor

the search fo r the archetyp e.10* D ecisive p rogress w a s m ade in the

twentieth centu ry by historians of the liturgy w ho approach ed theproblem from a d ifferent an gle than that o f their celebrated prede ces

sors. H. A. Wilson (19 15) , then H. Lietzman n ( 19 2 1), and espec ially J.

D eshu sses (i9 7.i),n> ha ve attemp ted to reconstitute the text C ha rle

magne received from the pope, rather than the work of Gregory, be*

cause w e k now toda y that eve n if that pop e played an im portant role

in the liturgical ren ovation un dertak en in Rom e betw een the sixth

and the seventh centuries, he did not necessarily compose an actual

sacram entary but p rincipally orations w hich all agree are his w o rk .1"4

i d - frttiifHta»«' ceitholica. I‘L 89. cots. 441-442.k »2. First Pamelius, then A. Rocca in 1593. H. Méu.ird in 164?., I.. A. Muratori in

1748, al! ha ve u sed m anuscripts from the ninth and tenth centuries already e xten



This approach has proven to he more productive than that adopted

by historians of the liturgy up to these recent decades; their vision

w as clo uded by questio ns o f authorship and archetype, less fruit fu l

than attention to the history o f texts.

Nature m rf Origin o f the Book

I'he Gre go rian Sacra men tary is a b ook intended for the exclusive

use o f the pope. It is pe rfectly o rgan ized accord ing to the liturgical

year (it com pris es 83 form ularies for the Tem poral and 79 for the

Sanctoral, which total nearly 565 pieces). It was probably written in

the first half of the seventh century under the pontificate of HonoriusI (625-638V05 In the second half of the seventh century this papal

sacramentary developed in three distinct directions, each one leading

to a different type of Gregorian Sacramentary.

77«? Gregorian o f the I lad rian um Tyjw'06 (see the stemma, p. 35)

This title designates the text sent by Pope Hadrian to Charlemagne

between 784 and 7 9 1; the greatest part of the m anu scripts that hav e

su rv ive d de rive from this text. The best am on g these is Cam brai,

B. M., ms. 164, written abou t 8 11 - 8 12 upon orders from Bishop

H ildo ard ; it is believe d to be a direct co p y o f the book rec eived by

C harlem ag n e.10? Its contents are v e ry c lose to those o f the book com

posed in the first half o f the seventh century u nd er P ope Honorius.

The fusion of the Temporal and Sanctoral into one liturgical year

Internationa] CoHoquios (Paris, tyR6) 637-644 (with references to and discussion

o f the important work of 1 1 . Ashw orth). The sam e author wa s kind enough to

share with m e—for wh ich I thank him very much—an unpublished study,

"Qu elques rem arques sur les oraisons de saint Grégo ire," 1 3 typewritten p ages

which 1 hope will be published. The ivories o f Camb ridge and F rankfurt am M ain

(second h alf of the ninth century) represent Gre go ry a s celebrant and liturgist,

and visua lly confirm the fact that the tw o m ain books of the time, that is, thesacramentary and the antiphonal, were attributed to Gregory (F. M. Knop, "Der

l.iturgiker a ls l.iturge: 7 m den lîlfenbeintafeln mit Htorstellungen der Messfeier in

Cam bridge und Frankfurt/ ' Ecclesia Ora»s 7 (1990) 23-42.

105, See principally C ha va sse 's important contributions, ' 'L'organisation

générale des sacramentaires dits grégo riens/' Revue des Scit'iict's religieuses 56

(1982) 179-200 and 253 -273; also Revue des S<'imces religieuses 57 {1963) 50-56; "L e



distin gu ishes it from the O ld Ge lasian. Throug ho ut the book, the for*

m ularies present the follow ing structure: one collect, one super obiata,

and one ad cotnplemium, with ve ry rare pro per prefaces, The term

used to des igna te the different orations (super oblata, ad complemlum)

as well as the absence of a second collect are the fundamental differ

ences between the Old Gelasian (presbyterial type used in Roman

parishes) and the Gregorian, very spare (festive type in use at the

p ap al court). The G rego rian o f the Hadrianutn type had been used in

the papal liturgy during the whole of the High Middle Ages so that it

had been stead ily aug m ented by the addition s to the liturgical yea r

m ade by the popes, notably Serg ius 1 (687-701) and G regory U

(7 15 -7 3 1), to wh om w e ow e the introduction of the M asses for the

Th ursd ays in Lent (see the stemm a).

In the context of the liturgical unification of the Em pire im ple

m ented by C harlem agne— Ihus renew ing his father 's undertaking—

this sacramentary arrived at the court of Aachen to be preserved

there as the "st an d ard " o f the text attributed to Pop e G rego ry, andcopies of w hich w ere to be dissem inated throughout the w ho le Em

pire.10* However, this sacramentary soon proved unsuited to the Em

pe ro r's unification policy. The court liturgists pro m ptly understood

that they w ere dea ling with a festive sacram entary intended to be

used on certain feasts only and clearly ill-adapted to the daily liturgi

cal needs of a parish. Whereupon Charlemagne complained to Pope

Hadrian who answered that he chose from the Lateran library whatseeme d to him the authentic sacram en tary of St. Greg ory. It is ea sy to

realize how em barrassed the Pope w as if one rem em bers that there

w as no uniform ity in the Roman liturgical practice at that time when

there w as no m andatory use of an y one sacramen tary, w ha teve r its

authority. Nevertheless, wishing to satisfy the request of the Frankish

sovereign, Hadrian simply picked out from the papal library the

book that app eared to him end ow ed w ith the literary an d religious

authority desired by Ch arlem agn e. But after crossing the A lps, this

sacramentary acquired a new status: from ancient collection it be

came an official book although it had not been written for that pur

pose. Recognizing the obvious unsuitability of the book, the liturgists



decided to correct the text (especially the rather mediocre Latin), then

to augment it with a supplement so that it could serve for the daily

liturg y The result is what is called the supplem ented Hadrianum. In

the past, it w as attributed to A lcuin, a m asterful Caro ling ian liturgistto wh om w c ow e the composit ion of m any votive M asses and even a

sacram en tary'"9 (see pp. 54-55)- H ow ever, nearly all h istorians agree

that it w as Benedict of An iane (C.750--821), the princ ipal reformer of

monastic life at the Council of Inden-Aachen in 836*817, w ho w a s the

m astermind of the supp lem en t to the Ha dria nu m“ 0 A t first appe nd ed

to the pure Gregorian, later on reorganized and incorporated into the

liturgical year, the supplement opens with a preface (called Hua&que

from the first w ord of the text) exp laining the w or k accom plished

and the very character of the supplem ent. This preface disapp eared,

a logical step, when the contents of the supplement were distributed

throughout the Hadrianum, from the year 850 on. Th e supplem ent it

se lf contains two parts: (1) many formularies, arranged according to

the liturgical year, that w ere m issing from the Hadriauum (Sundaysafter Christmas, after Epiphany, after Easter, after Ascension, after

Pentecost, C om m on of Saints, certain v otive M asses; var iou s bless

ings, consecrations, and ord inations for the use o f monastics; the ordo

o f baptism ; the who le o f ordinary Su nd ays, and so on); (2) 221 proper

prefaces, a series of blessings g iven b y the bishop, and the ritual for

the ordinations to minor orders. The principal sources consulted for

this w o rk of revision are the Old G elasian Sacramentary, the type IIG rego rian (for use by priests, see p. 54), and the Eighth-Century

G elasian wh ich in a certain w ay took its reveng e o ve r the Greg orian

109. J. Pesh usse s, "i-cs anciens sacramentaires de Tours," Rrt'uc bénédictin? 89

( 1979) 28 1-30 2; J. Desh usses and H. Barré, "A la recherche d u misset d ’AIcuin,"

Ephemerutes liiurgicae 82 {1968) 3-44; J. Deshusses, "L es m esses d 'Alc u in/ ' Archtv

ftir {.iturguitnsMtrschaJi 14 (»972) 7-41.n o . See J. Deshusses, "I.e supplément au sacramentaire grégorien: Alcuin ou

¿¿inl Benoît d'Aniane?" Archiv für Utur$itnvi$<*.'ii$chûft 9 (1965) 4 8 -7 1. Recently, J.

Décréaux, Le sucumentaire Ae Mumoulier (Aulun lybis) dans l'histoire Acs sacr/tutm- tain's carolingien* du /X- tiède. 2 vols . (Vatican City, 1985), thought he w as on solid

gro un d in attributing to I lelisachar (d. 836), the chan cellor o f the Em pire uniter

Lou is the Pious (reigned 814-84 0), the second part of the supp lem ent and the



(see pp . 46-48). Other sources a lso contributed to enrich ing the con

tents of the book: Alcu in's vo tive M asses, variou s Gallican doc u

ments, som e Visigothic pieces {such as nos. 14 0 0 -14 14 of the ritual tor

the liturgy of the dead).The descend ants of the Hadrianum are n um erous since this book

w a s the point o f departure for the evolu tio n from sacram enta ry to

m od em m issal.,n A s ea rly as the m iddle of the ninth century, it w as

the sacram entary used in a large p art o f the West, and the constant

additions and rem odelings it received an sw ered the needs of the

local liturgies. The im pre ssive num ber of its m anu scripts attests to

the success of the Hadrianum."2

The Type 2 Gregorian (Paduense)

W'e know this sacram enta ry th rough one single m anuscript copied

in the m iddle o f the ninth century, perha ps in northern Italy (Pad ua,

Bib!. C ap ., cod . D.47). Its contents su gg est a revision o f the G rego rian

executed betwee n 659 and 68 1 in order to ad ap t the papal sacrame n

tary to presbyterial u se .'1-1 Its direct de scen dants are practically n on

existent, but w e h ave seen in w ha t man ner the me dieval comp ilers

used it to compose the Eighth-Century Gelasian and, later on, the

supplement to the Hadrianunt.

Tin• Prc-Hadriiinic Gregorian

Deshu sses has pro ved the existence of a pre-H adrianic Grego rian

side b y side w ith the Hadrianum; it w as com posed about 685 on the

foundation o f the prim itive Grego rian and reached Ga ul at the end o f

the eighth or be ginn ing o f the ninth century, alon g w ith the iindria-

n m n . " 4 Its contents reveal the state of the Hadriamtnt before the pon

tificate of Sergius I, and the only witness to this text is the manuscript

of Trent, Museo Nazionale (Castel del Uuon Consiglio), probably

w ritten about 825 for the bishop o f Sal/burg , A rno, w ho w a s a clo sefriend of Alcuin. Like the Paduenst’, this man uscript did not have any

in . On this topic, see P. Bruytiants, Is* ora/sons du missel rontain, a vols. (Lou vain, 1952), and the well-documented article of A. Dumas. "I.is sources du nou veau missd romain," Notitiae {1971) 37ft.

112 See Camber CLLA 325-367



direct desce nd ants except in lou rs in the beginn ing of the ninth cen

tury w hen A icuin used it to com pose a sacram entary (called A lcu in's

M issal) to be used in his abbe y o f St.-M artin. It ha s been p ossib le to

reconstruct A lcu in's w ork thanks to tw o Sacram entarles o f Tours dating back to the ninth cen tury ” 5 and the Sacram entary o f Trent.116 In

spite of all this, many obscure areas remain concerning the exact

character of this sacram entary and the typ e (ecclesial) to wh ich it be-

longs. Th is difficulty is du e to the uncertain reconstitution o f Alcu in's

sacram entary, given the ma ny contam inations un dergone by the

manuscripts utilized for tliis reconstitution.

Evolution o f the Main Types o f Sacramentarles

$ $ o ami lo oo; The Composite Sacramentarles

Th e great success of the G regorian o f the supplem ented / ladrianum

type is not the final stage in the evolution of this sacramentary dur

ing the M iddle Ag es. For the historian o f the sacram en tary the tenth

and eleventh centuries mark both the progressive disappearance of

this book in fav or o f the m issal (see IV in this part) and the clea rly a f

firm ed w ill to prese rve it in the face of potential rivals in the dom ain

o f liturgical preem inence, such as the pontifical.

From the second h alf o f the ninth centu ry on , the fusion o f the

Hadrianum w ith its supp lem ent entailed rearrangem ents wh ose result

w as Ihe gradual additio n o f pic ces to this type, m ost of w hich were

present in the Eighth-Century Gelasian but had not been kept at thetime w hen the supp lem ent w as put together. The expression coined

by historians to designate the manuscripts having been thus modi

fied shows well the textual remodeling that took place: they speak of

"gelasian ized G reg oria ns ." In the course o f the tenth cen tu ry the

Gelasian proportion in the structure of the manuscript became so

preva lent that the G rego rian vestiges are som etime s difficult to detect

in a precise w ay. Th is process led to the creation o f a true Ge lasianbased on the Gregorian o f the supplem ented Hadrianum type. For in

stance, the structure of a fair nu m ber of fo rm ularies follow s that of

the O ld G elasian, w he reas others remain faithful to that of the G reg o

rian. These book s are som etim es called "com po site sacram entarles,"



an app ropriate expression to design ate this new kind o f sacram en

ta ry. These did not have any descend ants to speak o f because as early

as the year tooo, they were quickly supplanted by the new books

produced at that time, opening the way to a fresh period in the history o f the l iturgy and its boo ks.” 7

The main w itness to the com posite sacram entarles is ind isputably

the Sacramentary of Fulda (Gottingen, UniversitiitsbibL, cod. theol.

2 31) , com posed in the scriptorium o f Fulda about 9 75.n * It is the first

of a series oí sacram entados copied and decorated in Fulda for ex

port, and it is a true liturgical "monument" to the glory of the Car-

olingian pasl and its sacramentarles. The overabundance of prayers

pro ves lhat peop le w an ted sim p ly to gather together into an org a

nized w ho le all the great C arolingian crea lions in this dom ain. C e r

tain formu laries h av e an extra vag an t num ber of orations, much too

large for normal liturgical use: what we have here is a liturgical an

thology focused on the Carolingian period. Th is exceptional un der

taking, the on ly one o f its kind, can be exp lained by the liturgicalrivalry between the pontifical com posed in M ain/ ab out 960-961 on

the orders of Otto I (936-973) with a view to unifying the Kmpire and

the sacram entary as such, which had also served this sam e plan of

unification in C ha rlem ag n e's time. Feeling the sacram entary w as

threatened by the pontifical and supported by the Ottonian rulers,

the mo nks of Fulda so m ehow w anted to remind their society o f the

religious and political authority of a book already in decline. I low-ever, it was a false rivalry between the two liturgical books since their

characters w ere rad ically different and excluded an y competition.

4. I L L U S T R A T IO N O F S A C R A M E N T A L E S

D U R I N G T H E H IG H M I D D L E A G E S

In the research on the illustration of liturgical books, sac ra m en ta les

alw ay s occup ied a sp ecial place. The reasons for this pa rticular treatm ent are to be sou gh t in the im portance o f the sacram entary for the

typology of liturgical manuscripts and in the fact that it was one of

the earliest books to be adorned, at first by a simply ornamental dec

117. In addition to some works on particular points of the manuscripts, a com



oration and later on by iconographie cycles. Besides the m an y m ono

grap hs, w e ow e to Germ an scholars the best syntheses published on

this topic.1"’’ In France, I.eroqu ais' catalog ue s, though alread y dated,

remain a mine o f inform ation for art historians, and their introductions are still ve ry precious as a sum m ary of each type of book un der

study, includ ing the sacram entary.120

Th e first illustrated sacram éntanos ap peared du ring the Carolingian

period. In spite of an un paralleled deco rative richness, they did not

yet have a fixed iconography. In deed, in the beginning, liturgical books

w ere not meant to receive any narrative il lustration. Ixît us recall that

in the eighth and ninth centuries, the m anuscripts w hich painters abun

dan tly decorated w ere m ostly non-liturgical. The Bible w as treated

w ith partic ula r care in th is respect in confo rm ity w ith the paleo-Chris-

tian tra dition.121 The illustration of the Bible (the G os pels in particu

lar) p laye d a major role in the establishment o f icono graph ie cycles

which w ere later on integrated into the .sacramentarles.1“

A m on g the m any sacram entarie s o f the eighth and ninth centu riesthat hav e been preserved to ou r day, a rather sm all nu m ber are illus

trated in an icono graphie or m erely ornam ental m aimer. O nly som e

have the monogram VD (V 'ere Uignum) of the com m on preface and the

T o f the Tc igilu r in the canon o f the M ass adorn ed w ith interlacings

an d var iou s vegetab le motifs. ‘lï\e G ellon e Sacram entar)' (Paris, 13. N.,

lat. 12048) is an exception w ith its anthropom orphic and zoom orphic

letters an d the representation o f the crucifixion inserted in the canono f the M ass .131 It is on ly from the second ha lf of the ninth century on,

and especially in the tenth century, that the textual stability progres

sive ly acquired b y the sacram entarles is accom panied b y a trend of

system atization in the m ann er of illustrating them. Those sacram en

tarles of the ninth century which are the most richly dcco ratcd present

119 . Th ere is groat profit to be derive d from consu lting the ancient but fundamental studies of A . Springer, "D er Bilderschm uck in Sacramentar»»« des friihcn

Millelalter," Abhm uilungen P/iilologi?ch-Hi$torischen Classe der Kijnigt. SUcfisiadien

Ge>ell$chaJ) (ter Wfcsenschaften (I-eipzig, 1&89) 339-37H, and Ebner, M ístale Romanunt,

429-453 , to w hich one must add O. Pacht, Buchmulerei uV> M ille la lter (Munich,

1984) 32-44, and Litúrgica Vaticana, 32-34.120. I.eroquais, StfrrdwitviitfMVS. i:XXXU-XL!.



a diversified iconography without fixed rules. The Sacramentary of

Marmoutier (Aulun, B. M.f ms. 19 bis), w ritten in Tours about 850,

m ixes christoiogical themes w ith litúrgica] scenes (Abb ot R agan aldus

blessing the m onks, the conferring o f minor ord ers).1^ The incom plete (or fragm entary) Sacram cn lary o f Ch arles the Bald, perhaps

w ritten in M et/ about 869, o f w hich on ly a part o f the canon o f the

M ass rem ains (Paris, B. N., Int. 11 4 1) ,125 presents a pa rticularly d ev el

oped iconogra ph y (illustration of the Sanctus w ith an imag e of the

hea ven ly hierarchy) which w ill not become the rule in all subsequen t

sacram enta ries. M uch to the contrary, in the tenth an d eleventh cen

turies, the painters will be content with interlacings or vegeta ble m o

tifs for the com m on pre face and the representation of Ch rist crucified

before the Tc igilur; a certain number of these representations become

a strong the ological126 statement. Lastly, let us cite the Sacram entary

of Drogo (Paris, B. N., lat. 9428), written in Metz in the middle of the

ninth century; its ornamental decoration and christoiogical, hagio

grap hie, an d liturgical c ycles lodg ed in the initials m ake it on e of thegem s of m edieval il lum ination.127 Often, the im ages of these ma nu

scripts grea tly influenced the illustration not only of the sacramen-

taries of the tenth an d e leventh cen turies,128 but also those o f m any

other liturgical books.

The icon og raph y of sacram entarles can be classified into four m ain

thematic categories: (1 ) the illustration o f the calen da r w ith the sign s

of the Zodiac an d ev en tua lly the w ork s of the months, (2-3) the cycleof the New Testament and hagiographie representations for the great

feasts of the Temporal and the Sanctoral, and (4) the scenes with litur

gical sign ifican ce for the ritual pa rt o f the sacramentary. In som e rare

cases— in general, ro ya l or im perial com m issions— one finds illustra

tions deve lopin g themes o f political theology. One goo d ex am ple of

124. See R. E. Reynolds, "The Raganaldus Sacramentary and lis Litúrgico-Canonical Significance," S/«;n/.vni 46 (1971) 432-442.

125 . See the facsim ile of this manuscript (G raz, 1974) with «in introduction by F.Miitherich.

126. See the exhaustive stud y by R. Sunlrnp, comp lete with a g ood repertory of

the works under study, “Teigitur: Initialed u nd Kan onb ilder in mittelalterikhen

SakrameritarhnnHschriften," Text und Bild {Wiesbaden. J980) 278-382.



this is the W armund Sacra m entary (ivre a, Bibl. capit., cod. 86), m ade

for the bish op o í Ivrea (969—ío i 1); in sev eral plac es it glo rifies (he

person of Otto III (reigned 983-1002) through images stressing the di

vine orig in o f the em p eror's pow er.1*9 In the m anuscrip t, one o f thepictures o f the coronation of Otto represents tw o a m pu llae for the

anointing— w he reas the text of the ordo m entions on ly one— thus ex

pressing the theology o f the rex and $acerdo$ (king and priest) by

closely associating the anointing of baptism with the anointing ot* the

coronation. The two am pu llae, also sho w n in the representations of

the baptism o f Ch rist and that o f Con stantine in the sam e m anuscript

signify that the sovereign (Otto) is invested with a twofold power,priestly and royal. The explanation for these representations is found

in the de sire of the O ttoman e m pe ror to restore the connection w ith

the C aro lingian tradition and to establish him self as the legitimate

heir of the Roman Emperor.

H ow w ere the different im ages of a cycle organized? W hat w as the

placement of iconographic representations within the textual struc

ture? Is there a direct relation between the text and the illuminations?

A m on g the m any th em es form in g the ic onographic cycle, som e are

transmitted toge ther (this is the case in particu lar for the scenes o f

the N ew Testament, ha vin g in gene ral originated in the illustration o f

Bibles); others com e from isolated im ages (most often those of ivo ry

and gold work); still others are entirely new creations to fit a particu

lar text, such as those illustrating a ritual (bap tism , anointing of thesick, and so on). One o f the major functions of Ihe decoration of

sacramen tarles w as to underscore the ve ry structure of the liturgical

year through the successio n o f the M ass fo rm ularie s, to accent the

structure o f the ritual by setting off the texts of the ordines. The deco

ration, ornamen tal or figurative, visu ally em pha sizes the salient

points of the liturgical year, ab ove all the most important feasts o f the

Temporal and Sanctoral; in addition, it is tailored to the needs andcircum stances o f the place w he re the m anuscript w as to be used.

Through an original treatment o f the subject, the decora tion can even

129, R. Deshrrvw , "Otto III <md the Warmund Sarramentarv: A studv in Politi

cal Th eology," Zcitscltrifi fi ir Kunstgeschichte (19 71 ) 1-20 . In the sam e vein, see the



propose a theological interpretation oí the feast, as, for instance, the

paintings accom panying the form ularies o f the M ass o f A ll Saints in

the Pulda Sacram entarles, w ho se iconography is very inn ovative and

rich. In the sam e m anu scripts, there are other them es not be long ingto the classical icono grap hie cycle, such as, for exa m ple, the represen

tation of Popes G reg ory and G elasiu s in Ihe process of w riting their

respective sacramentarles;1 *" this illustration at the beginning of the

book show s that the monk-com pilers were fully aw are o f producing

a liturgically composite sacramentary.

The relationsh ips betw een the orations and the iconog raph ie repre

sentations are tenuous. The content o f the orations and of the non-narrative texts lend themselves poorly to illustration. Consequently,

side b y sid e w ith the strictly liturgical text, the different im ages o í the

christological cycle offer a na rrative and linear read ing of the story of

C hrist in parallel w ith the texts of the pray ers. This sam e "v isu aliz a

tion " of the gospe l narratives w ill reappear in the evan geliaries (see

III, 5, of this part). The hagiographie story is not linear, but the con

nection betw een the im ages and the texts is as elu sive as tor the im

age s from the life o f Christ. On ly the scenes w ith a liturgical character

(description o f actions) have som e relation w ith the text— the text of

the rubrics in the ordo, not that of the pra yer s— that they accompany.

T his absence of direct correlation betw een text and illustration in

sacrame ntarles partly explains w h y all the paintings are done within

frame s wh ich are set in the ov erall layout, som etim es occup ying afull page, sometimes inserted within the text, sometimes placed in

side ornamented initials. The liberation of the image from the text

and its subsequent autonom y are a phenom enon w hich develope d in

conjunction w ith Ihe diffusion o f the codex du ring antiquity, an d is

not p eculiar lo religious bo ok s.131

Apart from th e decorativ e aspect, one m ay w onder w hether such

illustrations, joined to the text which the celebrant must speak, playedany role in the act of p ray ing itself. It is fitting to be pru de nt on this

point because w e kn ow nothing of the eventual stim ulating effect

130. Authors' portraits are encountered more commonly in the psalters wilh thefigure of King David or in the evangeliaries with representations of the tour evan



produced on the theological discourse by these images. During the

celebration itself, they pro bab ly serv ed on ly as visual landm arks, a

sort of instantaneous rem inder— the very' nature of im ages is to

quic kly su gge st— o f the the me o f Ihe liturgy of the day.1*2 Non etheless, it is possible that cerlain illustrations m ay ha ve been the occa

sion for the creation of a theo logical discou rse through im ages, but

this rema ins exceptional in liturgical m anu scripts. Wo m ust not forget

that these illuminations contributed to the beaut)' of the sacred books

(including the sacram entary) and that they w ere sub ject to aesthetic

criteria in order to w orth ily honor the w ord of G od . M any m edieval

texts insist on Ihe m aterial valu e o f the liturgical boo ks beca use sinceSt. Jerom e, peoples deem ed that nothing w as too beau tiful wh en it

cam e to the pra ise of Go d. With this attitude, it is not surp risin g that

the liturgical book s arc by far the most num erou s am on g the books

thal have received sumptuous bindings with gold work, ivory work,

and precious stones.1’ * Th e fam ous binding o f the Drogo Sacram en

tary has scenes describing, among other things, the celebration of the

Euch arist in M etz in the ninth centu ry after the introduction o f the

ordiue* romani1*4 into G au l; it is the m ost striking ex am ple o f the ef

fort m ade by clerics o f the M iddle A ge s to adorn in a fitting m anner

the book of w orsh ip p ar excellence, the sacram entary.

13 2. Sw; f.-C. Bonne, "Ritu el d e la couleur: Fonctionnement et usa ge d es imagos

da ns te sacramentam* de Saint-Htienne d e Lim oges/' Imagee l signification, Rencon



II. The Books of Chant

i , H 1S T O K Y O F L I T U R G I C A L C H A N TIN T HE HIG H M IDDLE A G ES

Th e h istory of liturgical chant in antiqu ity and the: I iigh M iddle

A ges interests not only m usicolo gists but also liturgists and histo ri

ans. N um erou s studies b y m usicologists espec ially m ake it possible

to reconstruct the histo ry of the liturgico-m usical fo rm s o f the High

M iddle A ge s through the different fam ilies of liturgical chant. N o w a

d ay s there is a better app reciation of the imp ortance o f oral transmission in the practices o f antiquity and the High M iddle A g e s because

for all those centuries the transm ission o f pieces an d their me lodies

relied entirely on oral memory.*35 in the seventh century, Isidore of

Seville (c.560-636) wrote about this, "if people do not retain the

soun ds in their mem ories, the sou nd s perish because they cannot be

written."*36 And yet, the eighth and ninth centurie s sa w the rise of the

cod ification o f liturg ical chan t in the West, thanks to the creation o f anotation system and the multiplication of books wh ose pu rpo se w as

to he lp cantors me m orize the repertories o f m elodies (see pp. 68-69).

During antiquity, the first forms of chant were very close to the way

the readings w ere proclaim ed in churches. Cantillation, a w ay o f read

ing verging on melody, and responsorial chant, the alternation of a

eantillated psa lm with a short respon se by the assem bly, are at the ori

gin o f liturgical chant pro pe rly so ca lled .137 I^ater on, the chants of the

liturgy— M ass an d O ffice— fall into two categories found throughout

135. See Hlich, CoHfr'.th'oru/. 1:44-125; Pierce, "Using Liturgical Texts" (summary on IUich).

136. N isi etum (lb homine monoria teiu'antur, s oni pereunt, quia scribi non po»$unt.



the Western churche s: antip ho ns and respo nso ries.1'8 Su ng at differ

ent moments of the celebrations (see the table of the structure of the

celebration o f a M ass, pp. 19-20 ), the picces we re ge ne rally per

formed from memory by the soloist and the sc/10/iî cwi/onfw.From the eighth century on, especially under the reign of Pepin the

Short (751-768), Roman liturgical usages reached Gaul, first through

individual initiatives, mostly those of pilgrims, later on through the

official action of the state. A s a result o f its transfer from Rom e to

Gaul,1'9 the repertory of liturgical chant used in Rome for several

centuries w as sub m itted to m odifications. It w a s also at that tim e that

the repertories proper to different rites became individualized and

w ere sun g to their ow n particular m elo dies.140 A l that time, G rego

rian chant w as taught by cantors in a large part of Gau l on the basis

of a classification of the antiphons in a special book, the tonarv, in

w hich the antiphons are arranged under the eight to nes o f the G rego

rian chant.141 The Ca rolingian period w as also m arked b y the ap pe ar

ance and de velopm ent of neumatic notation, a true m em ory aid forthe cantors, but not yet in any way a true musical notation in the

strict sense. The neumes (from the Latin hi’iwm'4*) are graphic signs

w ritten above the w ord s of liturgic al texts (antip hons, responsories,

and so on), a catnpo aperto ["in an op en field"], that is to say, without

stave s; these sign s helped can tors remem ber the m elod y approp riate

for a given text.'43 Regarding liturgical chant, ihe neumatic notation

that developed in the ninth century was in some way a support of

138. C oncern ing the history and technical characteristics of antiphon s and re-

sponso ries, see Ifu jţlo, ibid., 25-27,139. See H. Hueck, "Die Hinfiihrung des Gregoriairischen Gesanges im Pranken-

reich," Ronnsche Quart<il$chrift 49 (1954) 1 7 2- 18 7 ; Ph. Bernard, "S ur un aspect con

troversé de to réforme carolingienne, 'vieux-ro m ain' et ‘gré go rien ."' Eccksia

Omrts 7(19 90 ) 163-18 9.140 . See, for exa m ple , the repertory o f the Beneven to liturgy, M. I lug lo, "t.'an*

cien chant bénéventain," ftr /ts if O h m s 2 (198s) 265-293.

141. See M. Huglo, Les toiwin*: Inventaire, analyse, civnţiartiiaon* (Paris, 1971)-

t ;-> in the Middle Ages , the word tteunui had a broader m eaning than the one w e

are used to—a grou p o f notes sun g on one syllable: it could design ate a melody, a

melisma, a responsorv o f the choir, amo ng other possible m eanings. See A.-M.



the oral tradition; at the sam e time, by pro ducing a chant bo ok, it

gav e concrete exp ression to the effort at codification-through -writing

of liturgical practices, an effort characteristic o f the Caro lingian pe

riod. The chant m anu scripts w ere not yet system atically prov ided

w ith neum es; only in the tenth century, w ould the neum es occupy all

the spaces between the lines o f text.144 Since the en d of the nineteenth

century, w ith the publication of the Paleographic musicale of Solesmes,

m usicologists have stressed the importance o f a sound kn ow ledge of

the different traditions of neuinatic notation, a knowledge necessary

from the historical and liturgical viewpoints and equally needed for

the reconstitution of ancient melodies.

a . T H K C H A N T S O F T H E R O M A N M A S S 1«

In the celebration of a Mass, the orations and canon belonged to the

celebrant using h is sacram en tary; the read ings w ere reserved for the

deacon and sub deacon eq uippe d w ith their ow n books (see III, 5-6, in

this part); finally, the lyrical component of the Mass was the province

of the soloists and the schoia cantorum. In the cou rse o f a eucharistiecelebration (see the table o f the structure o f the celebration o f a M ass,

pp . 19 -20 ), cantors had their severa l p arts to play in perfect synch rony

w ith the other actors in the celebratio n. A m ong the chants at M ass, it

is necessary to distingu ish those w hich ch ang e from d ay to da y (the

chants of the prop er o f the M ass) and those which a re invariable,

w hatever the feast (the chants o f the ordin ary o f the M ass) .

The Chants o f the Proper

The five chants of the pro per va ry throughout the ye ar and are,

w ith very fe w exceptio ns, bib lical, and m ost often, psalm ic . They are

designa ted by the generic term o f antiphon (atrtiphona).1*6 The introït

antiphon, usua lly sun g w ith one or several psalm verses, accom pa

nied the entrance procession into the church at the beginning of the

celebra tion.'47 The o ffertory and com m union chants also accom panied

144. During llu? High Middle Ages, one ntso often fituls chant pieces with

neumes in non-liturgical m anuscripts; frequen tly this is because of .ulditions. See

L>. Hscudier, "D es no tations mu sicales da ns tes m anu scrits non liturgiqu es an

térieurs au X ir siècle," Bibliothèque de I'Ftviet int Chtirles 129 ( 1971) 27-48.

1 (5 S w especially A Hkenberg Cur cantatur? Die Funktion de< liturgiehcn



processions, the first o ne d urin g the presentation o f the gifts, before

the consecration o f the bread and w ine, the second, du ring com m un

ion. Ih is last, the final sun g piece of the M ass, which im m ediately

follow ed the A gn u s Dei and the breaking o f the bread, has a structure close to that of the introit.’ 4“ The offerto ry chant co uld last as

long as w as nece ssary du ring the preparation o f the bread and w ine;

this is why the antiphon is followed by a large number of verses.144

The gradual, placed after the reading of the epistle, is the oldest of

the chants o f the prop er of the M ass. M ade o f a g rad ua l antiphon (re

sponse) and its verse , it used to be sun g by the soloist at the ambo,

standing not quite at the top—a place reserved for the gospel—buton a low er step, the grndit*, hence the term "gradual" to desigilate

this chan t.,5° The gr adu al w as imm ediately follow ed by the alleluia,

sun g before the gosp el an d still ha vin g one psalm verse attached to

it. The alleluia was introduced into the Roman Mass about the sev

enth century as a p relud e to the reading o f the gosp el; it announ ced

the com ing glory of C hrist the S av ior and accom pan ied the entrance

procession of the holy bo ok .1 ’ 1

Tfte Chants o f the Ordinary

The Kyrie eleison, the Sanctus, and the Agnus Dei are the three

main chants of the ordinary, to which one can add the Gloria and the

C re d o ,'52 sun g on certain occasions du ring the High M iddle Ag es.

The first three are g rou ps of acclamations.

The Kyrie, at first pu rely christological, comes directly after the in-troit and has taken tlte form o f a threefold supplication add ressed lo

the Father, a threefold supp lication add ressed to the Son, and ag ain a

threefold supplication addressed to the Father.'53 In all likelihood, it

148. See Jungman n, MS. 3:325-3 35; bkenberg, Cur cantatur, 105-109.

149. Jung inan n, M S, 2:298-304; F.kenberg, C ur eantatur. 8*5-89.

150. R. ). Hesbert, "Le graduel: Chant responsorial," Epltemeride* liturgica? 95(1981) 316-350 ; Jungmann, MS, 2:188-211; F.kenberg, Cur amtalur, 61-68.

15 1. A .-C. Martimort, "Origine et signification d e rA llelu ia de la m esse ro

maine," Meus concorde! twet: Pour Mgr A.-C. Martimort < 11'occasion e srs quarante an

nées rfVwivtgrrfnM?«! et des- vingt ans de la ftwisirtMlk?» Saow iiw lm u ùuit'i/umr (Paris,

1983) 95-122; Ekenberg, Cur cantatur. 68-75.

152 . Concerning the Greek versions o f these chants encountered in the m anu



w as intro duced into the Roman M ass befo re 529.1J4 A s for the Glo ria

(Luke 2:13-14), immediately following the Kvrie, it was originally re

stricted to the pontifical Christmas iiturgv. Because it is a hymn of

praise, it w as not sun g du ring times of penance or preparation, such as A dvent, Lent, the feast of the H oly Innocents.155 The Sanctus, strongly

focused on the Trinitarian faith, imm ediate ly follow s the preface intro

du cing the canon of the Mass, and w a s sun g by the priest;'56 it w as not

part of the primitive eucharistic liturgy but w as introduced into the

M ass about the fifth or sixth cen tury as an ad dress to C hrist.137 The

biblical text (threefold Sane Ins from Isaiah 6:3) w a s com bined with the

exclamation "Hosanna. . . " a reminiscence from Matthew's Gospel(21:9). Hie A gn us IX*i, sung at the moment of the breaking o f the bread,

is a threefold christological supplication and was adopted by the Roman

liturgy only about 700. Fundamentally, it is praise directed to Christ.158

The Credo, du ring the celebration o f M ass, app eare d first in the East in

the sixth century; in the West, it soon took the form of an expression of

faith said before Com m union. From the end o f the eighth century, it

w as sun g after the gospel readin g, but just occasio nally; it became an

integral part o f the l.atin M ass onlv in 1014.*59The G loria, Sanctus, and Cre do w ere included in the sacram entary

but were solem nly sun g by cantors. On ly the Kyrie w as a lw ay s in

clud ed in the antiph ona l (also called the gradu al). From the tenth

century on, these chants w ere frequently regroup ed into the books in

tended fo r the cantors and the schola cantorum; they had musical notation acco rding to se ve ral repertories, along w ith othe r chan ts that

came to enrich the I,atin Mass.

Enrichment o f the. Chant at Mass

A m ong the prin cipal creations o f the H ig h M id dle A ges in matter

of liturgical chant, one must mention the tropes, proses (or sequences),

154. Chavasse, "A Rom e," 25-44.

155. J. Magne, "Ctirmtna Christo, 3: Lc Gloria iti excel*!*." Epherucritiez liiitr^icae »no(1986) 368-390; Hkonbarg, Cur eautatur. 54-61 .

156. C oncern ing the history of the Sanctus, see I, the section on the sacramentary,

in this part, as well as G. Iversen, ed., Tro/vs tie ¡'ordinaire tie !a messe: Tropes du Sanctus. Corpus froporum 7 (Stockholm, 1990) 17-24; Ekenberg, Cur euntatur, 89-93.



an d pm sules. A spe cifically mon astic phenom enon, the tropes arc

text-b ased o r m elo dy-b ased ,0° chant*», extra-bib lical in orig in, that are

interpolated into the texts o r m elodies o f certain liturgical chants o f

the pro per or ordina ry o f the M ass in order to offer an exegelical interpretation of these chants.If” Owing to their theological richness,

the tropes ha ve in recent ye ar s been studied by liturgists, historians,

ph ilologists, m usicologists, art historians, w ho ha ve called attention

to their historical interest.16,1 Certain grea t m onastic centers, C lun y

principally, were opposed to this kind of composition since their spir

ituality did not correspond to the prevalent liturgical sensibility of

the time.163 The sequence is a melody*based trope of the alleluia; the

prosu le is inserted at the end of the con cludin g respo nso ries of each

noctum,6i in the office 0/ Matins. Finally, in ali these pieces o f the

High M iddle A ge s, the literary and poetic aspects are of prim e im

portance. The most beautiful Latin versification harmoniously allies

vvilh the richness of the li turgical m elo dies, respecting both metrical

and musical rules; one does not melodize just any texl or textualizciTcxlierung) just any melody.

Liturgical and Codteological Preliminaries

In I he beginn ing, the sole function of the boo ks of chant w as sim

ply to transmit the liturgical texts because the melodies were part of

the oral repertory. From the Caro lingian p eriod on, the liturgical

repertory for the M ass and Office w as established and w as dissem i

nated principally by means of the book, at first without notation.

160. Th e text-based tropes wo re entirely ne w com positions , trot mid melody,

grafted onto a pre-existing liturgical text. whereas, in the melody-based tropes,

the text w as gen erated by tin-* liturg ical melody.

i6 t. Se e, for instance, the interpretations of Am alariu s o f M et/ (0.750-780) for

the tropes o f the K yrie in R. Johnson. "Am alair e de Metz ot les tropes d u Kyric

eleison," Classic# e! iwduwvalia: Francisco Kfoll sepiuagcmiria dedkata (GvUlendal,»973)510-540.

16a- The team of the Corjnn Troparttm of Stockholm U niversity h as already p ub

lished seven volu m es of the great edition of the tropes o f the High M iddle Ages.

The p roceedings o f several conferences ha ve also been pu blished. See the recent

tn tritdizhvic dei iropi iilurgici, alti dci convcgnt uii Iropi hturgici. Paris <15 -19 Octo

ber 7985), Perugia (2- 5 Septem ber j 987), ed. K. \len»*sro (SpoleHv 1990).



H ow ever, the book, eve n in its final form o f codex w as not the only

channel. In order to set dow n in w ritin g new m usical com positions,

the rohtlus (sec pp. 78-79) and the tibelfus, both older than the book

properly so called, played an important role. Like the sacramontary and missal, the early books of chant’*5 were often made up of the col

lections o f several (¡belli (see the t ropers, II, 6, of this part). From the

ninth cen tury on, and throughout the w ho le o f the M idd le A ge s, the

iibelhts w a s also used to circulate a ne w o ffice, or a new' M ass, no

tably as far as chant w a s conce rned .166

On the cod icologic plane, the m anu scripts o f chant of the High

M iddle Ag es show two peculiarities that distingu ish them from other

liturgical books. Their format is sm aller than ave rag e; this is partly

explained by the way they were used at that time: in general, only

the solo ist condu cting the sdio/n w a s in po ssession o f the book, as a

m em ory aid. The book of chant is often ob long with na rrow pages

bec ause the soloist had to be able to hold it with one han d, contrary

to the celebrant, whose book rested on the altar, and the deacon, whoread the gospel from the book placed on the ambo. Only in the thir

teenth century, w ou ld the large choir lecterns allo w the achola to fol

low the chant in the big antiphonals (60 to 70 centimeters long)

w ritten in especia lly la rge characters.167

3 . T H E A N T I P H O N A L O F T H E M A S S O R G R A D U A L ' 68

The m asculine noun antiphonariun, or the neuter noun antiphonale derive from antiphoiui ["antiphon," "sung piece"]. With the an-

tiphonal's appearance in the eighth century, either word designated

the antiphonal o f tin? Office, the antiph onal o f the M ass, or else the

m anu scripts that contain both rep ertories. The ancient library cata

logues as well as the inventories of the treasuries kept in cathedrals

dem onstrate that the people of the M iddle Ag es used antiphowirius to

mean indistinctly an y typ e of antip hon al.1** In the second ha lf o f the

165. See Palazzo, "Role d es Hbelli."

16b. See Huglo, Lvre s lit' chant, 64-75.

167. See Huglo, ibid., 75-78, and D. Escudier, "Les manii&crits muskMux du

Move» Agt* (du IX'' ,iu XII1' sit’d«}: Kssai di* tvpologie," Ctxlicologica 3 (1980) 34-35 .



eighth century, the pieces of’ the Office on the one hand and those of

the Mass on the other were progre&sivelv separated into two different

books: the O ffice antiphonal and the M ass antiphonal. Th e latter is

m ore com m on ly called gr adu al (a term rather frequent in lho secondpa rt o f the M iddle A ges), after the chant o f the prope r of Ihe M ass in

troducing the alleluia.

History

Throu ghout the M iddle A ge s, peop le attributed to St. Greg ory (590-

604), besides the saeram cntary, the com po sition o f the chants of the

M ass. In his life o f G rego ry. John the Deacon (825-880) w rites at theend of the eighth century that the pope com posed an antiphonal for

the Roman schola awtorum.170 M od em criticism easily exp lain s this at

tribution within the perspective of the Carolingian reform, which even

in the liturgical dom ain, needed an argument d ra w n from authority

in order to impose a document.171 Be that as it may, the prologue Gre

gorius praesul ("Bishop G reg ory"), w hich is found in the earliest gr ad

uate an d w as pro bably co m posed about 800, attests to the m edievalbelief in G reg o ry's authorship. A s for the mod ern editors of the M ass

antiphonal, they for the most part sho w ed n o hesitation abo ut w rit

ing the pope's name in the title.'72 We are indebted to Hesbert for the

critical edition o f the six oldest m anu scripts (from the eighth and

ninth centuries)175 o f the M ass antiphon al; it is a w ork indispen sable

to all research in the history o f the book an d the pieces it contains.*"4


The grad ua l com prises the chants o f the pro per o f the M ass and sec

on da rily (at least du ring the H igh M iddle Ages) those of Ihe ordinary.

It presents the Tem poral a nd the San ctoral com bined (except after

See Becker, Gilahgt, and Bischofi, Scluitzi'erzekfini$$c; sec also thy distinction made

by A m olan us betw een the different chant books, J. M. H anssens, ed.. A in ahni quwof/t o fvm fifttrgiar ifi/wM. vol. 1 : L ilvr d r ordine <wiiphoittirii, Sludi e 118

(Vatican City, 1948) "Prologue 17 ,” p. 363.

»70. Wi.i Grcgorii 2.6. (PL 75, col. yo).

171. See the recent update by M. Huglo, "L'antiphonaire: archetype ou reper

toire orifiinel? " Grcgoirefe Gnnul. 661-669.

172. See, for instance, |. M. Tomasi, ontitMtm ¡1 S. Gregorio Optra



Easter and Pentecost) into one homogeneous liturgical year where

Easter falls on A pril 3. It begins w ith the first Su n da y o f Ad ven t

{whereas the sacramentarles and evangeliaries open with the vigil of

the Nativity) and ends w ith the feast o f Saint And rew on N ovem ber30. it contains more than 560 pieces, of w hich 70 are introit antiphons,

118 are gradual responsories, 100 alleluia verses, 18 t T a c t s (chants re

placin g the alleluia on certain p enitential da ys), 107 offertories, and

150 com m union antiphons.

Origin, Date o f Composition, and Evolution

Learned w ork s have clearly show n that the "G reg oria n " gradualha s its roots in the Ro m an liturgy as celebrated in the ba silicas.1"5

However, the manuscript tradition has transmitted to us a liturgical

and musical revision undertaken about 780 in the Frankish realm, on

the basis of a Rom an model o f the secon d h alf of the eighth century.

It is therefore difficult to go further back in the search for the original

repertory (a notion to be preferred to that of archetype)176 and for the

oldest forms o f the M ass antiphonal. The studies of C ha vasse havenonetheless shown that on the whole, the repertory of the Mass

chants took shap e at the same tim e as the repertories of the book s of

read ings and the sacram entaries, that is, in Rom e betw een the fifth

and seven th c en turies.177

From the Carolingian period o n, the evo lution o f the M ass anti-

phon al w as determined by tw o facts: elements that were originally

movable became fixed and texts increased in number. Among the

different chants of the proper, som e (like the alleluia ve rse s and the

gradu ate) w ere, m ore often than others, either fixed o r subject to va ri

ation in the course o f centuries. M an y chan ges also occurred in the

Sanctoral, especially through the creation of Masses for patron saints

17 5. See in particular A. C'havasse, "L e s p lus onciens types du lcelionnaire et de1 'antiphonaire do la m esse," R o w bi-iiMictiiie 62 ( 19 52 ) 3—9.1; "I ¿\ formation de

VAntiphomilc wissririim," BuUelm ttu ContiIt* i/rs Eludes de SainhSulpice 32 <1961)29- 41 ; “Qtntatorium et Anliphona!e mtssnrum: Quel<|ues proced es d e confection, di*

mancho* aprte» lo P entecóte, grad ué is du sa nctora l," Fxclesia Onuis {1984) 15-55;

and Ch avasso, "Hvang éliaire," especially 2 30-237.

176 See M I lu^lo "L 'éd ilion critique di» I'antiphonairo gré go rien " Sír/jjiúrjMm



an d the formation o f a Com m on o f Saints, w he reas the Temporal re

mained rather stable. Let us note also that from the eleventh century

on, five chants of the ordinary were inserted into the Gradual; for

merly, they were most often written in the sacramentarv, because of their place and role in the celebration, or less often in books like the

tropcr when they were ornamented with tropes (see II, 6, of this part).

Historical Importance o f the Antiphonal o f tin* Mass

Like the sacramentary, the antiphon als (of the M ass and o f the O f

fice) w ere de stined to becom e the official book se rv ing the politics of

liturgical unification undertaken by the Carolingian rulers. We haveseen that the adoption of the gradual in Gaul went hand in hand with

the kn ow ledge an d diffusion of Gregorian chant, then used in Rome,

by bishops and monastics in their liturgies.'78 But in contradistinction

to the O ffice antipho nal, the gr ad ual w a s not rem ode led cither in its

texts or in its repertory. H ug lo has rem arked that the divisio n o f the

repertory of the antiphon al into tw o grou ps (lands o f G erm an ic lan

gu age s in the east and lands o f Rom ance lan guages in the west), whichevo lved in separate w a y s from the midd le o f the ninth century, very

probably results from the division of the Carolingian Empire in 843 at

the Treaty o f Verd un .179

I us end b y looking at one o f the m anuscripts o f the ninth century,

the Antiphonal o f Com piegne (Paris, 15. NJ., lat. 17436), whose origin is

still debated by specialists; written about 860-880, it was in use at St.

Cornelius of Compiegne, imperial chapel of Charles the Bald (reigned

840-877).,So G y h as aptly d em onstrated that it w a s p erha ps an exact

copy of the antiphonal in use at Charlemagne's court in Aachen at the

beg inning o f the ninth century, a d ocum ent wh ich has been lost to

us.'81 This manuscript is m ade up ot two parts (gradu al in fols. iv -30v ,

antiphonal in fols. 31V-k»7v)#probably originally distinct. Both parts

178. See the testim ony o f Paul the Deacon (c .jao-c .&x i), Ct’sJii ephcoporun j Me/-

h'ttsium. NIGH, Sc. 2:268.

179. Sec Huglo. Uvrt's Jr chant, 84.180. See especially J. Froger, "L e lieu d e destination el d c proven ance du G>m-

pi’Hitit’/ isis ," I.-if w m concordat, 353; Meshcri, AM S, nos. 17 -19 .

