^RYJ 
 
 TY OF i 
 
 EGOJ

 
 yj/-
 
 LITURGICA HISTORICA
 
 OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS 
 
 LONDON EDINBURGH GLASGOW NEW YORK 
 
 TORONTO MELBOURNE CAPE TOWN BOMBAY 
 
 HUMPHREY MILFORD 
 
 PUBLISHER TO THE UNIVERSITV 
 
 iSS8
 
 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 PAPERS ON THE LITURGY 
 
 AND RELIGIOUS LIFE 
 
 OF THE WESTERN CHURCH 
 
 BY 
 EDMUND BISHOP 
 
 OXFORD 
 
 AT THE CLARENDON PRESS 
 
 I 9 I 8
 
 SORORI ET SORORIS FILIAE
 
 PREFACE 
 
 The papers contained in this volume were written in a period 
 extending over the last thirty years. They may all, I think, be 
 described as ' occasional '. 
 
 So far as those included in the first part (' Liturgica ') are concerned, 
 only one is really ' popular '—the first. The rest are more or less 
 technical, though not perhaps always in the usual and proper tech- 
 nical form. In reprinting them I have reviewed and revised them 
 all. To some new supplementary notes are added, running somehow 
 in more than one case to a length almost equalling that of the 
 original paper ; and to all, or nearly all, additional foot-notes have 
 been freely added. This new matter is printed in square brackets. 
 A supplementary note which stood at the end of No. VII has been 
 suppressed for reasons specified at p. 163. As regards No. X, On 
 the Origin of the Feast of the Conception of the Blessed Virgin, 
 there are reasons why it is altogether desirable to reprint it in the 
 shape in which it originally appeared in 1886. And as it stands in 
 this volume, the end of the supplementary note, pp. 250-9, is really 
 the concluding part of the original paper itself. Had I to write such 
 a paper now, and with present knowledge, it would be cast in a dif- 
 ferent shape. No. XV has been entirely rewritten and retains but 
 a few shreds of the original preliminary notice in Neues Archiv. 
 
 Mgr Mercati has been kind enough to let me print here his paper 
 More 'Spanish Symptoms' (No. VIII a), which first appeared in the 
 Journal of Theological Studies. 
 
 It may be well to explain what is the object of, what is the con- 
 necting link between, the very miscellaneous-looking papers composing 
 this first half of the volume. 
 
 The first paper indicates the conditions determining the developc-
 
 viii PREFACE 
 
 merit of the Western Mass in the critical period, the seventh centur}'^ 
 to the tenth, in which the fusion of the two great types of religiousness, 
 the Roman and the Hispano-Gallican, took place. The second is an 
 illustration of the same subject, from an earlier to a much later period, 
 from the point of view of one single material object, the Christian 
 Altar. 
 
 Nos. Ill, IV, V, and XV are devoted to three points : — First, the 
 precise fixation of the form and contents of the Gregorian Sacramen- 
 tary, or Book of Mass and Sacraments, at the earliest stage of its 
 history at which the full text of that book is presented to us in the 
 extant manuscripts, namely, the time of Pope Hadrian I, in the 
 closing decades of the eighth century. Secondly, an explanation of 
 the process to which this book was subjected in France when it was 
 officially adopted as the Sacramentary of the future by Charlemagne. 
 Incidentally it is shewn that the author of the Supplement added in 
 France to Hadrian's Gregoriammi was Alcuin. Thirdly, the fixation 
 of the text of the Gregorian Canon of the Roman Mass ; by which I 
 mean the text of the Canon as settled by Gregory the Great, 
 
 The full value and result of the precise fixation of these three 
 definite points may not at once appear evident or be adequately 
 realized. It will become clear, I have no hesitation in saying, in the 
 course of time. It will be seen that it becomes possible, working back- 
 ward into the earliest period of the use of the Gelasian book, as the 
 then Book of the Mass and Sacraments of the Roman Church, to see 
 how Gregory discarded earlier practices, now out of date and almost 
 meaningless, and modernized the rite. On the other hand — and this 
 is much more important, and may to some appear more attractive — it 
 will be possible to appraise the religious implications of the Gregorian 
 book and understand what is, I venture to think, an almost astound- 
 ing as it is a unique survival and conservation of old and simple ideas 
 in regard to some matters that most deeply touch the Christian life. 
 We shall then also be able to appreciate more justly and truly the 
 Gallican type of religious mind, by way indeed of contrast. 
 
 Paper VI and the following numbers are each devoted to an
 
 PREFACE ix 
 
 examination of some particular liturgical item, to the best of my 
 ability, according to the methods to-day accepted and applied to the 
 investigation of documents. Those particular items were not specially 
 selected, but were dealt with simply because some occurrent incident 
 set me to work upon them. Nor, as will be seen from what is said 
 above as to the Gregorian Sacramentary, were they the most impor- 
 tant items : far from it ; perhaps they may even count among insig- 
 nificant ones. But it is the method that matters. 
 
 These papers of the first part, besides the fact of their technicality, 
 were penned always with a sense that it needs wariness to take any 
 step, whether forward or backward, in a region so obscure and so 
 disputable as Early Liturgy, Eastern or Western. As said elsewhere, 
 it is a region not merely full of pitfalls, but one where the paths are 
 as sliddery and ' difficult ' as the via coliibri super petram. This at 
 all events is an impression borne in upon me by the experience of 
 a time that is now not far short of half a century. But (I would here 
 repeat) half, perhaps the major part, of the difficulty lies in the ease 
 with which theories and ' views ' have been allowed to outstrip the 
 accurate investigation, or knowledge, of facts. 
 
 The antiquarian papers forming the second part of the volume were 
 all originally printed in the Doivnsidc Rcviezv. If these tiny vignettes 
 do not of themselves commend themselves to the reader, I have 
 nothing further to advance in their favour. They were included 
 simply because I liked them, as having given me occasion to write in 
 my own natural style. 
 
 Before bringing these introductory words to a close I should like 
 in some way to associate this book with the names of three litur- 
 gists of the last century whom I hold in very particular respect : 
 Ernst Ranke, who first taught me the criticism of liturgical docu- 
 ments ; Theodor Kliefoth, from whom I learnt that for a full and 
 real understanding of ' Liturgy ' a lively interest in the forms and 
 formulae of public worship in nothing less than the whole range of 
 the communities that 'profess and call themselves Christians' is a 
 necessity ; finally, and before all, our fellow-countryman G. H. Forbes,
 
 X PREFACE 
 
 whose liturgical work, carried out in conditions of great difficulty in 
 an obscure country place near Edinburgh, simple and modest as is its 
 appearance, seems to me to rank in quality and value with the work 
 of the three or four sonimitds — Cassander the pioneer, Bona, Tommasi, 
 Mabillon. His Gallican Liturgies can never have been in the hands 
 of many ; and now, overlaid by the great productivity of a later 
 generation of liturgiologists, seems to have become practically for- 
 gotten, lost. A new edition, with the text revised on the manuscripts, 
 some modifications or corrections of a certain kind in both text and 
 marginalia, and the addition of the Missale Francornni, would be, so 
 I consider, the best contribution to the study and understanding of 
 Liturgy since his death, and a veritable boon to a young generation 
 of students growing up after the war, among whom may (it is to be 
 hoped) be found some who perceive that the history of Christian 
 worship, in its varieties and differing forms through the centuries, is at 
 the least and lowest a subject of human interest not less worthy of 
 attention than the ancient religions of Greece and Italy. 
 
 Mr K. Sisam of Oxford has most kindly read the proof-sheets, 
 and helped me with many suggestions relating to those inaccuracies 
 of style which either debase the expression or obscure the meaning : 
 helped me also to make alterations in some of the later papers, which 
 improve their form and bring some of the arguments into clearness 
 and evidence. 
 
 And what shall I say of the Clarendon Press? What can I say 
 but express the wish that the contents of this volume were better 
 worth the liberality, zeal, determination and speed with which, in 
 days of unexampled stress, the book has been carried through ? For 
 after all I must recognize that it is but a volume of scraps, with only 
 this of unity that they are the product of the native sense of a single 
 brain, occupied ever in the space of half a century with the problems 
 of our early religious history as Western Christians. And so at the 
 age of threescore years and beyond, thus gathering together these 
 fragments ne pcrcant, I commit the volume to the judgement and 
 I would fain hope the indulgence also of my readers. And if any of
 
 PREFACE 
 
 XI 
 
 them should find use or profit in the perusal of anything contained in 
 
 this volume, their thanks are due to Dom Hugh Connolly, without 
 
 whose help this collection of papers would certainly never have 
 
 reached the printer's hands. 
 
 EDMUND BISHOP. 
 
 Caburn, Park Lane, 
 Barnstaple. 
 
 Mr Edmund Bishop died on February 19, 19 17, leaving still unfinished 
 the proof-sheets of this book, to which he gave the last of his strength. By 
 his wish we have undertaken the final revision ; and as most of the papers in 
 their present form differ from the original prints, sometimes substantially, 
 sometimes in details of word or phrase, it seems necessary to assure the 
 reader that these changes are due to the author himself. Mr Bishop had 
 carefully revised all the slip proofs ; and, still more minutely, the sheets of 
 the first twelve papers. He had long since delegated to Dom Connolly the 
 verification of references and quotations, and the compilation of the indexes. 
 There remained only the minutiae of proof correction ; so that the volume 
 appears in the form which the author had chosen as final. 
 
 R. H. C. 
 K. S.
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 PART I : LITURGICAL 
 
 I. The Genius of the Roman Rite .... 
 II. On the History of the Christian Altar . 
 
 III. The Earliest Roman Mass Book (the Gelasianum) 
 
 IV. On some Early Manuscripts of the Gregorianum 
 V. On the Early Texts of the Roman Canon 
 
 VI. Kyrie Eleison : A Liturgical Consultation 
 
 VII. The Litany of Saints in the Stowe Missal 
 
 VIII. * Spanish Symptoms ' 
 
 VIII A. More ' Spanish Symptoms ' (by Mgr G. MercatO 
 
 IX. On the Origin of the Prymer .... 
 
 X. On the Origins of the Feast of the Conception of 
 THE Blessed Virgin Mary .... 
 
 XI. Origins of the Cope as a Church Vestment 
 
 XII. Holy Week Rites of Sarum, Hereford and Rouen 
 compared 
 
 XIII. Of Six Candles on the Altar : an Enquiry 
 
 XIV. Angilbert's Ritual Order for Saint-Riquier 
 XV. A Letter of Abbat Helisachar .... 
 
 PART II : ANTIQUARIAN 
 
 XVI. Some Ancient Benedictine Confraternity Books 
 
 XVII. A Benedictine Confr.\ter of the Ninth Century 
 
 XVIII. An Antiquary of the Ninth Century (Agnellus of 
 Ravenna) 
 
 XIX. About an Old Prayer Book 
 
 XX. Gifts of Bishop Henry of Blois, Abbat of Glaston 
 BURY, to Winchester Cathedral 
 
 XXI. From an Old Note-Book 
 
 PAGE 
 
 I 
 
 39 
 62 
 
 77 
 1x6 
 
 137 
 165 
 203 
 211 
 
 238 
 260 
 
 276 
 301 
 314 
 333 
 
 349 
 362 
 
 370 
 384 
 
 392 
 
 402
 
 XIV 
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 XXII. How A Cathedral was Built in the Fourteenth 
 Century (Milan Cathedral) .... 
 
 XXIII. Character Sketches from Mediaeval Inventories 
 
 XXIV. Leaves from the Diary of a Papal Master of Cere 
 
 MONIES 
 
 XXV. Pastor Dreygerwolt's Note-Book 
 
 XXVI. Abbat Stengel 
 
 XXVII. Richelieu and the Benedictines . 
 XXVIII. Historical Critics on the Critical Art 
 
 Addenda .... 
 
 General Index 
 
 Index of MSS referred to 
 
 page 
 
 411 
 422 
 
 434 
 444 
 
 453 
 462 
 
 475 
 
 485 
 487 
 
 503
 
 PART I: LITURGICAL 
 
 THE GENIUS OF THE ROMAN RITE ^ 
 
 It is with much diffidence that I venture to address any assembly 
 on the subject of this paper, or, indeed, discuss the Liturgy at all. On 
 questions connected with the origin, the relations, the extension, or the 
 history of the Roman rite, much has indeed been said and learnedly 
 written any time during this last fifty or sixty years ; much has been 
 disputed with regard to it within certain circles, and hotly disputed 
 too. Yet, after all, as the result of so much labour and zeal it cannot 
 be said, I think, that much real knowledge of the subject exists. By 
 ' real hioivledge ' I mean knowledge of such a kind as can be grasped 
 by the educated man who is no specialist, but who, regarding the 
 Roman Liturgy as a factor, and no inconsiderable factor, in the 
 religious history of the past, desires to possess some common notions 
 as to its character, compared with other rites that have existed in the 
 Christian world ; and would wish to know why, whilst they have been 
 discarded, it has become so widely spread and is now universal 
 throughout the West. Learned volume accumulates on learned 
 volume, theory is elaborated after theory, and yet the remark which 
 has been reported to me of an eminent historical writer, accustomed 
 to all the niceties of critical enquiry, has only too much justification. 
 ' In the course of my studies of the early middle ages ', he said, ' I have 
 not infrequently had need to obtain information on liturgical subjects 
 in order to understand the general history. I turn to the most 
 authorized books on the subject, and I confess I cannot understand 
 them, or bring what they say into accord with the results obtained by 
 the accepted modern methods of investigation.' 
 