181 P -M Gy "I e Corpus Anliphonalium Officii et les antiphonairescar-



arc adorn ed w ith a frontispiece-prologue, richly decorated, ascribing

ihc composition of the books to St. Gregory. Written with great care in

gold letters and embellished w ith ornate initials, this sum ptuous manu

script, used at the imperial court, acquires for this reason a particularimportance fo r historians of liturgy because it is the sole w itness to

the official character o f the antiphon al.1®2

4- T H E G R A D U A L O U T S ID E T H E G R A D U A L (OR

A N T IP H O N A L OF THK M A SS)

So m e rare med ieval m anu scripts juxtapo se into a perfect codico-

logical and paleog raph ic unity the sacram entary p rop erly so called

and the grad ua l, or a table o f the incipits in the g ra d u al.,8j Th ese are

the first sketches of m issals w ith juxta po sed parts, such as those

w hic h w ere developed from the ele venth to thirteenth centurie s and

contain the Mass readings in a third section. The fact that both books,

sacramen tary and grad ual, w ere believed to he the work o f Pope

G reg ory is withou t dou bt at the root o f the juxtaposition of the twobook s, for as far us the celebration is concerned, nothing w as changed

in the usual practices of the High Middle Ages: the celebrant with his

"m issa l" (in fact a sacram entary with the gra du al ap pen ded to it)

pronou nced on ly the orations, w hile the cantors and ch oir executed

the sung parts contained in the gradual. On the contrary, the fact that

in the sacram entary, the incipits o f the su ng p ieces are ad de d in the

m argin by the collect o f each formulary, or else are inserted at the be ginn ing o f the form ularies, eve n som etim es with notation, attests to

an interm ediary stage in the elaboration o f the m issal (see IV of this

part) and in the changes in eucharistic practice.

O ne encounters a gra du al table [of incipits] in one o f the sacram cn-

taries of St. Amand (Paris, B. N., lat. 2291; fols. 9-15), written about

182. Con cerning the other pertinent m anu scripts of the High M iddle A ges , see

Vogel introduction, 350 -^62 (w ith a list of the principal m anuscripts of the non-

Roman liturgies); Camber, CLLA, 50^ -518. Ga m ber’s typology for the gradual, as

lor other docum ents, is du biou s in n certain n um ber of cases. I low ever, a detailed

discus sion of the valid ity o f his classification w ould be far beyo nd the scope of

this manual.



^75” ^7^ >84 ‘‘ ftd «Iso in Paris, 15. N ., lat. 12050 (fols. 3 - 1 6v), com ing

from the scriptorium of C orb ie (shortly after 85 3).185 Exam ples o f the

incipits of sun g pieces in the m argins of the M ass form ularies are

found, for instance, in Paris, B. N., new acq. lat. 1589 (Tours, secondhalf of ninth century);186 Paris, B. N., lat. 9432 (Amiens?, ninth or tenth

century);'*7 and Rheims, B. M., 213 (St. Amand, about 869).'^

Rarer still are the lectionaries (with epistles arid gospels) combined

with a grad ual.189 This kind o f com posite book com ple tely d isap

peared after the twelfth century.

5 . r i l l i C A X T A T O R 1 U M

"A fter the reading o f the epistle by the subd eacon , the cantor as

cend s the am bo w ith his cantotorium and say s the rcsp on sory .",9° T his

text, taken from an ordo, giv es the definition an d purp ose o f the can-

tatorium: it w a s the soloist's book, containing o n ly the chan ts interca

lated between the readings at the beginning of Ihe Mass (gradual

responsory and alleluia), with sometimes the verses of the offertory.Practically absent from the ancient nom enclature of liturgical books,

the cantatoriuni had, in the Middle Ages a function more honorific

than real in the celebration. On this topic, A m alar ius w rites, ''The

cantor, [at the amboj, without being obliged to read his text, holds in

his hands (the canlator i i im w hose cover is decorated w ith ivory 1

plaques";191 thus the purely honorific character of the book is empha

sized. So m e do cum ents attesting this liturgical boo k are still extant;the old est is the Catttaiorium of M onz a (Monza, Tesoro della basilica

S. Giova nn i, cod. C 1 X), m ade about 800, probably in north ern Italy .192

184. See J. Deshusses, "Ch ronolog ie des gran ds snoramentaires dc Saint-Aim m d,"

Rcvuc bettedictine $7 (1977) 230-237.

185. The grad ual table w as perha ps add ed !o the main m anuscript in the tenth

century; see Hesbert, A M S, nos 21-22.186. See Deshusses, "Sacrairtentatres d e Tou rs."

187. Leroquais, Smrantrniaires. 1:38-43.

188. See D eshusses, "Ch rono logie ties sacramentaires."189. t.iki* St. Omer, B. M.. ms. 252 (lenth-elevcnth centuries); see I luglo, Livres

lie chant, 122.190. /’osiijiww (tulxluiconua) tegeril, cantor cunt eanlatorto ancendit et dicit



A text from A m alariu s o f M etz (C.780-C.850) suggests that from the

eighth and ninth centuries on, the lists of chant books for the Latin

liturgies were on the whole patterned on the model of the Roman us

ages of the eighth century.*9* In Rome they used an antiphonal without the intercalary chants of the first part o f the M ass (grad ua l

rcsponsory and alleluia), which were written in the cuntalorium. Con

sequently, wh en Ihe Rom an liturgy w as introduced into G au l, the

Mass antiphonal became the official book of the Romano-Frankish

liturgy, completed by the cantatorium, in im itation o f the Rom an prac

tices. Later on, the cantatorium disappeared rather quickly from the

typ olog y o f chant books; it w as first absorbed b y the antiphonal and

afte rw ard , in the. second part of the M idd le Ag es , by the m issal.

6. THE TROPKR

Th e collections of tropes w ith notation for the chants of the proper

an d /o r the ord inary ha ve for several ye ars been the subject of numer

ou s stud ies thanks to the assidu ou s w ork o f the team o f the Corpus

Troporum of the University of Stockholm. We owe to this team the

pub lication of several volu m es and four books of articles dealing

w ith particular aspects o f the trope genre.194 In these publicatio ns, the

most significant m anuscripts o f the High M iddle A ge s occup y an im

portant pla ce .195 Th e oldest tropers w e kn ow go back on ly to the

tenth century/96 but without doubt, the tropes existed already in the

eighth century.19" O riginally, they w ere written in the em pty spa ces(m argins, blank sheets) of other liturgical m anu scripts, princip ally

and logically in the antiphonals of the Mass and Office.

193. Hanssens, ¡.iber antiphonarii, "Prologue t1e online antipho/Mrii," 363; on this

point, see the translation and comments of Hugh», Livres de tfiatu, 97-98.

194. Sev en v olum es hav e already been published , in particular tropes of the

proper o f the Mass (cycle of Ch ristm as and cycle o f Faster), tropes of the Ag nus

Dei, tropes o f the Sanctus.195. For an overall v iew o f these m anuscripts, see H. H usm ann. fntpvn- and Se-

ijtu’tiduuidschrifien. International Inventory of Musical Sources 5 (Munich, 1964).

196. A s fo r the m anuscrip ts St. G all, Stiftsbibl., 381 and 484 (perhap s dating back

to 965), and Verona, Bibl. Capit., cod. XC (Mon za, m id-tenth century), see C. Zive*

longhi and G. Adami, f cfiilid M urc ia della Caiedrale <1i Verona (Verona. 1987) 86-67.

197. It scorns certain toda y that the tropes appeare d in the cou rse of the ninth



At the root o f the tropers, w e encounter anew , as H uglo dem on

strated, tibeUi which a llowed for the circulation o f the pieces and the

m aking of collections; these were the point of dep arture for the crea

tion of a book ho m ogen eou s in its contents and materia] fo rm .“58

Trop ers reveal w ith particular clarity the process o f the form ation of «1

Liturgical boo k in general because in a large num ber of m anu scripts,

the different liturgical sections w hich they com prise (tropes of the

Sanctus, tropes of the Gloria, and so on) begin with a new fascicle, an

ob viou s sign o f the com pilation o f liheiii. These manuscripts attest to

the intermediary stage between the UbeUus and the final book. In thelatter, ev er y trace of the gro up ing of the original libelli has been

erased: the text has been made a single whole on the codieological

level. Tropers fell in disuse before being o fficially supp ressed by the

C ou nc il of Trent; this elim ination na turally entailed their disa p p ea r

ance. The m anu scripts wh ich surv ive d date for the m ost part from

between the tenth and twelfth-thirteenth centuries. They were pro

duced in m any pa rts of Europe;1" how ever, the greatest concentration of places of com position w a s in northern Italy, the southw estern

part of France, and the Alpine region (today's Switzerland and Aus

tria). Another characteristic trait of the history of the tropers is that

since tropes w ere an essen tially m onastic phen om enon , the m ajority

o f m anuscripts w e possess w ere written in the scriptoria of abb eys,

am on g w hich St. G all and St. M artial o f Lim oges are the principal,

and in cathedral centers such as that of Winchester in England.200

There is no set pattern to the contents of the troper eve n though

certain tropes, like the celebrated d ialog ue Quem qaeritis of Haster

Sun day, are found in the m ajority of m anuscripts, fh is remarkable

variety results from several factors. O ne o f the m ost im portant is the

specialization, often extreme, o f the productions o f the different places

w here the pie ccs w ere com posed. The contents o f the m anuscrip tsoften reflect the typ e o f pieces that w ere favo rites in one center or

198. M. Huglo, "I,es liMU de tropes et les prem iers trop.ures-prosaires," Pax el

tkipicntia: Studies in Text and Music o f Liturgical Trop*** and Sequences in Metuory of

Cordon Anderson (Stockholm, »986) 13-22.

Th i f h l f i i f d f h i diff i h h



another. The composition of a troper was subject to no strict rule. The

book m ay contain either a great nu m ber of tropes (for the prope r and

the ordinary of the Mass) or pieces intended lo be used exclusively,

or alm ost exclu sively, with introit or offertory an tiphons. I hings become still more complicated when a sequentiary, or even in certain

cases a canlatorium*01 is ap pen ded to the tropcr. A curs ive review of

the lists o f sources used by the Corpus Troporum sh ow s that this kind

o f com posite book w as not rare between the tenth and twelfth cen

turies. O ther exam ples, such as P aris, B. N., lat. 1 1 1 8 (Gascony, tenth-

eleventh centuries), a troper-sequentiarv from St. Martial of Limoges,

even include a tonary {Paris, B. N., lat. 1118; fols. 104-114).202

The great variety in the contents of the tropers is no obstacle to the

uniformity of their presentation on the page. In general, visual pre

em inence is given to the neum alic notation. The neu m es seem to

"cr u sh " the written texts which em plo y ve ry sm all letters an d form

an extremely narrow ribbon. In the case of the long melismas on the

final a of the Alleluia, for instance, the neumes occupy practically the w hole page, w hereas on ly tw o or three alle lu ia s are w rit ten out. O b

viously, the tropers w ere utilitarian books used in the actual w orship

services. With no pretense of lux ury as a rule, they w ere sim ply litur

gical bo oks filling the practical need o f regu lar use.

Hinally, two principal groups of tropers must be distinguished:

mon astic and cathedral. M ost man uscripts belon g to the first group,

w ithin w hic h several categorie s are defined according to the repertories (either spe cialized or gen eral) and the codicolog ical aspect o f the

m anuscripts. The tropers of the cathedral typ e are m uch rarer and

contain a repertory pro per to the liturgical use o f cathed rals (festive

calendar, tropes for the ord inary o f the Mass). T hey a lso present cer

tain particularities absent from m onastic tropers, such a s the Ltuuies

regiae ("p raise s of the kin g" l (see Paris, Bibl. de 1'Arsenal, ms. 11(19;

Autun, 1 0 0 5 / 1 0 0 6 - 1 0 2 4 ) ,which suggest that the m anuscript w as

written for a specia l occasion (visit o f the sovereign to the cathedral,

as w as perh aps the case in Autun).



7. OTHER FORMS OF BOOKS

Besides the many possible combinations of chant books,20* there

exist odd kinds that cannot bo classified in an y cate go ry; such is the

ease o f the KxttlM s c r o l l s . T h e u se o f a scroJJ, a mtuhts, for a liturgical text was not restricted to the Easter Exultet and was certainly a

current practice before books, under the form of codices, became com

mon in the West.206 In ge ne ral, in the M id dle A ges , the text o f the E.v-

ultet, the de aco n 's chan t at the tim e the Ea ster cand le is lit during the

Kaster V igil, w as included in the sacram entary am on g the H oly Week

texts. In southern Italy, probably from the second half of the tenth

century on, the custom arose of making scrolls of the text of the K.rii/-

M with musical notation alternating with paintings illustrating the

m ain p assag es o f the tons cerei ("praise o f the ca n dle "! (sec p. 81).

D uring E aster night, the deacon, ho lding his liturgical rotttlus, as

cende d the am bo, san g o f the resurrection of Ch rist, sym bolized by

the lighted candle, and unro lled the scroll at the sam e time so that

the gathered faithful could see one by one the images illustrating thechant. The ExulM scroll— w ho se production w as concentrated in the

Benevenlo region in the eleventh and twelfth centuries—is the sole

representant o f its kind an d se em s to be a pe cu liar liturgical book. In

dee d, it w as clearly intended for the assem bly o f the faithful, wh o

sa w the pain tings right side u p a s it w as un rolled,*57 w he reas the text

w ith notes w a s w ritten in the other directio n so that the deacon

204. See Huglo, Livres de chunt, passim.205. See H ug lo, ibid., 63-64, and Liturgica Vaiicamt, 37-40.

21)6. See the exam ple« cited by R. E. Re yno lds, "Tin* Liturg y o f C lerical O rdina

tion in Early Medieval Art," Gtxtti 22 (1383) 27-38, especially p. 31. For instance,

Po pe Za ch arias (74 1-75 2) sent to St. Boniface (680-754) a scroll w ith the canon of

the Mass: wii* m/lctti luia demeitler incUnati. in rotulo dnto pra edido iu l rcligioso

preabitero luo. per h a t signa tmcUte crttas ijuanlc fieri deb&uil ittfiximits ("Kindly y ie ld ing to your desire, w e have m arked the sign o f the cross at the appropria te

places wh ere it m ust be m ade, m the the scroll given by the above-men tioned Lul,

your religio us p riest"! (.VJG'H, £/>., 3:372) . The fa m ous roltihis of Ravenna (Lugano,

A rch ivio dei Princip e Pin (no number) , from the seventh or eighth century, con

tains orations for A dv en t; see S. Benz, Der R&tutu* twi foKvrwuj. itach seiner Herkunft

unri seiner Jiedcutung fu r die Lilurgicgeschidtie kritisd i un tm ucht 1 QF 45 (1967) For



m ight read it / 08 Th e tw ofold function of Ihis book is d ea r: liturgical

and catechetical since it wa s d irectly destined for a liturgical action in

w hic h the assem bly takes an all- im portant part. Pastoral concern and

liturgical decorum meet here to wo rthily celebrate the highest point

of the liturgical year, the resurrection of the Lord.

8 . ILLUSTRATION OF THE CHAX'T BOOKS

OF THE HIGH MIDDLE AGES1"“

In contradistinction to the sacramentary and evangeliary, the books

o f liturgical chant were nev er truly decorated w ith am ple icono-graph ic cycles h ighlighting through im ages the structure o f the litur

gical year. Th is is pro bably d ue to the seconda ry p lace they occu py in

the hierarchy of liturgical books. Tine sacramentary, containing the sa

cred prayers (especially the canon of the Mass), and the evangeliary,

l he ho ly book pa r excellence from w hich the w ord of G od is pro

claim ed, occupy the first tw o places in the ecclesiological system of

liturgical books in the I ligh M iddle A ge s. In view o f their em inent positions, the sacramentary—placed on the altar and used by the priest

for the Eucharistic Prayer—and the evangeliary—processionally car

ried for the readin gs— are essential elements o f the liturgical decorum

of the eucharistic celebration. This is w h y Iheir material aspect (callig

raphy, bind ing, m od e o f illustration, all unsystemati/.ed) w ere treated

with specia l care. B y contrast, the chanl m anuscripts, begin nin g with

the M ass antiphonal, are practical books, p layin g on ly a secon dary

role on the liturgical stage. T he gen era l aspect, an d in particular the

ornamentation of these books, reflect their lower status. Among the

m any precious bind ings described an d a na lyzed by F. Steenbock, only

six belo ng to chant bo ok s210 and in m ost cases w ere n ot or igin ally in

tended for these but are bind ings o f antique ivo ries reused as covers.

For exam ple, the Troper of Au tun (Paris. BibL de 1'Arsenal, ms. 1169;beginn ing of eleventh century) inherited as its co ve r an iv or y o f the

fifth century representing an a llego ry of secular m usic;2“ the Cantato-

riwit of M onza (Mon za, Tesoro della basilica S. G iova nn i, cod . CIX;

208. In lact, the deacon knew bv heart this chanl. sung but once a vear, andprobably had no need for his scroll Hero again we see the fundamental role



eighth-ninth cen turies) is protected by two con sular dip tychs dating

from the b eginn ing o f the sixth century.*** Thus, the app eara nc e o f

the cantatoriuin fully correspon ds to the description sup plied by Ordo

ronuinus I from the eighth century, confirm ed by A m alariu s’ comm entem pliasteing its honorific function (sec p. 74). A few rare mentions

(such as antiphonamim / cum tabulis tburneis ("one antiphonal with

ivory covers"]) found in the inventories of church treasuries confirm

the witness of the manuscripts.25' Other ivories, today separated

from their m anuscripts, m ay ha ve served as co vers for chant books.

T his is the probab le hypoth esis that one can form ulate for the tw o fa-

m ous pieces from Frankfurt am M ain (Liebighau s, cod. Barth. 181)

and C am bridg e (Kitzwilliam M useum ) dated to the second h alf of the

ninth century; both are oblong in shape and represent clerics, espe

cially cantors, engaged in a liturgical celebration.*’4 Overall in the

M iddle A ges, one encounters in various m anu scripts or on the

ivo ries o f b indings215 scenes o f liturgical singing, but in these scenes,

the book s used by sing ers are not ne cessarily clearly show n. By in vokin g the new practice in tine d om ain o f liturgic al chant w hich came

abou t in the second ha lf o f the M iddle A ge s and the use of a lectern

for the large cho ir bo oks, T. Elich has given a con vinc ing exp lanation

of the appearance in breviaries and psalters of the thirteenth century

of the representation of cantors at the lectern.•*l6

W hen one exam ines the contents of the chant books, one sees that

althoug h the am ple iconograp hic cycles arc lacking (with few exce ptions), a large num ber of m anu scripts w ere decorated w ith m any

212. See ibid., no. 7 and fig 9.213. A first sampling of the inventories of church treasuries was made possible

by the Uischoff, Scholzvcm'icltnisac, which offers only a partial overview, nonetheless significant, of the conditions in the West. A similar but exhaustive work oughtto be undertaken on the subject of library catalogues and treasury inventories of

countries other than Germany.214. On the meaning of these ivory plaques anti tlu* hypothesis identifying the

central figure of the liturgical scenes on the plaques as St. Gregory, see Knop,"T.itugiker als Liturge."

215. A s on one of the small plaques on the back cover of the Drogon Sacramen-tary (Paris, B. N., lat. 9428, mid-ninth century), showing a Communion scene. Tothe left, the members of the stftola ore singing with hands open and extended, and



ornam ented initials, from the sim ple colored letter to the richest co m

positions intermingling zoomorphic and vegetable motifs. In a fair

nu m ber of m anu scripts, the painted initials lack artistry; but there are

exceptional w orks such as the A ntiphon al of Co m ptegn e (Paris, B. N.,lat. 17436; see pp. 7 2-7 3). Th e official character of this m anuscript ex

plains the care lavished on its ca lligra ph y and ornamentation. The

latter exhibits initials w ith foliated b an ds o f color and go ld, as w ell as

frontispieces written in go ld letters on a pu rp le bac kground fo r the ti

tles of tht* two pa rts of the m anu script.*1" Througho ut the M iddle

A ges, the richness and sum ptuousness o f the in it ia l letters increase .

A s ¿1 conclu sio n to this section, let u s tarry on som e chant m anu

scripts decorated in an excep tional m anner. T he illustration o f the Ex-

uitet scrolls of southern Italy d urin g the eleventh and twelfth

centuries rank am on g the most beautiful creations of m edieval illu

m ination.2,8 Intended for the assem bly o f the faithful gathered on

Easter night (see p. 78), the illustrations, literal in character, are in

serted betw een the passa ge s o f the text. A t the beginn ing o f thescroll, the deacon is represented a t the am bo, with the Raster candle

in on e hand an d the scroll in the other; he is facing the assem bly,

each m em ber of w hich is holding a lighted can dle. Th is scene is fol

low ed by a variable nu m ber of others entirely focused on the glory of

Christ (Majcslas Domini, an gelic choir adoring the Lord). Occasion

ally, this cyc le is interrupted by liturgical scenes (blessing o f the ba p

tismal font because baptism follow s the lighting of the candle du ringthe Easier Vigil) or anecdotal scenes (beekeeping because of the

pra ise o f bees in the text o f the Exultct).

O nly fo ur tropers, out of all the m anu scripts that hav e been pre

serv ed ,2’9 present iconog rap hic cycles m ostly borrow ed from other

217. See F. Mulhcrich and VV. Koehler. Karol in^ische .VIinialitren. vol. 5 (Berlin, 1(182)

1 2 7 - 1 3 1 .218. G. Cavalloand C Bertelli, Rotolidi "F.xidte! " del!'Italia meridionale (ftsri, 1973).219. Paris, B. N., lat. 9448 (Prum, c.990-995): J. Marquardt-Cherry, Illustration of

Troper Texts. The Pititiled Miniatures in the Prion Troper-Cradual (Los Angeles, 1986);"Ascension Sundays in Tropers: The Innovative Scenes in the Priim and Canterbury Tropers and Their Relationship to the Accom panying Texts-/' Essays: in Medinwl Studies. Proceedings of the Illinois Medieval Association 6 (1989) 68-78; and "Otto



l iturgical m anu scripts like the sacram entary and the evan geliary. C er

tain subjects, esp ec ially the hag iograp hic ones, are not necessarily

found in other typ es o f books; in this case, the im ages are directly in

spired by the text of the tropes. Hxcept for that of Prum (Paris, B. N.,

lat. 9448), the illustrated tropers were written for cathedral use or else

adap ted for it. The liturgical p urp ose o f these man uscripts, meant for

episcopal celebrations, certainly explains the high quality of their

execution.

Lastly, let us mention the sup erb figures person ifying the eight

tones of Gre go rian chant; their linear and ve ry colorful style is typical

of southw estern Fran ce in the tenth and eleventh centuries.“ 0 Th ey w ere placed in the part o f Paris , B. N ., lat. 1 13 8 (fols . 10 4 - 114 ) ,221

w hich deals w ith tones and represent m usic ians and jugglers carry

ing va riou s m usical instruments.3“

for the publication of the thesis 0/ E. Tevioldale, The Gufim Trofwr, University of North Carolina al Chapel Hill, 1990). Paris Bib!, tk* I'Arsenal, ms. u (>9 (Aulun,1105/1006-1024): Palazzo, "Confrontation du repertoire."

220 This style is characteristic of the decoration o f another troper originating in



HI. The Books of Readings

i . H I S T O R Y O F T H E L I T U K C i C A L R E A D I N G S F O R 1HI: MASS

A m ong the three essentia l actions o f the liturgy, prayer, chant, andreading , this last occup ies a p redom inant p lace becau se of its w ell-es

tablished role in the cultic practices of the early C hristians. The re ad

ing o f the Scripture go es back to the ve ry beginn ing o f Christian

w orship, thus settin g the Liturgy o f the Word at the heart o f the w hole

actio liturgica ("liturgical action"].“ 3 From the earliest time of Ch ris

tianity, the Bible was read during the different assemblies of the faith

ful. The p rinciple then w as to read the sacred text in its entirety (lectio

continua) so that the whole of Scripture could be food for meditation.

However, according to general opinion, texts (or biblical passages)

w ere chosen rather early (as early as the second century?) to be read

durin g the eucha ristic celeb ration224 o f a specific feast beca use they

w ere particularly fitting. The yearly recurrence o f the im portant

even ts of Christian h istory rap idly led to a choice of readings w hosethem es correspo nd ed to the m eaning o f the feasts o r the liturgical

time (prin cipally Easter, Asce nsion , Pentecost, Ch ristm as). It quick ly

became customary to read a given pericope225 on a precise day, but

prior to the fifth and sixth centuries, there were no strict rules in this

area. Dominated by liturgical improvisation,226 the first centuries left

223. This is not the place to discuss the complex origins of the l.iturgv of the Word in the West and the Host; sec the well-docunu»nh»d survey of Vogel, Introduction, 291-304 (with bibliography); CP, 2:59-68; A.-G. Martimorl, lectures liturgiques e.t leurs tivn% Typologie des sources du Moven Ago occidental, fasc. 64(Turnhout, 1992) 15-20.

224. The same is true of the Liturgy ol the Hours, although to a lesser degree;see Part 3 in this book and Taft Utur%y of the Hours: Martimorl Lectures liturgiquev



a great deal of freedom to ihc bisho p (or the leade r of the comm unity)

as to the choice of M ass readings.

Although the passage from G reek to Latin occurred progressively

d u rin g the first four C hristian centuries, most authorities select them iddle o f the third cen tury as the time wh en Latin b egan lo replace

Greek in the liturgy. This was the period during which people began

to com pose liturgical p iec esin Latin and m ade translations of the

G ree k versions of the Bible.227 In v iew o f this, it is be lieved that the

read ings w ere translated earlier than other liturgical texts.

N o do cum ent before the sixth centu ry attesting to the existence of

a system of readings has reached us. But there is no doubt that such a

system existed o w ing to the influence of the Jew ish custom of read

ing the Law and the Prophets in the synagogues.228 The testimony of

authors like Tertullian (0.160-0.225), Ambrose of Milan (374-397), and

A ugustine o f H ip po (396-430) support th is hypothesis .229 The old est

attestation to the existence o f a boo k of read ings is found in Genna-

d ius (fl. 470), acco rding to wh ich M usa eus o f M arse illes (d. c.460)com posed , at the request o f his bishop Ven erius (d. 452), ex sanclis

scriptitris krtiones totius antii fes tis nptas diebus; respot ¡soria ctiam psithno-

rum capitula lemporibus el leclionibus congruenthi ["(a bo ok containing)

the read ings from sacred Scripture approp riate to the feast d ay s for

the w ho le year, and also rcspon sories and even lists o f psalm s app ro

priate to (liturgical) times and (the contents of) the readings").230 In

addition, several documents, that is, the writings of St. Cyprian (d.258) and the Apostolic Tradition (composed about 215), mention a

catego ry o f clerics en tnisted w ith the readings du ring the assemb lies

and therefore attest to the existenc e of liturgical re adings.251 For the

ecdesiology of the liturgy, the emergence of the function of reader is

important because for the duration o f the H igh M iddle Ag es, two

types o f readers w ill ha ve their respective bo oks for their part in the

227. See Vogel, Introduction, 293-297; there is a good treatment of all the questions connected with Latin as a liturgical language in C. Mohnnann and B. Botte,"\ e latin iituigique," Vordimirede to w & c. Etudes liturgiqucs 2 (Louvain. 1953)29-48,

228. See Vogel, Introduction, 37^-379.229. See the texts quoted by Vogel, ibid.. 301-302.



celebration o f the M oss, the deacon an d the sub dca con (see III, 6 -7 , of

this pari). The tw o oldest "lection aries" that hav e been preserve d are

the man uscripts at W olfenbiittel (H erz og -A ug ust Bibl., cod. Weiss. 76;

beginning of sixth century, Gaul) and at Fulda (Mess. Landesbibl.cod. Bon if. 1; about 645, C ap ua ).*'2

A s to the num ber o f readings at M ass, it is necessary to distinguish

the Roman rite from the other Latin rites of the West.253 The usage

common to the Gallican, Milanese, Visigothic, and other rites was to

ha ve three rea din gs in the course o f the eucharistie celebration (Old

Testament, epistle, and gospel), with perieopes which varied from

rite to rite. In contrast, the Roman rite had only two readings (theepistle and gospel).254 From the seventh and eighth centuries on, the

custom o f having two readings w as w idely adopted in Gau l when

the Rom an rite ma de its w a y beyond the Alps.

Since the important surge in learning in the sixteenth and seven

teenth centuries, liturgists have sh ow n interest in the liturgical read

ings and their organ ization into lists and system s. Before the second

h alf o f the nineteenth century, great scholars like P am elius, Tom asi,

M artène published lists o f perieopes rather than occ up ying them

selv es w ith their or igins an d h istory.235 The w orks o f E. R anke236 and

S. BeisseP3" in the nineteenth century and then of W. H. Frere,238 T.

Klaus er,239 an d A . C hacasse240 in the twen tieth have m ade possible

232. See Vogel, introduction, 320-321 «mil 335-336.233. See A.-G. Martimort, "A propos (hi nombre* des lecture ¿1 la messe," Revue

des Sciences religieuses 58 (1984), Hommage à M. le Pr Chavasse, 42-51; Martimort,Lectures liturgiques. 6-18. Without taking into account the "reading" of the psalms,under the form of verses attached to the gradual and alleluia, see Martimort, "Fonction de la psalmodie dans la liturgie de la Parole/' Liturgie und Diehtung: F.i/t inter- disziphmres Kompendium, vol. 2 (St. Ottilien, 1983) 837-856,

234. See A. Chavasse, “ Le calendrier dominical romain au VI1’ siècle," Recherches

ties Sciences religieuses 41 (1953) 96-122.235. For a historiography of these studies», sw* Klauser, Qipititlarc evattgcliorum. XXU-XXVI.

236. E. Kamke, üns Kirchliche Pericopensijstem aus den iiltesten Urkutulen dcr romis- then Liturgie {Berlin, 1847).

237. S. Beissel, Enhtehimg der Perikop'n des riimisclti'ti Messbuehes (Preifourg-im-Ureisgau, 1907).



the reconstitution o f the history of the different syste m s of read ings

and the ascertainm ent of their "a rch ety pe s."241

2 . T H E L I S T S O F P E R I C O P F - S B F.FO RH T H E B O O K S O F

R E A D I N G S

The liturgical ye ar w as gra du ally established in the course o f the

first centuries o f Christianity an d had becom e ve ry stable2*3 by the

seve nth century. Th is evolution fostered, in Rom e especially, the d e

velo pm ent o f system s o f M ass readings which becam e fixed at the

sam e time, as dem onstrated by the lists o f pericopes in m edieval

manuscripts/'’5 For the preceding period, liturgisls avail themselves

first of all o f the references to book s and of the lists o f readings, v er y

brief references which yield only scant information on the contents of

the readings. Although indirect, other testimonies furnish more de

tails and certain o f them a llow us to determ ine the contents o f a list

and to deduce w hat the system o f readings w as. This has been m as

terfully dem onstrated by C h av asse in his research on the city o f Rome, whence, once more, comes the most weighty documenta

t io n .C h a v a s s e 1’s conclusions are as fol low s: under different forms,

the lists o f M ass re ad ings existed before the app eara nc e of the first

sacramen taries even though no docum ent before the end o f the sixth

century p ro ve s this. By goin g back in time from the first attestations

in the seventh century, it is possible to picture what the lists of the

fifth an d sixth centuries w ere like. For exam ple, the hom ilies in evan- gelin ("on the gospel"! which Gregory the Great delivered in the

years 590-592 and published in 593, are the first writte n testimonies

of a list o f readings organ ized acco rding to a sys tem .245 Eve ry ho m ily

is preceded by a pe ricope w hich is then comm ented upon , and the

241. Hen», the notion of archetype is not identical with fhe notion of liturgical

book in the strict sense, iho sacramentary for instance. What is sought is the recovery o f the lists of pericopt's as they were composed and circulated; see Marti-mort. Lectures liturgiques, first part.

¿42. See T. J. Talley, The Origins of the Liturgical Year (New York, 1986).243. See Vogel, Introduction, 304-1114.244. Chavasse, "Fvangéliaire," 177-179. For the documentation concerning the

Gallican iberian Ambrosian and other rites see Martimort lectures liturgiques



list pertains to the cvcle of readings in use at that time in the church

o f Rom e. Despite the pa rticular historical circum stances at the time

this Iisti4° originated, we have here an intermediary link between the

ancient lists, before Gregory, and the extensive revision undertakenin the seventh century.247 Th e con tinuity or, on the contrary, the d i

vergences observed b y C havasse between th is list and th ose of the

seventh century supp ort the idea that a pro gressive rearrangem ent of

the readings took place; from time to time, attempts at a more thor

ough reorganization had consequ ences of greater import for the es

tablishm ent of a true system than m ere rearrangem ents. Th e m arks of

the antiquity o f G reg or y's list are seen in the structure of Ad ven t(with six Sund ays) an d Kastertide, and also in the length o f certain

pericopes. Other features ap pe ar alread y as elem ents w hich w ill re

m ain stable throughout the w hole M iddle Ag es and even beyond:

nineteen pericopes out of the total are already those which will re

main assigned to certain feasts of the Temporal and Sanetoral.

In another sort of docum ent, historians d erive precious inform a

tion from the detailed lists of the liturgical objects and books given asend ow m ents to churches n ew ly found ed. For instance, in a chart of

471, relating to the foundation of a rural church in the vicinity of

Tivoli, liturgical book s are m entioned a fter objects such as chalices

and patens.248 In this list, one encounters biblical books (Gospels,

epistles, Psalter) accom pan ied by a comes. A s w ill be seen shortly, in

the High M iddle A ge s, this term often designated a list o f readings of

variable length that c ould serve fo r a good portion o f the liturgical

year. Such m entions are rare in the first Christian centurie s but are

significant clues suggesting that quite early there was a distribution

of pericopes over the liturgical year.

3 . T H E E A R L Y F O R M S O F T H E B O O K S O F K U A U I N G S

A s early as the fifth and six th centuries, the princip al fo rm s o f thebooks of readings m ade their appearance; w e must therefore abandon

the idea that they would have succeeded one another in a progressive

manner. Before the ninth century, the most common usage was to

246. Chavasse , "n va n ^lia ire ." 17g, thinks that the forty homilies commentedb h h l f h i b f hi i



w r ite m a rg in a l n otes in the b o o k s o f G o s p e l s a n d e v e n the w h o le

Bib le .24̂ T h eo do r K iau ser ha s rec o rd ed /50 f rom am on g the extant

m an u s cr ip t s an te dat i n g the ye ar Koo/2̂ tw e n ty- fi v e s am pl e s w ith

m arg ina l n o tat io n s/52 fourteen l is t s o f p er ico p es /5* three evnn-

gel iar ies ,254 and two sacramentaries with pericopes .255 These nota

t ion s w e re v ar i o u s s ig n s ( for i n s tan ce , c ros s e s p lace d in the m arg in

ju st b e fo re th e p e r ico p c ) in o rd e r to a ss is t the re a d e r in lo ca tin g the

g o s p e l p a s s a g e p r o p e r to a g i v e n fe a st . N o p a r t ic u l a r s ig n m a r k e d th e

e n d o f the pas s ag e . A s e a r l y a s the n i n th ce n tury , the g re a t s ucce s s o f

the l is ts o f p er icop es (capilulare) an d the e v a n g e l ia r i e s d i d n ot e n ta il

th e ra d i c a l d i s a p p e a r a n c e o f th e m a r g in a l n o te s, w h i c h w o u l d c o n

t inue to be used on occas ion in Bibles unti l the fourteenth century.256

It w as a l so in the e ighth century , and esp ec ia l ly in the n inth , that a

m u l ti tu d e o f g r a p h i c s i g n s ( sim ila r to p u n c tu a t io n ) a r o s e a n d d e v e l

op ed in order to fac i li ta te the read ing , in pa rt icular d u r in g the l iturg y ;

the se s ig n s con t in u e d the a tte m pts o f S t . J e rom e , am on g othe rs , in

that do m ain . 257 In the sam e sp i r it as I s idore o f Se v i l le , A lcu in g av eh i s re a d e r s a d v i c e o n th e p r o p e r w a y o f re a d i n g a t ex t, b y t a k in g in to

249. See Martimort, l.i'cturc* liturgiques 22-26; Kiauser, Capituiare cvangeliorum;

also, for an overall view of the graphic systems invented for the use of the gospelbooks in the .Middle Ages, see j. W zin, "I.e$ div isions du texte dans les Hvangiles

¡usqu'<i l'apparition de I'imprimerie," Gnifta c iwfwpiiMiHOMt’ del latino w l Medioe w .International Seminar, Rome, 27-29 September 1984 (Romo, 1988) 53-68.

250. Kiauser, Capitular? mongeliorum, XXX-XXXV.25 1. ()n the corpus of the oldest sources dealing w ith the books of readings,

without any distinction among rites, see Kiauser, Capituiare evangeUorim. XXX- XXXV; Camber, C i l A , vol. i, nos. 240-247, 360-376,401- 407, 540-549. On the nu

merous manuscripts attesting to the Gallican rite— in fact the lectionaries of theMerovingian period (like the famous l.uxeuil Lectionary, Paris, B. N., lat. 9427;

see P. Salmon. Le lectionnaire de Luxeuil, Collectanea biblica latina 9 {Rome, 1953)—sec the summary in the article by Salmon, "L e texte hiblique des lectionnaires

mirovingiens," La Bibiia nrH'ulto Medicevo, 26 npriic-2 7992, Settimane distudio del C'cntro italiano di studi sull'aito Mcdioevo 10 (Spoleto, 1963) 49» -517.

252. The distribution o f these twenty-five manuscripts by centuries is the fol

lowing: sixth: 2; seventh: 11; eighth: 10; about the year 800: 2.253. With the following distribution: sixth: 2; seventh: 3 ; eighth: 5; about the

year Six): 4.254 One manuscript from the seventh century and two from the eighth



account the oratorical punctuation and the div isions of the text ac

cording to the meaning: Quisquc legat hitjus sacra to in corpora libri lector

in ecclesin verba superua Dei, distinguens census, lilulos, coin, comwata

voce dicat, ut uccentus ore sonare aciat. Auribus ecciesuie reaonet vox vinuSa longe, omnia ut auditor laudet nb ore Deum ("Let any reader who reads

the exalted words o f God from the sacred b ody o f the book make

clear distinctions between meanings, titles, periods, and com m as so

lhat he may enunciate the accents with his mouth. May his pleasant

voic e carry far, so that everyone may hear and praise C od through

the read er 's m ou th ")/ 58 These words o f advice from the Carolingian

master bore fruit because the graphic and material presentation of the manuscripts improved in order to facilitate reading and compre

hension. One proof o f this is the preface o f Paris, B. N., lat. 9452 (fol.

126-126V, ninth century, St. Am and), w hich contains the lectionary

com piled by Alcuin himself (see pp. 9 8 -9 9 ).^

T H E L I S T S O F P I.-K IC O P ES O R C A P I T U L A R I E SFirst of all, it is necessary to distinguish three types of lists of peri-

cop es or capitularies: the lists of epistles (entitled capilula lectionum,

either with readings from the Old Testament or without these), the

origin o f the epistolary; the lists of gospel readings (capitularia evange-

lioritm), the origin o f the evangeliary ; and the lists uniting the two,

the origin o f the lectionary. In all three cases, the entries indicate for

each feast the day and the month; the liturgical day w ith, eventually,the Roman station (that is, the Roman stational church); the biblical

book with, for the Gospels, the number of the Eusebian section;260 tine

incipit and the explicit ("here ends"] of the pericope joined by usque

the.se questions, see M. Banniard, Viva tnki': Communication ecriteet coittnmrtication

tmtk’ du IV ' rti/ IX ' i’mOccident h i in (Paris, 1992).

2^8. Cetrm. 69, lines 18 5- 188 , MGH, Po., vol. 1: Aevi Kitrolint, 292; he gives similaradvice to scribes; see Carnt. 94, lines 1-2, MGH, Po.. vol. 1; (this is. quoted by

Gilles, "Ponctuatmn dans m anuscrits," 1 21 ).

259. Camber, CU.A. vol. 2, no. 1040.260. See Martimort, Lecluns liiurgujucs. zb(f. The division into pericope» of the

four Gospels in use during the I ligh M iddle Ag es w as the one established by Eu

sebius of Caesarea (260-340): 355 sections for Matthew, 233 for Mark, 342 for Luke,



("up to"]. For example, on the feast of the Nativity, one reads: hi na

tale Domini ail sanctum Mariam maiorem. $cd. {secumlunij Luc. cap. fli.

Exiit edictum a Caesare Augualo usq. lusque} pax hominibus bonne volun

tatis ["On the Nativity of the Lord at St. Mary Major, according toLuke 2 :1-14. those d ay s a decree went out from Ca esar Au gu stus'

up to 'peace amo ng those wh om he fav ors '"). An other exam ple, the

feast of St. Stephen: ht natale sci Slepftani. Scd. Matth. cap. C C X L Dica

bal fesus lurbis ludaeorutn usq. benedictus qui veuit in nomine Domini

["On the day of the birth into heaven of St. Stephen, according to

M att 23:34-39. 'Jesu s said to the cro w ds of the Je w s' up to 'Blessed is

the one w ho com es in the nam e o f the Lo rd "'|.

The generic term capitulare ap pe ars in the eighth century in certain

ordines romani: legitur lectio una sicut in capitulare commémorai ["one

reading is read a s is indicated in the cap itulary"| (Ordo romamts XXIV,

onto of the offices from A sh W ednesda y to H oly Sa turd ay);261 o r else,

Et imle legantitr lectiones duae qua* in capiltilare commémorai [ "A nd at

this point two readings are read as is indicated in the capitulary"|(Ordo romamts XV, capitulare ecclesiaslici ordini$).ibz Th is lerm p erhaps

designates, as early as the fifth century, any type of list of pericopes

intended for the liturgical read ings. Th e term comes (or liber comil is) is

used with a meaning equivalent to that of capitulare but is n ever ap

plied to a list o f go spe l pe ricopes. Th us cowcs som etimes rep laces the

term capitulare lectionum and, in certain cases, can designate the lec-

tionarv (epistles and gospels) (sec 111, 7, of this part).O ne can und erstand the h istory of the cap itularies on ly by clearly

distingu ishing the texts on the one hand and the m anu scripts w hich

are their material veh icle on the other. For m ost of the cases w e shall

examine, w e p ossess only "late " m anuscripts in com parison w ith the

da te of the com position o f their contents. We have a lrea d y seen the

sam e problem in the history of the sacramen tary and antiphonal. For

the book s o f reading s, the problem is ag gra va ted by the fact that neither the evan ge liary nor epistolary w ere ev er preceded, an d therefore

prepared, by libelli, indep end ent at first, then gathe red into collec

tions, a sort of rudim entary book. This difference is explained by the

simple fact that for the books of readings, the texts used already ex

isted since they w ere biblical texts wh ereas fo r the sacram entaries



the different feasts of the liturgical year. Reasons both practical and

ccclesiologic.il led to the com position of b ooks o f read ings, com piled

from marginal notes in Bibles and from capitular lists which some

how played for the eva n ge liary the sam e role as the libelli for thesacramentarv and the chant books.

A n additio nal piece o f in form atio n w ill help to understand the his

tory o f the evangeliary , the epistolary, and the lectionary. A s the wo rks

of Klauser263 and Chavasse26* have shown well, the gradual organi

zation o f liturgical time, in particular of the Tem poral, and to a lesser

de gree that of the local setting when* the liturgy w a s enacted (espe

cially in Rome) have in a large measure determined the history and

the w riting do w n o f the lists of read ings (the* atpitularia), which are

tine ancestors of the evangeliary, the epistolary, and the lectionary.265

From the viewp oint o f both time and space, w e find once m ore the

Rom an liturgy to be the point of dep arture for the history of the

books used lor Christian worship in the West.

Th us, in a general m anner, the choice of read ings and the orga niza tion o f the calend ar a re most often the best clues to the identity o f a

list of readings. Moreover, let us add that in the High Middle Ages,

since each church h ad its ow n Sanctoral and M asses for various cir

cum stances, the stu d y o f these two gr ou ps o f celebrations allow s us

lo discern the in dividu ality o f a give n ch urch 's system o f readings; in

most cases, at least in Gaul in the eighth century, churches had adapted

one o f the Rom an sy stem s o f the sixth and seventh ce ntu ries.266

5 - T H E B O O K O F G O S P E L S W I T H T H E C / I P / T U L A K H

E V A N G E U O R U M ; T H E E V A N G E L IA R Y 3*7

The capitninre a m igeiiorm n ascribes one pericope excerpted from

one of the Gospels to most days of the liturgical year. In general, these

lists are w ritten at the beg inning or, more often, at the en d o f the

manuscripts containing the complete text of the four Gospels. Thuseq uipp ed, the boo k of G osp els could be used directly at the euch aris

tie liturgy for the proclam ation o f the w ord o f G od by the deacon, for

263. Klnuspr, Capitularr etwngeliorum.

264. Among Chavosse's many contributions lo the history of the books of read



w hom this reading w as reserved. The evan geliary w as the result of

the transformation o f the capitulare evangelionon—up to then added to

the boo k of G os p els— into a book. Its structure follo w ed that o f the

capitulary, and this time the complété pcricope.s were written. Thesecharacteristics m ade the ev an ge liary an exc lusive ly liturgical book in

which the thread o f the narrative w a s broken, w hereas the books of

G ospe ls, even w ith the addition o f the capitulare or marginal nota

tions, w ere not pu rely liturgical because the stories o f Matthew,

M ark, Luke, and John w ere not used in their entirety for divine w or

ship. Two principal reasons explain this pro gressive p assag e from

book of Go spels with capitulare to evan geliary. First, an ob viou s prac

tical consideration led the scribes to facilitate the reader's task: it is

m uch sim pler to follow the liturgical yea r by turning pag es on w hich

the pericop es succeed o ne another in ord er than to manipulate, even

w ith a certain dexterity, a book o f G osp els for w hic h the contin ual

con sulting o f the capitulare is necessary to find the appropriate peri-

cop e.2*8 Secon d, the ecc lesiology of the liturgy w a s d eterm inative: ittended more and more to attribute a specific book to each person

having an official role in the celebration of the Mass.209

K lause r's census, although not exhau stive, is representative and al

lowed him to establish a typological classification of the books of

readings. On this basis, one can m ake a fruitful com parison, through

out the Middle Age s, between the books o f G ospels w ith capitulare

evan$eliorum on the one hand and the evan gcliaries and lectionaricson the other:

Books of G ospe ls Eva nge liarics and

w ith capitulare lectionarics

8th cen tury 2 1

9th cen tury 140 14

26ft. Martimort, ibid., 28, has a theory to explain the high number of gospelbooks with capitulare ewngelioruin in comparison lo the number of evangeliariesduring the Middle Ages: in fact, one >hould specify the High Middle Ages be*emii-e the reverence shown to ihe Gospel in the célébration led people to prefer abook containing the complete < lospels lo one comprising only the pericojws readat Mas*. Martimorl's argument does not appear to me solidly supported for an



Books of G osp els Ev ang eliaries and

w ith capitulare lectionaries

(cont'd) (cant'd)

iolh century 96 >0

11t h century toi 72

12th century 63 91

13th century 13 65

14th century 6 45

15th century 8 53

Th ese figu res clearly reveal the predom inance of the book s of

G ospels with capitularc during the High Middle Ages. Then in the

twelfth century, one notes the reversa l o f the tenden cy: the first book

becom es less frequent. Furthermore, the second becom es rare r from

the thirteenth cen tury on b ecause o f the rap id ascent o f the missal,

w hich com bin es all the books necessary fo r the celebration o f the

Mass, up to then distinct.In several type s of m ediev al docum ents (library catalogu es, inve n

tories of church treasuries, mon astic custom arics, and so on), the

terms used to designate the book s o f readin gs do not va ry much as a

rule and do not seem to reflect either their typolog ical va rie ty or their

evolution through the centuries. The title does not have the same

sym bolic im portance as for the sacram en tary and the antiphon.il, for

w hic h the authority of th eir presum ed author (G regory the Great, forinstance) im pose d their contents in the w ho le, or alm ost w ho le, West.

Beca use biblical texts do not need an y literary or religious authority,

the evangeliary never bore any official title, and the formula indpit

capitular? evangeliorum*70 at the beg inning of the cap itularies is strictly

practical in character. Besides, until very late in the Middle Ages, the

expression liber cvan%eliorum can designate any book used for read

ings, whatever its kind. In spite of this lack of lexical accuracy, one encounters with the passage of time, especially from the eleventh century

on, such terms as evaitgefiunt, lectiomirium, epistolarium, emngcliorum,

w hose exact m eaning often rem ains rather blurred because the sort of

270. Occasionally, one encounters the following terms, much r.iror than capitu-



docu m ents in wh ich these terms ap pe ar (library catalogu es, inven to

ries of church treasuries, customaries, and ordinaries) does not favor

the typological accuracy that historians w ou ld w ish to find. U nfortu

nately for them, literary texts do not shed more light on this field.H ow ever, it seem s that in the second half of the M iddle A ge s, the di

versif ication of the books o f readings is accom panied by a certain in

crease in the vo cab ula ry that designa tes them. Let u s no te that the

w ord evangehorum is very rare and is nol in use before the twelfth

century, w hich pro ves that the peop le o f the M iddle A ge s distin

guished b etween the liber evangel iomm cum capitularia and the eiwt-

geliarium, the eva ngeliary .271 Th e bo oks o f read ings, e spec ially the

boo ks of G osp els richly adorned and decorated, are often described

by the expressions texlus aureus, liber aureus, or else comes (liber comi-

lis), deriving from comma, that is, "section o f a pe ricope " a nd not

"com pa nio n," a s has too often been b elieved.*7*

Content o f the Capitularies and EvangeliariesThanks to the work of Klauser,*7i which refined that, a trifle older,

of Frcre, the organization of the gospel pericopes used in Rome in the

seventh and eighth centuries and later in a large p art of the West

from the second half of eighth, is well known to liturgists. Klauscr

distinguishe s four great typ es of gospel books: (1) Ty pe P i (about 645

in Rome), representing the oldest system of readings; this type was

established on the basis of the capihdare transcribed in a m anu scriptgoin g back to about the yea r 700 (Wurzburg, Un iversitatsbibl., cod.

M.p.th.f. 62; fols. iov—i 6 v);a7* (2) Type Lambda (about 74o)J?* and (3)

Ty pe Sigm a (about 755),276 both Rom an in origin a n d later varieties of

271. Andrieu, Pontifical, 1 ¡255: Tunc tluicomm progrediens de allari, sacra wsie m-itusius prccedtmtibu* cereosiatis cum ceresh et mctnsti, fHtrtal canngelioriin» uS4}ui’ at1

atnbonem qui canstitutustxt in medio comvntus ["Then tlu* deacon, leaving the altar, wearing the sacred vestment, preceded by candle-bearers with candles and incense, carries the evange liary to the ambo which is placed in the middle of the assem bly"]. With the exception of a few studies, lexical research is lacking in thedom ain of liturgical books; the books of readings are a case in point.

272. See Vogel, Inlnxlurlion. 318 -3 19 and 392, for the different terms used in theMiddle Ages to designate the books of readings.



the first type, they differ from Tvpe Pi in the Sanctoral and in the

Tem poral because o f the presence of pericopes for the T h ur sda ys in

Lent, introduced a t the time of G rego ry II (7 15 -7 3 1 Jr*77 {4) typ e Delta

(about 750), which is the Romano-Frankish adaptation of the 645list.3?* In this last case, as for the Frankish Eighth-Century Gelasian

Sacramentary, it w as n ecessary to adapt the Roman g ospe l readings

of the liturgical year to the needs of the Frankish churches.279 Com

pared to the three purely Roman types, the Sanctoral of Type Delta is

swollen by local Gallican feasts corresponding to the contents of the

Eighth-Ce ntury G elasian Sacramentary.

The origin a nd m anner of comp osition of Tv pe Pi from 645 are not yet entirely clear; its very com plex com position can on ly be the end

product of a protracted period during which liturgical time was being

constituted. E ach pericop e is indicated by the num ber it carries in the

F.usebian num eration, as w ell as by its incipit and exp licit, and pre

ceded by the da y o f the year. C ha vasse has shed light on several

points which explain the list of 6 ^ . 28t' Th is Roman281 "evan ge liarv"

proposes a classification of feasts and their gospel pericopes on the

basis of the liturgical year, com bining the Temp oral an d the Sanctoral.

The liturgical year, follow ing the Julian calendar, is the und isputed

temporal frame of reference for the system of readings. In this, there is

a striking correspondence between the organization o f the ev an geliary

o f 645 and that of the sac ram en tales, espe cially those of the G reg o

rian type. For these books, as in a lesser measure for the antiphonal,277. Sec Martimort, Livns titurgiques, 52-53 , on the oldest m anuscripts of these

two types.27$. Klauser, Capitulare nwigciiortfm. 1 ) 1 - 172 .27«». The oldest source of type delta is Besan^on, B. M., ms. 184 (end of eighth

century, in all likelihood composed in Murbach); the readings from the epistlesand the gospel pericopes are together (fols. 57-73), thus terming a regular little

lectionary (see pp. 99- 100}; on the manuscript and its publication, see Martimort,Led 11 res ¡¡¡urgiques. 32ft.; A. Wihnart, "Le comes de Murbach," Revue (vticdictine 300 9 »3) 25-69.

284). See especially Chavasse, "P lus anctens types"; "L 'évangcliatrc ronwin de645, un recueil: Sa composition (fa«;ons et materiaux)," Rente Ivnedtclinc 92 (1982)33-75; "Aménagements liturgiques"; “Aprés Grcgoire le Grand." I have nut hadthe opportunity to consult the two unpublished studies of Chavasse [since pub



the intent of the Rom an liturgists w as on e of the m ain factors that

produced the system o f readings of Type Pi; this intent w as to struc

ture a liturgical year more and more filled with a formulary, chants,

and readings proper to each day. C ha vassc has also show n that w hereas the tem poral fram e w as all-im portant, the local setting o f the

celebration o f the feasts play ed no part in the establishm ent of this

list. The stational churches are mentioned, but these references do not

affect either the date or the succession of the form ularies. The sixty-

eight feasts of the Sanctoral of Type Pi would be incorporated into

Types Sigm a and La m bd a, with a few add ition s, and into the Ro-

mano-Frankish Type Delta, which also has the feasts of local saintsand end s up h av ing a Sanctoral identical w ith that o f the Eighth-C en

tury Gelasian Sacramentary. The Rom ano-Frankish "E va n ge liary" of

750, in add ition to the epistolary o f the sam e typ e (see pp. 97-98), w ill

be the auth oritative one in the majority of Western churches during

the w ho le o f the M iddle A ges, even though the Sanctoral presents

specific local variations. The character o f an ev an ge liary is determined

above all by its Sanctoral, which must be studied first in order to de

tect particularities p rop er to a sp ecific church, clas sify m anu scripts,

discern the influence o f one church upon another, and so o n /*2

On the codicological plane, the book s o f G osp els w ith capitular? and

the evangeliaries (see the comparative list, pp. 92-93) do not present

a typological variety as rich as other books, the sacramentaries for in

stance. A s a rule, they are comp lete copies, often decorated w ith particular care both on the ins ide and the bindin g be cause of their u se in

church worship and their place of destination (monastery, cathedral,

parish, an d so on)28- Festive sam ples are rare, for instance the libetlus

of Fulda (a quire of 10 folios) (Aschaffenburg, Hofbibl., ms. 2) from

the en d of the tenth cen tury w hich contains on ly a series of pericopes

for certain big feasts: Christmas, Circum cision, Ep iphany, Purification,

Easter V igil, Easter Sun day, an d s om e feasts of the local Sanctoral,

282. The study of the feasts of saints in the evangeliaries of the Middle Ages isstill a domain under-exploited by liturgists and historians. There exists, however,a number of editions of gospel lists or particular evangeliaries, chiefly from theCacolingian penod; see, tor instance. R. Amiel, "Un capitnhrc cimigeliorum car-



like St. Martin. Its carefully executed decoration and its restricted

contents prove that this iihellus evangeliorum was reserved for festive

use ,2*4 w hich is an exception in the M idd le Ages. Th is small de gree of

typological variety noted for the books of readings in general is explained by the un iformity of customs, except for som e feasts of the

Sanctoral; thus, the bishop or the priest w ere sp ared the need o f se

curing a special copy when they traveled to celebrate the liturgy in a

different dioc esc or parish.

6. THE CAPITULARF. I .ECTIONUM A N D E P I S T O L A R Y

W heth er com bin ed w ith the pericopes from the Old Testament ornot, the lists of the ep istles ascribed to each da y of the liturgical ye ar

w ere fo rm ed roughly at the sam e tim e as the system s o f gospel read

ings. The capitula indicate here also the liturgical use o f the pericope s,

Ihc biblical book, the incipit and explicit. In the sam e w ay as the

gosp el capitularies, the lists of epistles w ere pro gressive ly m ade into

books, thus b ecom ing epistolaries prop erly so callcd. The eleventh

century a pp ears here also as the hing e28' betw een the two. Acco rdingto the w o rk o f the sp ec ialists/ 86 the Ro m an model o f the capitular? lec-

tionum, at the root of the epistolary when it was made into a book,

w ould have been organized at the end o f the six th century and, in its

m edieval form , w ou ld g o back to the seventh century, its ov erall plan

corresponds rather well to that of the ancient Cclasian Sacramentary,

although the Temporal and Sanctoral are combined. Its structure is as

follows: readings for the yearly liturgical cycle, readings for the cele

brations independent of the cycle, and lastly, without precise day, a

list of the forty-tw o readings from P au l's letters in their ord er in the

biblical text. Overall, its mode of composition is identical to that of

the evangeliary although its details are more difficult to make out.

284. Palazzo, ¿¡iUYrtWf/ito/res lit- Fulda.

285. Set’ the lists of manuscripts established by Klauser, Oipitulatv ttvattgvliorum. LXXl-XC. For the aipitularia ieclMuni 1. the distribution by century is the following:eighth: 1; ninth: 1; tenth: i; eleventh and twelfth: 1; thirteenth: 8}; fourteenth: 53:fifteenth: 40. For the epistolaries: ninth: 5; tenth: 6; eleventh: 10; twelfth: 26; thirteenth: 27; fourteenth: 20; fifteenth: 32. Concerning the oldest three immusrript-

f h li f i l F ld l d bibl d B ii ( iddl f h i h



A gain the tem poral fram e of the liturgical year is preem in ent, with

Temporal and Sanctoral combined. As for the evangeliary, the system

of re adin gs in the epistolary w as established on the basis of distinct

chronological sequences (Lent, Faster, Advent, Christmas) adjusted toform a linear and coherent liturgical cycle.2*7 The only witness to the

Roman epistolary is the m anuscript o f W ü rtzb u rg,^ wh ose im por

tance for the evan ge liary w e hav e seen (see pp. 94-95).

Especially w hen it w as exported from Rom e to G au l, wh ere other

system s of read ings— represented in particular by the l.ectionary o f

Lu xeuil (Paris, B. N., lat. 9 4 2 7 )^ — w ere in use. the Rom an epistolar)'

w as subm itted to rem odeling and adaptations. A s in the sacram entary and evangeliary', the chan ges affected principa lly the Sanctoral in ord er

to bring it into accordance with the Eighth-Century Gelasian Sacra

mentar)7.21)0 Tine pr incip al m anusc ript w itnesses are the Epistolary o f

Corbie (St. Petersburg, PubJichnaya Bibl., cod. lat. Q.v.l, no. 16; about

770-780),391 in w hich the pericopes are giv en in full; the liber comitis of

the eighth or the ninth centuries from northern Italy (Paris, B. N., lat.

9451),292 where all the readings from the epistles are combined with

those from the G osp els, and som etime s with those from the Old Testa

ment (in fact this is a true lectionary, see p. ioo)r9> the comes of M ur-

ba ch 2<M(Besnn^on, B. M., ms. 184), from the en d of the eighth century,

in which the readings from the epistles are combined with those from

the G osp els (fols. 57-7 3). Por Rom ano-Prankish G au l, let us m ention

also the "A lcu in l.ectionary": in reality this is an epistolary containing242 rea dings from the O ld Testament, the epistles, an d the Acts o f the

287. Kor more details on the very complex mode of composition of the Romanepistolar)', see G. Morin, "l.c plus anden comes ou lectionnaire de I'liglise romaim*,"Revue Ivn&lictiiie 27 (1910) 41-74, and especially A. Chavasse, "L'^pistolier romaindu codex de Wiirt/bourg: Son organisation/' Rgvuc SnWdictine 62 (1981) 280-331.

288. Universitatsbibl., Cod. M.p.lh.l. 62, beginning of eighth century (fols.2v—1 0v). See Martimort, Lectures litur^iifuefi, 31-32.289. See Salmon, Uetionnaire de Luxeuil. The liturgiiw» of northern Italy, southern

Italy, and even those* of the Spanish churches also possessed a lectionary whichremained rather stable throughout the centuries despite the spreading of Roman

usages. See Martimort. Lectures liturgiquet, 47-51.290. For details of the rearrangements, see Chavasse, "lívangélia ire," 250-255.



A postle s, arranged according to the litúrgica! year (Paris, B. N ., lat.

9452; third quarter of ninth century, written in St. Amand and coming

from Ch artres cathedral).*** Us orig inality is due to its sup plem ent of

sixty-five pericopes preceded by a p reface probably p enned by We-lisach ar (d. 836), the chan cellor of Lou is the Piou s (reigned 813-8 40 ),

and attributing this comes to Aleuin. Th is supp lem ent, perh ap s partly

the w ork of Alcuin (as is suggested by the add ition o f both the vigil

and least o f A ll Saints, as well as the vig il and feast o f St. M arlin) is

add ed to a local Rom an ep istolary com po sed about 670-680, w hose

contents are identical to those o f the Sacram entary o f Pa du a {Paduense.

about 660-670, see I of this part, the section on sacramentarles), but which has adapted the readings to the local G ali ic an feasts.

Besides the m anu scripts cited ab ove, there exists a large num ber of

other w itnesses from the ninth and tenth centuries, cither complete

or fragmentary, mere lists or epistolarios properly so called, about

which in fo rm ation w ill be fo und elsew here.“9* All are m ore or less

representative of the Roman ep istolary w ith som e variants and d o

not bring sup plem en tary elem ents to the unde rstanding of the history o f the ep istolary a s it has fust been d escribed.

7 . THK l .KCTlOXAKII iS

Before the lectionary properly so called t<x>k precedence over the

ev an ge liarv and ep istolary (chiefly from the eleventh and twelfth

centuries on), lists of read ings from both the ep istles and G os pe ls

w ere ad ded to Bib les or books o f G ospels . The tw o old est capitula ries

o f this type ho w ev er are sm all books inserted into artificial collec

tions of the late M iddle A ge s. First, w e ha ve the sixteen sheets (fols.

1- 16 ) of the codex kept in W ürzburg (Un iversitatsbibl., M .p.th.f. 62;

eighth cen tury),297 mentioned ab ove, w here e pistles and g osp els form

two distinct lists. In the second document (Besan^on, B. M., ms. 184;

fols. 5 7- 75 , end o f eighth or be ginn ing o f ninth century, M urbach),*9®the list of epistles and gosp els form a hom ogen eous w ho le for every

295. Ibid., >6; A. Wilnwt, "Le leetionnaire d'Alcuin," Ephemeruirs liturgiaw 51(1937)136-197.

296. St**? MiirHnmrt, /¿’¿(»tvs ¡iturgiques, 3.1-36, who points out exceptions, suchi l d l f h l h (S G ll S if bibl d



d a y o f the year. The function, o f these sm all books is not ea sy to d e

lineate. Personally, I dou bt that they were m em ory aid s intended to

be consulted before the celebration in o rder to kno w the readings of

the day.2* 1 Rather, perh ap s these iibelti w ere a m eans fo r tine transm is

sion of the lists of pericopes, as was the case for other types of libclli.

Th e absence of com plete m anuscript w itnesses as important as the

two m anuscripts just cited do es not in any w a y m ean that leclionaries

containing all the M ass readings (Old Testament, A cts of the Ap ostles,

even Revelation, epistles, and Gospels) were not produced before the

end of the eighth century. Texts from the fifth and sixth cen turies (see

pp . 87-8 8) attest to the existence o f com plete lectionaries at that period. A fair num ber o f palimp sest fragments dating from between the

sixth an d eighth centuries corroborates textual atte statio ns.^ T he list

established by Klauser for the full lectionaries (Voll-U’ktiomr) shows a

concentration between the eleventh and fifteenth centuries of the

m anuscripts used in R om e or in Romano-Frankish churches, with the

following d istribution by century: eleventh—eighteen; twelfth— eigh

teen; thirteenth— fourteen; fourteenth— eighteen; fifteenth— twenty.*01The two oldest complete lectionaries are Paris, B. N., lat. 9451 (end of

eighth century, northern Italy,302 see above), and Chartres, B. M., ms. 24

(destroyed in 1944), copied in Tours in the first half of the ninth cen

t u r y .l , { » t us also add that in the medieval l ibrary catalogues and in

ventories o f church treasuries, the com plete lectionaries are often

listed in grea ter detail than other liturgical books, it is not rare to read

references like lectiomrium cum evangeliis, lectbnurium cum epistoine or

to see in the sam e catalogue o r inventor)' the ev an ge liary and episto

lary clearly distingu ished from the lectionary. M ed ieval librarians ob

v io usly knew the diffe rent types o f books o f readings and le ft us

precise indications on the contents of the lectionaries.*04

Let us end this section on the boo ks o f M ass read ings by spec ifying

that their typology extends much farther than the main configurations w e h ave exam ined here: it w ill be necessary to en gag e in more

detailed stud ies {m odes o f com position, history) wh ich at this point

299. Ibid., 31; this hypothesis does not rest on any historical foundation.

300. Ibid., 37-39, vvht’ic a non-exhaustive list is given.Kl C it l ' li ti CXtV



are not available to historians of liturgical books. Among atypical

documents, let us mention the evangeliaries with collects, necessary

for the final part o f the third noc tum o f monastic vig ils (see Part 3, on

the Office). The read ings joined o r combined w ith a sacram entarv oran antiph ona l are part o f the first m issals in Ihc strict sen se and de

serv e, on that account, to be presented in the section dealin g with

them (IV of this part).

ft . ILLUSTRATION OF THE BOOKS OH KHADINGS

A m ong the m asterpieces o f m edieval il lum inatio n, the books for

the M ass readings, particularly the book of gospel readings, occupy an impo rtant place because o f both the decoration o f the inside o f

the book and the careful execution o f the bind ing. The privileged

status of sacred Scripture in the liturgy e xp lains in large pari w h y

these books were sum ptuou s in eve ry period, despite Jerom e's cau

tion agains t o ve rly luxu rious C hristian b ooks. Let u s recall that in

the M iddle A ges, the book o f G osp els w as carried in procession

through the church to the altar, then to the ambo, where Ihe deacon

read from it .* 5 Som etim es, m ediev al texts (library catalogue s, inven

tories o f church treasuries, custom aries, and s o on) w ere content

w ith sim p ly design ating the books o f readings by fiber fliovws, lexfiis

aureus a n ti tabufis ebun wa et getnw is, l ibr i HI auro t’l gemm is on u ili

["golden book ," "golde n text with ivo ry cov er and p recious stones,"

"three book s adorned w ith go ld and preciou s stones"],*06 term s emph asizing the lavishn ess of their inside ap pea rance (gold letters on a

pu rple backgroun d for instance) and their precious co w l's often

richly ornam ented w ith gem s, ivory, and gold. The greatest num ber

of the masterpieces of the m ediev al art of bin din g, at least d urin g

305. See the many references in the ortiim's nmumi, Andrieu, OR: and also in the

monastic customaries and, later on, flu1 ordinaries. See also Jungmann, MS, 2:216-219 . on symbolic meaning of those processions.

306. Hxamples of this are round in Ihe catalogue of the books o f the Abbey of St. Riquier (S51): lexltts evtm$elU IV awvis lillcris srripttis Solus I ["one copy of thetext of the four Cospels entirely written in gold letters"!, Beckcr, G uatogi, 28; alsothe list oi the books o f the Mainz cathedral (thirteenth century): mm.1 libri, <\tti pro omatu super altarc fwielwilttr, lit sunt cvangetiontm. tpisiolitre s w h'cHon/trii, benedic-



the High M iddle A ges, w as done for the gospels and other books of

readings.*07 Ep iscopa l cap itularies o f the ninth century direct priests

to use liturgical books worthy of their function in worship services

for the greatest glory o f the word o f Go d.From antiquity on and du ring m ost of the M iddle A ge s, the Bible

w as the object o f a rich decoratio n and gave rise lo iconographie:

cycles of great amplitude.*08 From the end of antiquity, the icono

grap hie traditions of the B ible pro gressive ly m ade their w ay into the

different liturgical books. During the Carolingian period, the still un

stable structure of these bo oks is one o f the cau ses for the lack of

w ell-established iconographie cycles for each o f the books. O nly thesacramentary received at that time a new kind of illustration, differ

ent from that of the Bible (see 1 of this part, the section on saeramen-

taries). From the High Middle Ages until the twelfth century/ the

illustration o f the boo ks o f reading s w as influenced by the paleo-

Ch ristian traditions, with w hich a few nove l features were m ixed.

The books of Gosp els, with or without capitulure, then the evan-

geliaries are the two main books that were illustrated/09 the paintings

o f the form er sup p lyin g the latter w ith the major part of their icono

graph ie subjects. The C arolingian books of G ospe ls often h ave for

their sole decoration fo ur full-page paintings (portraits of the ev an ge

lists, each at the beginning of his Gospel) and arches above the tables

o f Ca no ns; more rarely, paintings inspired by paleo-Ch ristian subjects,

such a s the fountain o f life and Ihc adoration o f the L am b .'10 In theEvangeliary of Godescalc (781-783; Paris, B. Nr., new acq. lat. 1203),

307. The catalogue compiled by Steenbock, Kirchlichc Prachleinband, is quite re vealing in this rcspcct; on the liturgical and symbolic function o f the decorationon precious bindings, sec pp. 51-56.

}o8. Concerning the illustration of the Bible in tin* Middle Ages, sec Cahn, BiNr nmane.

30g. Seo the ground-breaking work of S. Ueissel, Ceschichte dir F.iHmgeiienbiicher in dcr rrsMr HtUfe des MUlelnitcrs (Freiburg-im-Breisgau. 190*6). For a recent update, see E. Palazzo, "L'illustration de l'évangéliaire au haut Moyen Age," La Mai- <on-üieu 176(5988) 67-80.

310. As is seen in the Gospel Book of St. Médard of Soissons, Paris, B. N., lat. 8850

(first half of ninth century); K Heber-Suffrin, " l.a Jérusalem céleste dos Evangilesde St. Mëdard de Soissons, problèmes de perspective et d'iconographie à l'époque



nam ed for the scribe w ho signed the colophon and w ritten for C h ar

lemagne in the court scriptorium , the p aintings o f the eva ngelists as

w ell as those o f the Majestaa Dom ini and the fountain of life arc all

gro up ed together in the beg inning o f the manuscript because theGospel by Gospel arrangement was no longer possible. They are di

rectly inspired by the iconography of a book of Gospels from antiq

uity/11 and would be reproduced shortly afterward, sometimes in

larger programs, in Carolingian books of Gospels. The text of the

E va ng eliary o f G ode scalc is written in gold and silver letters on a p ur

ple background, which is fitting in view' of the destination of the

codex. In the dedicatory verse written at the end of the manuscript

Go descalc h imself exp lains the reasons for this sum ptuou sness: pur

ple sym bolizes the he aven ly kingdom wh ich is opened by the red

blood of C hrist and gold, the splendo r w ith which the wo rds of G od

brilliantly shine.-'32 This sort of praise is not restricted to the evan

geliary; it is found also in psalters, like that of Dagulf (about 795) kept

in Vienna (Österreich. NationalbibL, cod. 186 1). ih e decoration of theGo descalc m anuscript sho w s that at least du ring a g ood part of the

M iddle A ge s, the illustration o f the ev an ge liary w as not bound b y a

specific and clearly defined program, but came directly from that of

the boo k o f Gospels.

The Ottonian period marked a change in the illustration of the books

of M ass readings, in particular the evan geliary. H ie en d o f the tenth

and beginn ing of the eleventh centuries sa w important typologicaltransformations in the domain of liturgical books, notably those used

for the readings. From then on, evan geliaries w ere m ass-produced ;

and in certain scriptoria, like that of Reichenau, which worked for the

Ottonian court, they w ere endow ed with iconographic cycles adopted

from the Carolingian sacramentarles. O nly tw o d esign s from a frag*

ment of a Carolingian ev an ge liary (D usseldorf, Universitätsbibi. cod.

B. 11 3 : Rheims[?], third qua rter of ninth century)-'1* su gg est that asearly as the ninth century, there existed evangeliaries adorned with

iconographic cycles pre figurin g those o f the Ottonian m anuscripts from

the perspec tive of both the am plitud e of the cycle and the treatment of

3 1 1 . S w F. Mütherich. ' ‘Manuscrito enhiminés autour d 'Hilde gard e," /lc/fs «1«



the images. Th e vast m ajority of the program s in the Ottoman eva n

ge liaries am based on a Ch ristological cycle wh ich originated in bibli

cal illustration d ra w n from the sacram entarles or, more rarely, from

the book s of Go spe ls.JM The pericopes accom panied by a painting, either full-p age or in the initial letter, are in gen era l those o f the big

feasts o f the liturgical year, as in the sacram entarles. The icono

gra ph ie treatment is sim ilar ove rall to that of the paintings d evoted

lo the sam e subjects in the contem porary bo oks of G osp els from Re*

ichenau. H ow ever, som e evang eliaries contain p aintings foreign to

the gospe l cyc les; let us cite the de dica tory m iniature representing

H en ry II (reigned 100 2-1024 ) and lois w ife K un igun de on folio 2ro f

the eva n ge liary offered by the em pero r to the new bishopric of Bam

berg, which he had founded (Munich, Bayer. Staatsbibl., elm. 4452).

Rcccnt research has satisfactorily dem onstrated the political im port

of this im age since it w as the em peror w ho h ad com m issioned the

manuscript.>15 Another novel aspect of the Ottoman evangeliaries is

the im portant part giv en to im ages illustrating gosp el parables.-'16 Inthis regard , they are ve ry c lose to the iconogra phie tradition o f the

Byzantine books o f reading s, thoro ughly studied by K. W eitzmann.*17

The illustration o f the book s of readings used in the Rom anesqu e

period , first of all ev an geliaries, continued the Ottonian traditions,

w hich expla in s w h y the most beautiful evan geliaries o f th is period

originated in Germany. The innovations touch upon limited points

and never result in a distinctive iconography. Even the character of the decov is identical to that of the C aro ling ian and, later, Ottonian

periods (full-page illustrations, purely decorative or historiated ini

tials, ornam ental em bellishments). T his style de no tes a taste for the

archaic and seems to be a last surge of the iconographie tradition of

314. See the basic article o f A. Weiss, “ Die spiitantiko U'ktionar-Ulustr.iHon ini

Skriploriuin dcr Kok'hemm," Die AbU'i Reicht’tiuu (Sigmaringen, 1974) 311-362.315. P. K. Kk’in, "Die Apokalypse Ottos III and das Perikopenbuch Heinrichs

II," Aachenrr Kunslbltitter 56-57 (1988-1989) 5-52316. As in Munich, Bayer. StaaLsbibl., elm. ¿3338 (Uuidiunau, first half of

eleventh century); see A. Korteweg, "Das Hvangelistar Clm. 23338 und seine Stel-lung iiuu*rh.ilb der Reichenauer Schiilhandschriften," Studien zur mittehllerHchen Kuntt 800-1250: Festschrift für Florentim Miilherich zut» 70. Cerburlstog, ed. K. Bit*r-



Ihe liturgicii! b ooks from the High M idd le Age s. To account for this

state o f affairs, one must rem em ber the increa sing attention the artists

gave, from the twelfth century on, to the new categories of books in

the liturgical domain, such as the missal and pontifical, and to manuscripts containing excgetioal com m entaries. After the tw elfth century,

ev.ingetiaries and lectionaries w ou ld bccom e less and less num erous.

A fair num ber o f these Rom anesque evangeliaries are o f the fe stive

type and comprise only the readings for the big feasts of the year.

The manuscript of the Municipal Library of I.aon (ms. 550; Alsace,

end of twe lfth ccntury) h as on ly twenty-three sheets; the text of its

twenty-three pericopes all begin with a purely ornamental or hislori-ated initial. This manuscript has portraits of the evangelists, figures

of saints, and scenes from the life of Ch rist (presentation in the Temple

<md flagellation).**8 1-et u s also mention tw o true m asterpiec es of Ro

m anesque illum ination: the E va ng eliary o f Prüm (Paris, B. N., lat.

17325), whose date , 1 1 1 0 - 1 1 2 0 , w as recently determined b y C. Nor-

dent'alk; its iconographie cyc le de pend s m ost of all on local traditions-'19

interspersed with a few innovations having no direct connection with

the text but referring to the history of the Abb ey o f P r ü m ;^ and the

E va nge liary of St. Frentrud e (Munich, Bayer. Staatsbibl., d m . 15903)

executed in the first ha lf o f the eleventh ce ntu ry in Salzburg , w here

the Ottoman tradition w as also strong ly im plan ted.*"

Co m pared to the eva ng eliaries, the epistolaries never received any

important decoration during the Middle Ages. This fact, peculiar to the West, contrasts w ith the ic onographie traditio n o f the Byzantine ep is

tolaries and books o f the A cts o f the Apo stles, wh ose richness is often

com parable to that of the Greek book s of G osp els and evan geliaries.*22

318. On this manuscript, sec G. Camus, I a mémoire de» siècles, 2.000 rws d'éents

en Alsace (Strasbourg, 1988) 209-210.319. {¿specially in Ihe Tropor of Prüm (Paris, B. N., lat. 9448), from the end of

thy tenth century, and another evangeliary written in the same abbey in theeleventh century (Manchester, John Rylands Library, ms. 7}; see C Nordcnfalk,"A German Romanesque Ix'clionary in Pans: Date and Origin," The RurlingUnt

Ma$<\z:ne 130 (1988) 4-9,3 18 .320. What is meant here is the painting of the washing of the feet, in which Ihe

sandals shown near Peter are an allusion tu the relic the abbey possessed.h l



IV. Genesis and Development of the Missal

'['hanks to the w ork o f som e great scho lars of the twentieth century,

w e have gained a fairly good kn ow ledge o f the general condit io ns in

w hic h the genesis and develo pm ent o f the m issal took pla ce. The p io

neering s tud ies o f A . Kbner,53> A . B au m stark/ ^1 A . W ilmart,3*5 A .

D old,3* and V. Lero qu ais,137 and m ore recently those o f O. N uss-

baum*2* and A. H au sslingw lead to conclusions wh ich hav e been

confirm ed and m ade m ore precise by an alyses of particular points inthe m edieval m anuscripts.

It is com m on ly accepted toda y that the rise of the m issal cannot be

exp lained solely b y practical reasons such as the desire to m ake all

texts (orations, read ings, eve n rituals, blessing s, and so on) available

in one book. A certain evolution o f the ecclesiology o f the liturgy oc

curred after the Caro lingian period , on e consequen ce o f w hich w as

the concentration of the liturgical action in the celeb rant's han ds, a lthough the other actors in the cciebration w ere not eliminated. Beg in

ning with the eleventh century, the celebrant was under obligation to

recite, at least in a low vo ice, the sung parts o f the M ass, even though

they w ere executed by the choir, and the va riou s readings, even

though they w ere proclaim ed by the deacon and su bde acon .3>°

The m anu scripts wh ich h ave been preserved attest to this ev olu

tion an d m ake it possible to establish a typ olog y of the m edieval

323. Mi$$aie Romanum (1896).324. Missale Romanum: Si’ine Ettixeickhntg ihrc wkhligstett Urkunden und ProbJeme

(Eindhovon-Nijmegen. 1929) especially 132-143.325. "Le s anciens missels dc !a France," Ephemerides lit urgióte 46 (1932) 245-267.



m issal.1*1 Let u s se e the principal representative eases and their im

portance for the history of the Mass books.

A w ord o í caution: the different types w hic h w ill be described donot succeed one another acco rding to chrono logical order. On the

contrary, one observes as early as the ninth century the frequent co

existence of the different form s o f the missal in the I ligh M iddle

A ges- It is im possib le to speak o f a linear evolutio n that w ould lead

from a "rudimentary" form of missal to an elaborate book. Nonethe

less, the eleventh century m arked a d ecisive lum in the history o f the

missal: at that time, the sacramentarles and the iibeUi ntissarum y ielded to com plcle m anuscripts w hich specia lists call "p len ary

m issals"— an o bv ious pleona sm .33* A s a consequence, from the first

half of twelfth cen tury on, there w ere few er sacram entarles than

missals, and their numbers would diminish further in the thirteenth

and fourteenth centuries.5**

In the ninth century, m argin al notes app eare d, a s w ell as the first

forms of the missal with juxtapo sed parts and libclli miwirinit. In order

to illustrate the first case, let u s cite Rheims, B. M ., ms. 2 13 (St. Am an d,

abou t 869);3:m a sacram en tary from Tours da ting from the second ha lf

of the ninth century (Paris, B. N., new acq. lat. 1589); and a sacramen

tary, probably from Amiens, going back to the ninth or tenth century

(Paris, B. N ., lat. 9432). ” s In these three docum ents, cop yists have

transcribed in the margin of each Mass formulary the incipits of thechants of the gradual. The insertion of indications for the readings

corresponding to each M ass form ulary in the m argins o f sacram én

tanos w as not a practical solution because o f the length o f the peri-

copcs, w he reas the sim ple m ention o f the inripit of the chants w as

sufficient to bring to m em ory the piece to be sung.

The p rim itive form s of m issals w ith juxtap osed parts (the parts fol

low one another) had a certain success during the High Middle Agesand even later in the eleven th and twelfth centuries, a time of full

531. For the manuscripts, see tho nearly exhaustive list of Gamber, CLÍ.A 527-547, as well as the many fragments published by this author.

332. Concerning the medieval terminology of the missal and the ambiguity that



de velopm ent tor m issals in w hich Ihe different pa rts are combined.

In a first phase, only the sacramentary and the Mass antiphonal are

ju xtaposed, as in Paris , B. N ., lat. 229 1; fo ls. 9 - 15 (Sacram entary o f St.

A m and, about 8 7 5 - 8 7 6 ) — in th is docum ent, the oratio ns o f votive

Masses (fols. 177V-188V-) are accompanied by the readings from the

epistles and G ospe ls. The sam e is true o f the sacram entary-grad ual of

Corbie (Pa ris, B. lat. 12050 ; shortly after 853), w he re the gra du al

table occupies folios 3 -t 6 v ,3?7 In a later ph ase, in the eleventh a nd

twelfth centuries, the Mass Icctionary would be added to the sacra-

m entary-grad ual, thus form ing a true missal with juxtapo sed parts.Th e code x Grossly in B asel, an Alsatian m issal from the end o f the

eleventh century, is a go od sam ple of this: the antiphon al is on folios

1-51, the sacramentary on folios 56-150, and the leclionary on folios

150V—35 3y, the w ho le thing being follow ed by a series o f onlines writ

ten on folios 354.v-380v.tt8 Th is typ e o f missal w ou ld not long su rv ive

the arrival of the liturgical books called the "second generation"

(missal in which parts arc consolidated, pontifical, breviary, and soon). Typological evolution, together with the need to produce a book

finally unified, favored the creation of a missal in which each piece is

set in its right place, feast by feast.

Lastly, let us recall the essential role the ¡¡belli missarunt played in

the internal and external developm ent o f the m issal.” 9 Before reach

ing a com plete an d d efinitive form , the m issal also w ent also through

prelim inary stages wh ich can be con sidered emb ryonic form s: theseare the libdli missarum. C om po sed in general of four or five fascicles,

they contain ail the texts o f one or seve ral feasts. The structure o f the

form ularies is the follow ing: the orations (draw n from the sacram en

tary); the readings (normally found in the lectionary and the cvan-

geliary) ; and the incipits of the su ng piece s (contained in the M ass

antiphonal), sometimes with musical notation. As all the elements

}■}<>. De.shu.sses, "Chronologie des sacMinentaires."337. See I lesbert, AMS, XXIff.338. Ihe study of this manuscript, accompanied by its critic.it edition, is due to

be published in the near future in the series Spicilegium iriburgfnse by A. Hànggiand G. Nidner; sec E. Pala/20, "L'iUustr.ilion du codex Cinîssly: Missel b.ilois duXI*’ siècle " Hi t i d l' t n (>990) 15 22



necessary to the eucharistic celebration were gathered into one book,

the priest wa s able from then on to celebrate by h imself if he so de

sired. The I (belli mkaatrum, com ing especially from monasteries, som e

times served for quite specific liturgical actions, like private Masscs;wthey also could have been the m eans o f diffusing a new M ass.*1* In

monasteries, the profusion o f votive Masses, often private, is explainedprincipally by a liturgical use which favored personal devotion over

the collcctive and ecciesial celebration.*** Aided by a modest I ilk'll us

missarum, the priest-monk said h is Mass all by h imself either for his

ow n salvation or for that of sinners, whether alive o r dead , or for the

poor or for the gift of ram or for the deceased brethren.*43 Thanks to

these libelli used for private Masses one glim pses a wh ole phase in

the evolution o f the status of both the monastic and monastic spiritu

ality in medieval society.

340. See A. Haussling, Miwr/isfowHVHf und Eucharistiefeier, LQF 58 {1973); N. K.

Rasmussen and I*. Palazzo, "Messes privées, livre liturgique et architecture: A

propos du ms. Paris, Arsenal 610, et de l'église abbatiale de Roichenau-Mittelzell,"/tome des Sciences philosophiques et théologiques 72 (1988) 77-87.

34 1. This latter case is attested bv the first fascicle of Rouen, B. M., ms. A 566

(275}, which contains votive Masses for the Virgin and All Sainls (ninth century).In a later phase, this libellas was used in the eleventh century for the compositionof a more complete missal whose contents were exactly those of theCarolingiandocument; see E. Palazzo, "Un librllus missae du scriplornim de Saint-Amand pour

Saint-Denis: Son intérêt pour la typologie des manuscrits liturgiques," Repue béné

dictine 99 (1989) 286-292.342. See C. Vogel, "Deux conséquences de l'eschatologie grégorienne, la multi



Part Thre e

The Books of the Office



1. History and Function of the Office in the West

i . RKCAI . I . INC SOME HISTORICAL. FACTS

The h istory of the Office, tod ay m ore often called the Liturgy o f the

Hours, has for a long lime awakened the researchers' interest. Recently,

excellent su rve ys h av e been pu blished; as a consequence, I shall limit

m yself here to recalling the main pha ses o f the deve lopm ent o f the

P raye r of the H ours in the West, w ithou t neglecting the imp ortant

part the East took in the elaboration of this liturgy. I shall try to introduce read ers to the general structure of the Divine Office by high light

ing the different ritual acts that com po se it (psalm ody , chant, prayer,

reading, and so on) but without d ealing w ith the particularities prope r

to either the many Western traditions (Iberian, Ambrosian, and so on)

or the Eastern traditions d urin g the M iddle Ag es. Before approaching

the history of the different boo ks o f the Office, w e shall present some

o f the processes at w or k in the celebration o f the H ours an d giv e precise definitions of the principal terms belonging to the vocabulary in

use. As in the other parts of this manual, the Roman rite will receive

most of the attention because, ve ry early, its usa ges in the O ffice cam e

to dominate almost every region in the West.1

Origins o f the Prayer o f the Hours

U ncea sing p ray er on a da ily basis, such is the spiritual go al of the

Liturgy o f the Hours, a goal suggested by the New Testament. Tine New

«. Conc erning the reasons for this choice, see the Introduction. For an overallhistory of the Office, one must consult- above all Taft, Liturgy of She Hours. Thisbook is a rich mine because of its historical and scientific approach; it treats of all



Testament texts concern ing p ray er are num erous and can be classified

under the following categories: (i) references to Jesus (and others)

being at prayer, (2) exhortations or invitations to prayer, (3) instruc

tions on the man ner of pra ying , (4) texts of hym ns an d pra yers.J Fromits beginnings, Ch ristian pra yer inherited custom s from ancient Ju

daism , such as regular prayer, stron gly dom estic in character and said

at least twice a d ay at fixed hou rs in the morning and ev en ing .5 This

contribution of Jud aism is on ly one factor in the origin of the I.iturgy

o f the Hours, which is also rooted in the message of Christ, transmit

ted to us in the New Testament. The hymn of praise to the Father and

Ch rist must be renew ed d ay after da y m orning and e vening, and

even during the night. Going back to the first century, the D i d a d i e ,

Antiochene4 in orig in, exhorts Christians to p ray three tim es a day,

w hic h suggests alread y a regular and d a ily schedule of prayer. M ore

over, this text attests to the use of the Our Father (ch. 8.1-3).

For the first three centu ries, the docu m ents do not allow us to as

certain whether the Prayer of the f fours was structured according toone single schem e an d timetable.5 H ow ever, a certain nu m ber of tes

tim onies com ing from prestigious authors dem onstrate the progres

sive stabilization o f the va riou s elements o f the D ivine Office. In

Eg yp t, in the beg inning of the third century, Clemen t o f Alexan dria

(c .i50 -c .2i5 ) Insists on the fixed tim es of (he d ay devo ted to prayer:

at the third, sixth, and ninth hours; it is also from him that for the

first time, w e h ear of turning to the east when pra yin g.6 In the firsthalf of the third century, Origen (0.185-0.254) repeats Clement and in

troduces the practice of regularly sa yin g certain psalm s for a pa rticu

lar Ho ur, for instance. Psalm 14») for the even ing pray er. Tertullian

(c.i6o~c.225) is the first to describe the pattern of daily prayer, a pat

tern which will become the rule by the end of the fourth century.7 In

the m iddle of the third century, St. Cyp rian (d. 258), bishop o f Carth*

2. St’« Tati, Liturgy o f llur ! lours, 4-5; C li 4:157-162.3. On the ft'wish loundation of the Christian Liturgy of the i lours, see Tail,

Liturgy o f the ¡faura, 5-11; A.-C, Martimort, "L'histoire de l'office et son interpretation," Semnmriuui 1 (1972) 65-85, and chiefly 67-iKj.

4. J.-P. Audet, Lrt Dùiitchè: Instruction d a iipotrcs (Paris, 1958) ^19; W. Rordorf and



age, confirms for the church of North Africa Tertullian's testimony on

the structure o f prayer .8 Finally, the Apostolic Tradition * the liturgical

docum ent (w hich is also a collection o f canons) of greatest impor

tance from the third century and one of the earliest, says in chapter35, wh ich concerns m orning pray er at home, "Th e faithful, as soon as

they have awakened anil gotten up, and before they turn to their

w ork , shall pray to G od and then hurry to their w o rk ."

The documentation from the third century shows that what would

become the com plete series of the H ours in the fourth century w as on

its w a y; this series w ill then be: wh en rising , at the third, sixth, and

ninth hours, in the evening, and during the night. The contents of

these prayers were probably centered on sacred Scripture, catechesis,

an d hym ns. It is also at this period that the de ep m eaning o f da ily

prayer was underlined, notably the remembrance of the life and death

o f Jesu s, sym bolized by the rising and setting of the sun . The evenin g

lamp, w hich alread y had an eschatological connotation, w as Christ,

the light of the world. However, let us remember that this was not yet li turgy properly so called but, m ore sim ply, regula r hours at which

Ch ristians w ere exh orted to pray, either collectively o r in private.

Origins of the Office in the West (fourth to Sixth Centuries)

From the fourth cen tury on , but esp ecially in the fifth, the peace o f

the Ch urch an d the constant spread o f Ch ristianity am on g va rious

peoples, favored the development of a more intense liturgical life with carefully organized prayer m eetin gs, that is, the Office, hi the

West, tw o distinct fo rm s o f p rayer in com m on arose: lhat o f the

urban Ch ristian com m un ity (cathedral or parish Office) and lhat of

the mo nastic com m un ity (monastic O ffice).10

Due to a lack o f an y official liturgical docum ent, the cathedral Office

is kn ow n to us only through the testimonies the Ch urch Fathers ha ve

left us in their hom ilies, hag iogra ph ie stories, and also the decisions

8. P. Salmon, "Los origines de la prière des Heures d'après le témoignage deTerhillien et d e soint Cyprien ," Mélange* offerts il Mademoiselle Christine Mohr/uanti

(Utrecht, 1963) 202-210.9. Concerning the date and the disputed character o f this document, see espe



m ade by councils/ espec ially at the time of Cae sariu s, A rchbisho p of

A rles (502-542}, in the begin nin g o f the sixth century. The Of/ice es

sentially comprised a morning praise and an evening chant which

develop the symbolism of, respectively, the rising sun and, in theeve nin g, the light of the wo rld, Christ. Already, the choice of psalm s

w as determ ined by the hour of d ay ; and the Office com prised prayers,

hymns, responsories, and so on, according to a plan more and more

clearly defined. Su nd ay vigils, featuring p salm ody — of a particular

amplitude at taster—were added to the cathedral Office.

The m onastic O ffice is better kn ow n b ecause o f the m any traditions

that arose in the period extending from the fourth to sixth centuries

and through several fixed schemes for daily prayer, the cursus, result

ing from the need and obligation for the monk to practice the fans

continua ("continual praise"].

In the nu m erous m onastic cursus w hich w ere established at this

tim e in the West and the East, are sev era l com m on points on the

m ann er o f celebrating the Office: the structure o f the H ours, w hichacquires a quasi-definitive form (see pp. 124-125); the development

of p salm od y; the increasing use of antiphon s, inv itatory o r responso-

rial p salms, variou s sorts of readings, hym ns. M ost monastic cursus

had their origin in the practical application o f the ru les laid do w n b y

the reformers of monastic life, without the Church officially stepping

in to mandate this type of celebration. In the first place, let us cite the

Ru le of St. Benedict (first half of the sixth century) w h os e role is mostimportant for the developm ent of the Office, Ro m an as w ell as m ona s

tic, in the West. But we must also mention the Rule of St. Augustine

(end of the fourth century); the Gallican cursus, w ith the Rules of Au-

relian o f A rles and the m onastery of Lerins (fifth cen tury) ; the Ru le of

the M aster (sixth century), Italian in origin, w hose chap ters 33 to 43

are devo ted to the Office; the Rule of St. Co lum ban (about 615) , w ho se

ch ap ter 7 is at the source o f the Irish m on astic crjrsws; an d lastly the

Iberian tradition, resting mainly on the Rule for Monks by Isidore of

Se v ille (betwe en 590 and 600) and the rules w ritten by St. Fructuosus

o f Brag a (d. abo ut 665).15

u On all these rules and what they contain that is relevant to the* history of



The Roman Office in the Middle Ages (Sixth to Fifteenth Centuries)

Prepared by the different m onastic traditions enu m erated above,

the Rom an Office acqu ired, from the sixth cen tury on, the form it

kept until the twentieth century, a form based on two cursus having am onastic structure: the Rom an O ffice an d the Benedictine Office. Be

fore St. Benedict, Rome possessed, perhaps as early as the fourth cen

tury, a monastic cwrsi/s (coexisting with the cathedral Office), that of

the monasteries which served the great urban basilicas and the sanc

tuaries of the martyrs.1-* In the sixth century, Benedict utilized the

Rom an m ona stic Office to establish the cursus found in his Rule. Syn

thesizing wh at w as alread y in use in Rom e on the one hand an d hisown views concerning the Office on the other, Benedict was the cre

ator of the Benedictine Office as it is known to us from documents of

the eighth and ninth centuries. Today, all authors agree that the Bene

dictine Office de rives from the Rom an m onastic O ffice, even though

in the course o f the centuries and esp ecially durin g the H igh M iddle

A ges, the ele m ents o f the Prayer o f the H ours, as defined by Bene

dict, have enriched and e ven "corre cted " the structure of the Rom an

m ona stic office, thus sub stantially lightening the liturgical scheme.

1low eve r, in R om e itself, the Benedictine Office ne ver sup planted the

local usag e, w he reas it met with en orm ous success in m ost Western

monasteries.15

From the time o f Benedict to tine en d o f the M idd le A ge s, an d eve n

until Pius X and then Vatican II, the structure o f the Rom an O ffice didnot undergo any fundam ental chan ges, but only partial modifications

in the allotme nt o f psalm s, the add ition o f pro per offices to the Sanc-

tora! at the exp ense o f the Tem poral, the rise an d then m ultiplication

o f vo tive offices, the Office o f the D ead , and the office of the chap ter

after Prim e.u In the eighth century, the first efforts of the Caroling ian

rulers, particularly Pepin the Short, and certain dign itaries o f the

Church, favored the establishment of the Roman cwrsi<s beyond the A lps; this resulted in the coexistence o f tw o paralle l cursus, the Roman

and the Benedictine. Twice, at the time of C hro de gan g, bishop o f Metz

(742-766), wh o w as a great adm irer o f the Rom an liturgy,15 then at

t2. Sec Tail, Liturgy of ihe Hnurs. 13 1- 13 4; CP, 4:249-250.



the Co unc il o f Aach en in 8 16 -8 17 , w hich ratified sev eral of the initia

tives of Pepin the Short and Charlem agn e, the Rom an O ffice benefited

from the reform of the clergy—under the form of the institution of

Canons—so that it easily gained full acceptance in the cathedralchapters. Kxcept for the Iberian peninsula, the Roman rite was solidly

implanted in the West from the Carolingian period on. But only at

the end of the eleventh century, under the pontificate of Gregory VII

(107 3-108 5), w ould it be impo sed by the Roman Cu ria.

D uring the w ho le o f the M iddle A ges, both rwrsus (Roman and

Benedictine) w ere in use, often w ith adap tations du e to the insertion

of new liturgical compositions, sung pieces in particular; there werealso instances o f a m ixed curstts of the Rom an an d Benedictine Offices.

Indeed, the im portant differences b etween the tw o c«rs«s occasion

ally obliged m onk s to bring the tw o into agreement. On e of the im

portant differences concerns the number of responsories at the night

office (tw elve in the Benedictine O ffice, nine in the Rom an) wh ich

com m un ities had to increase or dim inish as the* case m ight be, thus

setting do w n their ow n lists of respon sories; today, these lists are

most useful in determining what the liturgical usages were.

In the second h alf o f the M iddle A ges , the history o f the Office is

characterized b y a g row ing inflation; this caused un easiness in cer

tain communities where it was felt that the length of each hour had be

come e xcessive in relation to the other dem an ds of the m onk s' lives.

In addition, the reform of the Roman liturgy by the Curia in the thirteenth century contributed to establish the Rom an O ffice as the model

for the wh ole Ch urch through the com position o f new books (the bre

v iary in particular).16 Only in the second half o f the thirteenth centu ry

w as the O ff ice o f the Roman C u ria— revised by the M aster G enerai o f

the Franciscan order, Haymo of Faversham (d. 1244)—to really take

over, than ks to the action o f the Friars Minor, w ho had ado pted it for

their order.17 Afterward, it was not before the fifteenth ccntury andthe R eformation that m any succ essive rearrangem ents took place in

the Roman breviary, which had become the office book par excellence.

Finally, let us recall that one of the strikin g facts in the history o f

the Office in the M iddle A ge s is the prog ressive develop m ent, start

ing in the m iddle o f the eighth century, o f the priva te recitation o f the



Office. In the Rule o f Benedict (ch. 50) and that of C hro de ga ng (ch. 4),

it is proscribed that anyon e not present in church for the celebration

of the Hours in common, must recite them in private. This practice

became comm on am on g the clergy about the tenth century and became even more prevalent in the thirteenth century with the Mendi

cant Orders adopting il because of their pastoral activities, which

w ere often itinerant.