 I am afraid I may have already managed to possess my hearers 
 with a somewhat unfavourable opinion in regard, generally, to the 
 subject of this essay. I should be sorry to do so, for it is really 
 a subject of deep interest, and one which it is desirable that, as 
 Catholics, we should be able to understand. And my belief is that 
 
 * A paper read at the meeting of the Historical Research Society at Archbishop's 
 House, Westminster, on May 8, 1899, and first printed in the Weekly Register, 
 May 1899 (three articles). 
 
 15S8 B
 
 2 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 the history of our sacred rites should be matter quite capable of 
 rational and simple exposition. 
 
 But our subject this evening is a much narrower one. It will be 
 well, first of all, to understand precisely what is meant by the title of 
 this essay : ' The Genius of the Roman Rite.' Some one a very long 
 time ago described Genius as ' Son of the Gods and Father of Men '. 
 It is thus we speak of the Genius of a people — the French or the 
 English, the German or the Italian ; a something intangible and 
 indefinable, it is true, but a permanent reality that we can quite well 
 apprehend ; a characteristic and distinguishing spirit that manifests 
 itself in all that that people says and does, in its history and its 
 literature ; determining the character of both, and affecting the general 
 character even of its thought. 
 
 An enquiry into the genius of the Roman rite is therefore an 
 endeavour to get at, and to recognize, the particular, the native spirit 
 animating and penetrating that rite, which differentiates it from others, 
 Gallican or Gothic, Greek or Oriental. If we can, as I say, get at this 
 and bring it into clear recognition, it is reasonable to anticipate that 
 a great step will have been taken towards understanding how it has 
 come about that this rite has so far recommended itself as to supersede 
 all others in Western Christendom. I say ' all others ', viewing the 
 Ambrosian rite as really Roman at bottom. Of course, to some minds, 
 the idea of a simple fiat of authority is sufficient explanation for any 
 or all such change. But, as a fact, it is not commonly so that great 
 changes do come about in this world. When the case is looked closely 
 into, it is generally found that sound reason and rational method, after 
 all, play the great part in human revolutions. 
 
 Our first business is to turn not to remains of antiquity, accessible 
 for the most part to the learned only, but to the authorized and official 
 Roman service books in current use, with which we are all familiar ; 
 and especially to the missal, the missal being the most important of 
 them all. Perusing the masses for the ecclesiastical year in the 
 Roman missal, or the votive masses, the attentive reader who has no 
 theories on the Liturgy, who will divest himself of book learning on 
 the subject and be content to note and observe just what is obviously 
 there, cannot fail to perceive how different in character, style, and 
 feeling are many of the prayers of the missal. Here is an example 
 which I hope will bring home what I mean ; it is in no way an 
 extreme case, and I choose it for that very reason. The prayers 
 taken for comparison are the collect, secret, and post-communion (i) for 
 All Souls Day, (2) those prescribed for the Living and the Dead to be 
 said in the third place on Ash Wednesday and during Lent. 
 
 I. Collect. — O God, the Creator and Redeemer of all the faithful.
 
 THE ROMAN RITE 3 
 
 grant to the souls of Thy servants departed the remission of all their 
 sins, that through pious supplications they may obtain the pardon 
 which they have always desired. 
 
 Secret. — Mercifully look down,0 Lord, we beseech Thee, upon this 
 Sacrifice which we offer to Thee for the souls of Thy servants ; that 
 to those to whom Thou didst grant the merit of Christian faith, Thou 
 mayest also grant its reward. 
 
 Post- Communion. — We beseech Thee, O Lord, that the prayer of 
 Thy suppliants may benefit the souls of Thy servants ; that Thou 
 mayest deliver them from all their sins, and make them partakers of 
 fhy redemption. 
 
 The following are the corresponding prayers ' for the Living and the 
 Dead ', prescribed to be said throughout Lent. 
 
 1. Colleet.—O Almighty and Eternal God, who hast dominion over 
 the living and the dead, and art merciful to all whom Thou fore- 
 knowest shall be Thine by faith and good works ; we humbly beseech 
 Thee that they for whom we have determined to offer up our prayers, 
 whether the present world still detains them in the flesh, or the future 
 hath already received them out of the body, may, by the intercession 
 of all Thy saints, and the clemency of Thy pity, obtain the pardon of 
 all their sins. 
 
 Secret. — O God, who alone knowest the number of the elect who are 
 to be placed in supernal felicity, grant, we beseech Thee, that, by the 
 intercession of all Thy Saints, the names of all those who have been 
 commended to our prayers, and of all the faithful, may be kept in that 
 book of blessed predestination. 
 
 Post-Comvmnion. — May the mysteries which we have received 
 purify us, we beseech Thee, O Almighty and Merciful God, and by 
 the intercession of all Thy Saints, grant that this Thy sacrament 
 may not be made unto us a means of condemnation, but of pardon 
 and salvation ; may it be the washing away of sins ; the strength of 
 the weak ; protection against all the dangers of the world ; and the 
 remission of all the sins of the faithful, living and dead. 
 
 It suffices, I think, only to listen to the reading of these prayers to 
 perceive how different are the two sets in spirit, in feeling, and in the 
 run of ideas. In the one set the ideas are as simple and elementary 
 as the expression is pregnant and precise : they are plain matter of 
 fact, without imagination at all. In the second set we are in a different 
 region — in one aspect vague and figurative, as with the ' book of 
 blessed predestination ' ; in another, in the midst of theological ideas, 
 the fruit of Christian reflection and speculation — with ' the number of 
 the elect ' and ' those whom Thou foreknowest shall be Thine by faith 
 and good works '. Again, the plain designation, ' the souls of Thy 
 
 B 2
 
 4 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 servants departed ', becomes in the second set, ' those whom the future 
 world hath already received out of the body '. Once more the simple 
 petition for the forgiveness of sins and the partaking of the redemption 
 becomes in the second set of prayers quite a litany. 
 
 I am not now saying ' this is Roman' or ' that is not Roman ' ; I am 
 not even saying that these two sets of prayers could not have been 
 written by one and the same man. But I do say that in that case his 
 mood, and sense, and feeling, issuing in his style, must have been very 
 different on the two occasions ; and that there is a difference as great 
 and as perceptible, as between the style of Addison and the style of 
 Macaulay. 
 
 But when, on going further and endeavouring to trace back the 
 history of the prayers just read, up to the earliest point at which I have 
 any knowledge of them, I find that the one set comes from a book 
 that is certainly, though not in every detail of its contents, Roman, 
 and that the other set comes from a quarter that is not Roman, but 
 may conveniently be called Gallican, a new aspect is given to the whole 
 question, and I begin to see possibilities of historical investigation. 
 
 It has been said that one reason for choosing the foregoing example 
 taken from within the covers of the Roman missal is that the contrast 
 is not extreme. To illustrate, however, the differing ' genius ' of 
 liturgical rites, I take a second example and compare a preface of the 
 Roman rite, and the corresponding preface from the Spanish Gothic 
 rite commonly called the Mozarabic. 
 
 Here is that marvellous preface for Pentecost in the Roman missal : 
 
 ' It is truly meet and just, right and salutary, that we should always, 
 and in all places, give thanks to Thee, O Holy Lord, Father Almighty, 
 Eternal God, through Jesus Christ our Lord ; Who ascending above all 
 heavens, and sitting at Thy right hand, poured forth the promised Holy 
 Ghost this day upon the children of adoption. Wherefore with joy 
 that knows no bounds the whole universe ^ exults ; the Powers, too, 
 above and the Angelic Hosts together hymn Thy glory, saying 
 evermore: Holy, Holy, Holy.' 
 
 It strikes one immediately as characteristic that, whilst in its preface 
 for Pentecost our Roman rite takes only some eight lines to com- 
 memorate that great mystery, the Gothic preface takes some eighty 
 lines. It would be impossible and wearisome to translate the whole ; 
 but I give the beginning and the end as shewing the contrast with the 
 Roman formula : 
 
 ' It is meet and right, O God Almighty, to acknowledge, as far as 
 
 * Totus in orbe terrarum mundus. The prayers in which the Roman genius 
 expresses itself are truly hard to render ; there have been in the past samples of 
 excellence in that line, and yet to the fastidious ear and sense, even these, in all 
 their old world beauty, are not satisfying after all.
 
 THE ROMAN RITE 5 
 
 man can do, Thy gracious benefit, and ever in yearly round to celebrate 
 tile gift of eternal salvation granted this day. For who shall keep 
 silent on the advent of Thy Holy Spirit, since through Thy Apostles 
 every tongue of the barbarians finds voice ? But who can sufficiently 
 tell the illapse of that fire on this day ? ' 
 
 The preface then goes on by slow meander to reach and to develop 
 the theme that the preservation of the unity of the faith is not preju- 
 diced by the variety of languages spoken by the faithful. It proceeds, 
 by and by, to touch on mystic meanings involved in the seven weeks 
 or fifty days of Eastertide ; and comes round at length again to the 
 idea of the unity of the faith in the diversity of the nations. The 
 preface closes thus : ' O flame that in burning confers fruitfulness, 
 whom every intellectual creature, vivified by it, confesses to be the 
 Lord Omnipotent ; participating in whose fire in more abundant 
 measure the Cherubim and Seraphim, magnifying the equality of the 
 Holiness Divine and the Omnipotence of the Trinity, never resting 
 and never wearying in their office, amidst the song of choirs of the 
 celestial host, of crying aloud with everlasting jubilation, adore and 
 glorify, saying : Holy, Holy, Holy.' 
 
 Prefaces, even those for the greatest mysteries of religion, worked 
 out into trifling considerations, are no rare exception in these early 
 Galilean and Spanish books. Read in the student's closet or the 
 library, these books are of the deepest interest ; they contain also 
 prayers of great beauty ; but when regarded as living rites, as giving 
 the prayers actually said and sung in public, they not only proclaim 
 themselves as the productions of a late, and sometimes of a barbarous 
 age, but they evince a tone of mind, and are the product of a spirit 
 alien to that which we have now become accustomed to regard as most 
 befitting the Divine worship, tutored as we have so long been in the 
 sobriety of Roman forms. Many fine things have been said of these 
 books, and much sentiment has been expended on them, but they could 
 not stand the test — a simple one — of a full translation into English. 
 
 Features that are most characteristic of them are not, indeed, wholly 
 wanting in the Roman missal, as, for instance, in the third prayer for 
 the blessing of the palms on Palm Sunday, which begins much like an 
 ordinary collect, and then breaks forth into an expository instruction 
 on the mystical meaning of the ceremony. ' The branches of palms, 
 then, signify His triumph ', &c. ; — an exposition quite in place in 
 an address to the people, but surely not so, according to our now 
 common notions, in a prayer addressed to God ; yet the style here 
 adopted is perfectly consonant with what is found in the prefaces of 
 the early Galilean and Spanish missals. 
 
 We are, of course, now accustomed to a printed Roman missal, and
 
 6 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 to regard this stereotyped book, through practice, as a homogeneous 
 whole. If we had nothing but the test of differences of style, it w^ould 
 be impossible to get beyond speculation as to the possibly diverse 
 elements of which the missal may be composed. As experience 
 shews, scientific discussions on such a basis have no end, simply 
 because no external criterion can be brought to bear on the subject. 
 They are commonly, therefore, best given over altogether. Fortu- 
 nately, however, in the present case such a criterion is available. We 
 are able to decompose the present Roman missal, refer it to its sources, 
 and recognize out of what elements or documents it is made up. The 
 question, therefore, is no longer matter of arbitrary speculation, but of 
 investigation into matter of fact. On this point, even so late as five 
 years ago, I could not have spoken with full confidence. Since then 
 I have seen, I think, every manuscript of real importance for the 
 history of the missal at the critical period, and know now what 
 precisely are the limits, or the contents, of the two documents, or 
 volumes, of which our present missal was made up, and know also in 
 a general but, I think, sufificient way what was the gradual course 
 of the fusion of these two documents. One of them may be taken as 
 genuinely Roman, without foreign admixture ; the other, though the 
 substratum, indeed the bulk of it, is Roman, has been considerably 
 modified by Gallican hands. In the course of the fusion several other 
 non-Roman items have been introduced. This process was going on 
 during the whole of the ninth century in France and Germany. As 
 to the date at which the book thus brought together was received and 
 adopted by the Roman Church, we are altogether in the dark ; but the 
 Roman missal of the present day is unimpeachable evidence that it is 
 a composite work ; whilst the evidence is equally clear that its 
 compilation did not take place in Rome, and that Rome only adopted 
 it ready made. 
 