The innumerable books of Hours in the fifteenth century', either

m odestly decorated or richly illustrated, dem onstrate a definite en

thusiasm on the part o f the wealthier classes for the Office, recited

priv ately or perh aps m ore often in a collective setting such as con fraternities; the accent w as placed pa rticularly on the offices of the Vir

gin an d the dead as w ell as on the penitential psalm s. Ih e brilliance

of the colors and the freshness of the pages which characterize Ihe

m ost beautiful exam ples that hav e endu red to our time reveal that

the liturgical book had become at the dawn of modern times and in

the hands of lay people an objccl denoting social prestige.1*

2. R IT E S , S P I R I T U A L I T Y , A N D S T R U C T U R E O F T H E O F F IC E

Like the Eucharist, the L iturgy o f the Hours co m prises several ritual

acts belonging to the categories o f prayer, singing , and reading. One

of the original traits o f the I>ivine Office is the connection, often closer

than that o f the euch aristic celebration, betw een the different p arts of

the rite. Hence the nece ssity of a goo d syn chron ization between theofficiants, more necessary than elsewhere if the ritual performance is

to be w orthily conducted. A certain num ber of persons p lay their own

d ea rly defined roles along with an assem bly, com posed o f monastics

or canons, w ho se p art is as essential a s those entrusted to individu als.

The mo nastic custom aries and o rdinaries su pp ly the richest do cu

mentation on the w ay the Office w as conducted in the M iddle A ges,

w hether in m onasteries or cathedrals.D epe nd ing on the time o f day, the celebration o f the O ffice is m ore

or less elaborate and its contents more or less substantial. This var iab il

ity from o ne H our to the othe r expla ins w h y it is difficult to describe

in too detailed a fashion the gen eral structure o f the Office, even

w ithout takin g into account the fact that m ost orders and monastic



com m unities had their ow n particular usages. Finally, cach H our is

imb ued w ith its specific spiritual m eaning so that the choice of pieces

and the w ay of rendering them v ar y from H our to Hour.

W hat fo llow s is sim p ly a presentation o f the principal ritual characteristics o f the Office (the invar iab le elements), its actors, its struc

ture (Roman and lîenedictine), and lastly the essential aspects of the

spirituality of the 1 lours.*9

The Rites unit Officiants

The syn ax is (the gathered assem bly) is presided o ve r by the bishop

(or a canon) in the cathe dral O ffice and by the abbot or ab bess in the

m onastic Office. The p res id er's part is prin cipa lly the recitation o f the

prayers and the reading of the Gospel, when this is called for. In cer

tain circum stances, as in the O ffice o f the cha pter after Prime, the

abbot addresses m atters concerning the life o f the monastery, for ex

am ple, the assignm ent o f penances for faults (cufpae) committed by

the monks. A s a rule, an y m onk in the com m un ity can be the reader

at the Office. Then there is the w hole o f the com m unity, gen era lly di

vided into tw o choirs for the requirem ents o f the psalm ody, under

the guidan ce o f on e o r two soloists.

In all liturgical fam ilies, the L iturgy o f the Hours is prayer, and prin

cipa lly praye r with Ihe psalm s, or psalm od y (from the Latin psatmus).20

A lread y in the ancient m onastic rule s, psalm ody p lays a preeminent

role in the m on k's prayer.*‘ In the M idd le A ge s, the recitation of psalms held an essential place in the Office and took on more and

more com plex forms.-“ By ado pting the principie o f lectio continua

19. Por a mor? thorough documentation on all these topics, see Taft, Liturgy of

the Hour*-, CP, 4; Salmon, Office divin.

20. See fail, Liturgy o f the Hours; CP, 4:190- ¿06; A.-G. Martimort, Mirabile lundis

omhnmt, mélanges liturgiques, éludes historiques, hi reforme conciliaire, portraits dc liturgistc*, Bibliotluua "Ephemerides liturgicae," subsidia 60 (Rome, 1991) 15-29("La prière des psaumes dans la liturgie des Heures") and 75-97 ("Fonction de lapsalmodie dans la liturgie de la Parole").

2 1. Seo the unpublished thesis of Th. F.lich, I*' contexte oral de la liturgie médiémle

et le rôle dit texte écrit. 3 vols. (Paris: Paris IV-Sorbonne ami Institut catholique deParis, 1988) 1.15-234; A. l)e Vogue. '‘Psalmodier n'est pas prier,” F.ccle$ta Oru»ts 6



prescribed in B enedict's R ule or by ch oosing p salm s according to the

ava ilab le time, one ends up w ith several forms of psalmod y. Here are

the principal ones: direct p salm od y in w hich one or sev eral soloists

sing the psalm in directum (straight through, w ithou t an tiphons or retrains! on one m elody an d w ithou t interruption; responsorinl ps al

mody, in which one or several soloists execute the psalm verses, but

at the end of each verse, the community takes up a brief responsory,

a sort of refrain rang ing from the sim ple w ord "a llelu ia" to part of a

psalm verse or a w ho le verse;23 alternating psalmo dy, in wh ich two

choirs alternate the sing ing o f the w ho le psalm w ithou t interruption,

verse by verse o r strophe by strophe. The chanting o f the psalm s at the

Office is enrichcd by antiphons (a kind of refrain generally sung at

the beginning and end o f the psalm , or even between strophes; hym ns;

tropes, alw a ys executed by the soloist or soloists and the choir.24

The re ad ings at the O ffice (also called lessons, from lecliottes) are of

three kinds: biblical, patristic, and ha giog rap hic.15 Th e biblical rea d

ing (Old and N ew Testaments) is the oldest and m ost im portant; as agen eral rule, the pr<x:!amation o f the Go sp el is the abbo t's or ab bess's

privilege. The num ber and choice of readings va ry from one tradition

to the next and according to the Hours. The wading of the Church

Fathers (hom ilies, sermon s) and Ihe hagiograp hic w ritin gs (legends

about the saints, passions of Ihe martyrs) also app eared ve ry ea rly in

the history of the Office, in Africa and the East, and greatly devel

oped during the Middle Ages. Like the sung pieces, the readings ateach Office can be divided into several chapters, passages (lessons) of

variable length and number, according to the H ours.26

Finally, the celebration of the Hours, like that of the Mass, makes

room for the recitation of prayers of intercession and thanksgiving. In

23. Hus ot psalm ody became the most frequent throughout the Latin

C.'hurch as early as the sixth century.24. See Huglo, Lrvres J e chant, 19-29, and also the definitions given below.25. On the history of the readings during the Office, see CP, 4:220-227; Marti-

inort, Lv/»res lititrgiqurt, 69-72; P.-M. Gy, "l-a Bible dans la liturgie au Moven Ago." Le Moi/cn Age d h fiibtc. od. P. Rich«? and G. Lorichon (Paris. 1984) 537-552,especially 541-552; and more generally, G. I^orichoti, "Gli us» della Bibbin," Lo

Sfwrt'o h'Hcrtirifltiel Medioevo. vol 1: // Medioevo hiin o. pt. 1: La produz hne del hwii»



the earliest m onastic rules, the custom o i con cludin g certain Offices

w ith prayers o f in tercession {especially Lauds and Vespers) is w ell at

tested.27 In most traditions, it becamc customary to introduce the

recitation o f the Pater (Our Father) at least three times a day at the be

gin nin g or end o f tine celebration. Suc h recitation could be acco m pa

nied b y that of an oration reserved to priests, a collect; this w a s said

also, without the Ou r Father, at certain H ours, alw ay s as a conclusion

to the Office. The collect said at M ass is also often used as the pray er

said by the presid cr at the Office. In rare occasions, a blessing w as

foreseen, as Bene dict's Rule prescribes at the en d o f Com pline.

Structure and Spirituality o f Ihe Hours

For a long time, liturgists ha ve been aw are of the specificity o f each

Hour, of its ow n character, o f its spirituality, and they have established

a hierarchy of the H ours.18 T he m ore or less sub stantial contents of

each office is in large part exp lained b y this hierarchy w hich w as

strongly affirm ed du ring the M iddle Ages. A ll tradit io ns begin the first H our w ith an introductio n, the in vita-

lory, a sort o f solemn exh ortation to d ivine praise. Th is office is m ade

up o f several psa lm s with an tiphons, v ariable from one rite to another

an d ac cord ing to the liturgical time.29 Th e m orning and eve nin g

praises, correspon ding to the natural rhythms o f d aily life, gav e rise

to the offices o f Lau d s (offichmt matutinale ("morning office")) and

Vespers.*0 C hristians begin and end the day b y p raisin g C o d . Thechoice of rea ding s (if there are any) an d in pa rticular of psalm s is de

termined b y the themes o f setting and rising, references to the death

and resurrection of C h rist. '1

Between La ud s and Vespers, the Ihree interm ediary H ours o f Teree,

Sex t, an d None-12 take place. Punctuating the monastic da y b y p rayer,

these three Ho urs alternate w ith the dem and s of w ork and comm u

nity life, as w ell as the eucharistic celebration. 'I'hey are the dee pest

expression of the unceasing prayer of Christians; their structure, the

sam e for the three I lours, remained unch anged du ring the M iddle

27. See CP. 4:227-229.28 See Taft Lifffrgy o fthe Hours 141 163



A ges. C om pline is the last office o f the day, preceding the night rest.”

Its elem ents, notably its penitential aspect, arc pa rticularly chosen b e

cause o f the approa ching night and the spiritual preparation it requires.

The night office com prises V igils (first office of the da y to com e

and not the last of Ihe preceding d ay), w ho se com position varies, ac

cording to the day, from one nocturn to three (on Sunday). The essen

tial go al o f V igils is the fostering of w atch fulne ss an d the stim ulation

o f the expectation of the Lord, w ho w ill com e ba ck at dayb reak.*4 The

Kaster Vigil, then secondarily various prayer meetings at night arc

prob ably at the root of the prog ressive evolution of the night office(hence its nam e o f V igils, som etimes c alled M atins), first for the big

feasts of the Temporal and later on for the celebrations of certain

feasts of saints, especially at their burial places.35 The night office in

variab ly opens w ith a verse repeated three times and a hym n; the

length of each nocturn is variable, and the third on Sunday is the

most developed.

T he last H our to be established in the cursus, Prim e (office of thefirst hou r of day) p robab ly goe s back to the fifth century and w as

perhaps instituted by John Cassian (c.360-435). It is celebrated in the

choir as are the other I lours, but it is ve ry short and ha s long been

perceived as duplicating the morning office. In the eighth century (as

attested by the Rule of C hro dcg an g destined for the cathedral of

Metz) and perha ps earlier, it w as follow ed by a sort of "su pp lem en t,"

the office in chapter.36 Th e office of P rim e in chap ter is seen as half-liturgical, half-adm inistrative since it wa s d urin g this assem bly that

m atters concern ing the life of the monastery' w ere ad dresse d. *7 The

office of Prime in chapter was not eliminated from the Roman Office

until Vatican IL38

33. Ibid., 271-2 72 .34. Ibid., 266--270.35. On the disputed origins—no doubt multiform—of Vigils, as well as their

connections with Lauds ami Prime, sec Taft, l iturgy o f the Hours, 191-213.36. See J, Froger, origin?* tie prime, Bibliotheca Ephemerides liturgicae 19

(Rome, 1946). Sue also the update on the state of these questions and the corrections proposed by Taft. Liturgy o f the Hours, 207-208.



Simplified Structure of the Content o f the I bu rs o f the Roman Monastic

Office (Benedictine Form) (after Taft, Liturgy of the 1lours, pp. j ¿4-138)

V i g i l s :Opening verse, said three times

Psalms 3 and 94

H y m n

—First nocturn:

6 psalms with refrain

Versicle

Blessing by the abbot or abbess

3 lessons and responsories in winter; 1 in summ er; 4 on Sunday s

—Second nocturn:6 psalms with alleluia

Brief biblical reading to be recited by heart

Versiclc

Litany —Third nocturn (on Sunday):

3 canticles with alleluia

Versicle

Blessing by the abbot4 lessons (NewTTestament) and responsories

Te Deum

GospelTe tiecei Inns {"it is fitting to praise yo u"]

Blessing

L a u d s :

Psalm 66Psalm 50 with refrain

2 variable psalms

Canticle

Psalms 146 to 150Reading from the epistles (Revelation on Sunday)

Responsory

I l



In t e r m e d i a t e H o u r s (P r i m e , T e r c e , S e x t , a n d N o n e ):

Opening verse

Hymn

3 variable psalms, with or without refrainReading (brief lesson)

Vcrsicle

Litany

Dismissal (prayer)

V e s p e r s :

O pening verse

4 variable psalm sReading

Responsory

Hymn

Versicle

Canticle from the GospelLitany

Our Father

Dismissal

C o m p i . i n ’ f :

Opening verse

Psalm s 4, 90, and 13 3 , without retrainHymn

Reading {brief lesson)

Versicle

Litany Blessing

Dismissal

Definitions o f the Principal Elements of the Office

— Antiphon: from the Latin antiphona (abbreviated Ant, or A. in the

manuscripts) designates a chanted piece, brief as a rule. Its function is

to frame the singing of each psalm and to indicate what psalm tone is

to be used Originally it was composed of one or two Scripture verses



The function o f the antiphon is musical, lyrical, and spiritual since it

highlights the meaning of the psalm . On the liturgical plane, by con

necting the psalm s one with the other, it insures the cohesion of an

office in the same way it unites the community that sings it throughantiphonal psalmody.

— Psalms: see the next section.— Rcspwisory: from the Latin responsorium (generally abbreviated #

in m anuscripts), designates what fo llows a reading whether at Mass

or during the Office. Originally, the responsory derived from the

psalm ody since it w as a psalm reduced to one or two verses, and it is

characterized by the repetition of a limited number of psalm verses.Later on, when the reading w as excerpted from other books o f the

Old Testament, the responsory also w as taken from the sam e text. In

the Midd le Ages , a given liturgical time, a given feast, had a common

treasury of responsories from which each church drew to organize its

ow n series. The study o f responsories is one of the means o f deter

mining the liturgical use o f a manuscript.— Versicle: from the Latin versus (abbreviated f in the manuscripts),

designates a shorl sentence draw n from the Psalms or other parts of

Scripture. There are versides of introduction ("O Cod, come to my

aid"), of conclusion ("Let us bless the Lord"'), of transition, leading

from the recitation of psalms to listening to the word of God or else

from the reading to the oration.

— Hymn: from the Latin hi/mnu$, designates lyrical chant in metricor rhythmic verses meant to enrich the spiritual power of the Office.

It expresses in poetical terms the m ystery of the da y w hile being at

the same time a solemn profession of faith. It is placed either in the

beg inning of the office or after the reading; in the latter case, it fosters

reflection on G od 's wo rd. Some hym ns were composed by great fig

ures o f Latin Christianity, such as St. Hilary o f Poitiers and St. A m

brose. They were collected into hymnals to facilitate their diffusion.— Lesson: from the Latin lectio, designates any reading done during

the Office. A brie f reading from Scripture is called capitulum ["chap

ter"! to Latin (see Martimort, Lcctures titurgiques, 74-76). A reading

from the Fathers of the Church is called a homily or senuon (gathered

in the homiliary) while the hagiograph ic readings are termed legends



— Biblical canticle: designates a rhythmed poem coming in general

from books of the Old Testament other than the Psalter. Some areadap ted from Gospel passages, for exam ple, Luke 1:46-55. The num

ber and distribution o f the biblical canticles are characteristic oí thedifferent liturgical traditions.

— Trope: sec Part 2, II, 6, the section dealing with the chant booksused at Mass.

—Collect. blessing, and Many: see Part 2 , 1, the section on sacram entarles.



II. Chant at the Office

». THE PSALTER The o ldest liturgical book is the Psalter, w hich w a s p roba bly com

po sed betwee n the tenth and third centuries B .C.E. Th is collection of

lyrical poem s, num bering 150,39 w as written in H ebrew and later on

translated into Latin from the Greek version of the Septuagint. Par

ticularly su itable for spiritual m editation, this biblical book w as used

very early in the liturgy, separated from the rest o f the Bib le and en

trusted to the can tor directin g the m on ks ' choir.40 The use o f thePsalter at the Office was mandated early on in the different rules, no

tably B enedict's.41 The anc ient m ona stic rules a llow us to discern the

multiple functions of the Psalter, used notably to teach reading.42 In

the beginning, each cursus of the L iturgy o f the Ho urs had its ow n

particular distribution o f the psalm s.43 C lea rly form ulated for the first

time in Benedict's Rule but in all likelihood already in use in the

Roman Office, the lectio continua o f the Psalter dom inated the Office

in the Middle A ge s according to tw o w eek ly arrangements: the Roman

cursus an d the Benedictine ct/rsws.44 Th e p rincip al difference between

39. On the problem o f num bering the psalm s, sec Le psau tier oecuménique, <1

liturgical text (Paris, 1987) 8.

40. On thi? history o f the psalm s and the psalter in general, see CP, 4:190-20}

(with a bibliography); Gy, "Bible dans la liturgie," 537-552, especially 544-550;

Leroquais, Psautiers; and Liturgica Vatican#, 52-54.

41. See lilich, Contexte oral: \f. Lohfink, "Psalinengebet und Psalterredaktion/’ A rch iv fii r U iu rgia vis senschafi 34 <1992) 1-22.

42. See P. Riche, "L e psautier, livre de lecture élémentaire d'ap rès les vie s des

saints mérovingiens," Etudes mérovingiennes: Actes îles fournées d e Poitiers. 1^-3 mai

952 (P i 1953) 253 256



the tw o cursas is the num ber of respon sories at V igils on feast d ay s,

nine for the Roman, twelve for the Benedictine.

The ManuscriptsI he psalters w hich have been preserved present a grea t va riety en

abling us to reconstruct the history of this liturgical book. In the fifth

and sixth centuries, and indeed throughout the Middle Ages, the

psalter used at the Office never stopped evolving and being

perfected.45 At that time, som e w riters, like Jero m e (c.347-420) and

Cassiodorus (490--C.585), set forth rules for the intelligible reading of

the sacred texts, including the Psalter. Most important among theserules w as the method o f coin et commata ["colons and co m m as"], based

on the distinctions to be m ade within one sentence, an d strong ly com

mended by Cassiodorus for a sound recitation of the Psalter. This s y s

tem consists in do ts placed at different heights between w ord s and

sentences.411 The oldest sources of the liturgical psalter that have come

d ow n to us sho w that the text w as copied per coto el cowmnta.47 Since

the psalm s are the pieces around which the other elements of the O f

fice are org anized , it w as natural for the Psalter, as a book, to becom e

the nu cleus to which other collections w ere attached . This pr<x:edure

qu ickly ga ve rise to several types of composite psalters. Furthermore,

from the H igh M iddle A ges on, the biblical Psalter and the liturgical

psalter m ust be distinguished . W hereas the form er keep s its biblical

structure with its div ision into five books (pss. 1 to 40, 41 to 7 1, 72 to88 ,89 to 10 5 ,10 6 to £50} and does not ha ve any additional items, the

liturgical psalter specifies the seven sub division s correspo nd ing to the

d ay s o f the w eek (following either the Rom an or m onastic arrange

ment); this is the psnltcriwti per ferias or psalleriuw feríale, b'rom the Car-

olingian p eriod on, other series of pieces came to sw ell the contentó of

the liturgical psalter: inventories, hymns, antiphons, orations, brief

lesson s, thus estab lishing a true typo log y o f this book.48 In the liturgical psalter properly so called, each psalm is assigned to its place in the

45. Con cern ing thin evo lutio n, sec* Lmikjimís, Psauliera, XL lV ff.; Salm on, Office iíiiñn, 46-50.

46. Sve A.-V. C ilios, "L a punctuation dan s les m anuscrits lihirgique-i au M ove«



Office; the book a lw ay s e nd s w ith a series of canticles, wh ich reflect

the different traditions, alon g w ith the Te Deu m , the Gloria Patri, and

a litany. Among the main types, let us cite the collectar-psalter, in

which each psalm is fo llo w ed by a collect (called psalm ic), and thehym nal-psalter, which besides the psalm s contains all the hym ns for

the entire week. In rare instances, the psalter is com bined with the an-

tiphonal (antiphons and responsories}.'49 A list— not exh austive— of

the olde st liturgical p salters has been com piled b y K . Cam ber,50 fea

turing among others two manuscripts from northern France. The first

one, Paris, B. N., lat. 13 15 9 (for St. Riquicr, end o f seventh century)

contains the Gallican psalter, canticles, Carolingian litanies, psalmiccollects.5* The second , Am iens, B. M., m s. 18 (C orbie, beginning of

ninth century) con tains the Gallican psalter, canticles, directions for

liturgical practice, litanies.52 The convenience of this com posite liturgi

cal book is ob vious: d urin g the celebration of the Office, each p artici

pant w as pro vid ed with the basic book for the celebration of the

Liturgy o f the Hours, enlarged by a va riable num ber o f pieces (hvinns,

canticles, litanies, and so on) w hich he or she could oxccu te or sim ply follow in the book. Th is first gro up ing of different elem ents of the O f

fice w ou ld b e completed in the eleventh cen tury w ith the adven t o f

the breviary. Tine active participation—sometimes only partial—of the

whole assem bly greatly contributed to the creation o f this typo of

com posite book, w ho se contents w ere by definition intended for d if

ferent categories o f users.

in the second h alf o f the M iddle A ge s, from the twelfth centu ry on,

one w itnesses an eve r-grow ing specialization o f the various types of

liturgical psalters.55 Th us b ooks we re com piled wh ich contained a ll the

pieces nece ssary for the night offices (the nocturnal), for the mo rning

49. Six; Hu glo , l.wrrs t k chant, 1 1 6 -1 17. To designate the psalter in the early li

bra ry catalogu es and inventories o f church treasuries, the pe op le ol the M iddle

A ges used term s enabling his toria ns to recogniz e the various com posite psalters

[pMitteriuu cum uuinaria, ft&iltcnum ghhtotum. duo p xtllcria in o’ltw cum gnuiali el yw-

tMrio. «ind so on |"d p salter with h ym na l." "a p salter w ith gloss es ," "tw o p salters

for choir w ith gradu al and hym nal"]); see the num erous references in Becker, Cain-

h g i , and Bischoff, Schalzverzeichnisse.

C b CLLA 6 8



Hours (the matutinal), for the day Hours (the diurnal).54 The ancient

catalogues of m ediev al libraries offer references correspon ding to

these books (noclurmlis liber, diurnale, matutinal?, or liber matutinalis)

as early as the eleventh century.35 However, these psalter-basedbook s are not the origin o f the breviary, which rather evo lve d from

the collcctar, as w ill be seen below.

In the sam e sp irit and in a w ay parallel to the m ultiplication o f Ihe

form s taken by the liturgical psalter and certain bo oks specific to ce r

tain Hou rs, one w itnesses du ring the M iddle A ge s the appearance of

responsorials (resjfonsoriale) which are collections of the responsories

gen erally contained in the antiphona ls. Am on g responsories, one candistingu ish those intended for Ihe night office and those, shorter, fol

lowing the readings.56 There were also vesperals (vesperalc), contain

ing everything necessary for the celebration of Vespers, in particular

those of the big feasts and Su n d ay s, and b ook s o f invitatories, that is,

collections of invitato ries w ith their different m elodies.57

Decoration o f the Psalter

The history of the illustration o f the Psalter du ring the antiquity

an d Ihe M iddle A ge s is pro bab ly one of the m ost beautiful chapters

of the history of art in the West.5* In the East as well as in the West,

the illustrated psalters offer full-page paintings, som etime s also his-

toriated or purely decorative initials and marginal illustrations.

The full-page paintings grant a place o f honor to the sup pose d au thor o f the Psalter, D av id, w hos e figu re is often placed at the begin

ning of the book, facing the incipit of the text, or inserted in the large

initial B of the first psalm (Brti/j/s t’iV ["H appy are those"]).59 St. Jerom e

54. C on cern ing thp?*' dif/erenl typ es o f books, st*; Fiala and irtonkauf, Utifrgk-

dte Somenklalur, 120; Bnroffio, "M anoscritti lilurg ici," 16 0- 16 5; J. Dubois and J.-L.l.uinaUro, Sources ci méthodes de l'hagiographie médiézvtle {Pa ris. 1993) #9-<)8.

55. S(H* Barker, CAtofagr. and Bischoff, Scfuitzuerztichnisse. O n the principal man u

scripts attesting to the«» books, sec Leroq uais, Psautiers.

56. See F iala and Irtenkauf, Uturgischc Nomenklahtr, J23; Baroffto, "Vl.inoscritli

liturgici," 163.

57. St’e Baro/fio, "M.moscrilli lilurgici," 163-26.1. O11 tJw? manuscript witnesses



is represented in his cap acity a s translator in the Psalter of Charles

the Bald {P aris, B. N\, lat. 1 152 ; fol. 4, second h a lf o f ninth century)/**

The great origin ality of illustration in the Psalter in the M iddle

A ges resides in the literal translation into im ages o f the psalm texts.In certain cases, the im age d evelop s a true exegesis o f tile psalm s.61

The Psalter of Stuttgart (VVurtembcrgische Lan dsbibliothek, cod. Bib!,

fol. 23), com posed at Saint-Germ ain-d es-Pre s in the first half o f the

ninth century,64 and the Psalter of Ulrech l (U niversiteilsbib l., cod . 32)

originating in Wautvillers (near Reims), also from the first half of the

ninth century,6-' are the tw o best exam ples o f this sort of illustration

from the High Middle Ages. Studies, especially those centered on thePsalter of Utrecht, ha ve sh ow n that m ost scenes ha d their source in

antiquity. In the second ha Jf o f the M iddle A ge s, the psalters with

glosses would give a fresh impetus to the literal and exegetic illustra

tion of the Psalter, as, for instance, Paris, B. N\, lat. 8846 (Canterbury,

last qua rter of twe lfth century, and Catalon ia, fourteenth century).64

In still other initials, scenes from Ihe Old and N ew Testaments are

represented, associating pa ssage s from the Psalter with e vents in the

life o f Christ.

V. 1.eroquais has felicitously distinguished five principa l system s of

illustration of the Psalter during the Middle Ages:6-" (i) illustration of

ev ery psalm w ith, in gene ral, one im age per psalm ; (2) illustration

based o f the div ision o f the Psalter into three gro up s o f fifty, w ith

psalters o f the 1Ugh M iddle Ages , one finds cycles, w ith a small n um ber of im

ag es, illustrating the life o f David.

60. J. H ubert, j. Porcher, VV. F. Volbaoh, l.'Kmpirc carolingien {Paris, 196$) fig. 13G.

6 1. Se e tlu> important article of F. Miitherich, "D ie versch ieden en Bedeutungss*

chichten in der Fruhmittelalterlichen Psalterillustration," /'nihniit ter laI ter I kite Sh<-

ilien 6 (1972) ¿32-244.

62. Der S tullga rier liiiderpMlter (Stuttgart, 1968).63. See H. T. De Wald, The llluatntlii» is o f the Utrecht Psalters (Princeton, 1932),

and S. Dufrenne, Lcs illustrations du ¡w itt ier ,1'Utrcchl: P ro ble m s tie sources et de I'npport cnrolingicn (Strasbourg, 1978).

64. On this psalter with glossws, which pn sent.s in three colum ns a threefold ve r

sion of the text (Hebrew, Roman, and Gallican), and its illustrations, see F. Avril

and P. Stimemann, M auuscrils enlu win es ti'origine msu la ir e (V iI1' XXf s tick ), Biblio-



on ly the first psalm o f each grou p b eing illustrated (pss. i, 5 1, and

t o t ); (3) the sam e principle app lied w hen the Psalter is d ivide d into

five books as in the Bible (pss. i , 4 1,7 2 ,8 9 ,10 6 ) ; (4) il lustration of the

first psa lm of each feria, w hen the psalter is a liturgical one w ith itsseven divisions; (5) illustration com bining system s 2 and 4. During

Ihe M iddle A ge s, certain regions of the West dev elop ed their ow n

particular iconography. Thus, a few A ng lo-Saxon psalters o f the High

M idd le A ge s art* cha racterized by a m ode o f illustration p rop er to the

insular tradition, featuring sym bo lic im ages correspon ding to the

w a y Irish and Knglish spir itualit ie s o f the eighth and ninth centu ries

perceived the Psalter. Tine dominant theme is the battle between goodand evil, especially the combat betw een D avid-C hrist and S atan.66

Lastly, let us cite psa lters that arc sm all, som etimes m inuscule in

size and w ere perh ap s used as am ulets. The majority o f these were

com m issioned b y h igh ly placed civil or ecclesiastical person ages and

attest to practices of private devotion which flourished in the second

ha lf o f the M iddle A ge s.67 Th e illustration o f this kind of psalter w as

ordinarily limited to ornamental dccoration with, at times, the portrait

of D avid . Aristocratic p salters of the twe lfth to fourteenth centuries—

the Psalter o f Ingebo rg for instance— are the heirs o f the Ca rolingian

pra yer books used b y lay peop le and are the forerunners of the richly

illustrated books o f Ho urs of the end o f the M iddle Ag es, wh ich w ere

prod uced for the devo tional n eeds o f well-to-do m em bers o f society.

2 . T H E A N T I P H O X A L O F T H E O F F IC E

The m onum ental publication o f the six volum es o f the Corpus Anti-

phonaiium Officii (CAO ) by R. J. Hesbert has entirely renew ed o ur

kn ow ledg e of the history of the antiphon al o f Ihe Office in the M iddle

66. On all the**» points, see the inn ova tive wo rk o f K. M. O pen shaw , "T h e Sym bolic Illustrations of the Psalter: An Insular Tradition," A rt e Medieval? 6 (1992)

4 1-6 0 , and "Th e Battle betw een Christ and Satan in the Tiberius Psalter," fourn al

o f ihe Warburg <v id Ccurtauld Institutes 52 (1989) 1-1-33.

67. A goo d e xam ple of this sort of sm all illustrated psalter is the manuscript

kept in St. Peter’s A bbey in Salzburg (Stifsbibl. St. Peter, cod. A 10), 4 cm. high,

proba bly w ritten in a scriptorium o f northern Franco in the third quarter o f the



A ges, a field singularly neglected in the research o f m edieval liturgical

sources.68 Hesbert undertook to explore the history of the Divine Of*

fice o f the Latin Ch urch ; to this end, he had to stud y the history of

one o f tine principal office books, the antiphon al, av ailin g him self of the impressive manuscript tradition.

A s is the fa te o f any w ork of th is m agnitude, H esbert's CAO re

ceived both p raise and criticism ; som e o f the latter ad dr ess basic

questions concerning his method/ som e bear on certain o f his conclu

sions,69 To exculpa te H esbert, one m ust sa y that the task w as particu

larly d ifficu lt given the great com plexity o f the repertories of the

Oificc in the Middle Ages.

Content o f the Antiphonal

There are two princip al categories of Office anlipho nals: the secular

(the Roman Office) and the monastic (Office inherited from Benedict's

Rule). The difference re sides in the num ber o f pieces at the night of

fice (Vigils), the Little Hours {Prime, Terce, Sext, and None), and Ves

pers: for the secular, nine antiphons and no ctum responsories at V igils,

on e brief responsory at the Little H ours, and five psalm s at Vespers;

for the monastic, twelve antiphons at Vigils, no brief responsory at

the Little Hou rs, and four p salm s at Vespers.

O ne of H esbert's most important conclusions w as the definitive

p roo f that the mo nastic tradition o f the O ffice der ive s entirely from

that o f the secu lar clergy.

68. Rerttm kcclesiastiatrum Documenta, Series maior, forties VII, V iil, IX, X, XJ, X//: vol. i: m anuscrip ts 0/ the Rom an cursus, vol. 2: m anuscripts of the m onastic cur-

<u$, vol. 3: im ’itatoria i't iintiphonae: F.dilio critica, vol. 4: Resjxtsoria, uyt s ms , f npnm et

writ/: Cdilh critica; vol. 5: Fou les earunujue prima ordinatio (list of 800 manuscripts;

classification of their responsories at V igils for Ad vent); vol 6: Secuiula e! lerlia or- dinaliones (second classification, based on the ver sk ie* of the Adv en t respon-

sories; third classification, based on textual variants) (Rome, 1963-1979).

69. F or a critical discussion o f H esbert's conclusions and o f the objections they

have sometimes met with, see the reports mentioned by Huglo, "L'anliphonaire,

archétype ou répertoire origine l?" Grégoire te Grand: Chanliliy, Centre culturel Les

Fontaine*. 1 5 - 19 septembre tgS z: Actes, CNRS: International Colloquies (Paris, 1986)



A s early as I he ninth century, the office antiphonal70 contain ed all

the sun g pieces grou ped into formu laries (antiphons an d respon-

sories)/1 classified according to the Hours and in the order of the

liturgical year.7* The Tem poral and Sanctoral are ge nera lly com bined;the Co m m on o f Saints is found at the end o f the book, w he re one m ay

also encounter a section in which the pieces are arranged according

to the eight tones of Gregorian chant. For the antiphons and respon-

sories, the (almost) general rule w as to w rite only the ope ning w ord s

(the incipit) of each piece, since the monastics knew by heart the major

part, if not the whole, of the repertory.75 Along the same lines, it was

on ly in the tenth and eleventh centuries that the scribes almo st system

atically added to the texts a neumatic notation.74 Tine earliest sources

w e possess o f the Office antiphonal transm it a repertory w ithout no

tation, for exam ple, P aris, B. N ., lat. 17436 (second h alf of ninth cen

tury, see pp. 137 -13 8 ).

In the m anuscripts, the different pieces and H ours o f the d a y are

ge ne rally indicated in abbrev iated forms: A . or Ant. for Antiphona; R. o r Rt’sp. for Responsorium; Ps. for Psalmua; V. or Vs. for Vt’rsws; Cant.

fo r Canticum; Ad Vesp. for Ad vesperas; Inv. fo r hivitatorium; hi I (fl, Hi)

nocl. for /« primo (secundo, lerlio) nocturno; Mat. h u d. fo r A d matutinas

(laudes); Ad Iwr. fo r A d horas; A d f, A d HI, A d VI, A d JX for A d primani.

A d tertiam, A d sextain. A d nonant; In ev. for the canticle from the Gosp el

(Magnificat, Benedictus); A d comp!, for A d compleiorium.

The Manuscript Tradition

From the centuries prior to the yea r 1000, w e p osse ss on ly a limited

num ber of Office antiphon als, all in v ario us degrees o f incompleteness.

Therefore, it is not easy to reconstruct the history o f this liturgical

70. Not lo be confused w ith tin* M ass antiph onal, also called grad u.il; sec Pari2, II, the section on Ihe chant book s fo r the Mass.

7 1. Concerning antiphons and responsories, see pp. 12 5-12 6. as w ell as CP, 4:217 -219 , and H uglo, Livres (k chant, 25-27.

72. For a b rief presentation o f the contents of the Office antiphonal, see Hu glo,

Livre* de rfumt, 8 1-8 2. S ee also the notices of Fiala and Irtenkauf, Uturgifiche Nomcnklatur. 12 1- 12 2 ; Barofilo. "Mnnoscritti liturgid." 163 -164 ; and Thiel, " l itu r-



book, in order to remedy this lack, we first have rccoursc to other

form s the antiphonal took durin g the High M iddle A g e s (tables of in-

cipits, com posite antipho na is, and so on) and then to the complete

antiph onais o f the eleventh and twelfth centuries, at a time the anti-phonal had not yet been incorporated into the breviary.75

Before the yea r i o o o , the list o f antiphon ais in the strict sense com

prises only six manuscripts:76

— Luc ca, Bibl. C ap ., cod. 490, perh aps prod uce d in Lucca itself as

ea rly as the eighth cen tury: it is a fragm ent, containing only

pieces for A dv en t;77

— Paris, B. N., lat. 174 36, the An tiphon al of C om piègn c, dating

from the second half of the ninth century: it juxtaposes both the

office repertory (fol. 2iv) and the Mass repertory (fols. IV-30V);78

— A lbi, B. M ., ms. 44, from the first h alf o f the tenth century (un

published);

— Antipho nal of M ont-Renaud, dating from the tenth century (Cor

bie?), Noyon;“9—St. Gall, StiftsbibL, cod. 390/391, from the tenth or eleventh cen

tury, St. Ca ll, An tiphon al o f Ha rtker o f St. C all;8“

— Berlin, StaatsbibL, m s. M us. 40047, go ing back to abo ut the ye ar

1000, Qued linburg .81

These m anu scripts present an alread y dev eloped structure that

su gge sts the existence o f first "attem pts" at com piling an tiphonais

before the ninth century.82 For instance, in the codex of Compiègne,the liturgical year is d ivid ed into tw o parts: from A d ve nt to Pentecost,

w ith all the offices o f the Tempora l and Sanctoral, and from Pentecost

75. ()n all of the manuscript witnesses, see Wesbert, CAO.

76. Se e Gy, "Carpus Arttiphonaiiutn Officii," 150 , and "l/a nt iplu m aire d<? l'office,"

Bulletin du Comité i/ts F.ttidi's 32 ( 1961) 21-28 .

77. See Cam ber, C L L A , no. 130 2; Froger, "Les fragm ents de Luc qu es (fin du VIII1' siè cle )," Etudes grégoriennes 18( 1979) M$ “ 1 53-

78. See Froger, "L e lieu de destination cl d e provenan ce du Comimtdùni'ii*," Ut

mens coucordet ixx i: Festschrift F . C ardin ? 2mot 75. Celmristag (St. Oltilien, 1980)

338-.*53-79. See lu' manuscrit du MonbReitaud. Paléographie musicale 16 (Solesmcs,

198e); Gamber, Ct.tA, no. 1307.



lo Ad vent, with, in succession, the Sanctoral, the various comm ons,and finally the responsories and anliphons for the Temporal. The invi-

tatory antiphons, the canticles Benedictas and Magnificat, the Sunday

antiphons draw n from the Go spels, and the short responsories aregiven in an appendix.8-' As we shall see shortly, these manuscripts

demonstrate to what degree the Cnrolingian reform had advanced,

not only for the VIass but also for the Liturgy o f the Hours. The im

portance of these six m anuscripts is great for the study of the reper

tory o f the Office since they were used in various degrees by Hesbertin his monumental publication (CAO). Thus the author wa s able to

address, more or less successfully d epending on the cases, the three

basic principles for the critical edition of any liturgical book: its gen

eral organization, the composition of its formularies, and the textual

analysis o f each individual piece. On the basis of this work , it ishenceforth possible to place within the liturgical tradition o f the an*

tiphonal any m anuscript of the Office by classifyin g it under one of

the groups defined by Hesbert; these group s result from the stu dy of the order of responsories, the choice of versicles, and the varian ts in

the pieces.

Besides these completely structured antiphonals, there existed

other forms o f this book in the eighth and ninth centuries. Let us cite

in particular the antiphonal table (with incipits) incorporated into

other liturgical books, such as the collectar used by the présider at

the choral Office.8’ Let us recall also the manuscripts— forerunners of the breviary*“5— in which the antiphonal w as juxtaposed to other

parts of the Office; the manuscript tradition suggests that this juxta

position, occurring from the eleventh century on, originated in Al

sace, in Sw itzerland (St. Gall),86 and perhaps also at M onte C assin o*7

♦•veil of l iMli with parts of the Office, before tlu* Caiolingian reform; on this topic,s w tlu* hypotheses of Salmon, Office divin, zSff-, and Moller, "Research on tht* An-

tiphonar: Problems and Perspective," Journal of ihe Plaitttong and Mediaeval MusicSociety lo (1987) 1- 14 ; on all these points, see Camber. CLLA, 495-500.

83. On the central role of the organization o f the pieces of the Office in the for

mation of a liturgical book, thp antiphonal. see Salmon, Office divin, 37-.13.

84. See the section on the collector (111 below).



Historical Importance of the Anliphona! o f the Office

Kxperts agree today that the Office antiphonal w as progressively

formed from an original repertory and nol from an archetype whose

composition was ascribed to Gregory the Great.** However, as wasthe case for the Mass antiphonal {the gradual), the attribution to Gre

gory was not without foundation. In his Vita sancti Cregorii <Life o f St.

Gregory), John the Deacon {825-S80) declares him to be the author of

the Roman antiphonal in connection with the creation of the schohi

cantoruni'** Th is statement w as sufficient for the Carolingian tradition

to perpetuate this idea, strengthened by the liturgical reform develop

ing in the eighth and ninth centuries at the instigation first of Pepin

the Short and especially Charlemagne afterward.90 Without denying

that Gregory the Great might have been the author of certain pieces,

it is impossible to hold that he compiled a whole antiphonal any

more than he com posed a com plete sacra mentary.91 One can reason

ably suppose that in the eighth and ninth centuries, and perhaps

even before, the Office antiphonal acquired successive components,Roman in origin and combined m ore or less felicitously with Gallican

repertories. In contrast to the Gregorian Sacramentarv and the Mass

antiphonal (the gradual), the Office antiphonal never attained, at

least under Charlemagne, the status of an official liturgical book. In

all likelihood, this was largely du e to the impossibility of unifyingthe whole empire through the liturgy on the basis of the Office reper

tory, given its extreme diversity, w hereas the Mass books, with theirgreater uniformity, offer a basis much more appropriate to unifica

tion. Huglo has justly noted that the divergences in the arrangement

of antiphons and responsories, despite a fairly homogeneous global

structure, give a strong specific character to the antiphonals (or the

repertories), thus demonstrating the differences between churches;

this sho w s that the driv ing force in these com pilations w as attachment to local practices rather than a desire for unity.92 In 817, the

Council of Aachen imposed a choice between the Benedictine Rule

(tw elve responsories at the night office) and the canonical Office,

88. See the slate of Ihe question and I he details given by Huglo, "Antiphonaire,

archétype " and also by Huglo "t 'édition critique de l'antiphonaire grégorien /'



(Rom an o r secular, with nine re sponsories), necessitating for the lat

ter pro gre ssive a dap tations in the course o f the ninth century.

H ow ever, after Ch arlem agn e's death in 814, the O ffice antiphonal

w a s lo cally subjected to rew orkin g at the hands o f fam ed liturgistsand theologians of the em pire wh o, h aving ob served the impossibility

of constituting one single repertory, composed their own antiphonals,

all based on the elements Rome had contributed.93

First of all, H elisachar (d. 836), Ihe chanc ellor of L ou is the Pious

(reigned 8 13-84 0) and then from 822 on the abbot of St. Riquier,*4

took upon h imself to m od ify Ihe verses w ho se corresponden ce with

the responsories did not favor, in his opinion, the spiritual under

stan din g o f the texts. This un derta king is at the root of the split be

tween the eastern grou p, w hich m aintained the prim itive verses, and

the western group, where the marks of Helisachar's changes are the

m ost ob viou s. A fterw ard , Am alariu s (C.780-C.850), concerned about

the im portan t va rian ts in the ord er o f the pieces, the respon sories in

particular, proposed an arrangement for his church (the diocese of Trier) on the basis o f the Metz An tiphonal, which w as imbu ed with

Roman influences. Th e hybrid character of Am alariu s' antiphon al re

sulted from the lack of a fixed tradition in Rome, which Amalarius

recognized, not without sadness:95 Ex utrisque (romanis et mettensibus)

col legi eo quae recta tnihi videbanhtr, et rutionnbili curaui congruere, atque

ea redada in itmuu corpus posui sub it no textu in Hue antiphonarii nostri

["1 ha ve collected from the tw o traditions (that of Rom e an d that of Metz) w ha t seemed to me right and in agreem ent with a reasonable

cu rsus; then, written into one w hole w ith one sing le text, 1 placed

them at the end of our an tiphon al"] (Pi. 105, col. 1314). This anti-

93. 1lug lo, "L e s reman iemen ts de l'antiphon aire au IXe siècle: I U'Usachar, Agob*

ard, Am alaire," Attt del XV/// Conv egno d i stu di sul tenta C id lo cristtano e PotHiea im- w ria le carolin$ia. Todi, 9 - 1 2 ottobre 1977 ( lix l i , 1979)8 9-120; Hugto, Livres de chant,

85-94, wherv the author underline;» the consequences of the reworking of the Car

olingien liturgists' antiphonal, which lasted well into the fourteenth century.

94. On the disputed attribution of the supp lem ent to the Gregorian sacramentary

to Helisachar, see Part 2 , 1, 3, the section on the history o f the sacram entary ; on He

lisach ar's w ork and his contribution to H u * C\m>linj;ian liturgy, see I hig lo, "Trois



phonal remained without descendants. Finally, in Lyons, where the

Greg orian antiphona l had been introduced by Leidrad (d. 813 ),96

Florus (d. c.860) and Ag ob ard (769-840) corro ded the antiphonal by

substituting responsories drawn from Scripture for non-biblical re-sponsories. By affirming as a principle that only biblical readings

should be used in the liturgy, Agobard, whose corrections met with

great success, preven ted the subsequen t creation o f non-biblical

pieces, such as tropes, in the region o f Lyo ns and in the religious

com m un ities influenced by his antiphon al.97

A fter th is perio d o f rem odeling, each m onastery or group o f m onas

teries elaborated its own rwrsitf with its own variants; however, one

cannot spe ak o f antipho nals p roperly so called.98

3 . T H P H Y M N A L

History, Forms, and Functions o f Hymns

A s early as the six th centu ry, the ancient m onastic rules, in particu

lar those of Benedict and Caesarius of Arles, mention the liturgicalrole of hymns and suggest that there existed repertories proper to the

different 1T ou rs." Th e fact that the singing of h ym ns is rooted in the

m onastic rules is the more impo rtant since until the end o f the ele v

enth century, hymns were exclusively used by monasteries before

being adopted by com m unities o f canons an d a ny cleric celebrating

the D ivine O ffice.100 A d d in g an extra d im ension to the poetic charac

ter o f the /itus perpetua at the Office, hymns introduce a lyrical element into the liturgy that fosters the mystery-oriented and spiritual

96. Sec MGI I, Tj;. 4, Aevi Karolini, pt. 2, p. 542.

97. See P.-M. G y 's rem arks, "L es tropes clans I'histoire de la liturj'io et do la

theologie," Research on Thi/vs (Stockholm, 1983) 7 -1 6 , especially 8-9.

98. On this evolution o f the adaptation o f the reworked antiphon al amon g the

Clun iacs. Cistercians, Carth usians, and the mendicant orders (Franciscans andDo minicans), see I lu^lo, Uvre> tic chant, 89-94.

99. On the hym ns as literary and poetical com positions, see CP, 4:7 .13 -2 16 ;]. Szci-

verffy. Die Amuilat 1ter fateinischen Hf/nineitdichtung: Eiu Handbuch. vol. 1: D v /ufivms-

chen Hi/wiicn hb zum Ende des 11. fahrhunderte. vol. 2: DiV hteinischen Ht/mncn tvru

r.itdc til's ti. fahrhumh'rt* Ws zum Ausgfln$ des MittelaUers (Berlin, 1984); J. Szo verffy,

fjitin tJyrri»s Typolo gie des so urces du M oven A ge occiden tal fasc 55 (Tumhout



reflection pro per to prayer.*01 Connection w ith the psalm s, p erv asive

reference lo the ho ur of day, as w ell as om nipresent Trinitarian p raise

characterize the profound essence of the hymns.

The Hymn Repertories

Th e question o f the orig ins of a liturgical hym nal, and therefore of

an appropriate book, has been debated all through this century in

ord er to arrive at trustworthy elements o f a solution."*2

Although it is not possible to go back to the Benedictin e hym nal,

w e have from the period preceding the m id dle o f the eighth century ,

fragmen ts of repertories, from wh ich w e m ust exclud e the Am brosian

hymns, which were not circulated in book form in the Middle Ages.103

A t the end o f the eighth and begin nin g o f the ninth centuries, the first

Frankish monastic hymnal was completed, soon to be supplanted by

the "official" h ym nal o f Benedict o f An iane; this hym nal, perh aps the

w o rk o f A lc uin at Tours, show s the in fluence o f Am brose. Several

outstanding h ym ns w ere comp osed d uring the Caro lingian period 104and enriched die repertory which became more and more carefully

related to the H ou rs and the d ay s o f the liturgical year. Som e hym ns

w ere even an opportunity fo r their authors to state th eir positions in

contemporary theological debates.105 From the Carolingian period to

ou r ow n day, the repertories of the hym na l do not cease to increase

since each new feast or office entails the creation o f pro pe r hym n s.106

to i. See J. Fontaine, N aissance de la poésie dans {'O ccid ent chré ti en: Esquisse d 'u n e

histoire de la poésie latine chrétienne du llf* au V lr siècle (Paris, 1981); J. Perret. "Aux

origines de l'hym nod ie latine: ¡/app ort de la civilisation ro m aine," I m Maison-Dieu

173 ( 1988)4 1 -6 0 .

t02. On this topic, sec P,-M. Gy , "L e trésor d es hy m nes ," La M aison-Dieu 17 3(1988) 19-40, especially 23-29.

103. On the imp ortance and influence in the M iddle A ges o f hym ns composed

b y St. Amb rose, see Hym nes/Ambroise de M ilan , <?d. J. Fonla ine , text established ,

translated, and annotated by J.-L Chariot el al. (Paris, 1992).