 It has become possible, therefore, out of the whole complex or 
 amalgam, to get at, and separate out, the genuine Roman elements ; 
 and it is evident that through these latter only is it possible to realize 
 what is the special contribution made by the Roman genius to the 
 Liturgy of the Western Church. This can best be seen by some 
 particular example ; and to give such an example must be the next 
 stage of our enquiry. 
 
 As the most convenient one, we may take what we are all familiar 
 with, viz, the text of the mass as it now stands in the Roman missal ; 
 and, disembarrassing it of foreign elements, put ourselves in a position 
 to consider the pure Roman product. These foreign elements may 
 be called to a large extent French, and, for the most part, made their 
 appearance in the Roman mass only in the later middle ages.
 
 THE ROMAN RITE 7 
 
 1. The Asperges, the psalm hidica with the following versicles, in 
 fact everything said up to, and including, the prayers said by the 
 priest when he ascends to the altar, are all non-Roman and of 
 comparatively late introduction. 
 
 2. The Kyrie clcison was introduced at a much earlier period, viz. 
 the second half of the fifth century. It was imported from the East ; 
 it was not a native Roman element of the mass. 
 
 3. The same may be said of the Gloria in cxcclsis ; and of the 
 Credo ; the former may have been introduced into the Roman mass in 
 the sixth, the second in the eleventh century. 
 
 4. The whole of the prayers accompanying the acts of the offertory 
 and the censing of the altar, the psalm at the lavabo, and the Siiscipe 
 fancta Trinitas, are all of late mediaeval introduction, and they again 
 are borrowed from what may be conveniently called French use. 
 
 5. The early history of the AgJius Dei is obscure, nor is it quite 
 clear whether it was actually in use in Rome before the latter part 
 of the seventh century or not.^ 
 
 6. The three prayers said before the communion, and all that 
 follows the collect called the ' post-communion ' (except the lie viissa 
 est), are again late, and all borrowed. 
 
 The purely Roman elements of our mass remain as follows : 
 
 1. The Collect. 
 
 2. The Epistle. 
 
 3. The Blessing before the Gospel. 
 
 4. The Gospel. 
 
 5. The Orate Fr aires and the collect, called the ' secret ', and all that 
 follows up to the Pax Domini (viz. the Preface, Canon, Lord's Prayer, 
 and the short prayer immediately following). 
 
 6. The collect called the ' post-communion '. 
 
 7. The Ite missa est. 
 
 In addition to this, account is to be taken of four items of chant, 
 viz. the Introit, Gradual, Offertory, and Communion. These, it is 
 true, are not Roman in the sense that they originated in Rome and 
 spread from thence elsewhere. They were adopted in Rome, speaking 
 generally, as soon as they made their appearance and began fairly to 
 spread. 
 
 Nothing, then, can possibly be more simple than the composition 
 (mind, I am not now speaking of ceremonies) of the early Roman mass, 
 say about the middle of the fifth century. The singing of a psalm, the 
 'introit', by the choir at the beginning, on the entry of the clergy; 
 a prayer or collect said by the celebrant ; followed by readings from 
 
 ' [As to Pope Sergius and the Agmis Dei, see the paper The Litany of Saints 
 in the Stowe Missal, No. VII below.]
 
 8 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 the Bible, separated by a psalm sung by the choir which we call the 
 ' gradual '. After the collection of the offerings of bread and wine 
 from the people, during which the choir sing another psalm — our 
 • offertory ' — the celebrant reads a second collect having reference to 
 the offered gifts, which collect we call the ' secret '. Next comes, as an 
 introduction to the great action of the sacrifice, what we call the 
 ' preface ', said by the celebrant, and followed by a solemn choral song 
 of praise to God, the Sanctus. Then follows the great act of sacrifice 
 itself embodying the consecration, viz. the prayer called the Canon. As 
 a preparation for the communion of the priest and people, the celebrant 
 says the Lord's Prayer, adding a few words which are, as it were, the 
 echo of that holy prayer, our Libera nos, quaesumus. Then comes the 
 communion of the people, during which a psalm is sung by the choir, 
 which we call the ' communion '. Finally the celebrant says a third 
 collect, our ' post-communion ', and the assembly is dismissed. 
 
 It is to be observed that these collects are extremely short ; three or 
 four lines, as we have them in our missal to-day. 
 
 What can be more simple? It is the mass reduced to its least 
 possible expression. There is not a single element that is not essential 
 — unless, indeed, it were contended that the readings from the Bible, 
 and the preface and Saizctiis, together with the singing of psalms at 
 the entry of the clergy, before the gospel, and during the acts of 
 collecting the offerings and the communion, are superfluous. 
 
 Turning now from the parts or items of which the native Roman 
 mass is composed to the ceremonial accompanying them, we shall find 
 this same character of simplicity confirmed. The documents to which 
 we have to trust for information on this matter do not in their present 
 shape go back further than the close of the eighth century, and they 
 not infrequently differ in points of detail ; but they certainly embody 
 customs observed some two or three centuries before. Their late date 
 does not affect the utility of these ceremonials, or Ordos as they are 
 called, for this reason : even supposing they were actually drawn up in 
 the eighth century, of one thing we may be certain, viz. that they do 
 not give us the simplification of a more elaborate ceremonial in use at 
 an earlier date, but, so far as changes have been made, they would 
 represent if anything the elaboration of something once even more 
 simple. But I, for one, have little doubt that, with the deduction of 
 a detail here or there (for which deduction a specific reason could be 
 given), we possess in these ordos, substantially, the ceremonial of the 
 Roman mass of the sixth, or even fifth, century. 
 
 To represent this ceremonial to the mind's eye is, perhaps, to-day 
 no such easy matter, now that long habit has accustomed us to much 
 that we view as a natural accompaniment of the service. For instance,
 
 THE ROMAN RITE 9 
 
 we do not realize at once how much of novel and imposing ceremonial 
 is involved in the addition, in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, of 
 the single act of the elevation of the Host and Chalice, with its 
 accompanying lights and torches, censings, bell-ringings, and genu- 
 flexions. Next, all ideas of censing the altar, the elements for the 
 sacrifice, or persons, are alien to the native Roman rite, and have been 
 introduced into it from elsewhere in the course of centuries. In trying 
 to figure to ourselves the true and unadulterated Roman ceremonial of 
 the mass,^ we must conceive ritual pomp as confined to two moments : 
 first, the entry of the celebrant into the church and up to the altar ; 
 secondly, in connexion with the singing of the gospel. We have only 
 an account of a great feast day and of a papal, or, what was the same 
 thing, an episcopal mass ; but the general character and proportion of 
 the ceremonial is not thereby seriously affected, as in those days the 
 determinant was not so much the dignity of the celebrant as the 
 dignity of the service. 
 
 The procession of the celebrant and his ministers to the altar on 
 great feasts must have been highly imposing with its seven acolytes 
 bearing torches, seven deacons, seven sub-deacons, one of whom 
 carried a fuming censer ; all in the procession, from the Pope himself 
 down to the acolytes, being vested in what the Romans called plane tac, 
 and we, chasubles. 
 
 The choir of singers was already stationed in the presbyterium 
 ranged in two groups, one on either side of the sanctuary in front of the 
 altar. On their beginning the introit the procession enters the church. 
 Advancing up the presbytery the seven acolytes range themselves four 
 on one side and three on the other, to allow the procession to pass up 
 through their midst ; further on the sub-deacons do the same. The 
 celebrant arriving at the foot of the altar bends low, then, standing 
 erect, prays to himself for a short space, gives the kiss of peace to his 
 attendant ministers, and prays again a short space during the conclusion 
 of the introit.'^ Meantime the deacons go up the steps of the altar two 
 and two, and kiss the ends of the altar on either side, returning to the 
 celebrant, who now ascends the altar steps, kisses the gospel book 
 lying upon the altar, and afterwards the altar itself. Then he goes to 
 his seat. 
 
 Saluting the people -with. Pax vobis (or, if the celebrant were a priest, 
 probably Dominus vobiscnm) and Orcvms, he says the collect and then 
 sits down to listen to the epistle, as do all the attendant ministers 
 
 ^ In the following brief sketch certain purely ritual (as distinct from ceremonial) 
 acts, like the offering of the gifts by the celebrant, the fraction, the commixtion, &c., 
 which are not of a character to strike the onlooker, are passed over in silence. 
 
 * The gradual addition of the chant of the Kyrie, Gloria, Agnus Dei, and Credo, 
 from the fifth to the eleventh century, did not affect the ceremonial of the mass.
 
 lo LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 except the sub-deacons, who stand on either side of the altar. A 
 sub-deacon goes to an ambo or pulpit unaccompanied, and without 
 any sort of ceremonial reads the epistle. The ensuing ceremonies 
 connected with the reading of the gospel, with the attendant lights 
 and censing of the book, are somewhat elaborate and indeed much 
 the same as now, except that the gospel was sung (as it is in some 
 places still sung) from a pulpit. At the close of the gospel, the book 
 was kissed by all within the sanctuary. 
 
 It may be said that with this the ceremonial parts of the old Roman 
 mass are over, just as the sacrifice is about to begin. The first act in 
 it is what our rubrics call unfolding of the corporal. I fear I should 
 shock my readers were I to use the expression of our common 
 parlance, ' spreading the table-cloth ' ; and yet this is the term which 
 exactly corresponds to what is prescribed in the earliest extant Roman 
 rubrics. In those days a corporal was a cloth large enough to cover 
 the altar. An acolyte stands holding the chalice with the corporal 
 laid upon it ; he hands the corporal to a deacon, who, with another 
 deacon, mounts to the altar, one standing at either end ; the deacon 
 begins to unfold the corporal, throws one end of it to the other deacon, 
 and so they spread it out over the altar ; just what may be seen done 
 any day in the laying of a table-cloth. I have been particular in 
 noting and describing this act in plain terms for a reason. ' How 
 homely ! ' some one may be tempted to exclaim. Now what is called 
 ' homeliness ', of any kind, is the very last quality I should be disposed 
 to predicate of the true Roman rite. The true Roman cannot forget 
 his dignity. The thing had to be done, and it was done in a plain 
 and simple but the most practical manner. It is all only and simply 
 practical. There are rites and times we know of that would have 
 encompassed the act with symbolism and shrouded it in mystery. 
 Mystery never flourished in the clear Roman atmosphere, and sym- 
 bolism was no product of the Roman religious mind. Christian 
 symbolism is not of pure Roman birth, nor a native product of the 
 Roman spirit. 
 
 The celebrant now goes down to collect the offerings of bread and 
 wine from the people, or, at least, from some, the most notable of 
 them, whilst the psalm we call the 'offertory' is being sung. There 
 are careful and somewhat lengthy directions as to the mode in which 
 these offerings are to be collected. It is of importance, however, to 
 observe that these directions are not ceremonial, but, just like the 
 direction to unfold the corporal, simply practical, purely practical, 
 to prevent blundering and to ensure, if possible, some measure of 
 good order. 
 
 After receiving the offerings, the celebrant returns to his seat and
 
 THE ROMAN RITE ii 
 
 washes his hands, whilst the deacons prepare the bread and wine on 
 the altar. When all is ready, the celebrant comes from his seat to the 
 altar, stands in front of it, kisses it, and says the collect called 
 the 'secret'. Meantime, the various ministers, priests, and deacons 
 range themselves behind him, one and all with head deeply bowed, 
 whilst the sub-deacons go behind the altar and stand erect, facing the 
 celebrant, to answer him when he says Per omnia sacaila saeadornm 
 at the end of the secret, and the Sursum corda, and the Graiias 
 agamus. The singing of the Sanctns now beginning, the sub-deacons 
 bend low and the celebrant also. When the singing of the Sanctns is 
 finished, the celebrant raises himself, and, alone in the assembly 
 standing erect, whilst all others remain with head bowed, he begins 
 the Canon in the midst of profound silence.^ 
 
 There is nothing to break this silence until he raises his voice to say 
 Nobis quoqne peccatoribns, when the sub-deacons stand erect. At the 
 words Per qnem haec omnia, the principal deacon lifts up the chalice 
 from the altar, to enable the celebrant to touch the side of the chalice 
 with the Sacred Host at the words Per ipsum et cum ipso,the doxology 
 with which the Canon concludes. 
 
 There may be doubts as to the position of the kiss of peace in the 
 early Roman mass owing to the transfer made by St Gregory of 
 the Pater noster to its present position. But in view of the terms used 
 by St Innocent I, it would seem more probable that the Pax was 
 given at this point, immediately at the close of the Canon. The kiss 
 of peace is given by the celebrant to the most dignified among the 
 clergy, is passed on to the rest, and then to the people. Meanwhile 
 the celebrant returns to his chair to say, as a preparation for the 
 communion, the Lord's Prayer and a short prayer, at the least 
 equivalent to the Libera nos quaesnmus of our present missal. 
 
 The altar is now cleared by the ministers of the chalice and 
 consecrated Hosts. The directions for the breaking of the Hosts, 
 preparatory to the communion, are again minute and careful, as at the 
 offertory ; here too, however, there is nothing purely ceremonial. But 
 the impression produced by the general communion of all the minis- 
 tering clergy in the sanctuary must have been, in the highest degree, 
 solemn and imposing. Next follows the communion of the people, 
 during which the psalm, which we call the ' communion ', was sung. 
 This finished, the celebrant went to the altar and said the collect, 
 
 ' [It seems to me doubtful if this practice of the silent recital of the Canon 
 (for which see Appendix to The Liturgical Hotnilies of Narsai, Cambridge 
 Texts and Studies viii I, pp. 121-126) can date, in Rome, earlier than the seventh 
 century, and if it be not a Byzantine reform. But, in any case, we are at present 
 in a position to do no more than offer opinions, or suggestions, on the subject.]
 
 12 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 now called the ' post-communion '. A deacon sang Itc missa est ; the 
 people answered Deo gratias, and the procession of the clergy 
 returned to the sacristy. 
 
 I know that many later writers have found defects and deficiencies 
 in the simple order of the Roman mass, as given in the earliest extant 
 books, have detected a hiatus here, and a gap there, which has been 
 supplied by the analogy of other rites or later practice.^ These I have 
 disregarded, on the ground that the original sources, taken as they 
 stand, give a perfectly reasonable and sufficient account without these 
 extraneous and conjectural helps; they present, perhaps, not much 
 more than the essentials of a mass, but still all the essentials. 
 
 Turning, however, from the mass in particular to the Roman rite at 
 large as now practised, it will be found, if the matter be looked into, 
 that the same rule holds good, viz. that the element which can be 
 identified as Roman is simple, and that the elaboration is a foreign 
 graft on that plain original stock ; for instance, the rites of Palm 
 Sunday, or the Reproaches of Good Friday, or the elaborate ceremonial 
 now attending the dedication of a church, or ordinations, or the 
 consecration of a bishop. 
 
 In fact, I think it would not be untrue to say that what is con- 
 sidered most picturesque, or attractive, or devout, or affective— in 
 a word, what is most ' interesting ', as the saying is, in the services of 
 our religion, just those things indeed which in the popular mind are 
 considered distinctive of ' Romanism ', and which go to make up, in 
 the main, what some people call the ' sensuousness of the Roman 
 Catholic ritual ', form precisely that element in it which is not 
 originally Roman at all, but has been gradually borrowed, imported^ 
 adopted, in the course of ages. Of course it would take a very long 
 time to make a full survey and give historical evidence in each 
 particular case. But I think that the general position is unassailable, 
 viz. that the genius of the native Roman rite is marked by simplicity, 
 practicality, a great sobriety and self-control, gravity and dignity ; 
 but there it stops. And for a rite truly Roman this is just what we 
 might expect. We must not separate in idea the Roman of pre- 
 Christian days and the Roman under the Christian dispensation ; at 
 bottom in his instincts, in his powers, in his limitations, he is the same. 
 It has been justly said that the Roman possessed the receptive but 
 not the creative imagination; or, as Newman has it, in a blunt 
 way, ' Rome, except in the case of some great Popes, has never shown 
 
 ^ I may say, in passing, that there seems a fairly good presumption that the 
 prayer called Super sindo/ion, still to be found in the Ambrosian missal, may 
 have formed an item of the early Roman mass; but I do not think this can be said 
 of any other suggested additional item.
 
 THE ROMAN RITE 13 
 
 any great gift of origination.' As we view the character of the Roman 
 as he has revealed himself in the course of his long history, we feel 
 that it was not in his soul that arose the idea of sackcloth and ashes, 
 and the priests, the Lord's ministers, weeping between the porch and 
 the altar ; or even the loud Hosannas to the Son of David, who came 
 meek, sitting on an ass, the people casting their garments in the way. 
 But it is precisely in this simplicity, this practicality, this gravity, this 
 absence of poetry, of that quality which we describe by the word 
 ' interesting', and of what our friends call ' sensuousness', that lies the 
 value and the importance of the native Roman rite for the history of 
 public worship in western Europe. 
 
 This paper may be fittingly closed by a rapid review of that history 
 as illustrating the importance and also the limitations of the role 
 played by the Roman genius therein. 
 
 It is commonly said that the main difference between the mass, or 
 rather the mass books, of the East and of the West lies in this, that 
 whilst the former supply an unvarying form to be said by the priest 
 from year's end to year's end, the mass in the West varies from day to 
 day according to the ecclesiastical season and the feast. It is obvious 
 that this variety, which prevails not in the Roman only, but in all the 
 various rites that have been in use in the West, could not have come 
 into existence until the ecclesiastical year was in some measure formed 
 or developed. This did not take place until the second half of the 
 fourth century. 
 
 We thus obtain a terminus a quo for dating the contents, so far as 
 they are variable, of all extant missals, Roman, Gothic, Gallican, 
 Ambrosian. Notices of the composition of masses and mass books in 
 the fifth century are not uncommon. Nothing, to my mind, can be 
 more unsatisfactory than the attempts that have been made to fix the 
 dates of prayers by means of allusions supposed to be contained in 
 them to current events ; and we must be content to be ignorant, though 
 if people will want to date things, it may be safe to say that the larger 
 bulk of the liturgical formulae to be found in the earliest Roman and 
 Gallican mass books probably comes from the fifth or sixth century ; 
 some few may date from the fourth ; though which these are can be 
 no more than a matter of uncertain conjecture. 
 
 Starting from the earliest extant manuscript missals, which are of 
 the seventh and eighth centuries, two propositions may be laid down 
 that admit of no denial : 
 
 I. That there is no possibility of mistaking a Gallican or Gothic for 
 a Roman book, and vice versa ; and that, not for any recondite reason 
 that may appeal only to the professed scholar, not for any ritual 
 peculiarity on which the rubrician would be called in to decide, but
 
 14 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 for a reason plain on the face of the books themselves — viz. a style, 
 a run of thought, and a mode of expression, so clearly different as to 
 declare the two things to be the product of the mind, spirit, and genius 
 of two different peoples. 
 
 2. That the Roman character comes out nowhere more clearly, 
 more purely, than in the missal which alone we certainly know to 
 have been in actual use in Rome at the very close of the eighth 
 century — the missal which is commonly called ' Gregorian ', from 
 St Gregory the Great. There are, therefore, perfectly good grounds 
 for saying that, up to this date, the rite of native Roman growth had 
 preserved itself in Rome with very little of foreign admixture. But 
 even so, the Roman mass contained in this book bears, as I believe, 
 marks of Constantinopolitan influence. The adoption of the Kyrie 
 from the East has been already mentioned. Pope Gregory the Great, 
 who before his elevation to the papacy had been the representative 
 of the Pope and the Roman Church in the imperial city of Constan- 
 tinople, was accused by some zealous persons of tampering with the 
 Roman liturgy, in the intent to approximate to Greek practice. 
 St Gregory ably excuses himself, but he does not say the charge is 
 untrue and baseless ; and there was, as I read the facts, warrant for 
 the charge. The litanies which he introduced into Rome, and to 
 which he gave such prominence, the sedulous deprecations for mercy, 
 mercy, mercy, were, like that great element of the early litany, the 
 Kyrie, an importation into Rome from abroad. The litany is no item 
 of Roman manufacture. But Gregory — if one of those great Roman 
 Pontiffs endowed, as Newman says, with the gift of origination — was 
 also a Roman, heart and soul, through and through ; and it is not 
 from Gregory, or in a book bearing his name, that we can expect 
 such alterations as might tend to obliterate or would obscure the 
 essentially Roman characteristics of the mass book of his Church 
 as a product of the Roman genius, in all its clearness, and simplicity, 
 and precision, and order, and practical sense, but also in what may 
 be called the severity of its lines, and its freedom from all that can 
 be called sentiment and effusiveness, or imagination, or mystery. 
 
 Turning to France, its mass books, as we have them, are in no 
 wise such pure product of the Gallic mind and sentiment. They are 
 full of fragments or entire prayers copied outright from Roman 
 books— not indeed the mass book then in use in Rome, but an earlier 
 one which the Gregorian had displaced. This discarded Roman book, 
 enriched with additions from Galilean sources according to individual 
 fancy and discretion, was also, in widely spread regions, adopted 
 bodily in the Prankish kingdom. 
 
 The state of things in France, so far as mass and missal are con-
 
 THE ROMAN RITE 15 
 
 cerned, at the accession of Charles the Great in 769, may be summed 
 up in two words : liturgical anarchy. 
 
 If by descent and blood a Frank, Charles was in soul and spirit 
 a Roman ; an autocrat indeed, but a man for whom autocracy meant 
 not the unbridled will of the ruler, but law and order and enlightened 
 administration in the real interests and for the true welfare of the 
 whole body politic. We have all heard of the monarch once designated 
 as ' Mon frere le sacristain '. Charles the Great was tenfold more ' the 
 sacristan ' than Joseph the Second. He made wars ; he made laws ; 
 he made himself Roman Emperor ; he loved letters ; but he enjoyed 
 his ecclesiastical administration and Church business of all sorts, in 
 every detail, ritual and other. Never was he more pleased with 
 himself than when presiding in his own chapel and setting everybody 
 to rights. To a mind like his the liturgical anarchy prevailing in his 
 kingdom was intolerable ; and, with his interests, the subject was sure, 
 by and by, to engage his attention. When that time came, common 
 sense dictated the measures most proper to put an end to the existing 
 condition of affairs. The remedy was to be sought from without. 
 The cardinal point of the policy of his house was close union with 
 Rome ; at Rome he had found in use a thoroughly sensible, well- 
 ordered mass book — the Gregorian. This he adopted as the book 
 which in future was to be brought into use throughout the length and 
 breadth of his dominions. On this point there must be no question 
 or parley. But he had also the ruler's instinct, and enough perhaps 
 of the Prankish spirit to recognize that to many, perhaps, this pure 
 Roman book must seem to be dry and jejune, or prove in practice 
 a curb, too hard to be borne, on natures more florid, or more sensitive, 
 or more rich. As a practical statesman he forthwith caused this 
 Gregorian mass book to be accordingly enriched with a supplement 
 of additions selected from the liturgical books already in use in 
 France. 
 
 This was only a beginning of changes. During the ninnth cetury 
 the study of sacred rites, and especially of the Roman liturgy, became 
 in France quite a fashionable pursuit ; not only Charles the Great, 
 but his son also, the Emperor Lewis the Pious, and again Lewis's 
 son, the Emperor Charles the Bald, shewed themselves greatly in- 
 terested in this branch of sacred science. The ninth century evidenced, 
 no less than later phases of the history of liturgy, how loud and 
 strenuous advocacy on the part of individuals of strict Roman ob- 
 servance could be found a singularly convenient means for pressing 
 on others, under cover of the august Roman name, private preferences ; 
 and it is no wonder if, at the close of the century, the Roman mass 
 book, in the hands of its Frankish admirers, assumed a form and
 
 i6 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 embodied rites which Pope Hadrian, who sent it to Charles the Great, 
 would not have recognized as his own. 
 
 Rome itself seems to have taken the least possible interest in all 
 that was going on; and ended in accepting from the hands of the 
 stranger, in place of the old Gregoriamun^ the mass book thus 
 compiled in France. There is no evidence whatever to shew when 
 this change took place in Rome ; nor do I know of any indication 
 even, except such as may be involved in this one fact, that so late as 
 the last quarter of the ninth century, the Gregorian mass book, sent 
 from Rome to Charles the Great, was to be found in use in northern 
 Italy, pure and free from Charles's addition. 
 