104. See Gy. "T rteo rd es hym nes," 25-29.

105. This hvpothesis w as recently advanced for the hymn Veni creator spiritus ,




Th e oldest hym nals know n to us appe ared und er the form of com

posite books. M any .ire hym nal-psalters or are tw inned w ith other

pieces o f the O ffice (collects, canticles, read ings) .107 In the non -liturgi-cal psalters, the hymn part is generally List in the manuscript. In litur

gical psalters, the hymns are placed witliin the Hours and feasts;10*

the oldest w itness es g o b ack to the eighth century, like Vat. R cgin. lat.

n (m iddle of eighth century) written in northern France, perha ps in

the region of Paris.109

In the ninth century, the first independent hymnals made their ap

pe aran ce .'50 A few mentions in library catalogues confirm the existence

of this book: Ubrum i/tmiorum optimum I "an excellent book of hym ns"]

(St. G all, second half of ninth cen tury );111 Hinnwrum iilwlli, voiutnitia

I rid ["three vo lum es o f sm all book s of hym ns"] (Cremon a, in 984);1,2

Ymnaria duo in choro semper Iwlvndn ("two hymn als which must alw ays

be available in choir"| (Monte Cassino, in 1023).,n The mentions o f the

hym nal as an autonom ous book also gro w m ore num erous in m onasticcustom aries from the tenth and e leventh centuries. M ost often, these

manuscripts record the repertory of a particular a tradition in which

the pieces are arranged according to the liturgical year but without

musical notation. Let us also keep in mind the great diversity of

hym nals, confirm ed by the m anu scripts, that endured throughou t the

M iddle Age s because there w as not one single repertory imposed in

the be ginn ing o ve r all the liturgical traditions o f the West. From onem anuscript to the next, it is not ran* to be faced w ith an Am bro sian, a

G allican , or an y other repertory. T his div er sity Ls reinforced b y the

extrem e va riety of the m elodies existing for the sam e h ym n .,M

107. S e e t h e n o n - e x h a x is H v e l i s t o f t h e m a n u s c r i p t w i t n e s s e s i n C a m b e r , C LLA , 602- 605. F o r «1b r i e f p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e h y m n a l , s e e a l s o F i a l a a n d I r l e n k a u f , L it u r - gteche iV d n t a ik kt u r. M y , B a r o f l i o , " M a n o s c r i t t i l i t u r g i c i , " 163; B . S t i i b l e i n , " H y n v

n a r , " D ie M u s i? : in Ge$ch ich te to u i C c ^ i' iiuw rt , a llge me inc Ea zy ld op a d ur d c r M u stk , e d .

F . B l u m e , v o l . 6( K a s s e l , 1957) c o l s . 986- 987.

108. F o r t h e h y m n a l - p s a l t e r s , s e e t h e l i s t o f s o u r c e s i n C h a m b e r , C X M , n o s . 1601-

1624, p p . 576- 587-

109. S e e i b i d . , n o . 1617, p . 583.

n o . S e c t h e r e m a r k s o f l U i g l o , l.ix»v * <le ilu u n . 108- 110.



The h ym nal as such did not su rv iv e the fusion of all the different

books of the Office into the breviary, a process occu rring in the

eleventh century for the m ost prim itive forms, but espe cially from

the twelfth and thirteenth centuries on.



ÏIÏ. Prayer at the Office: The Collectar


"It is the celebran t's book at the Office, containing the read ings

and collects. To day o nly a few exist in one o r the oilier religiou s

order, to the point that many a liturgist does not even know the

w o rd "collectar." The function o f th is book w as parallel to that o f the

sacram entary: it pro vide d the celebrant w ith the texts that w ere his

to proc laim ; readin gs o r chants not pertaining pro pe rly to the cele

brant were found in other bo ok s." Su ch is the definition given b y G y

in his study on the collectar and its connection with the ritual and

the processional .” 5

From a n in-depth ana lysis of the oldest m anu script sources, G y in

the first place, then Salmon, have demonstrated that the collector

play ed a central role, along with the psalter, in the process o f the formation of one single book for the Office, the other books having pro

gressively gathered around this twofold nucleus in order to constitute

the brev iary.” 6 Before the ap pea rancc of the collectar, the sacram en

tary w as used at the O ffice for the recitation of the orations; in gen era l

the collect o f the M ass of the d a y w a s used . In certain regions, this

usage probably persisted even after the ninth century, when the first

collectars w ere p rodu ced. Sev eral saeram entaries o f the eighth andninth centuries, w hether o f the Gelasian o r Greg orian type, contain

collects od matutinns |"at Lau ds"] and ad vesperum ["at Vespers"]; this

perh aps correspon ds to the original structure o f the Ro m an Office,

j 15 . Gy, "CoHecta ire." This text is repea ted in an updated fo rm in P.-M. Gy, La



which w a s limited to tw o I lo urs.117 These collects are often grouped

together, form ing o ne section o f the sacrame ntary, or else they follow

the Mass form ularies on certain d ay s, Kaster in particular. The Leonine

Sacramentary also gives, between formularies XXXI and XXXII, a series o f four orations for La ud s and V espers.“ * T hese collects and the

multiple aiiae orationes ¡"oth er orations''] of the sacram entaries are the

storehouse from which the independent collectar drew its material.

In its purest form, during the ninth century, the collectar contained

only collects'19 for the different Hours, in general borrowed from the

Mass of the day. In addition, it has collects spec ific for I ,auds and Ves

pe rs, according to Ihc order of the liturgical feasts, with Temporal and

Sanctoral com bined; ver y soon, capitula (short readings from sacred

Scripture) and an assortment of other preces (orations) wore added to

the collectar. From Ihc tenth century on , it w as en larged by the ad d i

tion o f other pieces,“ 0 and took vario u s form s belonging to strongly

characterized types in which the books we re either juxtaposed or com

bined. Thus, one m eets w ith hvm nal-(collectar)-psalters, antiphonal-collectars, bene dictional-collectars in wh ich the b lessing s are distrib

uted throughout the liturgical year at their proper places. The evan-

geliary with collects12’ contained the gospel pericopes with the corre

sp on din g orations; this book w as for the presider, w ho w as to read

these pieces at the night office. In the eleventh and twelfth centuries,

especially in monasteries, a ritual was joined with the collectar.122

O verall, the book s w e ha ve m entioned w ere m ost o f the time complete books to be used throughou t the entire liturgical ye ar and, m ore

rarely, festive com posite collectors intended for abbots, abbe sses, and

bisho ps w ho officiated on ly on big feasts.

In contrast to the sacramentary, whose contents were assigned very

ea rly to the different da ys of the ye ar (Tem poral and Sanctoral), the

11 7 . Gy, "C ollectaire," 442; A. Chiivasso, Le MCrtimittiain'gi'lntim (Tournai, 1958)

4.53- 455«1 18. See L. C. M ohlberg, Sacntmetthirium Verownse (Rom e, 1956) 75-76.

119 . On the origin o f the w ord "collect." see Part 1. L the section on sacramen

taries, anti Correa, Durham Collectar, 5-2 1 .

1 20. Those which Salm on calls the '«in ch ed collectors" in contrast lo the "sim ple



repertory tor the collector, wh ether sim ple or au gm ented , evolved

slowly toward a fixed and more or less definitive form. Precision in the

assign m ent o f collects and even short readings, and other preces w as

observed only from the twelfth century on and grew more rigorousd u ring the second half o f the M iddle Ages.


The numerous collectors of the High Middle Ages have been in

ventoried and described, at least in sum m ary fashio n, by P.-M. Gy,

P. Salmon, and K. Gamber;,2J some of them have been the object of

spccial studies. A s a result o f these efforts, the existence o f ind epe ndent coliectars is w ell attested as ea rly as the tenth century, an d the

typological diversity of the book can be uncovered thanks to the

manuscripts that have come down to us.

T he o ldest do cum ents attesting to the existence o f the collector are

fragm ents from the eighth cen tury: St. Ga ll, Stiftsbibl., cod. 349, pp.

5-36 (second ha lf of eighth century, from the region o f Constance),

co verin g the portion o f the ye ar from Easter Su n d ay to the feast of

Sts. Peter and Paul;13'1 Karlsruhe, Bad. Landesbibl., Fragm. augien. 22

(35 fols.; abou t 800, K eichenau), fragm ents of a pure Gre go rian collec

tor, with the orations for funerals.125 In the St. Gall fragments, the col

lects are arranged into form ularies corresp on ding to the da ys o f the

w eek after Easter (Vespers only ), the A nnuncia tio n, A scensio n, Pente

cost, the feasts o f Joh n the B aptist and Peter and Paul (I .auds and Vespers). Every form ula ry is interspersed w ith a series o f Aliae ora-

l tones paschales ["other paschal orations"].

For the ninth century, the Collectar of Prum (Trier, StadtbibL, cod.

504 [12 45]; i29v--.t38v),,2rt w hic h is attac hed to a m artyrolog y-

tonary, offers a m ore com plete collection com prising a part of the Sane-

toral w ith da ily collects ad nmtutinas, ad vesperas, and post evangtrlium.

12 3. (¡y, "C ollectain ;," especially .152-454, for the coliectars before the twelfth

century; Salm on, Office divin . 50-60; (¡amber, Cl I A , 548-559.124. See (¿amber, CLLA, no. 15 0 1; (X Ht’iinin jj, "D as Kollek tar tr<i)»nuvnt des

Sangallensis 340, pp. 5-36, Saec. Vlll," MMitnfzex li(urgitftu,a offer!* itu R. P. ttom

Bernard Bette (Louvain, 1972) «75-203; Correa, Dttrluim Collectar, 22-25.

«25. See Cam ber, CLLA, no. >502, and CLLA. Supplementum, 144; Correa, Durham



At that period, the term s and expressio ns colkctarium, liber collector-

his, collectaneuni, or else oratiomUe appear to designate the collector.127

In the tenth century, one obse rve s the m ultiplication o f pro per and

com plete collectars, often with re ad ings, som etime s attached to otherboo ks, most freque ntly the ritual, psalter, and hym na l. Let us cite es

pecially the follow ing m anuscripts:

— Rh eims, M., ms. 304 (first half of tenth century, Rh eim s, Saint-

Thierry), a ritual-collectar (ordo for the funeral se rv ice);’ '4*

—Vercelli, Bibl.capit., t:od. 178 (beginning of tentli century, Vercelli),

a ritual-collectar (ordines for baptism and penance); certain col

lects arc acco m pan ied by antiphons, respon sories, and lessons;lig

—D urham , Ch ap ter lib., cod. A .IV.19 (m iddle o f tenth century,

Durham ), a ritual-collectar (with b lessing s, rituals for ma rriage

and confirmation);150

— Zu rich, ZentralbibL, cod. Rh. 83 (about 1000, Kem pten), a hym -

nal-martyrology-co llectar, the collectar beg inning at fol. i&v, with

the title fu nomine D N I incipit liber officiorutn expositua a Sco Gregorio papa de fes tis diebua vel domiuicis sen cotlidinnh de circulo mini

("In the nam e o f the Lo rd, here beg ins the book o f offices set forth

by Pope St. Greg ory for festive day s and Su nd ays as w ell as for

ferial d ays th roughout the yearly c yc le "] .'’-*1

From the eleventh a nd twelfth centuries on, other books w ere joined

to the collectar, suc h a s the pontifical (O xford , Bodl. Lib., ms. liturg.

359; end o f eleven th century, Arez zo );'32 but in gene ral, the final andoften complex form of the collectar tended to evolve toward the early

forms of the breviary.'3-'

127 . Se e the num erous references in Becker, Oiialogi, and Bischoff, Schalzt'erzeich-

nisse. The terms collechvwuttt and orafionak postdate cotlcciarium and liber collectarius,

12ft. (.¿amber, CLLA, no. 1509, and CLLA, Supplctnention, 145; Corr&i, Durham

Collectar, 63-68.

129 Camber CLLA no 1510



IV. Reading at the Office

At the Office, there are three sorts o f readings; scriptural, patristic,and hagiograp hic, to w hich correspond as m any sorts o f boo ks, albeit

not always clearly differentiated. At first, these books were joined to

gether into the Office lectionarv; later on, the lesson s fou nd their place

in the breviary alon g w ith other parts o f the Office. To m ake things

easier, w e sha ll treat of these three typ es o f books separately, one after

the other.

t . T H E B I B L I C A L R E A D I N G S A N D T H E IR B O O K S

In the prayer of the early Christians, the reading of and meditation

on the Bible occu pied a p lace o f the greatest impo rtan ce.1-*4 It is pro b

able that the practice o f lectio am limu i (readin g the B ible in its entirety)

y ield ed early on to that o f choosing readings appropria te to the occa

sion. In his rule, Benedict directs several times that sacred Scripturebe read at the Office. Bv ery d ay at V igils, the series o f ps alm s is inter

acted by three readings (lectiones) draw n from either the O ld or N ew

Testament. A fter the second series of psalm s, a pa ssag e from the epis

tles is read. In summer, the nights being shorter, there are just three

readings with o nly one from the Old Testament. But on Sund ay, w hat

ev er the seaso n, there are four read ings a t the end of each o f the three

noctums, then, after the Te I.X'um, the presider reads the gospel. Lastly,Benedict prescribes for all the d ay H ours one reading after the psa l

mody (without specifying what kind). Benedict, following the Rule of

the Master, alread y d istinguishes long read ings from short ones (chap

ters). It is certain that the custom o f cu tting a biblical p as sage into

several readings existed at that period



ba silica o f St. Peter in Ihe second half o f the seven th century.155 The

liturgical yea r began w ith Q uinqu agesima a nd the great book s of the

Old Testament: Genesis, Bxodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy,

joshua. Durin g H oiv Week, passages from Isaiah and Lam entations

w ere read; at Easier, the epistles, the Acts o f the A postle s, and R eve

lation; after Pentecost, the balance o f historical books: Sam ue l, K ings ,

and Ch ronicles; in October an d N ovem ber, the W isdom books: Pro v

erbs, Ecclesiastes, So ng of So ng s, W isdom; in December, Isaiah, Jere

miah, Daniel; after Kpiphany, Ezekiel and (he minor prophets. Orrfo

romanus XIII A , w hich in the eighth cen tury form alizes the selectionof biblical read ings at the Lateran in Rom e, sh ow s som e modifications

of the preceding orrfo.136

In its overall structure, the cycle of readings described in Ottfrnes

XIV and XIIIA is th e one observed d urin g the M iddle A ges, w ith, of

course, more or less important local ada ptations dep en din g on the

places and custom s (in particular, on the venera tion o f local saints

since a ha giograp hic read ing m ight replace the biblical one in a givenmonastery).

G iven this scriptural fram ew ork, the liturgists o f the M iddle Ag es

eng age d in a curtailing o f all the read ings at the O ffice, som etimes

go ing as far as red ucing a pericope to its incipit. Tha nk s to a certain

flexibility in practice, the length of the readings varied from one Hour

to the other, according to the time of year and the different places.

The reasons for this curtailing were many. First, there was a generaltendency du ring the M iddle Ag es to drastically shorten the readings

in offices w hich h ad gro w n too long and increasingly enriched w ith

singing (tropes, hym ns, and so on). Second, there w a s the search for a

balance between prayer and other forms of devotion, and even a cer

tain alienation from Scripture— the exception to this disaffection w as

the Franciscan breviary of the thirteenth century in which the num

ber of patristic and h agiograp hic reading s w as reduced in favor o f

Scripture, in agreement with the renewed esteem for meditation on

the B ib le .1-17

In the beginning and d urin g a large part o f the M iddle Ag es, it w as

custom ary to use a B ible for the readings. Th is w as a sim ple proce*



dure: marginal notations written at the beginning of each biblical

bo ok allow ed the reader to qu ickly find the pcricopes for cach da y

an d each H o u r.'58 So m e rare m anuscripts of the Bible present an en

tirely liturgical structure, the book s being arra ng ed not in the ordero f the Vulgate but acco rding to the cycle of rea din gs (M ilan, Hibl.

Am brosiana, cod. E 51 in f.; ele venth-tw elfth centuries).‘ 3g The pro

gressive abridgement of readings gave rise to smaller books with se

lected contents, such as the Sa l/bu rg m anu script (M useum Carolino-

A ugusteum , no. 2163) from the ninth century in w hic h folio s 2 - 10

contain only the read ing s from Isaiah for A d v en t;140 another conse

quen ce of these shorter reading s w as the appearan ce o f lectionaries,

and then breviaries (see IV, 4, and VI of this part).

For the short read ings or abbreviated readin gs d ivid ing a biblical

pa ssag e into seve ral pericopes, it becam e customa ry early on to copy

them into the collectar, follow ing tine collects for the w ho le o f the

liturgical y ea r or inserted at their plac es in the celebration. The prob

able reason for this w as that the pre side r at the Office ha d the task of read ing a nd reciting both the brie f lesson an d the collect.141 H ow ever,

some collections of short readings (capitularies)*4* independent from

the collectar are extant; they w ere used in m ona steries for the day

H ours and the night office durin g Eastertide and d uring the summ er:

Ro m e, Bibl. Vallicel., cod. A .3, fols. 1-8 5 (eleventh century); St. C all,

Stiftsbibl., cod. 423 {tenth century) and 428 (eleventh century).143

Finally, one can su rm ise that in add ition to the lists of pericope s forthe M a ss /44 there existed lists of biblical rea dings for the O ffice, al

though none h as come d ow n to our times. But in the G allican liturgy,

w e have bib lical lectio naries, written in the six th and seventh cen

turies, that contain the Mass pericopes and the Office readings/45

138. See Salmon, Office divw . 26-27.

139. See Martnnort, ¡¿'dure.s lilurgitfues, 73.140. Cam ber, no. 1630a; for a gene ral view of the m anuscript witnesses

of the books of biblical readings at the Office in the High M iddle A ges , see C U A , 588-592.

141. Gy, "Collectaire," 448-450; Martinmrt thinks—wrongly, in our opinion—

that it is the presen ce o f the little chap ters in the collectar that led the presid er to

assu m e their reading, Lectures liturgtques, 75



either combined or in separate sections. One of the representative ex

amples of this type of book is the Lectionary of I uxeuil (Paris, B. N.,

lat. 9427; end of seventh or b egin ning of eighth century, from the re

gion of Paris).146

2 . TM K P A T R I ST IC R E A D IX 'G S A N D T H K IR B O O K S

In the West,147 the practice of reading the works of the Church Fa

thers is attested b y the Rule of Benedict wh o directs that, besides b ib

lical texts, biblical com m entaries be read e ve ry d a y at Vigils at the

time of yea r w hen nights are long: Oxiices uutem leguntur in vigiliis

Jivim ie auctoritalis, tarn veteris Testmmmti ijmtm Novi, sed et exposiliones

iv ¡rum, quae a nominal is et orthodoxis Patribus fac loe sunt ("Besides the

inspired b ooks of the Old and N ew Testaments the w ork s read at the

v ig ils should inclu de expla nations o f Scripture by reputable and or

thodox Fathers"|.,,,A But already in the Decrelmu Cehsianum —an Ital

ian work from the fiflh century which lists authors from the third,

fourth, and fifth centuries and w ho se reading w as recom m ended—the concern w as to eva luate the authority of the Fathers in orde r to

discern their su itability for liturgical re ad ing.'44 Because this com pila

tion utilizes Rom an docum ents, one can sup po se that the use o f pa

tristic read ings in the liturgy w as k n ow n in R om e before the sixth

century. Ordo rotnanus XIV (second h alf o f seventh century), repre

senting the custom s o f mo nasteries servin g the basilica o f St. Peter,

end s w ith these w ords: Tractatus z>ero sancti Hieronymi, Ambrosi, cetera- runt Palrutn, proul ordo poscit, leguntur ("Readings are taken from the

treatises of Sts. Jerom e, Am brose , and other Fathers, as the ordo indi

ca tes "!. 150 Con clud ing the yea rly cyc le of biblical re ad ings, these texts

w ere in tended as com m entaries on sacred Scrip ture. A little later, a

ho m ily on the gospe l replaced the scriptural text ev ery da y; and by

146. On this manuscript, see Salmon, i v Itrikmnain' tU' i.uxeuil, 2 vols.. Collectaneabiblica latma 7 and 9 (Romo, 1944, 1955).

147. Ihere is a goo d s um m ary o f tho state o f the questions concerning tlu* patris-

tic readings in A -G. Marhm ort, " 1 a kvturv patristique dan s la liturgie de s I leu tv s/ '

T m l i t w c t P n ig / vs st o : S t td l t f it u r g ic i in on ow Pn>f. A d r ie n N t v r n t , O S B , Sludia Anselmi-

ana 95 (Rom e, 1988) 31 1- 3 3 1 . See also M artimort, iuriun-s iitur^u(iu's. 77-ik); CR 4:222-225; Salmon O ffice Abitt



the eighth century, the cur$n$ o f patristic read ings can be regarded as

fixed in the West for the duration o f Ihe M iddle A ge s, albeit with a

good nu m ber of local v aria n ts. '5’

A s for the practice o f lectio continue, which w as one o f two w ays o f reading the Fathers at the O fficc /5’ no pa rticular book w as necessary.

It was sufficient to make use of the monastery library and take out a

manuscript o f the wo rks o f Au gustine or Jerome, for instance, and then

sim ply ad d in the m argins the div isions into readings. A representa

tive example of this practice is furnished us by some collections of

A u gustin e's serm ons: Bibl. Vat., Pal., lat. 2 10 (six th/seventh cen

turies, Lorsch); Pal., lat. 298 (tenth century, of un kn ow n pro ve

nance).15' H ow ever, the more and more rigorous assignm ent of

prop er read ings to the Ho urs an d feasts required the m aking o f ap

propriate books. Thu s w ere bom the sermon aries and hom iliaries of

fering to the celebrant a choice o f patristic co m m entaries easily

ava ilable for the patristic read ing at the O ffice.151 Th e great varie ty of

these books attests to the many customs in force, depending upon theplaces and the diffusio n o f traditions.

In the M iddle Age s, the distinction betw een serm on ary and homil-

iary was artificial even though in the Latin usage, the word "homily"

is reserved for the exp lanation o f the G osp el. In both book s, the Fa

thers’ texts, div ided into readings o f vary ing length, w ere copied in

the order in which they were used in the liturgical year, frequently

with a separatio n between the w in ter part (from A d vent to Faster)and the sum m er part (from Easter to Ad ven t). Sometimes, the authors

w ere id entified by an alp habetic system in which each had his ow n

letter. Some of the.se collections were simply used as an aid for the

spiritual meditation of the monastics; others were a resource for the

preparation of sermons; still others were intended for use at Mass.155

The work of several researchers has made it possible to reconstruct

the Roman homiliary of the sixth and seventh centuries on the basis

>51. On the later evolu tion, espe cially in the thirteenth century, o f the orga niz a

tion of patristic readings in the West, s w Salm on, Office div in, 9 3 * 9 4 » 166-167.

152. See Miirtimort. Lectures fiturgique*. 79-80.

153. {bid., ftu.



o f m ore recent m anu scripts (tenth to twelfth cen turies).156 Tha nk s to

the comparison with other ancient Roman books, such as lectionaries

{or rather lists of readings), it lias becom e po ssible to reconstitute the

origina l liturgical structure (respective organ ization o f the Temporal

and Sanctoral) of the homiliary of St. Peter. For each celebration, this

ho m iiiary offered a collection o f serm ons am on g w hich the presider

w as free to choose. So scholars have deduced that as with the sacra-

m entarv at M ass, each church or m onastery had its ow n particulari

ties. On the basis of the homiliary of St. Peter from the seventh

century, four types took form in the eighth century: (1) the Homiliary o f the Basilica o f St. Peter (after Bibl. Vat., Arch . S. Pietro, cod. C .10 5 ;

tenth century), ov era ll faithful to its mo del but incorp orating changes

due to the evolution of the Roman liturgy in the eighth and ninth

centuries; {2) H om iliary of Agim ond for the R om an basilica o f Sts.

Philip and Jam es, whoso three vo lum es cover the w ho le liturgical

year; (3) the H om iliary o f Egin on o f Verona (afte r Berlin, Deutsche

Staatsbibl., Phillipps 1676), written for the cathedral of Verona about796-799, under Egin on 's episcopa cy; (4) the H om iliary o f A lain of

Farfa (7 61-77 0), which can be reconstructed from tw o group s of

m anusc ripts.157 O ther hom iliaries preced ing the C aro ling ian reform

do not b elong to the Rom an tradition, and it is no t sure that they

w ere used fo r the O ffice.158

A t the time o f the adaptatio n o f the Rom an liturgical usages to the

needs of the Callican church, from tine eighth century on, the curseso f patristic read ings p rogressively became m ore precise, dep end ing

on local customs and the character of the officcs, either long and need

ing com plete rea ding s or short and requiring the curtailment o f all

kinds of texts, among them the Fathers' sermons and homilies. As he

had d one in the case of the sacram entary, C harlem agn e play ed a de

cisive role in the case o f the books o f read ings at the Office by com

156. Se e particularly the two basic pu blications of R. Gre goire , Lcs homelmires du Moyen Age: tnventnire. t'i analyse ties tuanuscnis (Rom e, 1966), <md Honteiiaires liiitr- giques mMievaux (Spoleto, 1980); A. Ch ava sse, "U n hom eliaire lihiryiqu e remain

du V lc sk-clo/' Kitiu’ bencdicline 90 (1980) 194 -23 3; J.-1 ’ ttouhot, "L'homeli.iin- de

Smnt-Pierre du Vatican au milieu du V IP sieck* et s«a posttfrite " Rccherches uugut-



missioning Paul the IX'acon to compose an "official" homiliary which

rap idly gaine d acceptance through out the em pire.*59 T his collection

contained 244 sections corresponding to the liturgical year as it had

been established by the Gregorian Sacramentary. This is a revealingfact, dem onstrating that the autho rity o f the official sacram entary at

the time of the Caroiingian period succeeded in imposing itself at the

expense of the Roman model represented by the homiliary of St. Peter

from the seventh century, wh ose influence end ured but w as transmit

ted through other channels. When compared to preceding collections,

the homiliarv of Paul the Deacon innovated on two essential points;

first, it strictly assigned one patristic text to each da y (with rare exce p

tions) and no longer a num ber of texts am on g wh ich a choice could

be m ade; second, it offered for all the Su n da ys of the ye ar and m any

feasts a hom ily on the gospel o f the d ay identified by one or two o f

the ope nin g verses.

From the ninth century on, one sees particular traditions proliferate

and become entrenched, depending upon the choice made by monasteries an d churches with regard to patristic rea din gs at the Office.160

Here, one m ust not take into account either A lcu in's hypothetical ho-

m iliary16’ or the ho m iliaries of the School of A u xe rre 162 com pose d for

m editation (in close connection w ith exegetical teaching) and not for

liturgical reading. Without going into a detailed description of each of

the collections, on w hich w e p ossess ve ry m any m on og rap hs,163 let us

sim p ly note som e im portant points in the evolution o f the liturgicalho m iliaries between the ninth and fifteenth centuries. The anc ient tra

ditions, p articu larly the Kom an hom iliarv o f St. Peter, either persisted

locally, esp ecia lly in central Italy, or w ere sup plan ted by profound

transform ations occurring in particular churches. In the West as a

159. Jbid., 87 -Î& (with bibliography}; Vogel, Introduction, 363-365. The com mis

sioning letter of Ch arlemagn e can be found in M G H , Qipitularia regum Fmncorum, vol. 1 , Ko-ft i.

160. See a report on the state of this question in Vogel, Introduction, 364-365.

161. See L'Eco le carolingienne d'Auxerre : De Murethitch <> Rfati, 8)o<.yoS: Entretiens

d'Aiixern' io S q . ed. D. logna-l’rat, C. Jeudy, G. Lorichon (Paris, 1991), in particular,

R. Etaix, "I.es hom éliaires carolingiens de l'Hcole d'Au xerre ,“ 24 3-2 51; see also H.

Barré, Les Imnêliatrcs airotingtent de IT.cote d'Auxerre, Slu d i e Iesti 225 (Vatican City,



whole , one notes im portant interaction between liturgical and exegeti-

cal ho m i!iaries/ the Jailer n urtu ring the first, and also betw een d iffer

ent liturgical traditions. From the tenth and eleventh centuries on,

texts from recent or contem porary au thors we re ad de d to the readingsdrawn from the Fathers/ and through these additions, the various tra

ditions asserted m ore clearly their distinct identities. The new orde rs

o f the twe lfth an d thirteenth ce nturies (especially the Cistercians and

Carthusians), imp osed a stand ard m odel upon the different hous es of

their orders.

Lastly, let us mention that in the tenth and eleventh centuries, Ihe

liturgical ho m iliarv w as inserted into the O ffice lectionary, like lhat of

Cluny (see section 4 below) in which the biblical, patristic, and hagio

graphie readings are grouped together. A little later, the Office lec-

tionary w a s itself incorp orated into Ihe bre via ry /64 but not without

having been reorganized in relation to the other parts of the Office.

3 . T I IE H A G I O CR A PH IC RE A D ING S A ND T H EIR BOOKSThe reading o f the lives o f saints and the pa ssions o f m artyrs du r

ing liturgical assem blies in antiquity is attested o n ly in Ch ristian

A frica, fo r in stance, at the time o f A ugustin e for the vigil o f a sain t's

feast. In the non-Roman liturgies of the seventh and eighth centuries

there w ere h agiograp hie readings at M ass and the Office, as is proved

by nu m erous Iberian, G allican, and Am brosian docu m ents. ’65 The

liturgical character o f the m an usc ripts pertaining to these traditionscannot be doubted: one proof am on g others is the existence of m ar

ginal notations for the division of the text into rea din gs for the Office

or Mass. For example, the Iberian passional, known through manu

scripts written at the A bb ey of Silos, offers a well-structured cycle of

ha giograp hie read ings follow ing the rhythm s o f the offices and litur

gical year.1** For a long time, the Roman liturgy remained hostile to

this type of wading in the liturgy. In their original state, Onlines ro-

164. See VI below, the section on the breviarv.165. On the history of hagiographie readings, see Martimort, Iscturcs liturgiques.

97-100; CP, 4:225-227. Concerning Hu* list of manuscripts of the Iberian, Gallican,and Ambrosian traditions, see Camber, CM A 18 1-183, 218-219, 286.



ftuwi XIII an d X IV ignore them; ho w ever, after their arriva l in G au l,

they w ere subm itted to modifications, on e o f them being the «autho

rization to read hagiographical accounts: similiter tractatus. proul ordo

poscit. pasfione* niartyrum et vita? patrm n catltolicorum leguntu r ("in thesame way as the treatises, according to what the ordo prescribes, the

passions o f the m artyrs and the live s of the Catho lic bathers are

re ad "].1*7 In Rom e itself at the beg inning o f the ninth century, one ob

serv es a change o f customs: from then on, it w as recom m ended, at

least for the vigil of Roman saints in their own churches, that their

passions be read. In the twelfth century, the ordo of the l-ateran pro

vid es for a hagiographic reading for all the b ig feasts o f saints.16® In

the second half o f the M iddle Ag es, p assions and legends became pre

dom inant in the Office readings, contributing up to six, and eve n nine,

lessons; certain people regarded them with grave reservations.169

The High Middle Ages left few manuscripts attesting to the Roman

tradition concerning hagiog raph ic readings. Hie early legend aries,

w hose production began in the eighth ccntury and reached its clim axin the eleventh and twelfth, w'ere rarely intended for the celebration of

the Office.*70 Their liturgical structure suggests rather that they were

used for the reading in the refectory or for personal meditation.1"1

Som e m edieval legen daries in w hich the texts are d ivid ed into three,

six, nine, or twe lve readings, w ere used in choir du ring the Officc, for

instance, Bibl. Vat., Vat., lat. 5771 (Bobbio, tenth century).172 From the

eleventh and twelfth centuries on, we know of a greater number of passionals—the passional was designated by the terms passionarius,

passionate, or liber passiontilis in m ediev al texts. They contained the acts

of the martyrs and, by extension, any other hagiographic narrative.’7'

It is possible that they were used in liturgical celebrations, but there

167. Ordo mnuutus XIV, see A nd rieu, OK, 3:4 1, 29-30 ; also D ubois and Lemaitre,

Sources ct methedes, 1 (>1-190.168. On all these questions, see M artimort, Lttfiift’s ¡iturgiques, 99-100.

169. See Salmo n, Officc div in, 98; on the place of these rea din gs in the Office of

the Rom an Cur ia in the thirteenth ccntury, see ibid., 14 3- 14 7.

170. See Lit urgfa* Vaticanu, 44-48.

17 1. See M artimort, Lectures liturgujtu's, 10 0 -10 1. On the legendaries as a hagio

graph ic literary genre, sec G , Philippart, Irgnuiiers lat ins ft autre* numtt$crit$



is no certain pro of of this. These p assionals gen erally follow the order

of the calenda r per circuium anni ["through the yearly cycle"]; others

are organ ized by categories of person ages (apostles, saints, confessors

of the faith). In the twelfth century, there appeared passionals presenting at the beg inning o f each life or passion o f a saint a historialcd ini

tial, whethe r related or unrelated lo a pa ssag e of the text; these are

true treasures o f hagio grap hic icono grap hy.’7-1

In fa d , the hagio grap hic re ad ing s a I the O ffice w ere most o/lcn

w ritten directly in the hom ilia rie s, cither in a distinct part o f the book

or inserted at their places in the succcssion of celebrations.1^5 How

ever , iii m an y cases, the com plete Icctionary rearran ged the cyc le of readings, including the hagiographic ones, w ith a v iew to balancing

the different kinds of texts according to the number of readings.

4 . T H E U - C T I O X ' A R Y O l ; I H H OFF-lCE

In a w ay sim ilar to that follow ed by the M ass lectionarv, the O ffice

lectionary bro ught together a large part o f the read ing s (in general,

on ly the incipit is written) for the O ffice as celebrated in a given place;

its plan correspo nd ed to each celebration for the w hole of the liturgi

cal year, most often divided into two parts (summer and winter).176

H av ing c om e onto the scene in the tenth century, the Office lectionar-

174. See, for instilncv, the famous Passional of Zw iefalten, about 11 2 0 - 11 3 5

(Stuttgart, Wurtem bergische l.andesbibl. Co d. Bibl. 2” 56-58), com prising three volum es; see Katafag dcr ilfuminierten Handschrifieii der Wurttmherpschen Umdesbib-

liothck Siu iig ar l: Die roimnischcu Handschrifien d cr Wurte/ni'crgischen Landesbiblio-

thek Siuttgart, vol. 2 .1, Provenance of Zw iefalten, ed. S. vo n Borries-Schulten and

H. Sp illing (Stuttgart, 1987) nos. 34-36; and S. vo n Borries-Schulten, "Z u r roman-

ischen Buchmnlerei in Zw iefallen: Z w ei Ulustrationsfolgen zu den Heiligenfeslen

de s Jnhros und ihrv Vorlagc n/' Zeitscltrifl fi i r Kunstgeschichti' 52 (1989) 445ft'. This

passional w as completed bv the illustrated m nriyrology, about 11 6 2 (Stuttgart, Co d.

hist. 20 415); see Z. Haefeli-Sonin, Auftm xgehrr und F.ntu't/rfckoiizt'pt im Zwkftiltencr mtirtttrolofi des 12. fahrhunderts (Berne, 1992) Krtt<ilo%, no. 64. See also the Passional

o f Weissenau, about 1200 (Geneva, cod. Bodm er 127); see S. Michon, U Grand Pas-

siomwire tiitunmu'r elr VVVvsSi*»/!« t‘t non scrifiioriunt Outour <lc 1200 {Geneva, 1990); at

the end o f this book there is a ve ry helpful catalogu e in w hich a fair num ber of il

lustrated passion als of the Middle A ge s are featured.

175. See Martimort, Uviures liiur$iipte$, 10 1, who gives a list of homiliarics with



ies diminished in num ber from the tw elfth century on, in fav or o f the

breviaries and ev en of other older forms o f book s of readings, such as

hom iliaries or b iblical, patristic, and hag iograp hic m anu scripts with

m arginal annotations. In his history o f the formation o f the breviary,Salmon rightly thinks that together with psalters and collectars, Of

fice lectionaries, called enriched (for example, Paris, B. W, lat. 743,

eleventh century, Saint-Ma rtial of L im oge s; Florence, Bib!. M arcel.,

cod. 0 .15 9 , end o f eleventh century, Tuscany), had acted as the nu

cleus around wltich certain prim itive form s o f the brev iary had taken

shape.'77

One of the particularities o f the O ffice lectionaries w as their essentially local character; they were intended for one monastery or one

religious order. The great diversity existing in both the arrangement

o f the O ffice rea ding s and the other elem ents o f the liturgy of the

I lours prevented the emergence of a standard lectionary, authorita

tive through out the w h ole West. An ab bey or an ord er affirm ed its

identity in liturgical matters by establishing, am on g other things, its

ow n original system o f readings, the result of the combination o f sev eral ho m iliaries for instance.

A m on g the O ffice le ctio naries which have been preserved, the most

com plete, in w hich Tem poral, Sanctoral, an d Co m m on o f the Saints

succee d one «mother, con tain the incipits o f the biblical, patristic, and

ha giograp hic readings for Su n da ys and big feasts (those w ith three

nocturns and twelve readings) organized into formularies; but they

do not p rov ide for ferial d ay s or feasts w ith three readings. We pos

sess a representative exam ple o f this sort of lectionary in the Cluniac

lectionary en tirely reconstituted b y R. Etaix on the ba sis o f three

manuscripts: Paris, B. N., lat. 13371 (fols. 871-96V); n.a.l. 2390 (first

half of eleven th century); n.a.l. 2246 (about tio o ).17,i T he se attemp ts at

reconstitution pro ve to be indispensable, not on ly for kn ow ing the

liturgy of a give n place at a certain p eriod o f the M idd le A ge s, butalso for reconstructing the Sanctoral o f an o utstanding abbey, like

Cluny, and thus on the basis of one liturgical cwrsus of the office, the

evo lution of the cult o f saints in general.

ii? f h h i d ) i l di i i i d b



O ther similar efforts have been successfully m ade by taking as a

point of departu re docu m entation often incomplete {fragm ents of lee*

tionaries) but nonetheless he lpful bec ause it can be com pared w ith

other sources like custom aries an d ordinaries (in w hich cerem oniesare described), breviaries, and also biblical ma nu scripts w ith marginal

annotations.’79



V. The Books of the Office of Prime

Long neglected by liturgists, Ihe books used for the office in chapter [the room w here a co m m un ity of m onastics or canons assem ble]

after Prim e h av e o f recent ye ars been the object of a ren ew ed interest,

especially on the part of historians. In fact, only the martyrology had

been studied p rev iou sly by m any liturgists. The red iscove ry (in cer

tain cases, one can ev en speak of discove ry) o f the other books, such

as necrologies or obituaries, libri memoriales, libri vitae, and ev en the

book o f the chapter, was stimu lated by the historians' research on thecom m em oration o f tine de ad in the M idd le A g e s.lRn

From the Carolingian period on, new forms of commemoration of

the dead dev eloped in the m edieval W est perhaps induced by an

other vision of death and the hereafter. New liturgical practices arose

¿it M ass and the O ffice du ring which on e comm em orated all deceased

religious (clerics, abbots, abbesses, monastics) as w ell a s certain lay

persons w hose nam es w ere kept in books (or other necrological documents) ow ing their origin to these pra ctices.181 'Hie com m em oration

of the dead w as the ideal setting for the em ergence o f new form s of

social intercourse, in pa rticular confraternities, b etwe en ecclesiastical

com m unities, abbeys, churches, cathedrals, and chapters o f canons.

In the C aro lingian pe riod, the recitation o f the nam es of the de ad to

180. 5 et> in particular the w ork o f the Germ an schoo l o f M unster, and especially

the book o f essays Memoria: Der CeschicfitUcfie JZeugnisuvrl </<•*. tilur^iadien Gedi'nkett>

ini Mittelulter, ed. K. Schmid ami J. Wollasch, Munstersche Mittelalter Schriften 48

(Munster, 19B4). Sec als o O.G . Oex le, "Memoria und Momorialuberlieferung im

friihen M ittelalter," FriilnnUtelnlL’rHdie Stt/dioi 10 (1976) 70-95.

181. Concerning the many necrological docum ents of that period—books, wax



be com m em orated du ring the liturgy d id not w ail for specific books

to be created. Before the appe aran ce o f true necrological do cum ents,

mention of the nam es of deceased persons, sin gly or in g roup s, are

found in a great num ber of m edieval docum ents. L imiting ourselvesto the liturgical field, w e find such na m es in sacramontaries, at the

canon of the M ass w here they are added to certain p ray ers (Memento,

Nobis quoque), an d in calen da rs.,'i i The creation o f new types o f book s

attests to the m assive d evelopm ent of these practices and of their

codification within a precise liturgical setting, the office in chapter,

where th ey w ere p laccd next to the com m em oration o f the sain ts and

m artyrs o f the Church. W hen re ad in a m ethodical w ay, these liturgical docum ents g ive

pre cious inform ation on ihe life of m edieva l society, in pa rticular in

m onasteries, w here the com m em oration o f the dead w as particularly

flourish ing .181 Finally, the w ork o f the School o f M ünster has show n

the richness o f these texts, or rather o f these lists, for lino stu dy o f the

relationship betw een m onasteries and for prosopo graphy .

i . T HE OF F ICE IN CHA PT ER A F T ER PRIM E

From the eighth century on, the custom o f reading the nam es of

the de ad w ho se com m em oration w as m ade at the office in chapter

after Prim e became w idespread. The H our of Prim e w as the last to

have been introduced into the cursus o f the D ivine O ffice, probab ly in

the fifth century.i8s But it was only in the eighth century- that Ihe first

tangible elem ents of this office m ake their appe arance. Written in a

little mon astic com m un ity follow ing the Lu xeu il observa nce , Ordo ro-

monuf XV III, ftoing back to the end o f the eighth century, sets the of

fice o f Prime, wh ich takes place in the dorm itory, at the first or second

hour of the day: 3. tshi prima ibi catttaiur ubi donniunt el ibidem pro in-

viccnt, cnpitolo dicto, orant. 4. St atini, ibi sediunt prior cum ipsis, i't ibi le-

gu n l regulam sam’ti Benedict} el <1 priore, vel cni ipse iussent. per sin gobs

365-405 , and b y the samt? authors, '"Socie tas et fraternités’: B egrü ndu ng eines

komm entierten Quellenwerkes zur Erforschung d er Personen und Personengrup

pen des Mittelattorx," ¡'rühinittehilterlicht Studien 9 (1975) 1-48.

iS y See Part 2 , 1, the section on sacram entaries.

S ll h d b L î M i ä S i M i l L é



sermones exponitur, ita ut omtuv inteiiegtwl ul tiuHus frater se tie igiwran-

titwi regole excusare po$sit ["3. '['his hour o f Prim e is sun g wh ere they

sleep; and once the little chapter has been recited, they pray in the

same place. 4. Immediately afterward, they sit there, the prior being w ith th em, and re ad the Rule o f St. Benedict; all the w ord s are ex

plained one by one by the prior or anyone charged w ith doing so in

order that no brother m ay excuse him self by invo king h is ignorance

of I he R u le "| .lS(’ T he Ru le that C hrod ega ng , b ishop o f M etz, im posed

on the canons of the cathedral marks an important step in the forma

tion o f Prime since it sh o w s a w ell-organized O ffice.187

A t that time, Prim e com prised the reading o f one chapter from theRu le (according to local custom s), a serm on or ho m ily (on Sunday,

W ednesd ay, Frid ay, and solem n feasts), and the reading of the martyr*

ology. But there w as nothing yet about com m em orating the dead.

On e canon of the C oun cil o f Aachen in 8 17 describes a similarly

structured office of Prime , and stresses the im portanc e of the martvr-

o lo g y ,'^ but it also allud es to the com m em oration of the de ad .,Sÿ

By Ihe ninth century, the office in chap ter after Prime w a s com

pletely established an d presented the follow ing structure: (1) office of

the reading s, (2) chap ter o f faults, (3) assignm en t o f manu al labor.

O nly the office o f reading s h ad a strictly liturgical characte r since

the other two parts w ere concerned rather w ith the organization of

life within the monaster)'. There was a special emphasis on penance

w ith the chapter of fa ults, during w hich the m onastic s publicly con

fessed their faults, accused one another, and received the penances

nc cessa ry fo r the atonement o f faults.

Because o f the first section, the office o f readin gs, a p articular book

came into existence, the chapter book, first attested in the ninth cen

tury. Th us, w e once m ore observe the sam e process, repeated

186. Andrieu, OR. 3:195-208.

187. Tw o redactions of C hro deg ang 's Rule w ith tw o different lilies are extant: In

Itora prinui ("at the first hour"] in the first (PL 89, col. 1067) mid ¿if capiiuhan quo-

lidic venial ("that one should com e to chapter everyd ny "| in the second ( P i 89, col.no2) .

188. See B. de Gaifficr, "D e l'us ag e et de la lecture du m artyrologe: Tém oignages

antérieu rs au XI1' siècle ," Amleclti BoUandimui 79 {19 6 1) 40-59.

" ff d " h f " d h



throughout the Middle Ages: a liturgical action, once firmly implanted,

brin gs abo ut the creation of an ap pro priate boo k, tailored fo r use in a

specific rite.

In monasteries and cathedral chapters, another consequence of theoffice in chapter after Prim e w as that a p articular spa ce reserved for

its enactm ent w as pro vided , the chap ter hall, early Indications of

w hich are alread y attested in the eighth century.191

2 . THE CHAPTIiK BOOK

A com posite book if there w as ever one sin ce it is m ade up o f oth er

books in juxtaposition, the chapter book was used in the Middle Agesfor just the first part (devoted to the readings) o f the office in chapter

after P rim e.1'1'* The o ldest com plete m anusc ripts go back to the ninth

century. The best know n am ong them is the m artyrology of U suard,

an inaccurate title since this book also includes the other texts of the

office of Prime (Paris, B. N., lat. 13745; Saint-Germain-des-Pres, after

858),195 whose contents are as follows:

— prologue by Usuard, a mon k o f Saint-Germain-des-Pres, the au

thor of the book (fols. 1- 2 );

— m artyrology, com posed by Usu ard (fols. 3-38);

— hy m ns in hon or of St. Germ ain (fols. 88v-89r);

— list o f the abbots o f Saint-G erm aiiv-des Pros (fols. 89V-90V);

— Rule o f St. B enedict (fo ls. 90%—156);

—necrology (fols. 157-183).Th e m ajority o f med ieval m anu scripts used at the office in chapter

are m ade up of the R ule (Benedictine, Au gustinian, an d so on), m arty

rology, and necrology (or obituary). Sometimes, a loctionary is added,

most often reduced to the mention of the liturgical day and gospel

pericop e follow ed by the incipit of the hom ily.194

au XVI1' siècle: L'exemple français," M enio m : Der G esdiid ii lidie XeugHtsuvrt,

625-648.

19 1. On this topic, see the texts collected b y l.en u ilre, "A u x origines de l'office

du chapitre et de la salle capitulaire: L 'exemp le tie Fontenello," La Neustriv: U v

¿my* (ii/ nord d e là Loire de 650 à S$o. Colloque historique international, éd. H. Atsm a, 2

vols ., Beiheftc lier Francia 16 (Sig m ariu gen, 1989) 2:365-369.

h h f h b k 1 " b h l " f



In the texts of the M idd le Ag es, the mention o f the l.ilv r capituli is

rare and accord ing to the stu d y o f J.-L. Lem aitre, is not found before

the thirteenth century.*95 During the High Middle Ages, the chapter

book w as often d esignated by the title of one o f the texts com posingit imnrtyrologium, re$ula) or on occasion both.

Let us now turn to the history and contents of the two principal

liturgical books contained in the chapter book.

3 . T H E M A R T Y R O L O G Y

J. Dubois devoted a large part o f his schola rly labors to the study of

m artyrologies, in w hich the historians of m edieval liturgy are highly interested, especially because these docu m ents help us understand

the cult o f sain ts’96 an d retrace its history.

W hile the litu rgical calendar cited o n ly the nam es and qualitie s of

the saints, the martyrology, which followed the Roman (calends,

nones, and ides) not the liturgical calendar,’'*7 announced the an

niversa ries o f the saints celebrated in the different churches. A lon g

w ith nam es, the places w here the sain ts w ere venerated, their quality,

their tim e, and som etim es a sum m ary o f their actions, their "history,"

w ere m entioned; hence the term "historical m a rtyro lo g y" These texts

w ere re ad every d a y d u rin g the first part o f the office ii\ chapter after

Prime, som etim es w ith se veral saints on the sam e day, therefore sev

eral "sto ries." Com piled from d iverse sources (legends, passions, lives

o f the saints, chronicles, and so on), the notices in the m artyro logy

Hours o f the Office or at Mass. For a com plete su rve y o f the manu scripts, their

contents, their codicological aspect, their chronological and geographical reparti

tion, see Leinaitre, "Liber capituli." 637-648.

195. T he oldest kno wn mention is in the chapter book o f the A bb ey o f C lunv

containing the list of the manuscripts commissioned by the abbot Yvos I of Vergy

(1257-1275), Paris, B. N., lat. 10938: item collectorturn . . .c i librutn ruu'mir capiiuti ["likew ise, a colloc tar. . . and the new chap ter bo ok "|; see l.emaitre, "Lib er capit

ul i , " 626627.

196. See I- Dubois, /r tnartiftvloge tin Movcn Age latin, Typologic des sources du

Moyen ag e occidental, fasc. 26 (Turnhout, 1978), with 7 pag es o f up date; see also

the collection of the main articles which he has devoted to this book, Martyrologe$:

D'U$uard «INmtriywlvgi' ronuiin (Ab bev ille, 1990), See also the notice in Uturgica



are the best sources of information on the cult of the saints, the to

pography a f places in antiquity and the H igh M iddle A ges, the dis

covery and translation of relics, the dedications of altars and

churches, the relationship betwe en m onasteries and chap ters of canons. The m ediev al m artyro logies, wh ethe r integrated into I he

chap ter boo k o r not, allo w us to reconstitute the history o f the differ

ent kn ow n traditions (based on the H icronym ian M artyro logy [fifth

century], tine Martyrology of Ado 1858], the M artyro logy o f Usuard

(after 858-b efore 875], and so on).

The m ajority o f m edieval m anu script sources contain, more or (ess

m odified, the text o f the M artyrolog y of U suard (w hich has no em pty

day). Usuard composed his martyrology, using several textual tradi

tions .198 A go od nu m ber of local typ es de rive from the M artyro logy

o f U suard, recast to a g reater o r lesse r extent.1'*9 The relative unity o f

different m artyrologies is due to their draw ing from a com m on store;

in the manuscripts, this forms a structure on which are arranged ele

m ents either particular to one religious hou se or shared by otherm onasteries o f the sam e family. Th is blend o f un ity and d ivers ity is

one of the riches of these liturgical documents. They enable us to

fathom, even to reconstitute, the history of a particular cult, to get the

feel of the evolution o f hagiog raph y in the M iddle A ge s, thanks to

he lpful com parisons w ith other liturgical books an d var iou s texts.