 The history of the liturgy during the later middle ages is simply 
 and merely a history of an attempt (and a successful attempt) to 
 accommodate the native Roman books and rites to the more devout, 
 or effusive, or imaginative genius of the nations which had one and all 
 adopted them ; and of the admission of these changes to a greater or 
 less extent by Rome or the Roman Curia, giving them thereby for 
 the benefit of posterity the authority of the Roman name. It was in 
 the course of these ages that the rite was enriched with a dramatic 
 element which it had hitherto so greatly lacked. It was then that, 
 subjected to this influence, actions were so largely added, expressive 
 of the words used in the service ; or prayers were introduced (as, for 
 instance, during the whole of the offertory in our present order of 
 the mass) which should correspond to each detail of the actions 
 performed. Practically at that time there was, strictly speaking, no 
 Roman rite left to follow. The Pope was very commonly, from the 
 beginning of the twelfth century, absent from Rome ; the Papal 
 Chapel might be anywhere ; and the observance of the churches in 
 Rome itself sank, whilst the offices performed in the majestic Gothic 
 cathedrals, now rising on every side, were ever increasing in dignity 
 and splendour. This was the epoch of the formation of a rite that 
 may not inaptly be called Romano-French, almost the last relics of 
 which have disappeared in our own day, unless, indeed, the compound 
 called ' Lyons-Roman ' can be regarded as a survival. This Romano- 
 French rite was possessed of just those qualities of picturesque and 
 interesting elaboration in which the native Roman rite was so notably 
 deficient ; it is this rite which has excited to so large an extent the 
 admiration and the interest of those who have occupied themselves 
 with the historical study of liturgy in the past two generations. 
 
 The final settlement of the papacy in Rome in the fifteenth century 
 brought little change, so far as the liturgy is concerned. The diaries 
 of the Papal ceremoniars which now begin, copies of which are to 
 be found in most of the great public libraries of Europe (and among
 
 THE ROMAN RITE i7 
 
 the rest, in the British Museum), give the fullest and most elaborate 
 details on Roman liturgy, as exhibited in the Papal Chapel and the 
 great churches of Rome at the close of the fifteenth and in the first 
 half of the sixteenth century, and explain how these were no longer, 
 as at an earlier period, models for imitation by the rest of Western 
 Christendom. An interesting correspondence between St Charles 
 Borromeo and some Roman friends gives a sufficient idea of the 
 state of the minor parish churches of Rome, and the services performed 
 therein, about the year 1560. 
 
 Taking a survey of western Europe as a whole, it was in much the 
 same condition of liturgical anarchy as that in which Charles the 
 Great had found his own realm some eight centuries before. The 
 Roman rite was the only one in use, except in the province of 
 Milan ; ^ but each church or diocese had modified it at discretion. 
 There was, in face of recent movements, need once more of setting 
 up a norm or type, and one somewhat more simple, to which the 
 various local churches should conform. Then, as eight centuries 
 before, in practice only one rite presented itself as possible for general 
 adoption — viz. that of the local Church of Rome. 
 
 Fortunately, in accordance with a trait in the Roman character, 
 the new settlement of the Roman books, made in accordance with 
 the desire of the Council of Trent, was based on existing practice 
 without any elaborate antiquarian investigation whether that practice 
 was due to foreign influence, or how far it was of genuine Roman 
 origin. As a fact, some ancient manuscripts then in the Vatican 
 Library were examined preparatory to settling the text of the missal 
 put forth by St Pius V ; but, fortunately, I repeat, these were not of 
 an earlier date than the eleventh or twelfth century, and were books 
 which issued from the union of the Gregorian, or true Roman, missal 
 with the compilation made in France by the direction of Charles the 
 Great towards the close of the eighth century. 
 
 With the missal and breviary of St Pius V, the Pontifical of 
 Gregory XIII, the Ritual of Paul V, and, finally, the Caeremoniale 
 Episcoporum of Urban VIII, the history of the Roman liturgy may- 
 be said to be closed ; there have indeed been alterations and revisions 
 since, but the changes made have been comparatively unimportant. 
 
 From the fact that the issue of these Roman service books of the 
 sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, with their adoption by all the 
 churches of the West, closes, and doubtless finally closes, that chapter 
 of liturgical history,^ it must not be inferred that the different racial 
 
 * I use these words in a popular, not (as I understand the matter) in a 'scientific' 
 sense. 
 
 ^ [Since this was written we have had a root and branch reform of the Breviary 
 
 ltS8 C
 
 i8 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 tendencies of mind and spirit, which exhibited themselves in the 
 Roman or Gothic and Gallican missals of the sixth or seventh or eighth 
 century, and are so clearly evidenced in the modifications to which 
 the Roman rite was subjected in the later middle ages, were no longer 
 active nor seeking to assert themselves in public worship in our 
 churches ; but that spirit has gone another way to work. In the 
 middle ages that effusive, affective, and devotional spirit continually 
 made itself felt in modifications in the liturgical books themselves, 
 and in the mode of carrying out the strictly ofificial or liturgical 
 public services. This explains the great variety and diversity of the 
 rituals, missals, and breviaries of later mediaeval times ; and it explains 
 also how the books of devotion of those days, contrary to what is 
 common now, were drawn up on the lines of the official service books 
 themselves ; or, as some people have put it, ' there were no popular 
 devotions in those days.' But this was only because the popular 
 devotional spirit expressed itself with freedom and liberty in the 
 strictly liturgical services of the various local churches. 
 
 By the action of St Pius V and his successors in stamping the 
 Roman books put forth by them with a definitive character, and by 
 the institution of a Congregation of Rites designed to keep observ- 
 ances on the lines laid down in those books, such manipulation of 
 the public service books of the Church as was common in the middle 
 ages in every country in Europe was destined to be finally put an 
 end to. But the spirit then active has never ceased to be active still, 
 and it still finds a field for its operations. Unable to act inside and 
 on the liturgy itself, it acts with yet greater freedom without. One 
 path shut up, it seeks its ends by another. And this is the explana- 
 tion of the rapid growth, the wonderful variety, and great development 
 in the last two or three centuries of what we call, to distinguish them 
 from the fixed official services, ' devotions ' ; whilst these again are 
 evidence that the two spirits, betraying themselves so clearly in the 
 first mass books of which we have knowledge, exist in their duality 
 still. 
 
 This is the explanation, too, of that contrast which so many writers 
 have drawn between the tone of our official prayer books, the missal, 
 the breviary, and the rest, and the books of devotion in general use 
 amongst us. To mention a single name : Dr Pusey was very fond 
 of pointing this out, now in one form, now in another; but his 
 anti-Roman prejudices unfortunately prevented him from seeing the 
 reason and discovering the cause. It may be urged by such persons, 
 in another mood, that the Roman expression of the sense of the 
 
 Psalter. If anything, its affinities would seem to be Gallican of the late seventeenth 
 and of the eighteenth centuries. It is a great advance.]
 
 THE ROMAN RITE 19 
 
 relation between man and his Maker, found in the Roman liturgy, is 
 an inadequate or unsatisfactory expression of the aspirations of the 
 soul. But it certainly has virtues of its own, virtues the more neces- 
 sary and the more valuable inasmuch as the religious history of 
 Europe at large has shewn them on more than one occasion not to 
 have been recognized in these relations as virtues at all. 
 
 If I had to indicate in two or three words only the main charac- 
 teristics which go to make up the genius of the Roman rite, I should 
 say that those characteristics were essentially soberness and sense. 
 
 ca
 
 II 
 
 ON THE HISTORY OF THE CHRISTIAN 
 
 ALTARS 
 
 To enter on the discussion of an archaeological question equipped 
 only with a measure of mere book knowledge and without practical 
 acquaintance with monuments is venturesome. The case is mine at 
 present. The attempt requires an apology. I make it at once ; and 
 so without more ado press forward to give a short account of the 
 historical development of the Christian Altar. 
 
 The subject is rather a wide one ; and it may not appear easy to make 
 a safe and sure way through the seemingly endless variety of altar, 
 and altar-piece, which the long series of the Christian centuries has 
 produced. What I look for is a book that will give an intelligible 
 history shewing how the form and arrangements of the Christian 
 Altar were influenced and modified at various periods by changed 
 circumstances, altered ideas. Moreover, in regard to this particular 
 matter, as in others that concern the liturgy, it is impossible to insist 
 too much that it is neither individual caprice in high places, nor (to 
 begin with) ecclesiastical decree, that brought about changes, but 
 the sense — sometimes the real good sense, sometimes the very indif- 
 ferent good sense — of the Christian people. The reader who may 
 have the patience to follow this paper to the end will judge for 
 himself whether it gives a prima facie reasonable sketch of the history 
 of the Christian Altar; an account which he can understand and 
 remember. The guide of my own steps along the unchancy road that 
 has to be traversed is the unassuming tractate of two plain Swabian 
 priests mentioned in the note below ; I believe the lines they lay 
 down to be the true ones, their little book the best on the subject 
 hitherto published. But the illustrations and references, whether speci- 
 fically mentioned or the basis of general statements, are not pilfered 
 but independently gathered for my own contentment ; and I have 
 dealt too with the subject generally after my own fashion.- 
 
 ^ From the Downside Review^ July 1905. 
 
 - The tractate referred to above is Laib und Schwarz, Studien iiberdie Geschichte 
 des christlichen Altars 88 pp. and 17 pi., oblong 4to, Stuttgart, 1857. According to 
 my recollection A. Schmid makes seven periods of the history of the altar : he might
 
 THE CHRISTIAN ALTAR ai 
 
 Our history may be rationally divided into three periods : the first 
 extending to the middle of the ninth century ; the second hence- 
 forward to the close of the fourteenth ; the third to the time of the 
 Gothic revival. The church of the Catacombs, and our own day, 
 might form periods in themselves ; the former may be dismissed as 
 wanting in practical interest ; the second as, let us say, wanting in 
 impersonality. 
 
 With the fourth century the Church stands out in the face of the 
 world, free in a new and sovereign manner to fashion her outward 
 adornment in accordance with her own spirit, or under external 
 influences from which, as no mere abstraction but a very mixed body 
 of living men and women, she has at no time been free — in the fourth 
 century less than most other ages. As is manifest at the first glance, 
 the particular, the distinguishing, feature of the altar then and in the 
 centuries that follow, in fact during the first period — whether the 
 material be stone or wood, whether the altar be solid or whether it 
 be hollow — is the prominence and respect given to the holy Table, 
 as the place of sacrifice. It was in form not oblong as now in the 
 West, but usually a cube ; and stood as a table in the utmost 
 simplicity. The Lord's board was too holy (too ' awful ' is another 
 view) to bear anything else but the Mystic Oblation itself, and such 
 objects, the cup, the paten, the linen cloth, as were necessary for 
 the offering up of the sacrifice. If indeed the Book of the Gospels 
 lay on the altar from the beginning of the mass until the gospel was 
 read, it is to be remembered that the Gospel Book was regarded as 
 representing our Lord Himself, just as the altar came to be conceived 
 of as the throne of the Great King. The rich altar coverings may be 
 taken, I conceive, as an integral part of the altar itself. Everything 
 of the nature of ornamental accessory was around, above, but apart 
 from, the altar. And of these ornaments or accessories that which 
 would most strike the eye, perhaps, was largely determined by 
 a consideration uppermost in the minds of many Christians of those 
 days, an idea new in the now triumphant Church, viz. that the holy 
 sacrifice was not merely a ' mystery of faith ', ' the unspeakable 
 mysteries ' that must be withdrawn from the eye of the unbeliever, 
 but a mystery so * dread ' that upon it not even the Christian himself 
 might gaze. Herein we have in great measure the explanation of 
 the ciborium, as it was then called, or baldaquin on four columns, 
 which, as I may say with the old proverb, hit two (nay three) birds 
 
 as well and as reasonably have made seventeen. I had thought of adding references 
 as notes at the end of the paper ; but on going through it in proof it has seemed to 
 me to read so much like a ' lecture ', and is so long, that I have been content to leave 
 it with the few footnotes as printed.
 
 1% LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 with one stone. First, strict use and requirement : the altar must 
 be veiled ; here was a convenient means for hanging up veils or 
 curtains.^ Secondly, it served for honour : the existence of a covering, 
 umbraculum, dais, umbella, over, and marking, the seat or station of 
 the ruler, magistrate, pontiff, existed in the general instinct of the 
 peoples ; it was surely fitting to render the same honour to the seat 
 of Majesty of the King of kings. Lastly, it must be admitted that 
 a mere square table, be it raised on many steps or on few, is not in 
 itself a dignified object ; the ' ciborium ' therefore satisfied the eye 
 and fell in with the sense of the fitness of things in the m.ind of the 
 common Christian worshipper in the fourth century and onwards ; 
 moreover, it afforded (as was found little by little) all the opportunities 
 for adorning the altar which the devout fancy might exercise without 
 infringing on the idea of the inviolable sanctity of that holy board. 
 Was it desired to have lights over and above the altar? they could 
 be hung from the ciborium ; flowers ? the wreath could be twined 
 round its columns ; how could precious metals, gold, gems, more fully 
 enrich the altar than by means of crowns hanging directly over it, 
 suspended by chains from the roof of the ciborium within ? ^ Was it 
 desired to raise on high the banner of the Great King, the Cross, it 
 could find no more fitting place than the apex of the ciborium. But 
 it is unnecessary to proceed in further detail. From almost every 
 point of view the altar of our first period (with its adjuncts) may, 
 I think, be considered the ideal altar. I do not mean for imitation 
 nowadays ; quite the contrary ; that would be a make-believe. 
 But given the requirements and the ideas of those days (not of 
 earlier times), it appears as a model of a fitting adaptation of means 
 to ends. 
 