True w itnesse s to the liturgical life of an abbey, they bea r the traces of

new cults in the num erous m arginal additions visible in alm ost allmanuscripte. The great numb er o f sources which h ave come dow n to

us prove that each church wanted to possess "its own" martyrology,

indispensable because of its use at the office. The martyrologies were

not on ly em ploye d to anno unce the saints of the d ay ; abov e all they

w ere m eant to in struct and spiritually ed ify the m em bers o f the com

m un ity by describing the saints' virtues and miracles.

The public reading of the martyrology at the office influenced the

material aspect of the manuscript, especially the layout of the pages,

w hic h needed to be cle ar in order to facilitate the read er 's task.

4 . T H E N E C R O L O G Y A N D O B IT U A R Y

l ike the martyrology the necrology followed the Roman calendar;



m em ory w as to be recalled at the office in chapter after Prime. In the

Carolingian fiber memorialis, used «it M a ss/ 10 m em bersh ip in a reli

gious community, lineage, and other criteria determined the order in

which the nam es w ere p la ced, w hereas, in the necrology, the date of death w as the sole factor determ ining the structure o f the book. The

advent of necrologies in the course of the ninth century, along with

the chap ter book s in w hich they genera lly w ere included, did not

spell the dem ise of the libri tnemoriafes, which continued to be used

until the twelfth century, as the m anu scripts that ha ve been kept

show. A s early as the Carolingian period, the necrology w as aug

mented by the transcription, into the m argins o f the original text, of

mutual agreements between confraternities by w hich two com m uni

ties pledged to commemorate the other's deceased monks in the

same w ay as their own.

In the thirteenth century, M ass end ow m en ts for the com m em ora

tion of the dead necessitated ihc creation of a new book, the obitu

ary,21” w hose contents w ere ak in to those of the necrology. Instead o f com m em orating a dea d person du ring the office of Prime, one cele

brated a M ass for that person. The structure of the obitua ry w as not

affected by this change o f practice since, like the necrology, it remained

a list of n am es classified in the order of the ann iversaries of the d ay s

of death. The on ly sizable difference between the two books w as that

the ob ituary also contained the legal w ill setting u p the end ow m ent

for anniversary Masses; thus, as much as n liturgical book, the obituary is a book of accounting since the income from the foundation was

entered there.

In most chapter books in the Middle Ages, the necrology and obitu

ary part follows, each day, the martyrology or the Kule.



VI. Genesis and Development of the Breviary

The h istory of the bre viary h as benefited from the assidu ou s w orko f m an y liturgists so that today w e are able to retrace the steps of the

gen esis and developm ent of this book du ring the M iddle A ge s and

the fo llow ing centuries.202

Like the m issal for the M ass, the br ev iary contains all the liturgical

texts for the O ffice, wh ethe r said in choir or in priva te. In the beg in

ning, the w ord breviiiriuni, wh ich m eans digest, designated a n y type

o f w ork presenting a sum m ary (sunmiarium) o f a text, juridical for instance.203 Before the first half of the thirteenth century, breviarium did

not yet designate a precise liturgical book. It is the Franciscan breviary

d eriv ing from the second rule o f the ord er app rov ed b y Innocent III in

12 2 3 that for the first time exp ressly bears the name breviarium: Clerici

fudent diinmtm officium secundum ordinem sanctae Rornam e Ecclesiae ex

cepta Psalleriô, ex quo habere poterunt b reim ia ["Th e clerics w ill celebrate

the Office according to the ordo of the ho ly Rom an Chu rch, cxccpt forthe psalter which they may use in shortened forms"].*14From the thir

teenth century on, the manuscripts often bear the title of breviarium, a

term, how eve r, that does not reflect the div ers ity o f the sources. The

first examples go back to the eleventh and twelfth centuries, and the

202. A m on g the historians o f the breviary, let u s cite in the first place S. Baumer.Histoire du bréviaire, 2 vols. (P ar is, 1905); then, P. Batiffol, Histoire du bnhnaiw romain.

3rd ed. (Paris, 19 11 ) ; H. Boluitta, Bibliographie tier Breviere, 1501-1850 (Leipzig, 1937);

and Leroquais, Bréviaire*. The last author studied a large num ber of m anuscripts

in ord er 10 w rite the introduction to his catalogtie (pp. l.-CX X X lll), wh ich has be

com e indispensable to an y stud y o f the breviary. Later on, we ha ve Salmon, Office

divin, with the telling su btitle, "H isto ire de la form ation du brévia ire du IXe au XVT-'



book spread like wildfire during the thirteenth, then during the rest

of the Middle Ages.205 In contrast to the missal, the breviary does not

seem to have been prepared by Iibelli, except perha ps for com plete of

fices of saints wh ich were circulated as independent booklets.206 A fewfragments of manuscripts from the ninth and tenth centuries suggest

the existence o f first attempts at brev iaries (with juxtap ose d rather

than blended parts) before the eleventh century, but their fragmentary

state preclud es an y defin itive con clusions/1-'7 li k e I ho first m issals, the

first breviaries juxtaposed the different elements of the Office: psalter,

h ym na l, antiphonal, lectionary, collector, and so on. Th is type with

juxtaposed parts w a s m ore com m only called Liber ojficialia, accordingto the expression found in the manuscript sources, especially those of

the eleventh century from Ge rm an ic regions.208 O ne grou p o f bre

v iaries from the eleventh century written in St. C a ll (for exam ple, St.

G all, Stiftsbibl., cod. 414) is represen tative of this type in wh ich the

pieces (anliphons, chapters, prayers, readings) are not abbreviated

but gro uped into sections.20*’1

A m ong the earliest breviaries w ith juxtaposed parts are som e m as

terpieces of medieval illumination, such as Paris, Bibl. Mazarine, ms.

364 (written by O derisius, abbot o f Monte Cassino between 1099 and

j 105). '2,0 It com prises, in successio n, all the books necessary for the

203. Lists o f m anuscripts are found in Leroq uais, Bmwirrrs; Van Dijk and Walker,

Origins. 528-542; Salmon , Office divin. 64-79.206. Salm on, Office di v in 62-63.

207. Set» especially the fragments pu blished by G amb er, CLIJ I , 606-614, and

CL LA. Suppkmentuni. 164 -166 . The author considers the earliest tw o attestations to

the bre viary to be the 21 folios of Basel, Universitatsb ibL, N: I 6 (nos. 8 and 20-22)

(owl oi tenth century, Irom Switzerland or northern Italy), CLLA, no. 1690, and

tw o folios kept in N urem berg, Germamschei> Museum.. Küpforstiehkabinett, Kapsel

536, SD 28 15 (first half of ninth century, from southern G erm any ); see K . Gam ber,

'Bin Brevier fragm ent aus dor 1. H alftedes 9. Jahrh un der ts," Revue Ivw dictine 93( 1985) 232-2 39. < ¡am be r's hypotheses in thus dom ain, as in that of the genes is o f

other liturgical books, are not un anim ou sly accepted by specialists; here as else

w here, the reproach is that his th eories on the form ation o f the books are base d

on fragments from which no certain conclusions can be deduced .

208. See H uglo, Livres it? chanl, 1 17 -1 18 . The expression Liber officiahs frequently

ap pe ars in the library catalogues o f Germ anic regions from the eleventh century



celebration o f the Office an d, a t the en d, the list o f incipils o f the piece.*»

arran ged in the order o f the celebration. Th is last p ari, entitled bre-

vtariunt sive ordo offidonm ("b rev iary or order of the O ffice"! seem s to

be a so rt o f brev iary w ithin a breviary.In the eleventh an d twelfth centuries, breviaries with their different

parts combined and inserted into their proper places in the celebra

tion, mad e their appearance. Th e tendency w as to shorten con sider

ably all pieces in order to diminish the thickness of the books. In the

breviaries used in choir, the read ings retained a reason able length,

w hereas in all the other types, they w ere reduced to a few lines or

eve n a few w ords. T his principle of reduction facilitated the use of

breviaries when traveling, and the size of the books proves that they

w ere som etim es taken alo ng on a journey.211 Being o f s m all dim en

sions and a s a consequen ce ve ry thick, the breviaries were div ided

into two parts (summer, from Haster to Advent, and winter, from Ad

vent to Easter; not Tem poral-Sanctoral) . The psalter, in general w rit

ten sep arately in the beginn ing of breviaries w ith comb ined parts, w as often om itted in the pocket type. T he m anuscrip ts present a

great ran ge o f choices for the breviaries: they could b e in one o r two

vo lum es;21-* form at, arrangem ent o f the text, m usic al notation, deco

ration w ere varied, dep end ing ab ove all on the kind o f use for w hich

they w ere intended .*13 Thus, there exist bre viarie s espec ially destined

for the abbot, others for the reading of the Hours to the sick in the in

firmary, others for traveling, others for the Office in choir, and so on.On e encounters " m issal-bre v ia ries" from the eleventh and twelfth

centuries; their purp ose w as not to sup erpose a bre viary on a missal

but to grou p into one book the wh ole liturgy o f one d a y or one feast,

not that of the who le year.214 In these manu scripts, Italian o r French in

orig in, M asses w ere inserted into bre viaries after Tercc, their proper

liturgical place.

The examination of the many manuscript sources from the eleventhand twelfth centuries leads to the conclusion that the breviary was

2 1 1. The term fwrtifirrium, designating pocket breviaries, lor instance those to be

taken along w hen traveling, continued to be used in England from the twelfth

centurv to the time of printed breviaries.



regarded as a practical book into which one attempted to gather to

gether as m any elemen ts of the Office as possible, w ithout a lw ay s suc

ceeding in including everything. At the same time, the breviary was

considered a m odel book and w as destined to reorgan ise the m ona s

tic and canonical liturg y in the second h alf of the eleventh century.

The stud y of Clun iac brev iaries com posed between the eleventh (for

instance, P aris, 13. N ., lat. 126m )215 an d thirteenth centu ries (for in

stance, the Brev iary of St.-Victor-sur-Rhins)i,h rev ea ls the persistence

o f a local tradition pe cu liar to the C lun iac Orde r, w hich influenced

the churches depending upon the great Burgundian monastery. In thethirteenth century, the breviary used by the R om an Cu ria, and su bse

qu en tly w ide ly d iffused because of its adoption by the Franciscan

Order, became the instrument wielded by ecclcsiastical authorities to

imp ose a standard liturgy o f the Office bearin g an official stam p.217

A fter Ih c M id dle A ges, breviaries prin ted in diffe rent regio ns dem on

strate in a striking manner the persistence of the medieval tradition,

especially for the Liturgy of the Hours.218

215. Set* f. Hourlier, "l x>bréviaire de Saint-Taurin: Un livre? liturgique chmisien àl’usage de PEchello-Saint-Aurin (Paris, BN, lat. 12601)," Etudes grégoriennes 3 (1959)163-176.

6 A D il "A d' b é i i it d Cl é à S i t



Part Four

The Books of Sacraments and Rites

For an y cultic celebration, one nee ds sacred texts and gu idelines

for conducting the rites. In the Christian liturgy, orations, organized

into form ularies, biblical read ings, and su ng picces, ap p ea r in books

intended for the different ministers hav ing a part in the w ors hip serv ice.1 It is eq ua lly ne cessary to ha ve at on e's disposal b oo ks descriptive

(even prescriptive) in character, w hich sp ec ify the order the cerem o

nies are to follow , the roles, m ovem ents, and p ostu res o f the actors,

an d g ive the list o f the required liturgical objects, and so on. Ac cord

ing to its proper liturgical meaning, an onlo is a description o f the sa

cred rites, a directory, a so rt of gu ide for the use o f priests and their

assistants, de scribing in detail the ord er of the ceremo nies and them ann er of their performance.

From the earliest times of Christianity (second to fifth centuries),

the description of the rites— kn ow n for that period through the cate-

chesis an d p reaching of bishop s an d p riests—p lay s a preem inent role

in the transm ission of the faith becau se, in the last ana lysis, w ha t is

involved is the search for liturgical norms destined to be imposed

first on on e com m unity, then on a dioce se, and finally on the wh ole

of Christendom .

In the fifth and sixth centuries, the first rulings for the principal

Ch ristian celebrations ap peared : bap tism , Eu charist, dedications o f

churches, offices of Holy Week, and so on. In Ihc Middle Ages, these

( )



romani, the rituals, an d Ihe pontificate, and on ano ther cultic plane ,

the custom aries, the ordinaries, the ceremonials, the processionals.

We turn now to the descriptio n o f the history o f these different

books. By reason o f their content an d character, ordines roman't, rituals,

and pontificals m ust be placed in the same catego ry: they are liturgi

cal books in the strict sense because they are used during celebrations

by the officiants. In contrast, custom aries, ordina ries, cerem onials,

and processiona ls belong rather to the category o f book s pertaining lo

the liturgy, regulating the rites (or describing their performance) o f a

religious order or a diocese, for instance, but play ing no part wh atso

ev er in the liturgy itself. These bo oks, wh ich a pp ea r in the second

half of the Middle Ages, will be presented later in other sections. As

for the ordinea romani, rituals, and pon tificals, it seem s judiciou s to

classify them according to their respective users: priesls, monks, bish

ops, pope. Indeed , it w ill soon become ob viou s that the type o f texts

they contain do es not a lw ay s m ake it easy to disting uish them from

one another. Finally, let us add that all these books, in som e degreeand despite their typological differences, sometime s im portant— as

the distinction between liturgical books and books ¡wrtaining lo the

liturg y— m ade an essential contribution to the C hu rch 's pur po se to

orde r its liturgy, to set do w n rules and usa ge s and then diffuse them

so that the liturg y might be the sacramen tal expression o f the

C hu rch 's doctrine.



I. The O rd i nes Rom an i

A n ordo concerns a precise liturgical action for which it assembles

together both the sacred texts to be spoken (incipits of the orations,

readings, chants, and so on) and under the form of rubrics, the rules

governing, sometimes to the slightest detail, the performance of this

action.* in gen eral, these texts are rathe r sho rt, hence it beho oves one

to be prudent w hen interpreting the m edieval termino logy used to

design ate them. A lthou gh this is not the place to elaborate on theterms pro per to each of the boo ks dealt w ith in this part, a prelim i

nary word of caution is necessary if one is to corrcctiy interpret the

medieval references to the ordines, references that correspo nd but

faintly to the actual contents of the m an usc ripts.1 In the m anuscripts,

the ordines are ve ry rare ly give n a title, still less are they introduced

by the mention of ordo or ordo romatius. Conversely, the term ordo (or

even ordo romatius) ap pe ars time and time again in the catalogues of medieval libraries in which, although it sometimes designates a real

ordo, episcopal for exam ple, it ap plies as mu ch to a m odest libellus as

to the large v olu m e of a pontifical or parish ritual.-* H ow eve r, certain

ordines romani (called OR from now on) bear titles disclosing their con

tents with precision: Deojficiis in nodibus ["The night offices"], Imtruc-

tio ecclesiastic! ordinis ("Hxposition of the ecclesiastical orde r") Ordo

vel demmtiatio scrutinii ["Ord er and ex planation o f the scrutinies"].

2. First of nil, one mu st distinguish between ordines in general and ordines ro

wan), wh ich are so called becau se o f their Rom an origin. It w ill quick ly become

obviou s that several ordines of the M iddle Ages have nothing in common with theordines ronutni



2 . N A T U R E O F T H E O K D I K ' E S R O M A N I

V arying in le ngth from a few folio s to more than sixty pages, the

OR have been classified according to the many liturgical actions

whic h they describe (one can alm ost sa y that there are as m any kindsof ordines as rites) and especially according to the type of liturgy they

pertain to. Distancing h im self from M abiUo n's classification, And rieu

grouped the OK (a total of fifty, without counting the doublets, see

table o f O R ) " in accordance with the sort of liturgy they refer to:

pa pa l, ep iscopa l, m onastic, and so on ; the one exception is the note

w orthy OK 50, w hich concerns the liturgical ye a r and is thus a par

ticular case. Am on g the most important for the history o f the liturgy,

one finds OR for the pope's or the bishop's Mass, Christian initiation,

the office of H oly Week, ordinations, the ded ication o f churches, the

blessing and coronation of sovereign s, funerals.

3 . TH E O R D I N E S R O M A N I I N T H E M A N U S C R I P T S 1 3

Befo re goin g on to the exam ination o f the different collections,their history, and their contents, let us see briefly how the texts were

used and circulated in the M iddle A ge s. Those liht’Hi which contained

one ordo each, gathered together at a given period (sixth and seventh

centuries), gav e rise to m ore or less organized collections o f tmUnts

(see pp . 1 8 2- 18 5 ). This grou pin g into m ore im portant codicological

entities—attested by the manuscripts of ordines from the eighth to

tenth centuries— ne ver really su pp lanted the w ritin g and circulationo f ordines (especially those of non-Rom an traditions) as indep enden t

book lets. For instance, booklets concern ing the dedication o f a church

continued to exist and were not necessarily inserted afterward into

an older m anu script or one con tem porary w ith the book let itself.l?

But a good num ber o f libelli w ere ad de d at a later date to a preexist

ing m anuscript; an exam ple o f this sort of thing is the ordo for the

1 1 . O n An drieu 's classification and num bering, see Andrieu, OK; and Vogel, In

troduction, 19 5- 19 7, with a usefu l concordance table between M abillon's clnssifica-

Hiw and And riou’s; see also Martiniort, Ordines, 1 1 0 - 1 2 3 .

12. Se e the first volu m e o f A nd rieu, OR, entirely devoted to Ihe manu scripts he

used for the edition of the texts He lias detailed reports on the fragments the iso



dedication of a church written on six folios and, subsequently tacked

onto a sacramentary produced in the second half oí the ninth century

in the circles of Charles the Bald (Paris, B. N., !at. 2292). M. Gros has

demonstrated that the Italian calligraphy of this ordo from theeleventh century as well as its text, independent from the Romano-

Gallican tradition, lead to the conclusion that this libelius w as com

posed to adapt the Carolingian manuscript to the local liturgy.'4

W heth er Rom an or not, one ordo or several ordines not infrequently

end up being transcribed on blank pages of manuscripts, whether

liturgical or not. O r else, and w ith m ore serious consequences for the

history o f Ihe liturgy/ they are inserted perfectly from the view po intso f both co dico logy an d liturgy into sacram en tarles.15 Tine sacram én

tanos of the Leonine type d o not contain an y ordo,16 w herea s the Gela-

sian and G reg oria n '7 ha ve included texts (rubrics and prayers) for the

rites of baptism, confirmation, penance, anointing of the sick, and fu

nerals. In parishes and monasteries, priests needed ihese texts which

ena bled them to celebrate bap tism or fun erals with the sacramentary,

the book pertaining to their function. We must also mention manu

scripts of m onastic origin in wh ich one encounters sup plem entary or-

dines, for the ded ication o f a church o r the consecration o f an altar, for

instance. These sacraméntanos with "enlarged" contents did nol pre

vent the advent and developm ent o f rituals (see 11 o f th is part).

The collections o f OR were most often transcribed into indepen

dent manuscripts. At first, the contents of these manuscripts were organ ized in var iou s w ay s de pen ding on the different collections, but

later on, the m aterial w as classified accord ing to the different typ es of

liturgy in which the ordines w ere to be used. The m anu scripts of this

second category, wh ich are som etim es collections o f libelli, m ark a de

cisive step in the formation of the pontifical, to such a point that they

are called "p rim itive pontificals."'*8

14. M. Gros, "L'ortio po ur !a dcdicace dcs ¿g lises dans lo saoramentain* de Noruin*

tola," /fanir bthiedkibu' 79 {1969) 368-374 .



4 . H I ST O R Y A N D C O N T E N T O F T H E C O L L E C T I O N S

O F O R D I N E S R O M A N I A N D O T H ER O R D I N E S " *

List of the ordines romani {the num bering is And rieu's):

x. Ordo for a pap al M ass (Rome, about 690-700).2. First supp lem en t to the ordo (Rom e, about 690-700).

3. Second supp leme nt to Ordo I (Rom e, abou t 690-71«) and

Frankish land s about 750).

4. Frankish revision o f Ordo 1 (Frankish land s, 750-800).

5. Second revision of Ordo i (Rh ine region, ab out 850-900).

6. Third Frankish revision o f Ordo I (Metz? 850-900}.

7. Prayers and sign s o f the cross at the C ano n of the M ass(Frankish land s, ninth century).

8. Vestments o f the po ntiff (Frankish land s, 850-900).

9. First ordo for an episcopal Mass (Frankish lands, 880-900).

10. First ordo for an episcopal M ass (M ainz? 900-950).

1 1 . Ordo for baptism (Rom e, seven th century, perh aps 550-600).

12 . Ordo for the Office (Rom e, 775-850).

13A. Ordo for the night o ffice read ings (Rome, 700-750).

13B. Ordo for the night office readings (Frankish lands, 775-800).

1 3 c . Ordo for the night office read ings (Frankish lan ds, about 1000).

13D. Ordo for the night office readings (Frankish lands, eleventh

century).

14 . Ordo for the read ings at the Vatican basilica (Rom e, 650-700).

15 . Capilulare ecclesiastic! ordinis ["Cha rter of the ecclesiasticalorder"} (Frankish lands, 775-780).

16 . ¡nstructio ecclesiaslici ordinis ("Ex po sition o f the ecclesiastical

ord er") (Frankish land s, 775-780).

17 . Breviarium ecclesiaslici ordinis ("Su m m ary of the ecclesiastical

order"J (Frankish lands, 780-800).

18. The mon astic D ivine Office (Frank ish land s, 775-780).

19 . Ordo for mon astic m eals (Frankish land s, 775-780).20. Ordo for the feast of the Purification (Frankish lands, eighth

century, after a Roman source).

2 1 . Procession o f the Gre ater Litanies (Frankish lands, eighth century).

22. Ordo for Lent (Frankish lan ds, 780-800}.

23. Ordo for Ho ly Th ursda y to H oly Saturd ay (Rom e, 700-750).



¿4- Ordo for the offices from Wednesday in Holy Week to Holy

Saturday (Frankish lands, 75o-8oo>.2i*

25. Blessing of the Easter candle {Prank ish land s, 800-850).

26. Ordo for the night office from H oly Th ursd ay to Easter (Rome,750-775).

27. Ap pen dix to Ordo XX VI (Frankish lands, 700-750 , after a

[Roman) source dating from about 650-700).

28. Ordo for m iddle Su n da y [fifth Su n da y o f Lent] to the octave o f

Easter (Frankish lands, about 800).

29. Monastic ortio for the last four days of Holy Week (Frankish

lands, 870-890).

30A. Ordo for Holy Thursday to the Sa turd ay after Easter, in (t!bi$

(Frankish lands, 750-800).3<>b. Ordo for Ho ly Th ursd ay to the Sa turd ay after Easter, in albis

(Frankish lands, 775-800}.

3 1 . Ordo for the Divine Office from the middle Sunday [fifth

Su n da y o f Lent] to the octave o f Easter (Frankish lands,850-900).

32. Ordo for the last three d ay s o f H oly W eek (Frankish lands,

880-900).

33 . Ordo for the last three da ys o f Ho ly Week (Frankish lands, tenth

century).

34. Roman ordo for ordinations (Rom e, abo ut 750, after a source

from the fourth century).35. Modified ordo for ordinations (Frankish lands, 900-925).

35A. Episcopal ordination (Rome, Frankish lands, about 970).

35B. Episcopal consecration (Rome, Frankish lands, 975-1000).

36. The de grees o f the Ro m an hierarchy (Rome, 880-900).

37A. Ordo for ordinations on Em ber D ays (Frankish lands, 800-900).37B. Ordo o f ordinations on Em ber D ay s (Frankish lands, Rhine*

region, about 825).

38. Ordo for ordinations on E m ber D ays (Frankish lands, Rhine

region , about 940).

39. O rdinations in the Rom an Church (Rom e, 790-800).

40A. Ordination of the pontiff (Rome, sixth century).

40B Ordination of the pontiff (Rome sixth century)



of the Roman C hurch wore models lo be imitated, and this goal neces

sitated the av ailab ility of written d escriptions. Here, w e com e close to

seeing the conditions unde r which the OK w ere produ ced in Ro m e in

the fifth and sixth centuries. At that lime, there d ev elop ed a m orestructured view of liturgical time, resulting in a process of the organi

zation o f the M ass orations into form ularies and of read ings and sung

pieces into system s as reflected in the sacram entaries, the boo ks of

read ings, and the antiph onals; and in parallel fashion, the practices

an d usag es pro per to the different rites w ere p rog ressively co dified in

the O R so as to en do w them w ith official status. In their w ork , An-

drieu a nd also liturgists like A. C ha va sse and V. Sa xer have described

very w ell the historical and liturgical settin g in w hic h the OR arose.32

A s an exam ple, let us sim ply recall the piv otal role the OR plaved in

the process of the development of the urban environment in the city

of Rom e (selling up o f parishes, platting o f neighborhoods and s o on).

5 . T H E R O M A N C O L L E C T I O N O R C O L L E C T I O N A Collection A w as put together in Gau l between 700 and 750 from

purely Roman ordhics an d m ade it possible to conduct celebrations ac

cord ing to the Rom an rite. We no longer h ave a ny docum ent contain

ing this collection, deriving from a Roman scriptorium. The oldest

attestation is Montpellier, Bib!. Fac. Méd., ms. 432 (Tours, beginning

o f ninth century).3* Se vera l m anusc ripts from the tenth and eleventh

centuries p ro ve that the collection w as circulated after the Carolin-gian pe riod .^ It pu ts together the follow ing ordities: (1) papal Mass

(about 690-700); (11) arrfo for C hristian initiation (about 700-750);

( î 3 a ) onto for the readings at Ihc night office (about 700-750); (27)

I loly Week (about 650-700); (42) ordo for the deposition o f relics

22. See in particular, A. Chavasse, "L'organisation staiionnale du Carême romain,

av an l le VIU1' siècle: Une organisation p asto rale /’ Rnnu' <its Science* religieuses 56(1 ^ 2 ) 17-3 2; "L es grand * cadres de la célébration à Rom e m wriv el extra murvs ju squ'a u VIIIe*s iècle," bénédictine 96 (1986) 7-26; "Am énag em ents liturgiques

à R om e au VIIe et au VIII'' siècle ." Rwue bénédictine 99 O989) 7 5 -10 2 ; "A Rome le

Jeud i sain t, au VU1’ siè cle , d ’après un vie il onto.“ Revue d'Ilhhrire ecclésiastique 50

(*9 5 5 ) 2 1 - 3 5 ; ^ Saxer, "L'utilisation par la liturgie de l'espace urbain el subur-

bain: I/exemp le de Rome dans l'Antiquité el le hau l Moy en A ge ," Acte* du X/’’



7 . T H E G A M . . I C A N C O L L E C T I O N S

Tw o collections contain onlines which are almo st ex clusive ly theirs

and have no posterity. The St. Amand Collection, so called from the

scriptorium of the abbe y in northern France w he re it w as don e, isprese rved in on e sing le m anu script (Paris, B. N ., lat. 974; lenth cen

tury).*9 In all likelihoo d, this collection w as co m piled ab out 77 0-790

and contains a Frankish recension of the ordo for the papal Mass, and

other ordines: (30B) for the Easter Triduu m and Easter Week (about

775-780); (21) for the procession of the Greater Litanies (eighth cen

tury); (39) for ordinations (Rom e, about 790-800); (43) for the d ep o si

tion of relics; (20) for the procession on the feast of the Purification

(eighth century, after a Roman source).Jl>

The St. G all Co llection (nam ed a fter St. C a ll, Stiftsbibl., cod . 349;

end o f eighth c en tu ry),'1 or accord ing to its title in the manu script, ca-

pitulore ecclesiastic) ordiiiis ["charter of the ecclesiastical order"), was

w rille n about 775-780 by a Burgundian or Austrasian m onk. The

anon ym ous author m ade use of Rom an sources which he adapted tolocal needs. The list of ordines in this collection, ob vio us ly destined

for monastic use, is as follows: (14) ordo for the readings at the night

office at the basilica of St. Peter (Rome, about 650-700); (15) the capit

ular? ccdesiaztici ordinis, a Roman ceremonial for the liturgical year

(about 775-780); (16) imtructio ecclesiastici ordinis ["exposition o f the

ecclesiastical ord er" ], a mo nastic cerem onial for the liturgical ye ar

(about 775-780); (18) the monastic Divine Office (about 775-780); (19)ordo for monastic meals (about 775-780).

Let us con clude this brief presentation o f the principal collections

w ith ordines wh ich w ere circulated in an independen t mann er with

out ev er becom ing part o f a ho m ogeneo us collection.32 The sm all

group of ordines transcribed in Brussels, Bibl. royale, cod. 10 12 7 -

10 14 4 (end o f eighth cen tury),53 forms not so m uch a collection as a

sort o f ritual for the pr iest's use. There, one finds the fo llow ing ordines: (3) second supplement to the ordo for the pap al M ass (about

690-700); (13») ordo for the readings at the night office; (24) ordo for

¿9. Ibid., 1:255-256.30. See Vogel, Introduction. 152, and M artimorl, Ordines, 24.



the O ffices from W ednesday in H oly Week to H oly Sa turd ay {about

750-800); (26) ordo for the night office from I loly T hur sd ay to Easter

(about 750-77 5); ( 3 0 A ) ordo for Holy Thursday to Saturday in (ilbis.

So m e o f these texts are taken up later on in m anu scripts o f the ninthand tenth centuries.*’ Rare ordincs were circulated independently

from a ny collection (such as A n d rieu 's num bers 35B, 37, 45 ,47) , see

the list of ordines just above) before being integrated into the vast

compilation of the Komano-Germanic Pontifical in the second half of

the tenth century.,5

To sim plify, on e cou ld s ay that the history o f the OR stops in the

tenth century with the appea rance o f the "prim itive po ntificals," and

especially the Romano-Germanic Pontifical. Nevertheless, the ordines,

and not just those of Roman origin, continued to have a life after the

creation of the pontifical, if only in the many rituals which are true

typological prolongations of the prescriptive texts found in the OK.

Th eir historical interest no longer need s an y dem onstration so im

portant was their impact on the Latin liturgy in the West, especially at the lime they made their way into the Frankish Empire.-'1’ I shall

sim ply limit m yse lf to recalling the unique testimony of the nine

sm all ivo ry plaqu es attached to the back cov er of the D rogon Sacra*

mentary (Paris, B. N., lat. 9428; middle of ninth century), showing

nine sccnes o f the Eu charist celebrated b y the bishop in the cathedral

of M etz. The differen t scenes, presented w ith a m eticulous attention

to detail (num ber an d p lacement o f the officiants, gestures, liturgicalobjects, and so on), reflect the historical fact that Metz adopted the or-

dines ronwni du ring the Carolingian period un der the episcopacy o f

C hro deg an g (742-766); this is incontrovertible p roo f o f the romaniza-

tion o f the G allican liturgy in one o f its bastions, the cathedra l of

Metz.*7



II. The Rituals

The history o f the rituals failed to aro use the interest o f a large

nu m ber o f liturgists, either those o f the seventeenth to nineteenth

centuries or those o f the twentieth century. The p articular status of

this liturgical book explains fora large part this relative historio

grap hic vo id. Indeed, at its origin, the history o f the book is one w ith

that o f the ordines romani and, from the Cou nc il o f Trent on, one w ith

that of the printed rituals. Between the two, the confusion of the rituals with the parish manuals (pastorale, manualc curatorum ["pastoral

gu ide /' "m anu al for the clergy in charge")), w hich are rather guides

and collections o f cou nsels addressed to pastors, has contributed to

render eve n m ore obscure the exact iden tity o f the rituals.3* Th e me

dieval manuscript rituals are the true ancestors of the printed rituals,

in particular of the official Rom an edition of 1 6 14 .^ T hey hav e been

p artially disentangled from othe r book s by P.-M. G y in an article w hich has left its stam p on the research in th is field .4” Besides this

ov erall study, there exist m ono graphic an alyses on a m ultitude of

manuscripts.

38. The definitions of the riftial given in good dictionaries of liturgical books are

generally not clear enough to elucidate the essential characteristics of the book;see, for instance, Fiala and Irtenkauf, Uturgischr Nom wklatur. 127, and Thiel,Uturgisciur Riichcr, 2392.

39. On the connection betw«vn manuscript rituals of the Middle Ages andprinted rituals of modem times, see J.-B. Molin and A. Aussedal-Mtnvielle, Reper

toire den rituels et processiomux imprimés en France (Paris, 1984).40. Gy, "Collectaire," 441-469, repeated, with some corrections and additions,



i . D E F IN I T I O N A N D F U N C T I O N OI-' I H E M E D I E V A L R I T U A L

The ritual contained e very thing that w as n ecessary (rubrics and

texts) for the performance o f one or severa l liturgical actions, in pa r

ticular those which w ere not exclu sively reserved for the bishop. Thisleads u s to sp ea k o f the ritual as the book o f the priest, indispen sable

for a certain num ber o f rites he presided over, som etim es as the sole

officiant if he w as invo lved in parish m inistry; it w a s also one of Ihe

books of the m onks and priest-mon ks w hich enab led them lo carry

out properly monastic riles. Centered on the administration of the

sacram ents, the rituals of the H igh M iddle A ge s contained the texts

o f certain OR or those o f olh er ordines wh ich ne ver qualified as OR and remained independent from any collection, whether Roman or

Gallican.

In order to und erstand correctly the typolog ical specificity o f the

rituals of the H igh M iddle Ag es, one m ust place them w ithin their

historical and ecclesiological context. Several historians have shown

that from the ninth century on, the parish emerged as an administra

tive and ecclesiastical entity; this prom oted a sp ecifically presb yterial

liturgy w ithin the m ultiple priestly functions.41 Co nv ersely, it is inter

esting to note that the process of codification and uniforrnization of

Ihe liturg y du rin g the C arolingian period strong ly influenced the de

velo pm ent o f the m edie val p arish 's conscio usness o f itself. T his all-

important role of the liturgy in the formation o f the parish com m unity

w as especia lly d ecisive in the diffusion o f the different liturgicalbooks or texts proper to a specific rite. The ceremonies and formulas

oi the sacred acts hav ing been fixed in w riting , the clergy, secu lar or

regular, played its role with increased authority in their religious

41. See the inclusive report of H. Platelle, "La paroisse el son curé jusqu'à la findu X li r siècle," i'cncadn 'men l religieux des fidèles mi Moi/ot Age el /usiiirViu Concile tie

Trente: l u paroisse, le clergé, h fxtstorale, ¡a 1levoiion, Actes du 109e Congrès nation.ildes soritftes savantes, Dijon. 1984, vol. j (Paris, 1985) 11-26; the important study ofA. Angenendt, "Die Liturgie und die Organisation des Kirchlidienieborts «mf deinLande," Crisfutiiizzizioiic n i orgtinizzaziotie ecd efiaït iiü tieütrcainf>agtw uell'alto Media-

evo: Espamiowe rcsistenze. lo-iôiiprik' ¡980, 2 vols., Settimane di studio del Centroifaliano di studi sull'alto Medioevo 28 (Spolelo. 1982) lu ôçff .; J. Avril "La paroissemédiévale: Bilan et perspectives d'après quelques travaux récents." Revue ¿'H is



m inistry lo the pop ulations.42 A n d in fact, a large nu m ber o f rituals

reflect certain a spects of this role.

2 . THE RITUAl . IN TUB L I B E L U : FORMS ANI.> FUNCTIONSIn his article pu blished in i960, G y established a meticulous typol

ogy for the different form s of man uscript rituals of the High M iddle

Ages.'1 * Within th is typolo gy, ¡¡belli occupy a place of hon or because of

their nu m ber and their imp ortance in the dev elop m en t of the ritual as

a liturgical book. Rituals contained the description of the acts (in the

rubrics) and the sacred formulas (orations, readings, and so on). From

the tenth century on, booklets meant to be used in a specific liturgical

action app eared. The m ain attestations ad du ced b y G y— to which

one m ust add the m any ¡¡belli studied since h is article w as written—

demonstrate that they were intended principally for the rites of

penance,44 the anointing o f the sick,45 an d funerals.46 Su ch a sp ecializa

tion shou ld not surp rise u s because it correspo nd s to the essential d u

ties o f a priest in his parish d urin g the High M iddle A ge s; these duties w ere second only to the celebratio n o f the Eucharist and the adm inis

tration of baptism.4“ For these last two, the priest, regular or secular,

42. On the active part taken by monks in liturgical and pastoral matters in certain parishes, in "compétition" or coordination with the secular priests, see especially C. Devailly, "L e clergé régulier et Je ministère paroissial," Cahiers ¿'Histoire

20 (1975) 259-272; Cî. Countable, "Monasteries, Rural Churches and the Cunt ant- marum in the Early Middle Ages," Cristiunïzzazionc. 1:340-389.43. See Gy, Collectant.44. The sacrament of penance underwent modification during the Carolingian

period; sec C. Vogel, l.c pécheur el la pénitence au Moyen Age (Paris, 1969); R. Kottje,"Busspraxis und Bussriten," Segtiie riti nella Chii'sa a!tomedi*a>ah: occidentale. n - 77aprile 198$, 2 vols, Settimane di studio del Centro italiano di studi sull'alto medio-evo 33 {Spoleto, 1987) 1:360-395.

45. See A. Triacca, "Le rite de Yunpoattio numuuin super infinitum dans l'ancienneliturgie ambrosienne," Iji maladie et la mort du chrétien datrs lu liturgie. ConférencesSaint-Serge, 2i‘‘ Semaine d'Etudes liturgiques, ior-4 juillet 1974, Bibliotheca■'Ivphemeridcs liturgicae," Subsidia 1 (Rome, 1975), 339-360.

46. See P.-Â. Février, "La mort du chrétien," Si’Çr» e riti. 2:881-942; D. Sicard, La liturgie de la mort dan» l'F.gliÿe latine des origines à la réforme carolingienne. LQF 63(Munster, 1978); F. Paxton, Christianizing Death: The Creation of Ritual Process in



used the sacramentary, which very often included the ritual of bap

tism. Since this sacrament w as a dm inistered in the course of a celebra

tion, it m ade no sen se to sep ara te its texts from the sacram entary. The

rituals of penan ce and those destined to help the sick and d yin g w erean a ltogether different case. Tn the pa rishe s of the High M iddle A ges,

these rites, then in the midst of development, necessitated a mobile

practice o f the liturgy, and , therefore, dem and ed app ropriate doc u

m ents w hich w ere e asy to carry and not costly. A sign ificative sam ple

o f this kind of boo klet is prese rved in Paris, B. N., lat. 13764 (fols.

9 0- 1 i6v), written in the scriptorium of St. A m an d ab out 900 an d incor

porated into a collection com ing from St. Remi in Rheim s.4* With itstw o rituals, one fo r penan ce and another for the anointing o f the sick

(with the Mass for the sick, including the readings and sung pieces),

it no do ubt w as intended for the priest goin g to visit the sick in the

cou ntryside surro un din g his pa rish.49 Others serv e on ly for funerals,

like the Ubellus from the tenth century (Rome, I3ibl. Valliccl., cod . C .10 ;

fols. 13 3 -1 3 8 ) from the m onastery o f San Kutizio in Valcasloriana in

U m bria, today include d in an e va n ge liary from the twelfth century.541

T he variety o f parish and m onastery rituals, wh ich arose in the

tenth century, w ou ld con tinue to the end o f the M idd le Age s. In the

twelfth and thirteenth centuries, the typ olo gy o f these easy-to -carry

booklets w as enriched with n ew rites, such as m arriage,’ 1 and this

cart*. See P Brommer, Capitula episcoporum: Die bishößiehen KtipHularien ties 9 und j 0 Jahrhunderts, Typologie des sources du Moyen Ago occidental, fasc. 43 (Tumhout,1985}; G. DevailJy, "La pastorale en Gaule au IX1' siècle," Rtrouc d'ilistoire de l'Eglise de F rance 59 (1973) 25-54; see also J. Avril, "A propos du ’pwprius sacerdos/ quelquesréflexions sur les pouvoirs du prêtre de paroisse," Proceedings of the Fifth International Congress of Medieval Canon Law, Salamanca. 2 j -25 September 1976, ed. S. Kut-tner and K. Pennington, Monumenta iuris canonici, series C, subsidia 6 {Vatican

City, i960) 471-486; anti J. Chélini, l.'atdv du Moyen Age: Naissance de la chrétienté occidentale. la {’«• religieux des laïcs à ¡’époque carolingienne {Paris, 1991 ).48 See H. Palazzo, "Les deux rituels d’un libellus de Saint-Aniand (Paris, B. K.,

lat. 13764," Kiïrft'/s: Mélanges offerts au P. Cu. OP (Paris, 1990) 423-436.49. [;or other libdli of the same kind, see E. Palazzo, “Le rôle des liivlli dans Ja

pratique liturgique du haut Moyen Age: Histoire et typologie." Revue Mabiilon 62,n.s. 1 (1990), 9-36, especially 2i>-28.



cau sed a n increasing specialization o f the libelli. Let us recall that in

the thirteenth century, the definitions o f diocesan liturg y and ad m in

istration of the sacraments were changed in the synodal statutes; this

favored the definitive institution of special booklets for the priests.52 At the tim e o f the Renaissance, the parish ritual w ould be com bin ed

w ith the m anual fo r the adm in is tratio n of the sacram ents ; an d the

texts for baptism, marriage, anointing of the sick, and funerals would

continue to be the core o f this book.

In the m onasteries also, the rituals continued to be m ore an d more

specialized in order to ad ap t to the evo lution o f the m ost diverse

liturgical practices. The abbatial rituals (especially in the second half o f the M idd le A ges) for rites that on ly the abb ot cou ld p erfo rm 53 are

am on g the most interesting because they became a p ecu liar category

of com posite books— they could contain texts for other rites— specifi

ca lly designed for the status and functions o f the abbot.5*

3 . T H E C O M P O S I T E R I T U A L S

W hether associated w ith other types of liturgical books or in sertedinto more important books, principally the sacramentary, the com

posite rituals of the High M iddle A ge s are as num erous as the inde

pendent libetii. They have been ve ry w ell studied by G y,55 wh o

distin gu ishes essentially the collectar-ritual and the sacram entarv-rit-

ual (or even the missal-ritual). The com bination o f the collectar5̂ and

ritual w as b om in m onastic m ilieux in the tenth century and p er

sisted at least until the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. The collectar

contained all the collects the celebrant needed for the Liturgy o f the

Hours, whereas the ritual associated with it most often comprised the

texts ne cessary for the liturgy o f the sick and o f the de ad , as w ell as

rites pecu liar to m onasteries (such as the ordo ad faciendum ittonachunt

["ordo for the m akin g o f a m onk "]). The celebrant used the collectar-

ritual for the liturgical actions at the Office and for others that tookplace in va rious parts of the monastery. T his book, of which w e possess

52. O. Pontal, Uv statute synorfaux. Typologii* des sources clu Moyen Age occidental, fasc.11 (Turnhcmt, 1975), and A. Vauchez, His/iwv tie In France re!igieu$t:, ed. J. Le Goff and R. Remonri, vol. 1: Pi’s (¡rigi/ic* au XIVCsiecle (Paris, 1988) 368-381.

53 S h H * bl i f d t t



com pare it w ith that o f the bishop, w ho w as the user of the pontifical

w hile the priest w as the user o f the ritual.

Few b ooks h av e had a m ore eventful life than the rituals, unceas

ingly adapted to the changes affecting the rites, hence the multitudeof possible form s the rituals cou ld take. A s it w as rarely a p aw n in

ecclesiastical politics— in contrast to the pontifical an d b rev iary— the

ritual eludes alm ost en tirely an y strict typo logical classification.

The m anu scripts attest to this state of affairs, because they som e

times offer com binations unh eard o f in other books; for exam ple,

there is the colleciar-ritual from the abbey of I,agrasse (Paris, B. N.,

lat. 933; second half o f eleventh century), to w hich a libcllus for thededication of a church was appended (fols. i55~i62v), written by a

scribe w h o w as p robably an Italian w orking in the southw est of

France, pe rhap s on the occasion o f a pap al visit.66



III. The Pontifical, the Book of the Bishop

Th e history of Ihe pontifical in Ihc M iddle A g e s has been m ade al

most entirely dear thanks to the research of C. Vogel and R. Elze on

the Romano-Germanic Pontifical dating from the tenth century (from

no w on referred to as RG P);67 that of M . A nd rieu on the pontificals

from the second ha if of the M iddle Age s;*8 and that o f N. K. Rasm us

sen on the pontificals called "p rim itive" (that is, from the ninth and

tenth centuries),** which are the intermediary link between the ordities romani an d the RGP. We are therefore in po ssession o f excellent edi

tions o f Ihe texts, accom panied by stud ies on the history o f the liturgy

authored by the best experts in this field.70

By an alyzin g the evolution of the prim itive form s of the pontifical

do w n to the time wh en it acquired the status of an o fficial book (RG P

and then R om an Pontificals), it is in fact the evo lution o f a part of the

episcopal, and even papal, liturgy that vve shall follow from the ninthto the fifteenth century.

i . T H E F IR S T P O N T I F IC A L S O R ''P R IM IT I V E P O N T I F IC A L S "

U p to Ra sm usse n's w ork , historians o f the liturgical books did not

really comprehend how the transition between the ordines, whether

isolated o r orga nized into collections, and the RG P, from the second

half of the tenth century, had ha pp ene d. It w as the m ore impo rtant to

elucid ate this point o f the history of liturgical b ooks since the RGP,

prod uced in the circles o f the Ottoman court between 950 and 962, a p

peared as the first official bo ok intended for the bishop and enab ling

67 V g l nd F l PRC



the p riestly charge w hich the bishop exercised in his cathedral, as the

priest did in his parish. At first {perhap s alread y in the second half o f

the ninth century), there were a s m an y libelli as rites to be perform ed;

and no special geograp hical region appe ars to ha ve been their privileged place of origin. Besides the indep enden t libelli, there were a few

rotuli. whose contents were equally limited to a specific rite (in gen

eral, o rdinations); some o f these date ba ck to the eleventh century,

after the app earan ce of the RGP73 The "pontifical" scrolls that have

been p reserv ed com e for the most part from southern Italy, a region

w here the use o f scrolls in the liturgy w as held in high fa vor.75 Tex

tual attestations prov e that these scrolls w ere in use as e ar ly as theCarolingian period. For instance, in a letter addressed in 8 6 9 - 8 7 0 to

Advenrius, the bis hop o f M etz, w ho w a s to travel to Trier on the oc

casion of the consecration of the new archbishop 0/ that city, Hincmar

of Kh eims su pp lies us w ith m any details on the order of the cere

mony and speaks of using a rolulus for the consecra tory rite.74

I'he follow ing references prob ably designa te as m any small-sized

iilfeUi of this kind, w hether m odest or luxu rious, dep end ing on wh erethey w ou ld be used an d for w hat type o f rite: ordo roman us ; ordo ro-

minii etweilii ["ordo for a R om an cou ncil"];75 ordo romamts in duo quater-

nionibus [ordo rommus in tw o q uires o f eight folios"]/'6 Quatenioa cum

Ictimin; Quaterno.s / cunt lelania et duos di' dedicatione; . . . quatmiiones //

["Quires o f eight folios with litany. One qu ire o f eight folios with litany

and two qu ires (for the ded ication o f a ch u rc h ). . . "] ;>7 ad ecdesiam

7 2. Rasmussen, Pontificaiix.7). See in particular the many r.xuitei scrolls Ironi ihe eleventh and twelfth cen

turies; see I’art 2, ti. 7, on the other forms of books. A good example of the pontifical scroll is supplied by ms. Asti, Uibl. Capit., cod. XIII (eleventh century); see l:.Dell'Oro, "Franum-nto di rotolo pontificate del socolo XI." Traditio ct Pntgressio: Sludi liturgia in inrnir Pwf. Adrien Nocent. OSB, Studia Anselmiana 95 (Rome,1988) 177-204.

74. See M. Andrieu, “Le sacre episcopal d'aprés I tmcrmir de Reims/’ Riwm?d'Hislow- cccl&itKtitiiie .(8 (1953) 22-7 3. For other testimonies: of the same kind, seeRasmussen, t\v\tifiaiux.

75. Catalogue of the library of the Archbishop of Salzburg, about 959*990; Becker.Catalogi. no. 34, p. 77.

76 C l f h Abb f S C ll i h B k C l / 22 31



consecraudtun qunteriiiones duos, ad visitondunt infirnunn quaterniones

duos, tui ordinationes eeclesinsticos ijutentiotui utto ( " h v o q u i re s o f eight

fol ios for the ded icat ion (of a chu rch) , tw o qu ires o f e igh t folios for

visi ting the s ick, on e qu ire of e igh t fol ios for ecclesiast ical o rdinatio n s" ! .“5 A lready in the tenth century, b u t esp ecia lly in the eleven th

and twelfth, the term ordo in l ibrary c atalogue s, e i the r w ith added

spe cific d etai ls on the r i tes or no t , is used to designa te preferably a

pontif ical : ordo ep hco palis . . . ordo ponltficalis [ "episcopal ordo . . .

pontif ical ord o"]?* ordo I wgcmfi'Hs ("on e silver-cov ered onto"].80

The nex t step toward the pontifical w as to assem ble several libelli

into an arti fic ial collect ion, w hich d id duty as a "p rim it ive " po ntif ical . Che l i turgical and codicological composit ion of a number of those

studied by R asm ussen betrays the com pilat ion o f libelli. N o tewo rth y

in that respect are the pontif icals of Beauvais (Leiden, Bibl. Ri jsku-

nivers. , BPL. 111.2; ninth-tenth centuries) ,8 ' of Rheims (Rheims, B. M.,

ms. 340; ninth o r tenth cen tury) ,8* and a Ben evento m anu script {Bibl.

Vat., Vat., lat. 77 01 ; tenth cen tur y ).8*

In all the po ntificals he stud ied, Rasm ussen ob serve d that any f ixed

structure in the contents w as lacking as w ell as any s table nucleus on

w hich other ordittea could have been grafted. This fact proves the em

pirical charac ter of their form ation. 1 'he great d iversity o f the results ,

usually modest in appearance, is the consequence of their being a

co m p i la tio n o f libelli, even though one f inds in almost every case or-

dines for the ded icat ion of chu rches, c ler ical ord inat ions, and penan ce.Rare are the m ore careful ly executed sam ples, such as the fam ous

Pontif ical of Sens from the tenth century (St . Petersburg, Publ. Bibl.

78. P i 132, col. 468: «1 list of episcopal UMli bequeathed by the; bishop of Fine tohis cathedral in 4)15, included in his testament, rather than a collection of UMli forming a little pontifical, as Rasmussen thinks; if his opinion were right, the reference would have been much shorter and would not have enumerated the different quires of eight folios.

79. Catalogue of the church of St. Martin in Touniai, twelfth century; see L. Delisle,Le cabinet dt'$ inanutcrils de !a BibUolhetfiie nutiwak', vol. 2 (Paris, 1874)110.134, p. 500,and no. 2.% , p. 503.

80. Inventory of the books and liturgical objects of the cathedral of Bamberg, second quarter of twelfth century; since this document (probably a pontifical, givenh d ) h d l b d h b



im M. E. Saltykova-Schrcdina, Int. Q.v.I., no. 35)^ for the use of the

metropolitan, containing the pledges o f obedience swo rn by the suffra

gan bishops of the prov ince o f Sens, the ord inary ep iscopal functions,

and royal rites (coronation of the king and queen) whose historicalsignificance is still a m atter o f controversy. Let us recall also that these

"primitive" pontificals appeared almost simultaneously in several

different p laces, a tact dem onstrating that there w ere no deliberate

"politics" involved in their creation.

In orde r to exp lain the genesis and dev elop m en t o f the pontificals,

one m ust first have recourse to reasons of a practical order: the bishop

had at h and, gathered into one slim volum e, ail he needed outsidethe euch aristic liturgy. W hen he celebrated in the cathed ral, he could

also use the sacram entary in w hich certain episcopal rites were at

first transcribed before being "d eta ch ed " to constitute the pontifical.

The b ish op 's increasingly prom inent role in the liturg y o f his church

from the ninth century on contributed to a historical process attested

to by the "p rim itiv e" pontificals. In the ninth and tenth centuries, the

episcopal function becom es m ore clearly defined w ithin Christian so*

ciety and grows more and mort* important in the social and religious

as w ell a s in the liturgical sph eres.*5 Th e ad ve n t o f the po ntifical as

an independ ent book dem onstrates this m om entous evolution o f the

b ish op 's position in his dioce se and his liturgical responsibility.86 The

RG P w ill be a sort of fu lfillme nt of this recogn ition of the bishop as a

major figure in Western Christendom.

84. Ibid. The date (ninth century) and (he importance of this inanuwript wererccentlv reviewed, in less than convincing a manner, by P. Konakov, who ispreparing an edition with commentaries.

85. See J.-C Picard, "L'ordre carolingien," Histoire de h France religieuse, 1:171-281; M. Parisse, "Princes laïques et/ou moines: Les évêques du X1- siècle, //secoio <li t'erro: »¡¡to e realtà del secoh X. 19-25 aprile 1990, 2 vols., Settimane di studio del

Centro itaiiano di studi sull'alto Medioevo 38 (Spoleto, 1991) 2:449-516.86- See, for example, B. Guillemain, "L'action pastorale des évêques en Franceaux XIe et XI1e- siècles," Is istiluiioni eccltsiaslkhe délia 5 «)Cwf<is ¿¿ci secoh XI XU, Diocesi. pievi e parrochie. Atti délia sesta setlimana mtenwionale di studio,Milano, t-7 settembre 1974, Miscellanea del Centro di studi mediovali 8 (Milan,1 9 7 7 ) 117-135; M. Moslert, "L'abbé, l'évêque et le pape: L'image de l'évêque idéaldans les oeuvres d'Abbott de Reury," Religion et culture autour de l ’an mil: Royaume



2. A C A T E G O R Y B Y I T S E L F : T H E B E N E D IC T IO N A L S

There w ere blessings8' in both sacram entaries and pontificals, in

w hich they gen erally fo rm ed a distinct part; otherw ise, they w ere

m ade into a separa te book called a bened ictional. In the sacramen -laries, the ble ssing s w ere essentially fo r mo nastic use. W hen joined to

a pontifical, either being a part o f the bo ok or inserted am on g the or-

dines, they concerned more specifically the episcopal function. As for

the indep enden t book, R asm ussen has p roved the existence of libelli,

sorts of em bryo s w hich he n am es "sim ple bened ictional»/'88 preced

ing the app earan ce o f the com plete bcn edictionals.*9 For the most

part, these sim ple ben edictionals are libelli containing espec ially ep iscopal blessings for the entire liturgical year and votive Masses; some

are for military or royal functions. Let us cite as an example a manu

script in M unich (Bayer. Staatsbibl., elm. 6430; fols. 1- 14 ) , prod uced

in Freising in the ninth or tenth century.** O ther m anu scripts juxta

pose the benedictional and p ontifical, as in the sum ptuo us m anu

script in R oue n (B .M., ms. Y.7 [369], written in Winchester abo ut 9&1

for Arch bisho p R obert.9' Finally, the com plete benedictional m akes

its appearance in the tenth century or thereabouts, when it becomes

an indepen dent book in the typo logy o f the liturgical docum ents per

taining to the bishop. But history of this book as distinct from the

pontifical has not yet been the object of the thorough stud y it d e

serve s.92 One of the best specim ens of this once ind epe nd ent book is

the Benedictional of Bishop W arm un dus, w ritten m northern Italy atthe end of the eleventh century (Ivrea, Bibl. capit., cod. 10 [XX|).93

$7. Concerning this particular sort of liturgical piece, set* Part 2 ,1, i, the sectionon the content nf the sacramentary, and H. E. Moeller, Corpus bewdictiomon episco-

paliuitt, 4 vols., CCSl.. 162 (Turnhout, 1971-1973).88. Rasmussen, Pwti/iam.

89. These libelti containing blessings are attested in the library catalogues likethat of St. M ary Major in Cremona, from the year 98.j: F.pi'nypaliunt bcnedictionwn UMliiiuro in$cripti volume// ttmafi ("One volum e o f booklets of episcopal blessings

written in gold"]. Jn this case, the iilvUi are perhaps already bound into one volume? See Becker, Catalogs, no. 36, p. $1.

90. See Camber, CH.A, no. 280, p. 184; J. Deshusses, "l.e benedictionnaire galli-can du VIII* siecle," Ephesneriites liturgum 77 (1963) 169-187.



There also exist some "enlarged benedictionals" into which prayers

and ordines wore in serle d w ithin the b ody o f b le ssin gs without

ch an gin g the structure of the book in the least. IJeirtg insep arab le

from the history o f the pontifical and to a lessor de gre e from that of Ihc sacramentary, the benedictional gained its autonomy because of

the dev elopm ent o f the episcopal liturg y and becau se it is in some

w ay the second textual instrum ent after the pontifical, needed by the

bishop in h is cathcdral. Since the greatest nu m ber o f them w ere in

tended for bishops, the independent forms of this book are fre

qu en tly referred to «is ep isco pa l ben edictionals.94

3. T H E R O M A N O - G K R M A N IC P O V M F I C A L

Vogel con siders the Rom ano-Cerm anic Pontifical "o n e o f the tw o

m ain cultic m onum ents o f the Ottoman renaissance in the second

half of the tenth cen tu ry" (the othe r being the Fulda Sacramentary);^5

indeed, with it, the history o f the liturgical b ooks of the H igh M iddle

A ges takes a new turn. In the first pla ce, it consecrates the episcopal

liturgy, wh ich no w has an official book w ith w hich ob viou sly all the

other books used in worship must be in accord. In the second place,

the R G P thrusts us into another period o f the history of the liturgy

and its books, for it is the point of de partu re, if not the pro gen itor of

the books called the "seco nd gen eration." Together w ith the missal

and the breviary, it puts an end to the "first generation," bom of the

Carolingian liturgical reform (notably with the sacramentary andordim's).

H avin g been the object of m any stu dies and o f a "d efin itive " edition

by Vogel and Rh.e,90 the RGP and its history are well known today.

i\iatun' and Content of the R C I >

A lthough they are an extensiv e com pilatio n o f liturgical texts1—

som etim es called disparate— the contents of the R G P neverthelesspresent an org an ised structure so that they form a true book free

from the rando m ness and g rop ings that characterised the gatherings

94. For studies on other benedictionals of the 1Ugh Middle Ages, see in particular the works of Dc’il'Oro, among w h ic h it will be helpful to consult "II Dentxlt-



K o i r f f s

o f t h c R o m a n f l ' G c r m a n i c P o

n t i f i c a l ( a f l e r C

V o g e i ,

J n t r o d u c t i o n

a u x

S o u r c o s , p . 2 3 5 )

0 0 S 1

o n f r i

O o í i

o

o

t i

o o i t

i x k h

i * V >



groups: (1) Germanic (26 mss.); (2) Italian, whose.1 manuscripts were

copicd from Germanic models (7 mss.); (3) French (3 mss.); (4) Eng

lish (2 mss.). The olde st source d ates from the secon d half of the tenth

century (Lucca, Bibl. capit., cod. 607);500 in all likelihood copied inl.ucca itself from a m odel prod uced in M ain/, the ve ry p lace wh ere

the RGP originated, it is considered the manuscript most faithful to

the original state of the book.101 All the copies that have been pre

served derive from one comm on archetype wh ich an examination of

the manuscript tradition authorizes us to place in Ihe Romano-Ger-

m anic Empire, more precisely in M ainz. The v ariants prop er to the

different regional gro up s can be explained in two w ay s: several re

censions m ay h ave been p roduce d in the scriptoria of M ainz, o r these

regional variants attest that the hypothetical archetype rapidly un

derwent adaptations when it was diffused throughout a large part of

the West (see pp . 207-209).

O rigin , Date, and Historical Circumstances o f the Creation o f the R G P The RG P is a book that w as brou ght to com pletion through the em

pe ror 's w ill; it w as for the Ottonian sovereigns w ha t the Greg orian

Sacramentarv of the Hailrianum type had been for the Carolingian

rulers.102 On the political plane, this carefully planned and organized

compilation seems to have been undertaken to support the Ottomans'

attempt at a liturgical reunification of the Empire in imitation of

100. The date assigned to the Lucca manuscript is not unanimously accepted by the specialists. Some think it goes back to the verv first years of the eleventh cen

tury; see recently R. E. Renolds, "The Ritual of Clerical Ordination of the Sacra-mentarium Gelasianum Saec. Vlll: Early Evidence from Southern Italy," Ritueh, 437-445, especially 439. The analysis tips the scale in favor of the tenth century.

10 1. The wording o f the question in the ceremonial of bishops, Vis ¡nmctac Mogo-

hensi Ecdesiae, mihiet successoribus weis fuient tt subicctiowm exhitviv? ("Do you resolve to show fidelity and submission to the Church of Mainz, to me, and to my sucatsAors?"}, which the metropolitan addressed to the bishop to be ordained (hissuffragan), as well as the insertion of the names of the saints proper to l.ucca in thelitany favor the hypothesis that this is an Italian copy of a manuscript from Mainz;see Vogel, /ufnirftfc//i»>), 234 and 244. However, the morphology of the calligraphy dot's not seem to me to exclude a scribe of German origin. Could this be pertiaps a



Cha rlem agn e a century earlier. This undertaking coincided w ith the es

tablishment of the RrichskircUetisystem ("imperial ecclesiastical system"]

by Otto I. This system linked the bishops directly to his person while

granting them the means of exercising their power in their territories.Tine rapid diffusion of the RG P w as d ue less to its intrinsic valu e than

to the renow n o f the place w here it w as co m posed , the see o f the

archbishopric of Mainz, whose eighteen suffragan dioceses made up

the m iddle part o f the em pire. At that time, the archbishop of M ainz

often combined with his charge the function of archchancellor of the

empire, which contributed to enhance the importance of the city of

M ainz , then re ga rded as the true religious cap ital. From 954 to 968,

the archbishop-archchancellor was William, son of Otto I and brother

of Otto fl. The spe cialists o f the RG P see in him the princ ipal protec

tor (perha ps even the artisan) o f the u nd ertaking, if not its inspiier.

Ordo L, which covers the entire liturgical year (Vogel-Elze, PRC,

section XCIX), does not seem to depend on an independent tradition

antedating the RGP. tn this ordo, a SangaJlian hymn (Hutnilf pn ve et sinccra dcvotiotic ("W ith hum ble p ray er and sincere de votion "] from

abou t 925) sung on Rogation D ays giv es variants characteristic of

Main/.: Ottmarus pater ["o u r father O ttmar"], fou nd er and protector

of the Abb ey of St. G all, is replaced b y Albanus pater ("ou r father

A lb an "]; m entions o f Sts . Boniface and D is ib od, the patrons respec

tively o f the city of M ainz and the A bb ey o f D isibodenberg near

Mainz. It is not plausible that these additions and substitutions weredo ne eisew he re than in the scriptorium o f St. A lban in M ain z.,,)J

The w ork of Vogel and Elze allow s us to assign a date between 950

and 962 to this compilation. The principal sources of Ordo L (practi

cally all the texts arc from the first half of the tenth century) furnish

the terminus ante quern mm. A thorough exam ination o f the oldest

manuscript witnesses (in particular ms. 607 of I.ucca) furnish the ter

m inus ad quem . These argumen ts arc confirm ed by the an alysis of the

for the royal coronation (Vogel-Elze, section LXXIl, ordo ad rcgem

benedkendum ["ordo for the blessing of a king "]) wh ich ap pea rs in this

exact form for the first time in the R G P ."HTh e contents of this ordo do

103. For a more developed treatment of the asgumcnts in favor of the Mainz ori



not correspond to the description of the royal coronation of Otto I in

Aachen on A u gust 7, 936, which is known to us through a chronicler's

account.105 On the contrary, they are in perfect agreement with the

description of the royal coronation o f Otto il on M ay 26, 96 1, also in A achen .106 Presidin g over th is cerem ony w as the archchancellor o f

the em pire and p rima te of Germ any, W illiam o f M ainz; it is plausible

that he m ight have com posed an ortlo esp ecially for this occasion.

Its pow erful influence an d its prestige designated M ainz as the

natural place of origin for a ne w liturgical book intended to serv e the

religious politics o f the Ottoman dyn asty. The success o f tine boo k

w as im m edia te as show n by its w id espread diffusion th roughout a

large pari o f Ihe Em pire. H ow ever, because it ha d been conceived for

a lim ited use, exc lusiv ely episcopal, the book did not succecd in su p

planting in the hierarchy o f liturgical books the sacram enlary, the

symbol of the Carolingian liturgical reform. Upon William's death in

968, the abbey o f Fulda , the great rival o f the see of M ainz , recovered

its political and religious supremacy in the empire. The scriptoriumof Fulda then began to produce a series of sacramentaries; the most

important w as conceived as a sort o f "l iturgical mon um ent," a com

pilation of the types of sacramen taries from the Carolingian period,

as if to obstruct the othe r com pilation of the Ottonian period , em a

nating from the rival city of Mainz, the RGP,107 or to complete it. Fa

vorab le political circum stances because o f the renomtio imperii

["restoration o f the Em pire" ] prom oted b y the O ttonians, secured agoo d m easure o f success— albeit temp orary— for the RGP. It also

benefited from a certain liturgical decline in R om e, when* it received

a warm welcome. Otto 1, accompanied by m any d ignitaries of his

church, m ade several sojourns in Italy with the intent o f rem edying

the liturgical vo id w hich at that time afflicted Rom e along w ith a

large part of Italy. Under these conditions, the RGP appeared as the

ideal instrum ent for revitalizing the Roman liturgy. This w as theprincipal reason for its rapid implantation in Rome, where even

Piipsfe, 4 vols. (Stuttgart, 1968-1971); see also the up-to-date report by J. Mori,L'idéologie du glaive: Préhistoire de la chevalerie (Gent’va. 19R3) 84-102.



und er G regory VII (10 73 -108 5), so reticent toward anything com ing

from the em pire, it beca m e author itative a s one of the tools for the re

newal of liturgical books.

Therefore, the RGP serves as a hinge in the typology of liturgicalbooks and o ccupies a prim ordial place in the developm ent of C hris

tian w orship d urin g the second ha lf of the M iddle Ag es. It w as both

a com pilation o f usag es and texts old er than itself and a po int of de

parture for the ma king o f ne w books. It can be said that ow ing to the

RGP's implantation in Rome, the orditu's rontnni, organized at last into

one hom oge neo us book and no long er assem bled into collections,

came back to their original homeland after a long peregrination be

yond the A lp s, w hich started at the begin nin g o f the eighth century .

4. T H E R O M A N A N D N ' O N - R O M A N P O N T I F I C A L S 108

The posterity of the RGP, espe cially in Italy, w as con siderable as

early as the eleventh century. By the twelfth, the Mainz compilation

ha d been so intim ately melded w ith the Ro m an usag es that liturgists

and canonists had even forgotten its origin. About 1150, when quot

ing (he RGP, Prior Bernard109 in his ordo officiortun Ecclcsiae Lnteranoi-

sis ["ordv for the offices o f the Church o f the L ateran "| sim ply c alls il

ordo romamts.1™ In fact, the RG P q uic kly becam e the essential source

for the composition of Roman pontificals in the twelfth century. The

process consisted in substantially pruning the Mainz book in order to

ad ap t it to the conditions o f the Ro m an liturgy. The liturgists o f thedifferent churches of Rome acted as their Frankish confreres had

don e a few centuries earlier w hen they had had to ad ap t the Roman

sources (sacramentarv, antipho nal, onlines roimni) to the ne eds o f the

Galilean church. The reworking of the RGP in Rome resulted espe

cially in the deletion of the coronation ordiues, purely monastic pieces

and rituals, strictly Galilean usages, and didactic compositions. Thus,

108. A good survey o f the history of the pontifical after the RGP has recently bm:npublished by M. Klockener, Die Liturgie dcr Ditizesamynode: Siudtett zur CtKchichie and Jlteohgie dcs ''Qrdond synndum’' dr* "Poti(ifictih‘ Rommum.“ LQF 68 (1986) es

pecially 25-^8.109. As Gv tas shown, the historical importance of this ordo is considerable since



as modifications proceeded, the RGP itself progressively receded into

the back groun d, yieldin g to more "pra ctica l" books directly intended

for the l iturg y." ’

A n d rieu 's w ork on the Rom an pontificals o f the tw elfth century“ 2led to the conclusion that the RG P is their com m on source. The nine

m anu scripts used by A n drieu for h is edition of the pontifical o f the

twelfth century present a structure very close to that of the RGP and

are tine exp ression of the liturgy o f sev eral churches in R om e.“ 3 A fter

the First l.ateran Council, ] j 23, the pa pa cy recovered its sovereign ty

in the gove rnm ent o f the Church and in pa rticular in its liturgical ex

pression. It was decided to send throughout Europe papal legates with the missio n o f reorientin g lo cal liturgical usages and aligning

them according to Roman practices. In this operation, the new pontif

icals, born from the revision of the RGP, playe d a prom inent role.

Under the pontificate of Innocent III (1198-1216), a new impulse

w a s g iven to the Rom an pontifical w ithin a thoroughgoing refo rm of

the Latin Church initiated by the pope. The liturgists at the pontifical

court comp osed book s reflecting the official liturgy of the C ur ia and

destined to be imposed on the whole West.11,1 Among these new

books, the ordinary,115 the missal, and the pontifical occupied the

foremost positions within a system aiming at the ecclesiological iden

tification of the cccleski rotnnua and the curia romatia. Tine po ntifica l,

which the term inolo gy o f the tim e often confu sed w ith the ordinary,

resulted from the recasting of the different versio ns of the Rom anpontifical o f the twelfth century. There also, the ver y root o f the book

is the RGP. The edition o f the archetype, w hich w e also o w e to A n

drieu, has m ade it possible to distinguish se veral recensions through

out the thirteenth century.110 Already widely circulated in Italy, this

official p ontifical o f the Rom an C hurch w as, in its third recension,

m ade the norm in France at the time the pap acy m oved to Av ignon

in the fourteenth century. At that point, it competed with the pontifi-

m . On alt those questions, see ibid., PRC 5:51-55.H2. Andrieu, Pontifical, vol. 1113. On those manuscripts, sec ibid., and Vogel, tiitwfactioii, 250-251.114. See P.-M. Gy, "L‘unification liturgkjne de ('Occident el la liturgie de la curie



cal w ritten aroun d 12 9 3 -1 2 9 5 '17 by the em inent liturgist of the thir

teenth century, William Durandus (3230 -1296), bishop of Monde.11*

A fter "stru gg les" fo r influence and recip rocal contam in ations, the

Pontifical of William Durandus—itself partially inspired by theRom an pontificals of the twelfth century since the auth or had so

jo urned in Italy— finally trium phed, thank-s to a h ig h ly unstable situ

ation in Rome al the lime of the Great Schism in the West. Partially

descended from the RGP, the wo rk o f Durand us served as a basis for

the first printed edition of the Pontificate ronumum in 1485110 (see

stenima, p. 202). The threefold division’20 adopted by Durandus for

his pontifical becam e the norm ative structure for all future printed

editions. The different sources used by D urandu s, pon tifical from the

twelfth century, pontifical of the Curia from the thirteenth century,

and e ven a few pieces from the R GP that ha d not been retained in the

Roman books, mak e this pontifical a true sum m a of the episcopal

liturgy, attesting to the abundan t po sterity o f the RGP, the progenitor

of w ork s that w ere the sym bo ls of a specific period in the history of the Church du ring the Middle Ages.

5 . I I . L U S T R A T I O N O F T H E P O N T I F I C A L " 1

"It would seem that for four centuries (down to the thirteenth cen

tury), the miniaturists did not dare to directly approach the decora

tion of the pon tifical."1“ Th is statement from the great French liturgist

l.eroqu ais is still valid for m od em research even though it deserv es

117. Andrieu, Pontifical, vol. 3. Andneu, Pontifical, vol. 4, offers tables and a general index of the three volumes of edited texts.

11 $ . On the work <ind influence of William Durandus, see Guillaume Durand: Evêque de Mende (vers 1230-1296). canoniate, liturgiateet homme politique, ed. P.-M.Gy, Actes de la table rondo du CN RS, Mende, 2-1-27 mi1' '990 (Paris, 1992).

119 . On the different versions of the printed pontificals down to Vatican II, see Vogel, Introduction, 255-256.

j 20. In prima ¡xirte de persvnartwi bcnciUctionibus, ordbuMiontbtis el consccrationis l* k .l a%ilur. . . . In fecunda parte tie consecratbnibua el Ivnnlictioinbu* aliaruw tarn sacrarum if turn pmpkanarum rerunt a$ilur. . . . hi tcrtia parte 1le quibufidum eccle$iasti- ci? officii* agitur. . . | "The first part treats of the blessings, ordinations, and consecrations of persons. . The second part treats of the consecrations and blessings



satisfactorily dem onstrated that this cyc le reflected the ordination

liturgy o f southern Italy (ind epe nd ent from I he RG P, circulated in (he

region at that time) and that the images closely followed the rubrics

o f the ordo. T his cyc le is thus situated outside the Caro lingia n icono*graphic tradition of these rites as found in other books than the pon

ti f ic a l .C o n c e rn in g this Italian one already notices that one

o f the m ost striking characteristics o f the illustration, first o f the or-

dines, then o f the pon tifical, is as faithful a representation as p ossible

of the descrip tive part o f the rites and in pa rticular o f the rubrics.

The R G P w as never endow ed w ith an iconographie cycle on a par

with the officia l ro le which Ottoman politics assig ned to it in liturg ical

matters. The re ason s are p erh ap s to be sou gh t, in the first place, in the

absence o f an y icono grap hie tradition for the sort of p ieces contained

in this book and, in the second, in the will of the Main/ compilers to

avo id an y reference, even through im ages, to the sacram entary— the

sym bol o f the C arolingian liturgical un ity— in wh ich illustration tra

ditionally h eld an im portant place. O nly a limited n um ber o f pontifi

cals from the end of the tenth and beginning of the eleventh centuries

w ere decorated w ith cycle s borrow ed from th e sacram enta ry. A s ex

amples, let us cite the luxurious Pontifical of Archbishop Robert

(Rouen, B. M., ms. Y. 7 I369]), made in Winchester about 980,127 and

the Pontifical of St. Dunstan {Paris, B. N., lat. 943), perhaps written in

Canterbury, with four full-page drawings whose Trinitarian iconogra

p h y is exceptional an d rem ained w ithou t po sterity.128 Pontificals of Germanic origin from the same period and from circles where RGI>

and Ottonian art were dom inant contain im ages h av in g an official

character: they sh ow the bishop in the exercise of his ecclesiastical

function o r in his position within Ottonian p olitics. Th ese ima ges

sho w the bishop 's po w er through the liturgical bad ge of his charge,

the pontifical. Paris, 15. N., lat. 1231 (between 1060 and 1084), opens

w ith a fu ll-page pain tin g representing the bishop o f Regensburg, O ttoof R ieden burg, offering his book to St. Peter, patron o f his church, in

the iconographie tradition of the dedication scenes.129 This is the one

126. Reynolds, "Im age an d Texl: The Liturgy of Cleric.il Ordination in Harly

Medieval Art," &xUt 22 (»983) 27-^R.



IV. The Customaries

In the typo logy o f the liturgical boo ks of the M iddle A ge s, the cu s

tom aries occup y a place apart because of their mixed status as books

o f an d fo r the liturgy on the one han d an d a s collections of the usages

of d aily life on the other hand. Althou gh il w as not a liturgical boo k in

the strict sense, that is, it w as not use d d u ring the worsh ip services,

the custom ary neverthe less contained the rules go ve rn ing the liturgi

cal life of a m onastic comm unity. In this capacity, it d ese rve s the full

attention o f historians of Christian w orsh ip and logically takes its

place beside the oniines rottumi in the category o f documen ts prescrip

tive in character.

On account of the renewed interest the customaries have benefited

from in recent de cad es, in pa rticular on the part of spec ialists inm onasticism, w e can avail ourselves today of a twofold docum enta

tion (editions and studies) that lay the gro un d w ork for further re

search. German historians have distinguished themselves by their

w ork in this field . Their trail bla zer has been K. H allin ger, preceded

by B. Albers. The latter wrote a pioneering thesis on monastic life in

C lu n y an d Gor/.e in the tenth and eleventh ce nturies/34 before

launching the collection Corpus Consuetudinum Momsticarum, whichhas com pletely renew ed the stud y o f customaries, as w ell as that of

other related d ocum ents, such as the statutes.1*5

i v*. K. Hallinger, Corzc-Kluntf. Siudieit ztt den momistischen Isbensfonncti and Gcftenstitzeit ini Hochnittchller, z vols. (Rome, 1950, reed. 197*); today, this book



t . H IS T O R Y O F T H E M K D J E V A L C U S T O M A R I E S

In the ba ckg rou nd o f the custo m aries, w e find the notions of rule

an d custom . From its origins, m onast icism has been based on a series

of rules, legislated b y the fou nd ers, wh ich define the reg ular l i fe o f them onastics . Th ese rules— som e thirty of them b etwe en the f if th and the

eighth centuries— organ ize the m on ast ics ' d ai ly l i fe w ith its manual/

intellectual, and liturgical activities.**6 Being locally adapted, the rule

becam e custom w hich , not w ritten at f irst, w a s transmitted prin cipa lly

b y the usages o f com m una l l ife . 1*7 D uring the C arol ingian period, one

sees som e indiv idual m onastery or re lig ious ord er g ive a def ini t ive

form to m any custom s based on ancient rules ( for instance those of

St . Benedict an d St. Au gu stine). M odifications to the Ben edictine Ru le,

then dom inant , and the subject o f a com m entary by Sm aragd us { first

h alf of ninth cen tury) w ere pro po sed at variou s councils , like that of

A ach en in 8 16 - 8 17 , d u rin g w h ich attem pts w e re m ad e to im p ose the

custom s of Benedict o f A nian e. ’ 5* But the local usa ges held their

gro un d , and thus a m onast ic ge og rap h y is discernible in the ninthcentury determ ined b y the kinds o f custom s observed in m ona ster

ies . 159 A t that t im e, there w ere no custom aries pro pe rly so cal led, but

rather texts describing the usag es o f som e m onasteries ( like A nian e

an d F ulda) in ord er to allow other m onasteries to ado pt them. On ce

the d ai ly routine o f m onast ic l ife an d l iturgical u sag es w ere written

do w n, custom started to be codified. H ow ever, i t w as on ly in the tenth

century that cu stom aries pro perly so called cam e into existence. They w e re w ell-org an ized collections o f a ll th e aspects, w h eth er m aterial o r

136. Sec A. l>o Vogue, tes règles monastique* anciennes (400-700), Typologie des

sources du Moyen A ge occidental, fasc. 46 (Turnhout, 19&5).137. On the notion of custom, see the fundamental article of K. Hallinger, "Con-

suetudo: Begritf, Formen, Forschimgsgeschiehte, tnhalt," Untersuchuugen ztt Klofler und Siifi, Verôffentlichungen dos Max-Planck-lnstituts fur <ji?schichte68 (Gottin

gen, 1980) 140-166; see also J. F. Anjjerer, " ? . w Problematik der Dégriffé Reguki-

Consuetudo-Observanz und Orden," Stuiiien und Milleilungen zur Cescluchte des

Benediktimnvrdens ¡oui seiner 7 .xwige 88 (1977) 312-323.138. J. Sommier, "D ie Beschlüssedcs Aachener Konztls im Jah r 8 16 ," Zetlsd iriff

fi ir kirehen%e$chichtc 74 (1963) 15-82 . In the field o f monastic architecture, Benedict



liturgical, of the life of a monastery.140 YVhat happened then was that

the tradition p rop er to one m onastery sprea d to a m ore or less exten

sive region, thus creating zone« of influen ce for im portant m onasteries

such a s Fleury (Sainl-Benoit-sur-Loire) , Fu lda, C luny, St . Em m eram

of R egen sburg, S t. Ga l l, M onte Ca ss ino, Canterbury . Al though sha r

ing a com m on backgro und , tradit ions ne vertheless de velop ed in a

re lative ly indepe nde nt m anner so that d i fferences app eared, n otably

in the internal organization of a monastery and l iturgical practices.

F inal ly , w he re and w he n var ious t radit ions recorded in the custom

aries ca m e into contact, different p olit ical , social , econ om ic, and reli

g io us ideas confronted on e another, as w e are g oing to sec.

2 . N A T U R E A N D C O N T E N T O F T H E C U S T O M A R I E S

By stu dy ing the C luniac custom s and statutes between the tenth

and twelfth centuries, D. logn a-Prat has p icked o ut three essential

characterist ics of this sort of docum ent, ap p lyin g to all the custom-

aries o f the High M idd le A ges.*1*1 Before goin g into m ore detai l concern ing ea ch o f these cha racteristics, let us recall that m ed ieval

term inology does not really d ist ingu ish between custom aries and

statutes ; the bo un da ry betw een cottsuetmiines, statutn, inslituln is

som et im es b lurred . H ow ever , the custom s recorded in custom aries

described all the practices in the l ife of a monastery, whereas the

statutes, decreed by the abbot or abbess, concerned o n ly part icular

points. Som e authors, l ike G. Co n stab le, '42 regard the preem inence of s tatutes ov er custom s as the express ion o f increas ing abbat ia l p ow er

in the twelfth c en tury; others, w ithou t reject ing this hyp oth esis , grant

a lesse r im portan ce to tine statutes, pointing ou t that they w ere before

ai l e lse correct ions— on specif ic po ints o f the custom s in force— of al

read y existent custom aries.

140. See the historical report of I- Donnat, "L c s coutumes monastiquejs auteu rde I'an mil," Religion et culture autourde ¡'tin mil, 17-24; and "Les coutumiers

ntunastKfucs: une novel?« e»un?prise et ferritoire nou veau ," Revue Mtibillon 64,

n.s. 3 (1992) 5-21.14 1. D. logna-Prat, "Coutum es et statute dum sien s comm e sources historiques

(ca 990- ca 1200)," Mabillon 64, n.s. 3 (1992) 23-48.

142. C». Constable, "Clu niac A dm inistration and Adm inistrators in ihe twelfth



censed abbots; the second deals w ith the m eals acco m pan ying the

celebra tion of certain fea sts of the San ctoral an d Tem poral.146 H ere,

the d ai ly l i fe of the com m un ity in the cou rse of the ye ar accords with

its pa rali lurgica l a ctivit ies an d is regu lated in one o f its asp ects (diet)acco rding to the l iturgical ca len d ar. '47

Customs and statutes wen? also regulatory texts , for they could im

p os e on all the establ ishm ents of the sam e rel igious ord er a new rule

o f l ife . Th eir norm at ive character in th is case depe nd ed upon the ju

r idical va lue o f the com pilat ion s. For the au thority o f the custom aries

and the statutes to assert i tsel f w ithin a rel igious orde r or gro up of

m onaster ies , they had to em anate f rom an important abbev w hich ex

ercised its inf luence ov er a goo d n um ber of prior ies . A s ear ly as the

end o f the tenth century , the sove reignty o f C lun y w as m easured es

pe cia l ly by the m any "han dw ritten w o rk s/ ' 14*5am on g w hich custom -

aries occup ied a large place.

Last ly , these do cum en ts are, on o ccasion, also reform texts concern

ing both internal usag es and their dif fusion outside the m otherhousc.The exam ple o f the Ab bey o f C lun y is aga in v ery revea l ing s ince

m ost o f the C luniac custom s in ou r possess ion are cop ies m ade in

other m onasteries. Th e Liber w hich is such an important

source o f inform ation on m onast ic an d l iturgical l ife in the tenth and

eleventh centur ies , has come d ow n to us thanks to the reform un der

taken by A bbot H ugh o f Far fa (998-1039) in h is I ta lian m onastery, ap

paren t ly insp ired by the exam ple o f C lun y a lthough he preserved theus ag es o f Farfa. I .et us also observ e that from one abb ey to another,

the adoption of a part icular custom coming from a monastery 0/

prest igious au thority could concern ev er y facet o f li fe in the place

w h ich ad o p ted the cu sto m or e lse co u ld be on ly a p artia l b o rro w in g

that left intact the preem inence o f local traditions. Th e en d resu lt w as

that the custom s w ere m ore or less com posite de pe nd ing up on

w h eth er th e ad o p tion o f im p orted u sag es w a s total o r partial.

1 46. !.. Morclle, " \ l i s l e des repas commém oratifs offerts aux moines de l 'ab

bay e de Corb ie (vers 986-989), une nouvelle pièce au dossier du 'Patrimoine de

saint A da lhard '?" Revue M $t ' de Philologie e! d ’Hfctoire 69 {19 91 ) 279-399.

147. Other asperts o f the dailv life of monastics have been studied on the basis



3. H I S T O R I C A L A N D L I T U R G I C A L I N T E R E S T

O F T H E C U S T O M A R I E S

The custom aries are a source of inexh austible richness for all me

dievalists, be they arch aeolog ists or historians of religious life, socialand econ om ic practices, political ideology, or art. A com pa rative stud y

of the different liturgical traditions pro per to different m onasteries

can be achieved in large part on ly on the basis of the clues sup plied

by m onastic customaries. Th e greater or sm aller degree o f codifica

tion of liturgical usa ges from p lace to place en ab les researchers to

distingu ish steps in the establishm ent of a specific liturgy and d eter

m ine w h al are its links w ith the diocesan liturgy. T his codification

should be studied m onastery by m onastery and often w ould reveal

its roots in the u sages of the Caroling ian tradition, stron gly influenced

by the reform movement of Benedictine monasticism promoted by

Benedict of An ian e.‘ 5° The m edieval custom aries are especially im

portant witnesses to the persistence, or lack of it, of the liturgical

m odes established du ring the C arolingian period. We know, for instance, thanks to the work of L. Donnat,151 that the Carolingian foun

dations w ere particularly w ell de velop ed in the Cluniac zone of

influence, w he reas to the con trary— to spe ak o n ly of the territory of

ea rly Trance— F leu ry 's (Saint-Benoit-sur-Loire) /.one of influence

maintained liturgical usages more definitely rooted in the Frankish

tradition— imbued w ith ancient practices and l<x:al custom s— ante

dating the m onastic reform of Benedict of An iane.Th e liturgical cha racteristics, am on g others, o f each tradition, tend

ing either to conservatism o r innovation, allow us to discern m ore pre

cisely the different roles played b y specific m onasteries (or grou ps o f

monasteries) in po litical an d so cial life betwe en the tenth and twelfth

centuries.15* For instance, the traces observed in C lun y o f usages com

ing from the Germanic world highlight the central position of that

Burgu ndian m ona stery situated on the border between French terri

tory and that of the emp ire. This corroborates w ha t is k no w n o f the

150. See J. Sommier, "Benedictus II: L'na régula, una consuehido," (isnciiictmc

Culture (750-1050) ( L o u v Ain 1983) «4/#



actions by some C htniac abbots, in p articular O dilo and H ugh , in

favo r of a rapprochem ent with the em pire,’53

Th e particulars o f the da ily life and ad m inistrative system proper

to each com m un ity or group o f m onasteries ap pe ar clearly throughan attentive exam ination o f the custom aries, Questions such as the

conditions of admission to the monastery, with their implications for

social h isto ry ;'54 the ev olu tion o f the ecclesiastical hierarchy, notab ly

with the in sistence on the abbot's power, are elucid ated by several

cha pters in the custom aries. Econom ic w ealth can also be evaluated

by com paring account bo oks and charts w ith the pa ssag es in the cu s

tomaries that deal with the possessions of the monastery and the dis

tribution o f its goo ds , espec ially un de r the form o f food for the poor.

Finally, the customaries have enabled us to reconstitute through the

com parative study o f textual sources and archeological sources the

architectural and artistic history of many monasteries and churches

of the M iddle Ages, som e of which h ave entirely d isappeared. The

monastery of Cluny and its church (Cluny 11), key edifices of Burgu n dy about the ye ar 1000 and built unde r the abbacies o f M aiolus

and Odilo,*55 or the abbatial church of Fruttuaria in Lombardy, estab

lished in the eleventh ce ntu ry b y W illiam of V olp ian o/56 can be re

constructed than ks to such investigations. For the h istory o f liturgical

objects, vestments, and altars, the custom aries su pp ly a docu m enta

tion of exceptional interest, still under-exploited.

To sum up, three main steps marked the history of the customaries: ( i) the setting do w n of custom s and usages derive d from m onas

tic rules in the C arolingian pe riod; (2) the codification of usa ge s in

1 53. Among thi* many studies oi J. Wollasch on the relationship* between Cluny and the empire, se?, for example, "Kaiser Heinrich 1 J. in Cluny," Fnihmittehilterliche

Siudtcn 3 (1969) 327-342.

154. Constable, "Entrance to Cluny in the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuriesaccording to the Cluniac Customaries." A iedianwlia Christiana, XF-XIIF siècle: Hommage à Raymond Foranlle (Paris, 1989) 334-354.

155. See K. J. Conant, Cluny, k f église* et la maison tin chcf d'ordre, Mediaeval Academy of America 77 (Macon, 1968); C. Sapin, "C lu ny II et l'interprétationarchéologique de son plan,” Religion et culture autour de l'an mil, 85 -% ; N. Stratford, "L es bâtiments de l'abbaye de Cluny à l'époque médiévale: Etat des ques



V. The O rd in aries*57

O rdinaries belong ed to the sam e category o f books concerned withthe liturgy a s I he cu stomaries, the collections o f rules, an d even the

reading gu ide s (for the refectory, for exam ple) of wh ich w e spo ke

above. T he ord inaries answ ered the need for codification of the litur

gical u sages o f the clergy, w hethe r religious or diocesan, and therefore

w ere, even m ore than th e custom arie s, in dis pensable com plem ents o f

the Jitiirgical boo ks prop erly so ca lled .158

In a recent sum m ation of the subject, A .-G. M artim ort establishesa clear distinction between customary and ordinary: "Practically

what diffe rentia tes the one type from the other is that the ordin ary

desc ribes the course o f the liturgical y ea r w ith its celebrations: Office,

Mass, processions, whereas the customary enumerates (1 w ould add

'also') the usages and rites of the life of the community, thus particu

larizing and com plem enting in the case of m onastics and canon s the

prescription s o f the Ru le. . . . " ‘w None theless, there ex ists a real, al

most genetic, link betw een these tw o typ es of docum ents. One could

sa y that in som e w ay, the ord inary w as alrea d y contained in the cus

tomary. C om pared w ith the latter, it d id not include w h at concerned

the da ily life o f the m onasteries. Because o f its strictly liturgical cha r

acter, the ordinary devoted a much larger place to the description of

rites. Although it was not a liturgical book in the strict sense, it mustbe reg arde d as a boo k pe rtaining to the liturgy, since it cod ified, regu

lated the usage s of a m onastic comm unity, a cathedral, a diocese. Som e

authors even call it, and rightly, a book used in the preparation of

157. This section is inspired in large part by m y attempt to bring all results together; “ Les ordinaire* liturgiques comme sources pour 1'historien du Moycn



w orship serv ice s/6* for from the tw elfth century on, it w as th is hook

that outlined the way in which each celebration ought to be conducted

and established connections between ihc different actors and their re

spective books.Let u s exam ine the three m ain traits which characterized an o rdi

nary. First o f all, it ve ry exa ctly follow ed the un folding o f the liturgi

cal ye ar in w hich , dep end ing on the cases, the Iem poral an d the

Sanctoral w ere either com bined or separate, and it w as gen erally pre

ceded by a calend ar w ho se contents m ight agree or not w ith its ow n.

It w as within this time frame that all liturgical actions for each da y

w ere described, the M ass as w ell as the Office. Second, as a generalrule, the ord inary g ave «inly the incipits o f the liturgical pieces (chants,

prayers, readings, and so on) in the order in which they occurred in

the celebration; these incipits w ere interspersed w ith rubrics of va ri

able length wh ich described the ccremony. These description s we re

intended for the master o f ceremon ies w ho a lso had to use this book.

In the third place, it described the essentially local usage of a cathe

dral, a monastery, or a cano ns' church; o f a diocese, a m onastic fam

ily, an o rde r of canons, mo nastics, o r m endicants.

i . H I S T O R Y O F T H E O R D I N A R Y A M D

A T T E M P T A T T Y P O L O G Y

There h ave been general studies as w ell as m onographs written on

the history o f the ordinary. The recent writing s of M artimo rt and E.Foley 1*1 com plem ent older w ork s such as the introduction o f A.

Hanggi to the Ordinary of Rheinau from the twelfth century/62 the

stud y o f B. Schimm elpfennig on the books of ceremonies in the Roman

Chu rch in the M idd le A g e s /6̂ and esp ecially the un pub lished p ape r

of J. D ufrasne on the m anu script ordinaries o f diocesan churches

160. Soi* E. Foley, "The / ibri onlituirii: An Introduction," Ephcmeriitefi iitur^iaw 10a(329-137).

161. See Martimort, Qrditws; E. Foley is above all the author of a study accompanying the publication of the first ordinary o f the Abbey of St. Denis (Paris, BiW.Mazarine, 10s. 526), dating from the second quarter of the thirteenth centurv, which will be mentioned below: The Pinl Ortiimty of (he Rin/n! Abbey of Saint-Denis in



kept in the Bibliothèque nationale in Paris.’64 In addition, there exists

a vast number o f monographic s t u d ie s ,u s u a l ly preceded by a h i s

torical introduction on the place un der consideration a nd its liturgi

cal visages. W hile the onlines romatii were centered on actions, the ordinary fo

cused rather on the liturgical organiza tion o f a spe cific place throu gh

out the year. It w as an instrum ent of codification a nd se arch for unity

among the liturgical traditions proper to a religious family, monastery,

cathedral, diocese. In order to acquire this authority, it needed to be

separated from the custom ary in w hich it w ould ha ve been submerged

in the m ass of the usages of the m onastic or canonical life describedin the latter. The appearance of the independent ordinary in the twelfth

century can also b e exp lained by practical reasons, as is often the case

w ith liturgical books: it sorted out, reorgani2ed, cla ssif ie d the num er

ous p ieces (chants, prayers, readings) that w ere gra d ua lly add ed to

the C hu rch 's prayer.

The golde n ag e o f the ord inary w as the thirteenth century, in the

course o f which one observes a sort o f extrem e individualization of the local liturgies, w hethe r m onastic o r diocesan. T his phen om enon

became even more accentuated in the fourteenth and fifteenth cen

turies with the result that the ordinary gained a major importance for

liturgical and religiou s history in general. Often, the com position of

an ord ina ry w as not fortuitous: it accom pan ied a reform of the liturgy

or set dow n a Iradition in writing d urin g a period (essentially die

thirteenth century) in which many new offices—formerly added to

oustomaries and liturgical books on extra pages or in the margins—

had to be includ ed in a manu script. In this case, w he ther locally or

w ithin a w hole religious order, a revis io n w a s undertaken: liturgical

practices were updated in order to remedy uncertainties, facilitate the

perfo rm ance of the ceremon ies, an d pre ve nt errors. The ordinary

took its place am on g the "secon d g ene ration " o f books, along w iththe pontifical (the one de rivin g from the R G P of the tenth century),

breviary, and m issal. In this grou p, it ap pe ars as a central element

164. J. Dufrasne, /¿s imiuwm’s wmhmslwVs des égti&r.s séculières conservés à !a Biblio- thïqut' naifcttaie <k Paris fvpeivriHen momoiï institut supérieur de Liturgie {Paris



around which the other books organized themselves within a new ec-

clesiology of the liturgy, hencc its historical importance.166

If one w an ts to describe m ore accurately an d p recisely the typ ol

o gy of the ordina ries, one must of ne cessity take into account thecharacter of the community they pertained lo and therefore distin

gu ish the ordinaries of the cathedrals—a nd the churches depen ding

upon them— from those o f m onasteries an d also from those destined

for a w ho le congregation of m onastics or canons. W ithin these m ain

categories, on e mu st m eticulously exam ine the man uscripts them

selves in order to discern the types, a work to which Dufrasne ap

plied himself, and arrive at a characterization of each ordinary basedon the m anner o f celebration. Som e ordinaries furnish lengthy and

detailed rubrics en abling us to reconstruct the offices or the M ass as

they w ere celebrated in a give n place; others on the contrary are

short on rubrics (in this case the rubrics are o n ly the connecting link

between the different pieces) an d g ive scant information on celebra

tions and processions. The ordinaries with long rubrics and those

w ith short ones are not specific to one type o f ordinary: they can be

found in cath edrals or m onasteries alike. It m ust be ad de d that the

ordin aries o f the fourteenth, fifteenth, and eve n sixteenth centuries,

had a tendency to be overloaded with extraordina rily detailed

rubrics. The ea rlier ord inaries , that is, m ain ly those from tine thir

teenth century, g ive rather sparse information in the w a y o f rubrics

and a ver ag e on ly sixty to eighty sheets, w ha tever the liturgical context in wh ich they we re used.

The ca a'fu l exam ination o f the man uscripts makes it possible to re

fine the typ ology o f the ordinaries, which reflects the variety o f the

celebrations. O ne encoun ters cases o f textual juxtapo sition lending

them selves to historica l interpretation. I ,et tis cite that of a custo m ary

and an ordinary combined into one perfect paleographic and codico-

logical unity, like that in Paris, B. NL, lat. 13874 (Corbie, first half of twelfth century); in this docum ent the C ustom ary o f Clun v coexists

w ith the O rdinary o f C orbie . Another exam ple is fo und in Paris , B. N.,

lat. .1237 (Tours, fifteenth century); there also one ho m ogeneo us w ho le

results from the juxtaposition of a cathedral ord inary (fols. i- 5 ir ) and

the syn od al statutes of the dio cese (fols. 51V-83V). A third exam ple is



this case, w e note that it w as intended for use in the diocese, w ithout

mention of an y particular place, not even the cathedral— wh ich one

w ould have expected— and w as sim p ly meant to be used in a varie ty

of w ay s w ithin the diocese. Perhaps this w as a pocket cop y whichthe bish op w ou ld ha ve taken on his travels to the parishes; thanks to

Jiis ordinary, he could fo llow the usages o f his cathedral and adapt

them to the parish he w as visiting . The sm all si/.e o f the m anuscript

{19.5 by 15 centimeters), its lim ited nu m ber of folios (thirty-two),

and its casual app earance w ou ld sup po rt this hypothesis. O verall,

the ord inar y ap pe ars to h av e been an essen tially utilitarian book

w hic h w as regularly consulted (as proved by the p ages often wornout or dam aged) and w hose mo dest aspect contrasts with the m ag

nificence o f the calligrap hy and decoration o f the liturgical books

containing sacred texts. However, a few manuscripts are exceptions,

but in general these emanate from royal or pontifical circles. Thus

Paris, B. N ., lat. 14 3 5 (50.5 by 1 1. 5 centim eters, end of fourteenth or

beginn ing o f fifteenth century), the ord inary of the chapel o f the

king o f France {the Sainte-Chap elle), is w ritten in a clean hand with,at the beginning of each celebration, a handsome initial letter

adorned with fine filigree. There exists another one, Paris, B. N., lat.

416 2 A (central Italy, 1365 ), mad e for C ard inal Albo rno z; it is one of

the rare m ed ieval sam ples that has a richly d ecorated frontispiece

spe cifyin g that it contains the text o f the ordina ry of the Rom an

Cu ria at the time of Innocent III (12 13 -12 :16) . The han dw riting is

carefu lly executed, but in contrast to the kin g's copy, it w as o b vi

ou sly h eavi ly used as show n b y its w orn condition.