 Before passing on to the second period I must leave our guides 
 and say a few words on my own account on matters not noticed by 
 them, the treatment of which is necessary for understanding the 
 natural development of our subject and the later restriction of its 
 treatment to the Western Church. One and single as may be the 
 Christian Divine worship in its essence, the liturgical forms and 
 formulae of the age with which we are now dealing are the genuine 
 products of the native character, the proper and often very different 
 religious feeling, of the various races, peoples, ' churches,' making up 
 the one Church. And already in this first period, on the very 
 
 ' In a painting in the ' Vienna Genesis ', attributed to the fourth century, is an 
 altar ciborium with a veil only in front, i.e. towards the people (plate 7 in WickhoflTs 
 reproduction). 
 
 "^ A painting in the ' Ashburnham Pentateuch' (7th cent.?) shews how this was 
 done. The crowns of the Guarrazar Treasure, now partly in Paris, partly in Madrid, 
 are extant examples.
 
 THE CHRISTIAN ALTAR 23 
 
 threshold of it, in the fifth century, is to be found a distinction which 
 clearly marks off two different ways of viewing, or even conceiving, 
 the Christian sacrifice as an act of altar-worship ; a difference which 
 in fact has determined the whole later history of the altar in the East 
 and in the West.^ Mention has just been made of the veils, &c., used 
 to hide from the people the sight of the altar during the sacrifice. 
 Throughout the Russo-Greek Church (to speak of the Eastern 
 'Great Church' only) the iconostasis, as if a veritable wall, now 
 effectively serves the same purpose ; so effectually indeed that it 
 shuts off the people from the sacrifice of the altar, it might be said, 
 altogether. In making this remark I have neither wish nor intention 
 to cast any reflection on this form of worship. I simply take a fact 
 as a fact and presume that those who have adopted the form know 
 what is best for themselves. If we go into the churches of Rome 
 there are rails, cajicelli, mostly low, and that is all ; and the altar 
 lies open to the eye of every wayfarer. Here again I but mention 
 a fact as fact ; and note the striking contrast as a fact too. But all 
 this, on the one side and on the other, is not the product of mere 
 ' taste ' ; the practical reasons and the rationale of these two practices, 
 which indicate two radically differing conceptions of the one great 
 act of Christian public worship, go down deep into Christian anti- 
 quity ; the roots of the difference lie as far back as at least the end 
 of the fourth century. Let us take up the oldest Greek and Latin 
 liturgy books that are at once typical and substantially practical, 
 'St James' and 'St Basil' on the one hand, and the Leonine and 
 Gelasian books on the other. If we run through them ever so 
 rapidly, but with observant eye, a distinction forces itself on the 
 attention which is of concern for us here : in the Greek books a 
 dominant note is this, the concern of the officiating priest, personally 
 and individually, for his own unworthiness to offer the sacrifice ; it 
 is awe, fear, dread that speak to us in these Greek orders. This 
 note may be said to be entirely absent from the Roman formulae, 
 which may be counted by hundreds ; whilst in its stead this dominant 
 note may be discerned : that the sacrifice is the sacrifice of combined 
 priest and people, ' ct plebis ct pracsttlis.' It would be out of place 
 here even to indicate the growth in the fourth and fifth centuries of 
 the living ideas of which the Russo-Greek iconostasis and the Roman 
 altar rails are in the twentieth the material expression.^ But I may 
 
 ' I say nothing in this paper about Rood Screens. The late Dr J. M. Neale's 
 distinction between the rood screen and the iconostasis sounds, and to some extent 
 is, pedantic. But that distinction is so far well founded as to put the rood screen 
 beyond the concern of the present brief sketch. 
 
 [On this subject see Appendix to The Liturgical Homilies of A'arsai, Cambridge 
 Texts and Studies viii i, pp. 92-97.]
 
 24 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 say in passing (remembering that I am a debtor for proofs of, or 
 warrant for, all that has been and is here asserted) that these expres- 
 sions of the Greek liturgies indicate not a primitive but a late' stage 
 of Christian sense, feeling, devotion. Whilst the eloquent Chrysostom 
 in his continual insistence on ' fear and dread ' of the ' awful ', the 
 ' terrible ' sacrifice, the divine mysteries, had in view real abuses and 
 grave irreverences attaching to the act of Holy Communion among 
 the people of Antioch, it may be doubted whether his eloquence and 
 his zeal do not carry him far away from the sense and feeling of the 
 earlier Christian centuries, or whether he is not paving the way for, 
 and is himself a witness to, a change in the appreciation of those 
 mysteries by the Christian people themselves. Certainly St Basil 
 knows none of these ' terrible ' and ' awful ' words ; the idea is unknown 
 in the Liturgy of the Apostolic Constitutions, which, interpolated 
 though it is,^ represents (there seems no reason to doubt) faithfully 
 for the point that concerns us, the traditional sense of the truly 
 apostolic Church of Antioch ; it is not found in the prayer book of 
 Serapion, which gives the religious type of official Egyptian piety as 
 late as the middle of the fourth century. Subject to correction, the 
 earliest witness I have found for that terror and awfulness of the 
 Christian sacrifice which has issued in its entire withdrawal from 
 the eyes of the people is in St Cyril of Jerusalem. But then I hasten 
 to add that the Liturgy of St James'', or the Hierosolymitan piety 
 represented by St Cyril, is the last quarter in which I should look 
 for a true and untroubled rendering of the tone and spirit of Christian 
 piety of the three earliest Christian centuries, the first to which 
 I should turn to learn the newer developments, the new sense, feeling, 
 religious sentiment, induced by, or following on, the triumph of the 
 Church. 
 
 It has been necessary to bring clearly into prominence in this place 
 the difference in the type of public worship, so far as concerns the 
 mass, that grew up and developed in the East and West ; and its 
 cause. The effects of the later incursions of Byzantinism in various 
 regions of the West, bringing about modifications, as in much weightier 
 matters, so too in such minor points as the use of veils, &c., 
 must in such a sketch as this be left out of account, or only mentioned 
 to be passed by.^ With the institution of the iconostasis as a wall 
 separating a church into two distinct parts, one for the clergy, the 
 other for the laity, any development or modification of the altar was, 
 
 ^ I note by the way, to obviate possible objection, that Funk cannot find ' heresy ' 
 in the Liturgy (Die apostolischen Konstitutionen, pp. 357 sqq. ; Thcologische 
 Quartalschrift, 1896, pp. 346-347). 
 
 ^ I suppose Lib. Pont if., ed. Duchesne i 363, 11. 7-10, may refer to veils hanging 
 round the altar from the baldaquin ; and is the earliest case for Rome (684-685).
 
 THE CHRISTIAN ALTAR 25 
 
 for reasons that are obvious, practically arrested in the regions 
 influenced from Constantinople. Conservatism is easily maintained 
 in matters under exclusive ecclesiastical control; in the West, the 
 altar lay open to the influence of popular piety, of lay sentiment, 
 lay taste, or want of it, and innovations and innovators could thus 
 have free play. In spite of rood screens and other temporary or 
 graver impedimenta, the publicity of the mass, its popular character, 
 the oneness of the sacrifice combined of priest and people in vi^ord 
 and deed, and its material expression in the open church on what 
 has been termed the 'all-seeing' principle, has maintained itself as 
 typical for the West, to which the further evolution of the altar is 
 now restricted and to which we may henceforth confine our attention. 
 Let us pass on to the altar of the second period. No one, I think, 
 who has fairly reflected on what may be called the evolution of 
 ecclesiastical ornament and design, to say nothing of weightier concerns, 
 can fail to have been struck by the part taken therein by a certain 
 (I think the prevalent) type of devout mind, the mark of whose action 
 is commonly this: to emphasize or bring into prominence some 
 accessory feature at the expense of the principal and main object, 
 or indeed to proceed so far as to subordinate this latter to it. It 
 was the same in the eighth century as in the eighteenth, and so 
 I suppose it ever will be. This is just what happened in regard to 
 the altar in our second and third periods. The first indication of the 
 change appears in a homily or pastoral on the duties of the clergy, 
 which has commonly passed under the name of Pope Leo IV, and 
 forms the groundwork of the address of the presiding prelate to the 
 assembly in the Ordo ad Synodinn of the present Roman Pontifical. 
 Whatever be the date of the first draft (and I am suspicious of 
 attempts to father it on an earlier writer) it is, I take it, certain that 
 the document is of Gallican origin; and that, as testimony for the 
 point which concerns us, it cannot be referred to a date earlier than 
 the close of the eighth century. Its direction as to the altar is as 
 follows : ' Let nothing be placed on the altar but capsac with relics 
 of the saints, or perchance the four holy Gospels of God, or a pyxis 
 with the Body of our Lord as viaticum for the sick ; other things to 
 be stored in some clean place.' In this direction the item to be 
 observed as important for the development of the altar is that which 
 •concerns the relics of the Saints, not (as in our day we should, or 
 indeed most persons would, naturally have supposed) that concerning 
 the Sacrament of the altar. For it must be allowed that during the 
 whole middle ages, in spite of much Gallican innovation in the order 
 and ceremonies of the mass, the Blessed Sacrament reserved was 
 commonly treated with a kind of indifference which at present would
 
 i6 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 be considered to be of the nature of ' irreverence ', I will not say 
 indignity. But the question of ' reverence ' or ' irreverence ' in these 
 matters is one much more difficult to handle than some who deal 
 with it with confident touch at all recognize, little realizing how 
 entirely subjective are their appreciations, and how much the ideas 
 even of persons external to the Roman Communion are really deter- 
 mined by practices and usages that are purely post-Tridentine, or at 
 most can be traced back to a type of devotionalism developed in 
 Germany in the century, or almost the decades, immediately preceding 
 the outbreak of the Protestant Reformation. 
 
 The change involved in the permission cited above to place relics 
 on the altar table may seem slight, and, when taken in conjunction 
 with the Gospel Book and the Body of our Lord, hardly worthy of 
 notice : yet it was destined in the long run to modify the character, 
 disposition, and even situation of the altar. The prescription must 
 be brought into connexion with tendencies of the time which the 
 lapse of very few years was to see greatly accentuated. Elsewhere 
 in the Doivnsidc Review'^ I touched for a moment on the spoiling 
 of Italian cities and churches to the profit of the new buildings 
 erected by Charles the Great in his own home. But this example 
 was followed in their own way by great churches and monasteries 
 in Prankish and Germanic lands. The ancient foundations as well 
 as the new ones favoured by the new dynasty enriched themselves 
 in the first half of the ninth century with relics, entire bodies of 
 saints, brought from across the Alps and especially from Rome. 
 Thus Fulda by the care of Rhaban received the relics of St Alexander 
 and many others from Rome ; Eginhard obtained those of SS. Peter 
 and Marcellinus for his foundation of Seligenstadt, also from Rome ; 
 so too Coblentz, Corvey, Priim, Reichenau, and other establishments 
 obtained like treasures ; St Severus was covertly stolen from Ravenna 
 that the cathedral of Mentz might be thereby the richer ; in 851 
 Salzburg welcomed St Hermes, again from Rome ; at an earlier date 
 St Liborius was brought from Le Mans to Paderborn. But churches 
 which possessed the bodies of their own local saints were fired with 
 emulation, and resolved that these should hold their own in public 
 esteem as against, or along with, the outlandish importations. 
 ' Translations ' and ' elevations ' became the order of the day. The 
 Norman invasions in the ninth century compelled many churches 
 along the whole of western France to carry their relics further 
 inland for safety. This movement, whereby churches which could 
 not hitherto boast of bodies of saints became possessed of those 
 
 ^ Vol. xiii pp. 193-194; see the paper Ati Antiquary of the Nmth Cetitury, 
 No. XVIII below.
 
 THE CHRISTIAN ALTAR 27 
 
 removed from their proper resting place, contributed to promote 
 further this cultus. Moreover, these numerous translations must have 
 tended to bring into vogue portable shrines, as distinguished from the 
 old system of confessions and tombs or repositories of solid masonry 
 underneath the altar. The new spirit of devotion required (we must 
 be content with the facts that are there to speak for themselves and 
 not seek reason in a case where stat pro ratione voluntas) — required, 
 I say, that the relics of the saints instead of lying underneath, under- 
 ground, should be raised up, put above, on, the altar. Here the 
 congruity of the ancient practice with the words in the Apocalypse 
 of St John, Vidi siibttis altare, &c., was held of no account, for the 
 dictates of newly developed tastes among the devout people required 
 it should be otherwise. 
 