The m edieval d esignations o f the ordinaries arc often approxim ate

and lack ing in precision .167 The gen eric terms most frequen tly encoun

tered, with no distinction w ha teve r between types, are the following :

fiber ordiuarius (the most frequent in the titles of manuscripts), ordi-

Harium. onto, ordo ecclesianticus, ordo officiorum, qffïcium eccltmifàiïcum, breve, observtwtiae, consueludines, liber cerenioniarum, directorium chart.

Often, the mere title is insufficient to establish a distinction between

the types of ordinaries, hence the need to study the actual text of the

manuscripts in order to discover what contents a particular title cov

ers. Consequently, in the vast u nd ertaking of refining the typo logy of



the ord inaries, m an y specific kinds are still ov erloo ke d, such a s the

abstracts or condensations of ordinaries, w hich are sim ply m ade up

o f lists.

2 . H I S T O R I C A L A N D L I T U R G I C A L I N T E R E S T

OF THE OKLMNARM-IS

Like the custom aries, the ordin aries are indispe nsab le for histori

ans of Christian worship, in particular liturgists, hut also for theolo

gian s— notably in their study of the form s taken by the celebration of

the sacram ents in the course o f centuries. Indispen sable also for histo

rians of m usic, w ho , thanks to the ord inaries, are able to perfect theirkn ow ledge o f the evolution o f the repertory p roper to a g iven feast

an d also their kn ow ledge of the history of m usical notation. Indis

pensable, finally, fo r historians of architecture and a rcheology, w ho

can find in the ord inaries precio us inform ation on the history of a

bu ilding a nd its interior plan. The historical and archeo logical stu dy

of a church shou ld system atically include that of the ord inaries be

cau se it is high ly prob able tliat architectural rem ode lings an d interiorrearrangem ents, even new constructions ha ve entailed the com posi

tion of an ordinary. F or instance, the ord inary o f the Ab be y o f St.

Denis written about 1234/68 is the most important source not only for

ou r redisco very o f the m ann er o f w orship in the monaster)' and its

surroundings in the thirteenth century, but also for our evaluation of

the degree o f persistence, at a time wh en the royal influence regained

its strength, of the liturgical tradition inhe rited from S ug er (d. 1 15 1 ) ,

in spite of the architectural modifications worked on the Carolingian

and Romanesque parts of the edifice between 1231 and 1281.169 Lastly,

let u s add that for their part, expe rts in the top ograp hy of the towns

and villag es of the M iddle A ge s find in the ordinaries precious pieces

o f information, espe cially because of the m any d escriptions o f proces

sions through towns.For the fourteenth, fifteenth, and even sixteenth centuries, the ordi

naries shed light on certain aspe cts of p op ular religiosity and sacred

dram a, on occasion through the description o f superstitious practices.1̂

Som etimes, espe cially in the m anuscripts o f the fifteenth century

G8 S F l fi t O di



w hich feature more and more d evelop ed rubrics, one com es across

unexpected details, l ike the enum eration o f the beve rage s offered to

the clcrgy on the occasion of lengthy processions.

Th e stud y o f ord inaries also contributes to a better kn ow ledge o f certain m om ents in the history o f the Church and the liturgy. We give

on ly tw o exam ples. First, the new conception of the Chu rch elabo

rated by the Roman Curia at the beginning of the thirteenth century

in wh ich an official o rdinary pla ys an im portan t ro le.'71 In the first

ha lf of the thirteenth century, Innocent Ml and his succe ssors g av e a

fresh importance to tine liturgy of the papal chapel; the concrete ex

pression of this new em phasis w as the compo sition o f reshaped l iturgical books w ith, in the first place, the ord inary o f the Curia ( 12 13 -

1216), regulating both the Office and the Mass, and then the pontifi

cal and missal. In this new system, the ordinary, which in the con

temporary references is often confused with the pontifical, occupied

an im portant place because it w as the basic book according to which

all the other books pertaining to the liturgy were organized. At the

same time, the idea that the liturgy of the papal chapel was the most

authentic in the Ro m an Church gaine d w idesp read acceptance; as a

result, the way was open to the ccclesiological identification between

the ecclesia romatut and the curia romann. In this context, it is po ssible

that a standard ordina ry— w ho se oldest attestation is Paris, 13. N., lat.,

4162 /K i?2— w as com pose d in ord er to sprea d abroad the m odel of the

pa pa l chapel througho ut the West.

The second exam ple concerns the restoration o f the diocesan church

and the redefinition of the liturgy. The liturgical ren ew al at the dioce

san level was made possible only by the strengthening of the power

o f bish op s and that of the local churches. T he concrete expression s of

this increase of episcopal p ow er w ere the deve lopm ent of the cathe

dral chapters (which elected the bishops), the rise of real episcopal cu

rias in dioceses, the growth of economic power, and a more effectiveinfluence of bishops on the urban scene (especially in the construction

o f vast cathedrals).1” The diocesan syn ods, alread y reactivated at the

171. See Gy, "PapauUS el droit liturgique," 229-245.172. This manuscript no longer entirely reflects the original state of the papaldi b i 6 J P V Dijk T/



en d o f the twelfth century, w ere instrum ents o f reform and action in

the bisho ps' han ds. Thu s, there w as an unden iable relationship be

tween the synodal statutes of the thirteenth century and the redaction

of ord ina ries .'74 It w a s for this reason that both texts w ere often joinedin one manuscript.175 In Paris at the beginning of the thirteenth cen

tury, the statutes of E ud es de S u lly stipulated that the ordinary of

parish priests must be in conformity with 1hat of the cathedral, the

first church in the diocese. In 126 1 in A nge rs, the statutes of Nicolas

G ellent specify that "priests shou ld h ave the ord inary an d fo llow it.

We order that each church be in possessio n of the book called the or

dinary, w hich the priests w ill consult ev er yd ay before starting Vespersin order to perform these sam e Vespers, M atins, and the office o f the

following day according to the directions in the ordinary."176 As we

can see, the prescriptions o f syn od al statutes often enable us to deter

mine accurately the date o f com position for the ordinaries. It ha pp ens

that the ord inaries not on ly describe wh at w as u su ally don e, but also

rev eal that the selection o f pieces and rites w as d u e lo a decree com

ing from a higher authority.’ 77 B y regu lating the liturgy o f the dio

cese, the ord inary legislated in matters of w orsh ip in the sam e w a y as

the syno dal statutes d id for the overall diocesan adm inistration.

Therefore, the convening o f a syn od m ay w ell h ave been the occa

sion fo r the com position o f an o rdin ary o r even the revision o f an al

rea dy existing book, or indeed, its rew orking o f the latter with a vie w

to establishing liturgical legislation.

174. Contvnüng the synodal sUtutes, set» O. Postal, Les statuts synodaux. Typologie des .sources du Moyen Age occidental, fasc. 11 (Turnhout, 1975).

175. See p. 224, Paris, B. N., lat. 12}/ .176. 11*0 translation is thaï of J. Avril, Is s sta tu ts syo t la ux fra nça is du X II I' ' sièc le ,

vol. 3: sta tu ts syno d a ux an g ev ins de la seconde m o it iéd u X M r sih le (Paris, 19S8)



VI. The Processionals

Situated a t the bo un da ry between sev eral other books pertaining tothe liturgy, the processional has not yet ga ined the attention it dese rve s

on the part o f historians because it is com m only associated w ith other

bo oks.i7* How ever, the fact that it is frequen tly joined to an an tipho nal

or a collectar has resulted in its being stu died , albeit partially, b y those

spec ializing in these book s. G y d evo ted fundam ental pa ge s to the

pro cession al.179 M uglo po nd ered the role o f the processional in the

histo ry o f liturgical chan t.,8° What follow s is esse ntially b ased onthese works.

Content and History o f the Processional

A t its begin nin g, the processio nal w as exclusively a book o f chant

and contained the procession antiphons for the Office and , m ore rarely,

for the M ass. Its existence is attested at least as ea rly as the tenth or

eleventh ccntury in m anuscripts w e sh all come back to later, but be

fore this period, we have no reliable information. R.-J. Hesbert, op

posing the hypotheses of H. Leclercq,181 supposed that convenient

booklets containing procession chants already existed in the Carolin-

gian p eriod .’8* Un fortunately, no exa m ple sup por ts H esbert's idea, so

178. 'Ihis kind of book is completely absent from the work of Vogel, I n t r oduc t i on ; a brief and somewhat imprecise notice is devoted to this book in the nomenclature of Pinia and Irtenkauf, Liiu r g h t r fie N o n w n k k t i ir, 128; in Thiel's article, the notice is even shorter and. this time, downright erroneous, Biicher, 2389,Set* also Huglo, t.wres tte chattl, 1 to -1 1 1.

179. Cry, ''Collectaire"; this text was reprinted in I.iturgte dans t'lthtoire, 91-126.180. We eagerly await the publication of Huglo's catalogue of the manuscript



w e must be content with arguments drawn from the examination of Caroiingian chant books. In certain antiphonais of the ninth and

tenth centuries, one encounters gro ups o f procession antiphons form

ing a pari o f the books. C onversely, the absence o f these antiphonsfrom I w o o f the most important pre-Carolingian antiphonals (the

manuscripts of Monza and Rheinau)'8* suggests that these pieces

were incorporated into the antiphonal after having existed separately.In the medieval library catalogues, the term processionate (one also

finds protxssionarium, processionarius) does nol appear before the sec

ond half, and even the end, of the Middle Ages. Mentions of chant //-

belli perhaps refer in fact to processionals und er the form o f separatebooklets, but nothing allows us to affirm this: Item aiii libelli, quae [sic!

in choro habentur ["Similarly, other booklets which are kept in choir"]

(catalogue of the Abbey of Schaffhausen, about 10 8 3-j 096).184 On the

contrary, an entry in the library catalogue of the Priory o f St. Martin of

La Canourgu e en Gevau dan , dating from the twelfth century, attests

the existence o f processional booklets: Catmiiones Isici <le antiphams

processionals ["quires o f eight folios o f processional antiphons"].185

In the tenth and eleventh centuries, the processionals were fre

quently included in composite books which were perhaps the resultof a grouping of libelli; in these books, the processionals were gath

ered together with tropers and sequentiaries.'*6 Several of these

manuscripts have been described by Gy: Paris, N., lat. 1 1 2 1 (its

principal part dating between 994 and 1033 ), com prising troper, separate sequences, offertories, procession antiphons, gospel antiphons

for the time after Pentecost, sequentiary; Rome, Bibl. Casa., cod. 1741,

and Bibl. Na/.ionale, cod. 1343, two processional-tropers from the

eleventh century. In these manuscripts, the different parts are clearly

distinct from one another, without fusion of the pieces.

From the twelfth and especially thirteenth centuries on, the proces

sional acquired a place among the many liturgical books that achurch w as expected to possess. The processional appeared first

1 S3. Monza, Tesoro San Giovanni, cod. CIX (Monza, c.800); Zurich, Zentralbibl.,cod. Rh. 30 (Abbey of Nivelle* or Chur, eighth or ninth century); see Vogel, In t ro

duct ion , 359.



under the form o f bo ok lets/87 ¿is the reference in the catalogue o f St.Martin o f La Canourgue cited above attests, or perhaps it was already

made up into a m ow substantia] book. As time went on, the proces

sional increased in size and was 110 longer limited only to processionantiphons. Several churches in France have preserved num erous pro

cessionals from the period between the thirteenth and fifteenth cen

turies. Among the new religious orders, som e did not include

processionals in the official list o f liturgical boo ks which w as estab

lished rather early in their history. This w as the case o f Qteaux,

which, however, owned more than twenty processionals at the time

of the compilation o f the catalogue o f john o f Cirey in 1489.188In the thirteenth century, one observes two developments: on the

one hand, the processional was frequently included in official lists,

notably in the Dominicans' established by Humbert de Romans, mas

ter of the order between 1254 and 12 5 6 ;^ on the other hand, the pro

cessional gained a new configuration as a descriptive book since the

rubrics pertaining to the processions increasingly took precedenceover the antiphons. The combination of the ritual and processional

then appears as a logical step because the procession chants held an

important place in the enactment of rites, such as funerals. By the

end o f the Middle Ages, although still retaining its specific character,

the processional looked more like a ritual, more or less complete, de

pending o f the rites it contained. In the fifteenth and sixteenth cen

turies, the processional became a book of utmost necessity in thechurches, whether monastic or diocesan , to such a point that its con

tents were considerably augmented. Originally containing only procession chants with their rubrics, the processional now also included

other antiphons, versicles, responsories, and complete rituals (for fu

nerals, the wash ing o f feet on H oly Thursday, the Adoration of the

187. As Gy noted in "CoJlectaire," 468, the reference drawn from the list of bookscommissioned, according to Leo of Ostia, by Didier, abbot of Monte Cassino (1058-»085), does not allow us to decide with certainty whether we are dealing with aprocessional in the proper sense or with a collection containing the orations saidby the priest: M tpi-wn fecit, el de alio libello in <juo sumi orationts processiowiuv. . . ("He composed this, and from another Ubeltus containing the processional prayers



Cross on Good Friday, various rites o f ablution, and s o on); som e

times, the processional wa s even appended to a book o f the flo u rs .'^



VII. The Ceremonials^1

The ceremonials are in some w ays the end result of the typological

evolution o f the ordinaries at a time (mainly the fifteenth and sixteenth

centuries) the books used in worship had entered a further phase in

their history. Compared to the ordinary, the ccremonial was at once

more precise in its instructions concerning the performance of the

rites and devoid of any reference to liturgical texts (chants, prayers,

readings). To be helpfu l, it had to be used in conjunction with an ordinary, or even with the liturgical books properly so called. This ty

pological difference app ears clearly on ly from the fifteenth century

on, at the time the "true" ceremonials appeared. Before that time, the

books had features akin to the ordinary, the customary, even the pon

tifical and ceremonial. The lack of definite boundaries between these

different kinds w ere du e to the conditions which cau sed the emer

gence of a new book genuinely destined for the liturgy, the ceremonial. A s Martim ort has reminded his readers, "the need for a ceremonial

pro perly so called w ould be felt especially at the time o f the Triden

tine reform,"*92 particularly in the pontifical court and some episco

pal curias.

The strong reso lve to regulate as precisely as possible the liturgy o f

the Rom an C uria arose in the second half of the twelfth ccntury and

even more in the thirteenth. The liturgical usages of the Curia already

constituted the principal elements of the papal ceremonial. The main

purpo se of these texts w as to describe in detail the opulencc which

the rites demanded, from the material and human viewpoints, and to

give all necessary particulars concerning the roles of the officiants. For

hi h di d ifi l l d d f



com posed w hich relaie to particular rites; one of those w as com piled

for the papa cy d urin g its stay in Av igno n.193 In the fifteenth century,

the existence of the papal a nd episcop al cerem onials is confirmed

thanks to the elaborate wo rk o f pe rson s in high places at the pontificalcourt. At the request of Innocent VIII (1484-1492), Agostino Patrizi

Piccolomini and John Burckhard compiled a ceremonial presented to

the Pope in 1488, printed for the first time in 1516, and often reprinted

afte rw ard .,SM

A lon g the sam e lines as the cerem onia l, and a lso in the fifteenth

century, diaries for use by the pap al m asters of cerem onies appeared ;

in these are noted, d ay by day, the actual perform ance of the cerem o

nies, the receptions, the corteges, the journ eys, w ith a w ealth o f par

ticulars relating to protocol and accoun ts the incidents that might

h ave occurred.

The cerem onials for the episcop al M ass ap pea red in the second half

o f the fifteenth ccntury, in the w ak e o f those destined for the papal

court, and reached their full development in the sixteenth in works

com m ission ed b y c ard ina ls.195 Before they cam e into being, the cus

tom, as early as the thirteenth century, was to simply add particular

rites to p ontificals in the strict sense.

With the develo pm ent o f the cerem onia l, the end o f the M id dle

A ges and th e Renaissance w ere characteriz ed by an in creased spe

cialization o f the boo ks that desc ribe the liturgy ; the balance which

existed in the ordinary betw een d etailed rubrics and sacred texts w aslost. For historians o f the papa cy a s w ell as fo r spe cialists of rites at

the junction o f the M iddle A ge s and M odern Times, the ceremo nials

are an im portan t source for their research.196 For m ediev alists, th ey

193. S e e ibid., 96-104, and the study of Schimmelpfermig, Zeremonienb i icher .

194. See the important studies of M. Dykmans, Le cérémonial papa l de la f i n t in M o ye n Ag e à la Rena issa nc e , 4 vols.. Bibliothèque de l'Institut historique belge deRome 24-27 (Brussels, 1977-1985), and l .'o i 'u v rc de Pa t rizi Pic c o lom in i o u le cérémo

nial pap al l ie la p rem ière Rena issa nc e . 2 vols., Sttidi e Testi 293-294 {Vatican City,1980-1982).

195. See Marlimort, O rd ine s, 107-109.196. For the sixteenth century, the ceremonials can be the p r i n c i p a l source for

the interpretation of images representing papa! ceremonies; see for example, N. K.



arc a far cry from their ancestors o f the M iddle A ge s (ordinet mnumi,

pontificals, custom nries, ordina ries) and en able them to eva luate the

w a y s in w hich li turgical tradit io ns w ere transmitted beyond the

Middle Ages, sometimes down to Vatican II, thanks to their codification through print.

/



Conclusion

By w ay o f epilog ue to this history of the liturgical books in the

Middle Ages in the West, I would simply recall three points, already

met with in this book, for which the study o f the sources of the liturgy proved of particular interest and whose important contribution to the

history o f the M iddle Ag es it highlighted.These three points are: the use the royal and imperial powers m ade

of the liturgical books in order to validate and strengthen political re

forms; die central role played by these books in the history o f the papacy, in particular in the thirteenth century after the Fourth Lateran

Council; and finally, the impact of these books on the developm ent of

private devotion am ong clerics and lay people, which w as on the pe

riph ery o f the official liturgy.

Historians h ave often observed that in tine kings' and em perors'

search for political stability within their territories, liturgical books

had p laye d a fundamental role. First, the Carolingians, with the Gregorian Sacramentary, then the Ottonians, w ith the Rom ano-Germanic

Pontifical, attempted, with different degrees of success, the liturgical

unification of the empire. Each time, the liturgical books were part of

an array of administrative "instrum ents" (juridical, political, economic)

whose purpose w as to im pose new regulations. Already in the middle

of the eighth century, Pepin the Short (741-768) had perceived the de

termining role of the books o f wo rship in the success of a liturgical

reform within the Frankish kingdom. First Pepin's and then Charle

m agn e's politics were aimed at liturgical unification based on the

Roman model, supported by books in use in Rome, the sacramentary

in particular. In the Caro lingian sovere igns' eye s, the authoritative

i i tt f hi ld l f R th f



M iddle A ges, the sacram entarv occu pies the sum m it of the hierarchy

of the different books used in w orsh ip. This explains Pepin and

C ha rlem agn e's choice: the liturgy of the em pire could be organized

on ly aroun d the sacratnentary, the true corc o f Christian w orship.In the second half of the tenth century, the Oltonians imitated their

predecessors by granting a preeminent role to liturgical books in the

building of the empire; to this end, they favored the making of a new

book, the pontifical, wh ose success w a s great in the secon d h alf of the

M iddle Ag es. In contrast to the Ca rolingians, the Ottonians did not di

rect their liturgists to use an alrea d y ex isting book ; they urged them

to m ake a n ew book, and the fact that it wa s a com pilation ap pe ars as

its most innovative feature. It was destined for the bishop because of

his role in the Reichskirchensysteni ("im perial ecclesiastical svstem "J o f

the empire, l.ike theology and law, the (episcopal) liturgy was codi

fied in a compilation, an undertaking willed by the political power.

Th e contribution o f the history o f the liturgy and its boo ks to the

kn ow ledge of the pap acy is w ell kn ow n, principally for the secondhalf of the Middle Ages, beginning with Innocent 111 ( 1 19 8- 12 16 ) , a

time w hen the notion o f Curia romana makes its appearance. Let it

suffice to recall the fundamental part the popes and the Curia played

from the thirteenth century on in the process of enforcing the assim i

lation, and eve n the ecclesiological identification, o f the Eccle$ia ro-

m am w ith the Curia nwumti. In this process, the liturgy and its books

hold a place of ho nor w ith, first o f all, the com position of an ord inary (between 12 13 and 12x6), then of a m issal, a pontifical, an d a breviary.

In order to impose upon the West a liturgy in conformity with that of

the pap al chapel, new books had to be m ade and d iffused . For the

sake of com parison, it wo uld be interesting to stud y the liturgy o f the

royal c ha pe ls established in the cou rse o f the thirteenth century, esp e

cia lly that of the Sainte-Chap elle in Paris, in order to discern its own

identity and measure its eventual influence elsewhere than at court,’

alongside that exercised by the liturgy of the Curia.

1. Already spoken of by R. Branner. "The .Sainte-C hapelle and the Cap el in Re g is in the Thirteenth Century," G& t a , 10 /»(1971) 19-22; and C Billot, "Les Saintes-Chapelles {Xlir'-XVT' siècle): Approches comparées de fondations dynastûjes,"



In the thirteenth century, therefore, the papal chapel becamc the

highest tribunal in m atters o f ecclesiology, dethro ning the Lateran

basilica, wh ich u p to then had represented the ancient tradition o f the

Roman liturgy. Prior to this development, the Lateran canons, who

w illin g ly welcom ed the pope fo r celebrations, had not been in ured to

external influences-. Th us, in the twelfth century, the cano nical ordo of

Lucca, regulating almost every thin g in the can on s' lives, had played

an important part in the writing of the Lateran canonical ordo. In the

latter, the place o f pap al cerem onies, along with those prescribed in

the canonical u sag es o f Lucc a, w ere ke pt intact.2 But the transfer of liturgical and ecciesiological power from the Lateran to the papal

chapel, which occurred in the thirteenth century, would nullify any

external influence on the organization and definition of the Roman

liturgy, from then on identified with the Curia.

Beginning with the Carolingian period, there developed forms of

liturgical expression too often neglected b y historians o f w orsh ip be

cause they we re considered m arginal w hen com pared w ith the liturgy o f the Rucharist and the sacramen ts. In large part, they concern pri

vate devotion and personal piety. For the H ig h M iddle A ges, textual

attestations and the manuscripts that have been preserved reveal the

devotional activities of the clergy and the educated laity (emperors

and em presses, kings an d qu eens, princes and p rincesses, and so on).

To satisfy their personal piety, ind ividu als needed app ropriate books,

such as the booklets of the Carolingian period (the iibelli precumy ["prayer books"]) allowing them to celebrate privately the Hours or

to devo te them selves to exercises o f devotion.

In the second half of the Middle Ages, especially from the twelfth

century on, the rise of new religious orders, the Mendicants in par

ticular, as we ll as the gr ow ing d esire o f the lay p eop le to pray by

themselves outside their participation in the liturgy of the Church,

had as a consequence the flowering and spreading o f form s of private

piety up to then practiced b y clergy, royalty, and nobility. Th is is at

tested by the many books of Hours from the fourteenth and fifteenth

centuries, most w ide ly disseminated am ong lay pe ople, especially the

2 See P -M Gy "Interactions entre liturgies: Influence des chanoines de Lucques



bo urgeoisie o f the cities.'* Several scho lars ha ve fully d em onstrated

the role of these form s of expression of devo tion in the evolution of

reading practices, esp ecially am on g the Jaity, and the place o f the

book in Western culture.5The Church, essentially the regular clergy, did not remain inactive

in this m ovem ent and participated in the creation o f n ew books of

piety. Alon gside the num erous abridged psalters and pocket bre

viaries fo r the use o f m onastics and m endic ants— Franciscans and

D om inicans— one sees the de velopm en t in mona steries, particularly

am ong nuns, o f libelli precum that are adapted to the new monastic

spirituality w hich, m arked b y the spirit of the times, tended to em

phasize personal devotion and de velop a v ision ary m ysticism .6

It is also at that time that one observes the liturgical books of both

antiquity and the High ¿Middle Ages, called "first generation books,"

un dergoing changes leading to "second generation b oo ks/' the prin

cip al o f w hich are the m issai, breviary, and pontifical, all character

ized by an increase in the local particularities wh ich w ill be the rulein the life of the Ch urch d ow n to the Coun cil o f Trent.

But this is the subject of anoth er book.

4. R. Wicck, Tim e Sa nc t if ie d : The Rook o f Ho u rs in M e d ie iv l A r t rimf ¡.iff (London,1988).

5. See P. Saenger, "Books of Hours and the Reading Habits of the Laler Middle Ages," Sc rit t u ra e c iv ilité 9 (1985) 239-269, and ’' M a n i è r e s do lire médiévales/' H is

to ire de l'éd it ion fra nça ise: Le l iv re c onq uérant: D u Mo ye n Ag e a u m ilie u d u X V [ f siècle.,



Selected Bibliography

History and Typology o f Liturgical BooksHeinzer, F. "Liturgische Bücher." U’xikon des gesamten Buchxwsens. Vol. 4,

p. 580. Stuttgart, 1995.

Johnson, M. Bibliographie Liturgien: Bibliographie der nachschlagexverkefür Littirgiewissenschafl. Biblioteca "Ephemerides Liturgic«e," Subsidia 63.Rome, 1992.

Kranemann, B. "Liturgische Bücher als schriftliche Zeugnisse dorLiturgiegeschichte: lîntstehung-Typologie-Funktion." Imagination des Unsichtbaren: 1200 fahre Bildende Kunst im Bistum Münster, 147-166. Ed.K. Brandi. Ausstellung des Westfalischen Landesmuseums für Kunst

und Kulturgeschichte, Lamischaftsverband Westfalen-Lippe, Münster,

13 . Juni bis 31. Oktober 1993. Münster, 1993.Lowdcn, ]. "Luxury and Liturgy: The Functions of Books." Church and People

in Byzantium. Ed. R. Morris, 263-280. Society for the Promotion of

Byzantine Studies, Twentieth Spring Symposium of Byzantine Studies,Manchester, 1986. Birmingham, 1990.

Neuheuser, H.-P. Internationale Bibliographie "Liturgische B ü c h e r EineAustwM kunslhistorischer und liturgiexvissenschaftlicher Literatur zu liturgischen

Handschriften und Drucken. Munich, 1991.____. "Typologie und Terminologie liturgischer Bücher." Bibliothek: Forschung

und Praxis 16 (1992) 45-65. (Important, especially for the problems posed

by the search for a practical nomenclature for bibliographers.)Palazzo, 6. "Libri liturgici." F.nciclopedia italiana dell'arte. Rome, in press.

The Cataloging of Liturgical ManuscriptsBalboni, D. "La catalogazione dei libri liturgici." F.phemerides Liturgicae 31

(1961) 223-236.



Palazzo, F.. "L e catalogue des ordinaires des bibliothèques de France, une nou velle entreprise de catalogage des manuscrite liturgiques." Die ErscMics-

sungder Quellen des mittelalterUchen liturgischen Cesangs 39. Wolfenbütteler

Symposion, 1996. In press.

Historiography o f the Research on Liturgical Booh

Johnson, C , and A . Ward. "The Hispanic Liturgy and Dorn Marius Férotin."

Ephemerides Ulurgieae 1 1 0 (1996) 252-256.

Klockener, M. "Bio*bibliographisches Repertorium der LiturgiewLssenschaft/'

Archiv ffir ¡.¡turgiewissenschaft 35-3 6 (1993-1994) 285-357.

SacranienlariesD avril, A., ed. The Winchcombe Sacramentary (Orleans, Bibliothèque municipale,

227/305/). Henry Bradshaw Society 109. London, 1995.

Metzger, M. Les sacramenlaires. 'typologie des sources du Moyen Age occiden

tal, fasc. 70. Turnhout, t994-

Moeller, E., I. M. Clément, and B. Coppierters 't Wallant, eds.. Corpus Qrati- omiMf. 8 vols. C C SL i6t>-i6oH. Tum hout, 1992 -

Palazzo, E. Les sacramenlaires de Fulda: Elude $ur l'iconographie el la liturgie à

¡ ‘époque ottonienne. LQF 77. Münster, 1994.

Books of ChantBernard, P. "Bilan historiographique de la question des rapports entre les

chants 'Vieux-Rom ain' et 'Gré go rien /" Ecelesia Orans 11 (1994) 323-353.

____ . "l.e s chants propres de la messe dans les répertoires 'Grégorien ' et ro

main ancien, essai d'édition pratique des variantes textuelles/'

Ephemerides Liturgicae n o (1996) 210 -25 1 .

Exultet: Rotoli liturgici de! medioevo méridionale, Dir. G. Cavallo. Coord. G.

Orwfinoand O. Pecere. Rome, 1994.

Hiley, P . Western Pîainchaiit: A Handbook. Oxford, 1993.

Hughes, A . la te Mediei'al Liturgical Offices: Resources for Electronic Research: Sources and Chants. 2 vols, and 5 computer disks. Toronto, 1994-1996.

Kelly, Th. The Benecvntan Chant. Oxford, 1989.

lioote of Mass Readingsd d b d l l d l



Book* of the Office

Utaix, K. Homcliaires patnstiques latins: Recueils d'études de manuscrits médié

vaux. Collection des Etudes Augustiniennes, Série M oyen A ge et Temps

modernes 29. Paris, 1994.____ . "Le Actionnaire de l'office de Cruas." Reîm edu vivarais 98 ( 1994) 15-2 2.

Lilurgia delle ore: Tempo e rilo. Atll délia 22 settimana di studio dell'Associazione

Professori di Lilurgia, Susa (Torino), 29 ago sto -3 settembre 1993. Bibliot-

eca "Ephemerides Lihirgicae," Subsidia 75. Rome, 1994. In particular, F.

IJell'Oro, "Recenti edizioni critiche di fonti liturgiche," 197-303.

Ottosen, K. The Responsories and Versicles ofthe Latin Office ofthe Dead. Arhus,

1993.

Books of Sacrantents and Rights

Cygler , F. ''Règles, coutum iers et statuts (Vt‘-X ll lc siècles): Brèves considéra

tions historico-typologiques." ht vie quotidienne, des moines et chanoines

réguliers au Moyen Age et Temps modernes, 31-49. Wroclaw, 1994.

Klöckener, M. "D as Pontifikale: Ein Liturgiebuch im Spiegel seiner Benennun

gen und der Vorreden seiner Herausgeber, zugleich W ürdigung und Weiterführung einer Studie von Marc Dykm ans/' Archiv ß ir Liturgieivis-

senschaß 28 {1986) 396-415.

Palazzo, E. "Authenticité, codification et mémoire dans la liturgie médiévale,

l'exemple du 'prototype' de l'ordre dominicain." Liturgie, musique cl cul

ture au X /r siM e: U }prototype de la liturgie dominicaine. Actes du colloque

international de Rome, 1995. ln press.

____

, "L e cataloque des ordinaires des bibliothèques de France, une nouvelleentreprise de catalogage des manuscrits liturgiques." Die Erschliessung

der Quellen des mittelalterlichen liturgischen Gesangs 39. Wolfenbütteier

Symposion, 1996. In press.Reynaud, V. "U n cérémonial de la fin du X V r siècle à l'usage de la cathédrale

de Tolède." Revue Mahillon 67, n.s. 6 (1995) 225-24 1.



Index of Persons

Ado, 16 5 Adventius (bishop of Metz), 197

Agim ond, 154

Agnellus of Ravenna, 29

Agobard (bishop of Lyon), 14 1

Ala in o f Farfa, 154

Alb om oz (cardinal), 225

Alcuin, 29, 53-55,88, 9 9 ,14 2 , 155

Amalartus o f Metz, 70,80, 140

Ambrose (bishop of Milan), St., 21,

8 4 , 1 2 6 , 1 4 2 , 1 5 2

Andrieu, M., 14 ,176 , 18 1

Arno (bishop of Salzburg), 54

A s s e m a n i ,39

Augustine, St., 3 6 ,8 4 ,1 16 ,15 2 ,15 6 ,214

Aurelian (bishop of Arles), 116

Barre, H., 15

Batiffol, P., 1 5

Baumstark, A., 5

Benedict, St., 4 7 ,11 6 ,13 7 , i 19, 121,122,129, 141,149, 152,, 214

Benedict of Aniane, St., 53 ,14 2 ,2 14 ,

218

Bernard (prior of the Lateran), 207

Beyssac, C.f 11-12

h G

Caesarius (bishop of Arles), St ,

116, 141

Canute, 59Cassian, John, 123

Cassiodorus, 130

Celestine 1, 71Charlemagne, 30 ,47 ,50 ,51-5 2, 56,

72 , 1 03 , 1 1 8 , 1 39- 1 40 , 1 54- 1 55 ,

205,237-238

Charles the Bald, 58,72,133, 178

Chenu, M .-P., 10

Chavasse , A., 12 , 1 3 ,9 2 , 18 2

Ch rodegan g (bishop of Metz), 47,

1 1 7 , 1 19 , 123, 163, 185, 237-238

Clement o f Alexandria, St., 114Columban, St., 11 6

Cy prian (bishop of Carthage), St.,

84 , 1 1 4

Pagulf, 103

Damasus I, S t, 71

Delisle, L., 12 ,1 3Pesh usscs, J., 12

Didier (abbot of Monte Cassino),

231Pisibod of Mainz, 205

Donnat, L., 218

D f M 8 8



Durand, U., 8

Durandus, William, 209, 210

Ebner, A., 12, 13Egbert of York, 50

Eginon (bishop of Verona), >54

Elze, R., 14

limnw, 59

Eudes of Sully, 19 3,22 8

Florus of Lyon, 14 1Frere, W. H., 13

Fructuosus of B raga, St., 11 6

Camber, K., 13

Gau tier (bishop of O rleans), 3 1

Cclasius !, St., 41,4 4 ,50 ,6 0Gellent, Nicolas, 228

Gentmdius of M arseilles, 29,84

Germain, M., 7, 34

Gherbald (bishop o f Liège), 33

Godescalc, 102-10 3Grégoire, R., 15

Gregory I (the Great), St., 21, 28, 30,

45- 5°» 52,6 0,70 ,73,86 -8 7,93 ^139, 148

Gregory 11, St., 45, 52 ,95

Gregory VII, St., 118 , 207

Gregory XIII, 234

Gy, P.-M., 16

Hadrian 1,30, 50,52

Haito (bishop of Basel), 31Hnymo of Faversham, n 8

I lelisachar, 5 3 ,9 9 ,14 0

Henry 11, 104, 212

Hervé (bishop o f Beauvais), 2 12

Hesbert, R.-J,, (4

I littorp, M., 176

Honorius !, 51

llug lo, M., 14 ,72

Hugh (abbot of Clun y), St., 219Hugh (abbot of Farfa), 217

Humbert of Romans, 231

Ingeborg, 134

Innocent 111, 169, 208, 210,225, 227,

238

Innocent VM, 234Isidore (bishop o f Seville), St., 63,

8 8 , 1 1 6

Jerome, St., 6 1, 88, 10 1, J30, 132, 152

John III, 4 0 -4 1,42

John of Cirey, 231

John the Deacon, 7 0 ,139

Jungm ann,J. A ., 5

Klauser, Th., 13

Kunigiinde, 104

Lan dulf (bishop of Benovento), 210

Leidrad, 141

Leo I (the Great), St., 39,40

Leo III, S t, 53

I.eo o f Ostia, 231

Leroquais, V., 1 1 , 1 2 , 53, 209-210

Louis the Pious, 53,99,140

Mabillon, 7- 9 ,34 , 176, 17 7 ,18 1

Maiolus (abbot of Cluny), St., 219Maingaud (abbot of Corbie), 216

Mamert, St., 47

M arine, E., 7 -9 , 34 ,85 , 176 , 181

Martimort, A.-G., 15

Martin (bishop of Tours), St., 47



Oderisius, 170

Odilo {abbot o f Ciuny)/ St., 219

Origen, 114

Otto 1, 56,205, 206Otto 11,205,206

Otto III, 59Otto of Riedenburg, 211

Pamelius (Jacques de Joig ny de

Paméle), 9, 34,5 0 ,85

Paul the Deacon, 155

Pau linus (bishop of Nola), St., 29

Pepin the Short, 4 5,4 6 ,47 ,64 ,

1 1 7 - 1 1 8 , 1 3 9 , 1 8 3 , 2 37 -238

Piccolomini, Agostino Pntrizi. 234

Pius V, St., 9

Pius X, St., 1 1 7

Prix, St., 47

Rabanus Maurus, 142

Raganaldus, 58

Ralph (bishop of Bourgcs), 31

Rasmussen, N. K., 14, 16

Regimbert (abbot of Reichenau), 193

Robert the Pious, 212

Robert (bishop of Winchester), 200,2 11

Rocca, A., 9, 34, 50

Roger (bishop of Beauvais), 2 12

Rutger (bishop of Trior), 3 1

Salmon, P., 15

Saxer, V., 17,182

Sergius 1,45 ,52 , 54

Smaragd us, 214Stuiber, A., 12

Suger, 226

TertuHian, 84, 1 14 - 1 1 5

Tomasi, J., 9, 34»44/ 7 °> s5

Usuard, 164,165

Van Dijk, S ., 15

Venerius (bishop of Marseilles), 84

Vigilius, 41

Vogel, C ., 14 , 15

Walafrid Strabo, 30 Walcaud (bishop of Liège), 3 1

W amuuuius (bishop of Ivrea)/59,

200

William (bishop of Mainz), 205-206

William of Volpiano, 219

Wilmart, A ., 10 - 1 1

Wi tiges, 84

Yves I of Vergy (abbot o f C lunv),165

Zaccaria, F. A., 10

Zacharias, St., 78



Index of Places

A frica, 3 6 , 1 1 5 , «2 1/156

Aachen, 5 2 ,5 3 ,7 2 , 1 1 8 ,1 3 9 , 16 3 ,

206,214

Alsace, 10 5 ,13 8

A m iens, 7 4 ,10 8

A ngers, 228

Aniane, 2 14

A ntw erp, 8

Arezzo, 148

Aurillac, 82

A ustria , 76

A utun, 7 7 ,7 9 ,8 1

A uxerre, 155

Avig non, 208,2 34

Bamberg, 104, 198

Beauvais , 198,212

Bobbio, 8 8 ,157

Cambrai, 4 8 , 181

Canterbury, 8 i , 13 3 ,2 1 1 , 2 15

Ca pu a, 85Catalonia, 133

Ch artres, 99

Ch elles, 44

Chu r, 230

Citeaux, 231

l d

Constance, 147

Corbie , 74, 9 8 , 10 9 , 13 1 , 132 , 137,

2 16 ,224

Cremona, 143,200

Durham, 148

Hchternach, 28

Egypt, 1 14

Eine, 198

England, 76 , 17 1 ,223

Farfa, 21 7

Flavigny, 47Fleury, 4 7 ,2 15 , 218

Fran ce , 7 6 , 8 2 , 1 3 1 , 1 3 4 , 1 43 , 1 8 4 ,

194, 20 8 ,2 18 ,23 1

Freising, 200

Fruttuaria, 219

Fulda , 56 ,60 ,85 ,9 6 ,201 , 206,2 14 ,

2 15

Gascon y, 77

G aul , 45 - 46 ,47 - 48 ,5 4 ,6 i , 64 ,7 2 ,

75/ 8 5 ,9 1 ,98 , *57 ' 181 ,

1 8 2 - 1 8 3 , 2 3 7

Gellone 46 48 57



Italy, 54, 74, 76, 78, 81, 98, 100, 155,

17 0 , 19 2 , 19 3 , 19 7 , 200, 206, 207,

208, 209, 2 1 1 , 225

Ivrea, 59

Jerusale m , 22

Kempten, 148

Lagrasse, 194

Lerins, 116

Liège, 188

Limburg, 33

L im oge s, 7 6 ,7 7 , 1 5 9 , 1 9 2

Lorsch, 153

Lucca, 152 , 177 , 204,205 ,239

Luxeuil , 88,98,152, 162

Lyons, 14]

Mainz, 56, 101 , 179,204, 205-206,2 0 7 , 2 1 1

Marmoutier, 58 ,10t

M eaux, 46,75

Monde, 209,228

M e tz, 4 7 , 5 8 ,6 1 ,8 0 , 1 1 7 , 1 2 3 ,1 40 ,

1 6 3 , 1 7 9 , 1 8 5

Monte Cassino, 138, 143, 17 0 ,215 ,

231

M onza, 230

Murbach, 95,98,99

N ivelles, 230

No vara, 201

Noyon , 137

Orléans, 47

Paris , 93 , 143 , 152 ,22 8 ,23 8

St-Germain-des-Prés, 8 , 13 3 , 16 4

Pa sso w, 32

Pfäfers, 193

Reichenau, 3 1 , 81 , 103 , 10 4 , 14 7 , 19 3

Khoims, 148, 190,197,198

Rheinau, 22 2,23 0

Rome, xxiv , 13 , 1 7 , 25, 4 1 , 45,47, 50,6 4 , 7 l>72, 75- * > - 8 7 - 9 1 , 9 4 , 9& ,

1 0 0 , 1 1 7 , 1 4 0 , 1 5 2 , 1 5 7 , 1 7 9 - 1 8 1 ,

182-183, 184, 206-209, 237

Lateran, 40, 52, 15 0 ,15 7 , 207,

237, 239

St. Peter, 149,152, 154-155

St. Peter in Ch ains, 45

Sts. Philip and James, 154

Rouen, 8

St. Amand, 73 ,74 ,89 ,99 , 108 , 109 ,

1 8 4 , 1 9 0

St.-Benoit-sur-Loire, see Fleury

St. Denis, 222,2 26

St. C a ll, 7 6 , 13 7 , 13 8 , 1 4 3 , 14 7 , 1 7 0 ,1 8 4 , 1 9 7 , 2 05 ,2 1 5

St.-Guilhem-le-Desert, see Gellone

St.-M ariin-de-Li-Canourgue, 230

St-M au r (congregation of), 7 ,8

S t Riquier, 30, 1 0 1 , 13 t , 140

Salzburg, 54 ,10 5, 197

Schaffhausen, 2 12 ,23 0

Sens, 198-199Silos, 156

Soissons, 162

Solesmes, 13,65

Switzerland, 76, 138,170

Tivo li, 87

Tournai, 198,203

To urs, 5 5 , 5 8 , 7 4 , 1 0 0 , 1 0 8 , 14 2 , 1 8 2 ,

224

Trent, 187, 240

Trier, 140 ,19 7

Uz&, 224



W eisscnau, 15 $

Winchester, zoo, 2 1 1

W isse nbourg, 193

York, 50

Zwiefalten, 158



Index of Liturgical Pieces

Agnus Del, 20,45, 66, 67 ,75 ,8 0

Allelu ia , 19 ,6 6 ,6 8 ,7 0 ,7 1 , 74, 75 ,77

Bcncdiclus, 136,138

CdWMMWCYWilS, 22

Comm union ontiphon, 2 0 ,6 5 ,7 1

Credo, 66,67

Exultet, 78, Hi, 197

Gloria, 19,66,67, 76

Gloria Patri, 131

Gradual , 19 ,33 ,66 ,7 1 ,74 ,75

M w i£//ur, 22, .|5

Humili prece et sincera devotione, 205

Introitantiphon, 19,6 5 ,6 6 ,7 1, 77

Kyrie Eleison, 19,66,67

Üivm nos, 2 2 ,23

Magniiicat, 136,138

Memento, 2 2 ,23

NoWs qttoque, 22, 23

Offertory antiphon, 19 ,65 ,66 ,74 ,

77Our Father, 20, 21 , 2 3 ,1 14 ,12 2 ,12 4 ,

125

Q«(7w oblationem, 22

Quem quaeritis, 76

Qta pridie. 22

Sanctus, 19, 22, 58,66,76

Supplices ie rogamus, 23

Supra quae, 23

Te decet Ians. 124

Te Deum, 124, 131, 149

Te igitur, 22 ,57 ,58

Tract, 71

Unde el memorvs, 22

Vent creator $piritu$, 142

Verc dignunt, 22



Index of Manuscripts

Alb i, Biblioteca municipale

ms. 44: *37

Amiens, Bibliothèque municipale

m s . 1 8 : 1 3 1 , 1 3 2

Aosia, Biblioteca capitolare

cod. 15: 201

Aschaffenburg, Hofbibliothek

ms. 2: 96 Asti, Biblioteca capitolare

cod- XIII: 197

Autu n, Bibliothèque municipale

ms. 19 bis: 53, 58

Basel, Cod. Gressly: 109

____ , Universitätsbibliothek

N 1 6 (nos. 8,20-22): 370

Bamberg, Staatsbibliothek

Lit. 5: 81

Lit. 53: 212

Berlin, Staatsbibliothek Preussischer

Kulturbesitz

ms. Mus. 40047: .137

____ , Deutsche StaatsbibliothekPhiIHpps 1676: 154

Besançon, Bibliothèque municipale

ms. 184:95,98,99

Brussels, Bibliothèque royale

cod. 10127 -10144 :184

Durham, C hapter Library

cod. A .IV .19 :148

Düsseldorf, Universitätsbibliothek

cod. B.113: 103

Florence, Biblioteca Marcellinna

cod. C 1 59 : 159

Fulda, Hessische Landesbibliothekcod. Bonifatianus 1: 85, 97

Geneva, Bibliotheca Bodmeriana

cod. Bodmer t2 7 :158

Gottingen, Universitätsbibliothek

cod. theol. 233: 56

ivrea, Biblioteca capitolarc

cod. 10 (XX): 200

cod. 86: 59

Karlsruhe, Badische LandesbibÜo*thek

Fragment, augien. 22:147

l^jon. Bibliothèque municipale

ms. 550: 103

Leiden, Bibliotheek der Rijksuni-

vcrsiteit

BPL 111 .2: 198

London British Library



cod. 60 5:177

cod. 607: 204, 205Lugano, Archivio del Principe Pio

Rotulus of Ravenna (nonumber): 78

Madrid, Biblioteca de la Real

Academ ia de la Historia

cod. 39:156Manchester, John Rylands Library

ms. 7: 103

Milan, Biblioteca Ambrosianacod. Ë 51 inf.: 151

Montpellier, Bibliothèque de la

Faculté de médecine

ms. 412: 182

Mont-Renaud, Private collection

Antiphonaire: 13 7

Monza, Tesoro della basilica S.Giovanni Battista

cod. CIX: 74,7 9,2 30

Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek

clm. 4452:104

dm . 6430:200

clm. 15903:105

clm. 2333 8:104

Novara, Biblioteca capitolarecod. LXXXVÏM (Colombo 4): 203

Nurem burg, Germanisches

Nationalmuseum

Kupferstichkabincit, Kapsel 536,

SD 2815: 170

Oxford, Bodleian Libran'

liturg. 359:148

Padua, Biblioteca capitolare

cod. D.47: 35/ 54P i Bibli hè d l'A l

ms. 5*5:1 9*ms. 526: 222,226

Bibliothèque nationale

grec t0 2 :105

lat. 743: 159lat. 816:46

lat. 933: *94lat. 943: 2 1 1

lat. 974: 184lat. 1084:82

lat 1118: 77, 82

lat. 1121: 230la t 1 1 4 c 58

la t 1 352 : 133lat. 1231: 211

lat. 1234: 224

lat. 3237: 224,228lat. 1435: 225

Jat. 2291: 73 ,10 9lat. 2292:178lat. 2294: 29

lat. 4 i6aA : 225, 227lat. 5231: 192

lat. 7193: 44

lat. 884 6:133lat. 8850:102lat. 9427: 88,98,152

lat. 9428: 5 8 ,6 1,8 0 ,18 5lat. 9432:74, 108

lat. 9433: 28

lat. 9448: 83,82,105lat. 9451: 98, loo

lat. 9452:89 ,9 9

lat 10938: 165lat. 12048: 35,46,48, 57lat. 12050:74,109

lat. 12051:9

lat. 12601:372lat. 13159:131



Int. 13908: 216lat. 17325: 105

{¿1 . 17436:72,81, 136, 137

new acq. lat. 1203:102

new acq. lat. 1589:74,10S

new acq. lat. 2246: 159

now acq. lat. 2390: 159

Rheims, Bibliothèque municipale

ms. 2 13:7 4 , 108

ms. 304: 148

ms. 340: 198

Rome, Biblioteca Apostolic«)

Vatican«, Arch iv io S. Pietro

cod. C.105: 154

____ _ Borghes.lat. 359: 99

____ , Ottoboni

lat. 145:192____ .Pal.

lat. 21 0 :15 3

lat. 29 8 :153____ , Regin.

lat. 9:97lat. 1 1 : 1 4 3

lat. 316 :9, 28 ,35,42 ,44 ___ rVdt.

lat- 5755=97lat. 5 7 7 1:15 7

lat. 7701:198

____ _ Biblioteca Casanatensecod. 1741: 230

, Biblioteca Nazionalecod. 1343: 230

____ , Biblioteca Vallicelliana

cod. A .3 : 151

cod. B.141: 24

cod. C.io: 190

Priary of Santa Sabina

St. Gall, Stiftsbibliothekcod. 348: 29,46

cod. 349:147, 184cod. 374:99

cod. 381:75

cod. 390/391: 137cod. 414: 170

cod. 423: 151

cod .428 : 15 1cod. 484: 75

St.-Omer, Bibliothèque municipale

ms. 252: 74St. Petersburg. Publiclunaja Biblio-

teka

lat. Q.v.l, no. 16:98

lat. Q.v.l, no. 35: 198

St.-Victor-sur-Rhins

breviary (no number): 172

Salzburg, Museum Carolino-Augus-tcum

no. 2163: 151

____ , Stiftsbibliothek St. Peler

cod. A I o: t34

Schaffhausen, Stadtbibliothek

M i n isteria I bibJ iothek

Min. 9 4 :212Stuttgart, Württembergische l^n-

desbibliothek

cod. Bibl. fol. 2 3 :1 3 3

cod. Bibl. 2, no. 56-58: 158

cod. Hist. 2, no. 415:158

Trent, Museo N azionale (Castel del

Buonconsiglio)

sacramentary (no. number): 35,

54-55Trier, Stadtbibliothek

cod. 504(1245): 147

(e.palazzo) history of liturgical books

Documents