 How was the combination of altar and raised shrine to be carried 
 out ? It is to be remembered that at this time the practice of dividing 
 the bodies of the saints into portions or particles was not yet in 
 vogue ; indeed it ran counter to the then prevalent feelings of reve- 
 rence, at least in the West. Shrines were therefore large, as large as 
 the altar, larger indeed than those simple cubes which ancient piety 
 had found sufficient and becoming. Such shrines raised up required 
 a good solid base. Speaking in a rough and general way this is what 
 was done. The relic chest (shrine adorned with precious metals, &c.) 
 was placed commonly at right angles with the altar, close to the 
 back, and in the centre, of it ; raised on a base of masonry, one end 
 of the shrine rested on the altar itself, and formed a sort of rich 
 ornamental centre-piece — where our present tabernacle is, and giving 
 perhaps something of the same effect. Or else it rested on a low 
 retable for the sake of giving to the whole height and dignity. On 
 this arrangement the ciborium could be retained only with some 
 difficulty ; and accordingly under the new system the ciborium was 
 made to cover not the altar but the shrine ; as at Lorsch in the later 
 years of the tenth century, where it is described as ' super requiem 
 Martyris '. And by and by it gradually falls into disuse. Indeed 
 when we look at abbat Suger's great altar at St Denis (this is only 
 a conjectural restoration on documentary evidence, it is true, but not 
 for us the less instructive), or minor altars in the same church, or the 
 old high altar of Notre Dame at Paris, or of Arras cathedral — all 
 well known examples to be found in the usual books — it is clear that 
 the ciborium in such cases would be only in the way. Of course it 
 may be said that all this could only have effect in great and notable 
 churches. This is true ; but then as we all know, or can know, it is 
 the great people who set the fashion in this world, and the imitation 
 of our ' betters ' has become as it were an instinct. So it was in the
 
 a8 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 case we are considering, as may appear in reviewing the practical 
 effect of the new system. 
 
 Speaking in general terms the effect was this : that whereas the 
 old altars had as it were neither back nor front but were free all 
 round, and looked alike to the people and singers on the nave side 
 and to the clergy celebrant or ministrant in the presbytery, the new 
 combination of altar with shrine gave to the altar a back and a front ; 
 and so the way was paved for placing, in defiance both of precedent 
 and of ancient reverence, the altar against the wall of the church as 
 we find in our parish churches of the Gothic period, and indeed in 
 principle in the greatest churches too ; and so we come to hear 
 by and by of frontals and dossals, and reredoses, and the like. More- 
 over, from obvious considerations of biensiance there arose a natural 
 tendency to lengthen the altar and substitute for the cube, which 
 might easily appear as a mere end of the base of the shrine, an 
 oblong ; and the fashion once started the oblong became more and 
 more pronounced. And this of itself tended to hasten the disuse of 
 the ciborium from considerations of good taste and convenience, or 
 indeed of mere good sense, which need not be here developed. But 
 the disuse of the old ciborium resting on four columns and with solid 
 roof brought with it inevitably other changes. We have seen that it 
 served on its summit to bear the cross, beneath suspended lights or 
 pendent crowns, the latter indeed enriched with pendent crosses 
 hanging right over, almost on, the altar ; besides curtains and adorn- 
 ments that an ingenious piety might fancy. For all these, which 
 could not be given up, a place must be found. The principle of the 
 inviolability of the Lord's board once infringed, the practice of its 
 infringement was destined to go far. No longer reserved exclusively 
 for the sacrifice, why should not a cross, lights, be placed on the 
 Holy Table itself? And so it was done, little by little, now here, 
 now there ; in some places only during the sacrifice, in others per- 
 manently. Thus at the abbey of Zwiefalten in Swabia the cross was 
 kept ' iiigitcr' and 'semper' on the altar itself at a date earlier than 
 1135. At first, or in some places, only one candlestick was placed 
 on one side of the altar, as a set-off, it would seem, to a cross placed 
 on the other ; by the thirteenth century the symmetrical arrangement 
 of two candles was common, though there was still a certain chariness 
 in regard to the novelty ; in one case I remember to have observed 
 in an inventory of this date (I think of a parish church in northern 
 Italy) that brackets over the altar were used instead of candlesticks 
 on it. By the fourteenth century, the close of our second period, 
 whatever be the exception or the survival of archaism here or there, 
 the practice of two candlesticks on the altar was general, or the law.
 
 THE CHRISTIAN ALTAR 29 
 
 And this, for side altars, is the real or historical meaning of the rubric 
 in the Roman missal, i.e. the meaning of those who wrote, approved, 
 and promulgated it ; though of course I should ex aninio accept for 
 practice the interpretation the modern rubrician has tended to give it. 
 But this by the way. 
 
 Another cause contributed to a change in the form of the altar 
 producing the long narrow structures common in the West. In the 
 eleventh century, and yet more in the twelfth, churches were commonly 
 rebuilt, and new monastic churches were founded, on a much grander 
 scale than hitherto. As churches came to be built longer, smaller 
 altars no longer pleased. I give a few examples. At Petershausen 
 in the diocese of Constance up to about 1 134 the high altar was quite 
 small — ' parviihwi ' ; hollow, and made out of five square stones — ' sed 
 tantuin ex qidiiqice qicadris lapidibus covipaginatum ' ; this the abbat 
 did away with and built another ' mains et stiblimius ' according to 
 the taste of his time. At the abbey of Lower Altaich in Bavaria up 
 to 1253 there were six altars in the chapel of the Blessed Virgin; 
 since they were ' Jiimis contigiia et valde parva ' — ' excessively crowded 
 and so very small ', ' ei propter hoc cssent imiltiim despectni ' — ' and as 
 nowadays nothing obtains respect unless it advertises itself as big ', 
 abbat Herman cleared them out and put two in their place. The 
 author of an interesting and curious tractate, regretfully recording the 
 old customs that were dying out in Alsace in the thirteenth century, 
 describes the altars found in that province in the early part of the 
 century as commonly three feet high, broad, and long, the mensa 
 projecting beyond the sides every way about four inches. Here is 
 the old cube altar surviving still in the country parish churches, but 
 the projection of the mensa shews, I apprehend, the influence even 
 here of the newer fashions. Here or there even some great or 
 wealthy corporation chose to keep to the old paths. So at St Martial's 
 at Limoges a new ciborium was put up in 1220 and the ' subterranettni ' 
 completed at large cost ; this I gather to be a continuance of the old 
 arrangement of the first period. And at Scheyern in Bavaria the 
 ciborium of the high altar was finished in 1224. But though the 
 ciborium disappears (Italy, at least central and southern Italy, is not 
 in question here), the need very soon shews itself for some new way 
 to secure a covering for the altar place, and for a continuance with 
 some modifications of the curtains that hung therefrom. Into this 
 connexion must be brought the prescription of several councils, 
 especially of Lower Germany, in the thirteenth century, requiring 
 that a white linen cloth be stretched up over the altar — ' siirstcm super 
 altare ' — extending over its length and breadth ; here only cases of 
 extreme poverty are contemplated. Elsewhere the new style of
 
 30 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 canopy might be either in wood or in richer stuffs. From a York 
 register of capitular visitations sedc vacante, I gather such a canopy 
 or 'celatura' was general in that diocese. But the mere linen cloth 
 is a descendant in direct line from the ciborium and (besides keeping 
 off dust from the Holy Table) was intended no less than it to serve 
 as a mark of honour and reverence. 
 
 In course of time the shrines originally placed at the back of and 
 touching the altar were, with the lengthening of the eastern arm of 
 the church and the adoption of long choirs in the new-rising Gothic 
 structures, detached and thrown eastward (but still placed lengthwise 
 east and west as before), as in the case of so many of our cathedral 
 and larger monastic churches, Ely, Canterbury, St Albans ; though 
 the old system must have been in some places long maintained. 
 Thus it was not until about the year 1345 that Thomas de la Mare, 
 then the prior of Tynemouth, removed the shrine of St Oswin, till 
 now ' altari viaiori comicxum ' — ' attached to the high altar ', and 
 put it ' in the place where it now stands, so that pilgrims could walk 
 all round it and more easily and freely pay their devotions thereat '. 
 
 But such isolation of the altar consequent on isolation of the shrine 
 dictated naturally the development of the solid reredos, for which 
 pattern was long ago found in the hanging dossals or in the churches 
 where the high altar had been already attached to the eastern wall. 
 And this brings us to the altar of our third period, extending from 
 the fourteenth century to the second or third decade of the nineteenth, 
 the period of great reredos altars. The rudimentary retable which 
 the great relic altars had introduced had by the close of the four- 
 teenth century become so far enlarged that it afforded a welcome field 
 for the exercise of the arts of the sculptor and painter. In these 
 favourable circumstances the dimensions of the reredos went on con- 
 tinually increasing until in the last days of Gothic it attained a size 
 fit to compare with the best efforts of later days. But the new 
 rotables, or reredoses, instead of resting on their own base, came now 
 to rest, in fact not infrequently, and always to the eye, on the altar 
 table itself, which thus came to look as if a serviceable base for 
 a superincumbent mass of ornamentation. By and by it was found 
 most convenient to throw back the great altar-pieces of the new type 
 against the church wall, as well to obtain support for these mighty 
 structures as to save trouble, expense, and ingenuity in making some- 
 thing passable out of the back of the reredos itself. 
 
 Be it noted, there is here no question of styles. In our third period 
 the typical ' altars ', Gothic, Renaissance, Rococo, shew this common 
 character : their main feature seems to be an extension and accumu- 
 lation of accessory ornament at the expense of the thing itself for the
 
 THE CHRISTIAN ALTAR 31 
 
 sake of which the ornament exists. The towering altar-pieces of the 
 seventeenth and eighteenth centuries which obstructed the choirs of 
 many a grand Gothic church, to which was sacrificed so much of 
 brilh'ant painted glass, so much of architectural elegance and beauty, 
 are still only too often set down to the credit of ' the Renaissance ' and 
 its evil influence ; but in fact those times only bettered the instruction 
 they had received from the exaggerated models of declining Gothic. 
 The later styles used the means and forms proper to their own genius, 
 but they did no more than pursue the end the later Gothic had set 
 before itself. And so it came about naturally that, by and by, to 
 erect a ' fine altar ' meant to put up an immense (some may think 
 monstrous) and highly decorated altar-piece. In fact the high altar 
 (i. e. reredos) of Winchester or of St Albans, so justly admired, and 
 the miserable wooden painted thing put up in many a noble French 
 church by aspiring poverty in the early days after the Revolution, 
 really belong to the same family ; the aim was to put up something 
 strikingly rich and beautiful, no doubt, if possible ; but at any, even 
 the least cost, something strikingly big. It was the very inversion of 
 the ideas of the earlier Christian days : that I conceive to be true ; 
 but it was also the way in which the men of the time conceived the 
 rendering of honour to the holy altar, that is all. Nor indeed am 
 I insensible to the merit in their own way of characteristic altar-pieces 
 of even ' the worst period ' (as our friend the Gothic Puritan wall 
 have it). I recall a particular case : in an out-of-the-way country 
 village, a great church built by a wealthy community in the second 
 half of the eighteenth century, grandly proportioned, lofty, light, airy, 
 whitewashed ; with this peculiarity, that the tower is at the east end 
 and rises over the high altar. This ' altar ' occupies the whole eastern 
 wall, towering up to the vault some eighty or ninety feet, a pyramid 
 of black and white marble, niches, urns, ornaments in profusion all 
 complete. The effect is superb ; so I thought when I first saw it as 
 a youngster, so it has always seemed to me still when I have seen it 
 since. But whether there were altar there or tabernacle, so far as 
 observation goes I never noticed and cannot tell. So far as I can 
 make out, in our first period the idea by which everything was 
 determined was the very altar of God itself; in our last the deter- 
 minant is the senses of the beholder and the impression to be made 
 by the designer upon him. 
 
 This same tendency to strike, to occupy, the beholder with acces- 
 sories is observable from the first, in matters of detail no less than 
 in general design, in the altar characteristic of our third period. The 
 altar is loaded with temporary as well as permanent ornaments. It 
 came to serve as a sort of expositorium on great feast days for all
 
 32 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 the church treasury and church plate, reliquaries and what not in the 
 shape of arms and busts and many another form of beauty besides ; 
 objects that were now multiplied beyond measure, on the one hand 
 through the commonness of small relics, fragments (a tendency greatly 
 promoted by the importation of such relics from the East, and 
 especially Constantinople, during the time of the Crusades), and on 
 the other by the veritable mania for rich plate which prevailed in the 
 second half of the fourteenth century. I will take two special 
 examples of this mode of shewing reverence to the altar ; one taken 
 from the first, the other from the last days of our period, each 
 characteristic of its own time. In the first half of the fifteenth 
 century Lewis of Bavaria-Ingolstadt, oppressor of the church of 
 Freising, ' ad cor rediens ' — ' coming to a better mind ' — gave to it 
 a great silver image (of some saint may we suppose ?) ' secundiiin se 
 formatam' — 'in the likeness of himself, as a pledge that he would 
 refrain in future from his past ill practices ; which image (says the 
 chronicler) I myself have often seen when totum sanctnarium in 
 altari stetit — 'the whole church-treasury of Freising stood on the 
 high altar ' — on festal days. This is an example of a type common 
 enough in those times, which few churches are rich enough, except 
 perhaps in Bohemia or Hungary, Portugal or Spain, to imitate 
 to-day ; a type that some might be disposed to call the buffet (or 
 sideboard) style of altar. My warrantor for the second case, a careful 
 and interested eyewitness, says this altar-piece was elaborate and 
 rich in the extreme, and the quantity of ornament with which it was 
 loaded was distributed without much discretion ' everywhere '. ' To 
 say the truth (he continues), this altar is not happily conceived ; it is 
 so low and overburdened that it is no easy matter to descry the 
 officiating priest. But it is certain that there is not an altar in the 
 kingdom more richly decorated, and whereon there is a greater 
 quantity of reliquaries and vases and candlesticks and branches and 
 lamps and other such things, some of silver, some of silver-gilt, some 
 even of gold. Indeed nothing is wanting to complete its magnificence; 
 and besides it has ingenious and clever sacristans who are continually 
 inventing new modes of adorning it.' We have reached the zenith ; 
 after this decline only is possible. 
 
 Of course during this period there were survivals of earlier practice ; 
 but our business is to have prominently before us what is typical of 
 each period ; it is the rising tide that is our chief concern, not the 
 ebb. Angers cathedral, for instance, maintained the extreme severity 
 of earlier ages ; Lyons made it a point of honour to do its best in 
 the same direction ; Amiens (of the high altar of which, as it existed 
 at the close of the seventeenth century, a description is given us by
 
 THE CHRISTIAN ALTAR 33 
 
 a citizen and shopkeeper of the time who read Claude de Vert, and 
 had pretty notions about the Liturgy, and the Office, and church 
 things generally) — Amiens at that date may be taken more or less 
 as a representative of the relic altar of the second period. Notices 
 of ancient altars of French cathedrals and other large churches at 
 the beginning of the eighteenth century abound ; it is a pity the 
 subject has not been dealt with in a monograph. Here it will be 
 enough to mention the arrangement of the old high altar of Notre 
 Dame at Paris, demolished to make way for the sumptuous embellish- 
 ment of the choir carried out at the expense of Lewis XIV, as perhaps 
 it gave the idea of the high chantry of Henry V in the apse of 
 Westminster Abbey. At the extremity of the choir, on the site of 
 the new altar of Lewis XIV and behind the old one, was the altar 
 of the Trinity, commonly called also des Ardens, raised up so that 
 it could be seen over the high altar from the stalls of the choir. 
 Underneath it was a place called the Coitditoire, kept locked, in the 
 cupboard of which all the vestments, &c., for high mass were kept ; 
 in former times the Blessed Sacrament had also been reserved there. 
 It would appear from a paper sent to the liturgist Le Brun that an 
 arrangement somewhat similar existed in the cathedral of Troyes. 
 His informant writing about 1714-1715 says: 'Our high altar has 
 been moved ; it has been raised three steps and placed further east- 
 wards, close to, and on the same level with, an altar that is behind it 
 at which were said masses for the dead and obits.^ Before the change 
 it was possible from the choir to see this altar, and the priest saying 
 mass at it, above the high altar. Now it is quite out of sight and 
 disused, the masses formerly said at it being now said at the high 
 altar.' With the eighteenth century a change came, and the high 
 altars on the old models in the French cathedrals are, concurrently 
 with the adoption of the new breviaries, frequently replaced by an 
 ' atitel a la romaine ' ; that is, as interpreted then, plain, of good or 
 precious material, marble, with six great silver candlesticks upon it 
 and a greater silver crucifix in the middle. Rural churches, if only 
 for the reason that they are poor and have commonly small resources 
 or none, were more conservative ; and it is towards these that the 
 archaeologist should direct his attention in every country to discover 
 the relics of venerable antiquity and ancient discipline. But those 
 whose main interest is development, or evolution, must turn their 
 attention elsewhere. 
 
 So much for the past. With one observation on the period 
 excluded from our historical survey, the present, and another on 
 Rome, I cease. And for the first : it is in our present, modern days 
 
 * Does this throw any light on the name ' Atttel des Ardens ' at Notre Dame ? 
 
 15M D
 
 34 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 that the resei-ved Sacrament has for the first time come to be 
 recognized generally as the main determinant for the design of the 
 high altar. Objection may be taken, perhaps, to such a statement ; 
 but I think a little reflection and knowledge will shew it to be just. 
 The document cited above, when we passed from our first period to 
 the second, shewed that, at about the turn of the eighth and ninth 
 centuries, the possibility presented itself of a combination of the 
 altar and the reserved Sacrament as a starting point for a new 
 development, at least in France. As a fact the combination of altar 
 and relic shrine was adopted. It might be thought at first blush 
 that at least the altar of our third period received for determinant 
 the combination passed over in the ninth century. But that this was 
 not so will appear, I believe, from two considerations. One is based 
 on the very character of that type of altar itself. The other attaches 
 to the history of religious sentiment ; between which and doctrine, and 
 between the effects of either, I hasten to add, it is necessary carefully 
 to discriminate. Just as ritual is the mere husk, so religious sentiment 
 is of the very inner life, of Liturgy ; but it is all too little heeded, 
 indeed quite overlooked commonly, I fancy, in dealing with that 
 subject historically. How many of us instinctively realize, I wonder, 
 the modernness of the sense implied by the idea of our churches as 
 ' the home of the Blessed Sacrament * ? Personally of course I cannot 
 undo myself of this sense, and indeed should feel lost, and as if bereft, 
 in them without it ; moreover, it is this sense which perhaps more 
 than anything else devoutly impresses ' well-minded ' persons who 
 are not of our communion. But this has nothing to do with the 
 historical question ; which doubtless it would be profitable to under- 
 stand also. 
 
 It is a fact that the general character of the typical altar-piece of 
 our third period was fixed before, and long before, the tide of devo- 
 tional feeling had turned in the direction just indicated. There is no 
 question of countries presumedly more or less naturally ' Catholic ' 
 here ; no question of this side of the Alps or Pyrenees and the other. 
 For instance, the Blessed Sacrament was kept ' in quodam angiilo ' — 
 ' in an out-of-the-way corner ' — of the cathedral of Verona up to the 
 second or third decade of the sixteenth century, when the great 
 reforming bishop Ghiberti had it enclosed in a ' tabernacle ' of marble 
 and crystal, borne by four angels in brass, and the whole not placed 
 on, but suspended over, the high altar, 'that he might excite the 
 devout minds of priests and people to godly piety ' towards the 
 reserved Sacrament of the altar. How long this ' suspension ' was 
 maintained in the cathedral of Verona I do not know; but the 
 arrangement Ghiberti adopted, when taken in connexion with his
 
 THE CHRISTIAN ALTAR 35 
 
 professed object, is worthy of attention. For the altar-pieces charac- 
 teristic of our third period bear on their face the evidence that they 
 were not designed with the end Ghiberti had in view and that they 
 are not well calculated to compass it. If in any of these structures 
 the idea is betrayed of calling attention primarily to the conditorium 
 of the Blessed Sacrament, the great edifice, often domical, surmounting 
 the centre of the altar, was for show, not use ; the real tabernacle 
 was no more than an obscure little cupboard underneath their 
 hzse— antrum is the term Sebastian Paoli, an excellent, learned, 
 and observant Neapolitan priest, applies to it in the middle of the 
 eighteenth century. Bishop Ghiberti's instinct, I think, was true, his 
 sense of the adaptation of means to ends just, when he adopted the 
 method of the ' suspension ' over his high altar : it was at once the 
 easiest and the most effective way of making the Blessed Sacrament 
 reserved the central object of a church of at least large dimensions. 
 But his case is only an ' early anticipation '. This, too, was the strong 
 point (if my memory does not play me false) of Lewis XIV's work 
 on the altar of Notre Dame. That this is so, and how, any visitor 
 can verify for himself at the cathedral of Amiens even to-day. The 
 little golden cup in the centre of the great ' gloire ' put up in the 
 eighteenth century draws to it all eyes that will let themselves be 
 simply and naturally guided by what they see before them; to the 
 eyes of the believer it dominates that vast choir and the Presence it 
 hides is by him felt. Here in our last period (to such as will lay 
 aside those disturbing antipathies arising from changes in taste or 
 preferences of style) is an instance of a fitting adaptation of means 
 to ends. It combined the taste of the time for big altar-pieces with 
 an uncompromising, overruling assertion of the Sacrament as the 
 very principle of life of the church building itself. 
 
 The slow process of development which was to issue in our present 
 sense in regard to the combination of the conditorium for the reserved 
 Sacrament and the altar is, I think, roughly and generally speaking, 
 somewhat as follows, and the statement holds good, I believe, in 
 its general outlines for almost every part of the Western Church. 
 In the middle ages the idea connected with the ' Sainte Reserve' (even 
 after the popularization of the Corpus Christi procession and the 
 spread of the use of the monstrance) was not worship but Viaticum ; ^ 
 
 ^ [A friend in writing to me has pointed out that this statement is to be 
 allowed only with some reserves. I give his words here : ' May 1 just mention to 
 you that your explanation of the Blessed Sacrament being thought of more with 
 regard to the Viaticum than as an object of worship is certainly correct, but 
 admits of some limitations. I am thinking here of a passage in Sibert's Carmelite 
 Ordinate of the early years of the fourteenth century : " Sacramentum Eukaristiae 
 ... ad usum infirmorum et chori devotionem honorifice reservetur." But then 
 in a religious house the Viaticum is only administered to the members of the 
 
 D 2
 
 ^6 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 nor was it connected either with the idea of ordinary communion. 
 Even the devout then communicated but four or five times a year 
 and at certain great feasts. The parish priest knew the number of 
 his intending communicants on each occasion and consecrated the 
 required number of hosts accordingly. During the whole middle 
 ages the usual place of reservation was some recess, or as it were 
 cupboard, often closed with iron bars, sometimes fairly high up, in the 
 wall on the Gospel, and more rarely on the Epistle, side of the altar. 
 Sometimes (as bishop Devie says was the case in the district of Bresse, 
 north of Lyons) the '■petite arnioire grillie ', as he calls it, was ' att fond 
 du cJiaur '. All this is speaking generally : and I would add in 
 passing that any idea, if it exists, that the 'suspension' was the 
 universal discipline, even throughout France, needs, I think, revision. 
 Besides other objections that may be taken to this method of what 
 may be called the ' loctdus in imiro ', there is an all too common one 
 — damp. This was probably an effectual consideration in the later 
 invention of ' sacrament-houses ' prevalent in the Low Countries and 
 Germany on into the Slavic lands in communion with Rome : but 
 this was obviously an expedient that could be adopted only by 
 wealthy churches, not in country parishes, where the difficulty had 
 to be met in another way. With the gradual increase of frequent 
 communion at uncertain times that spread in the later years of the 
 sixteenth century and grew yet more marked in the seventeenth, 
 other and obvious inconveniences of the old arrangement were in- 
 creasingly felt ; and the tabernacle on the altar was the obvious way 
 out of them ; from which transfer has in an insensible manner grown 
 up that modern and now prevailing sense that I have mentioned 
 above. It did not come about at once ; but the change did introduce 
 a new idea (or revived a ' primitive ' one) in regard to the ' Sainte 
 Riserve' itself; the once exclusive idea of viaticum gradually fell 
 into the background, and the idea of reservation of the Sacrament at 
 the altar now grew to be dominantly connected with the idea of 
 communion, but now in the church building itself. So much was 
 this the case, and so naturally did all this come about, that in one 
 case that I have noticed (the parish church of Neisse, the finest and 
 best served parish church in Silesia, with no less than forty-five altars) 
 the large host for the weekly procession of the Blessed Sacrament 
 on Thursdays and the hosts for the sick were reserved in the Sacra- 
 community, who are not always dying, so that the expression may be peculiar to 
 a regular church.' There can be no doubt that the expositions to be mentioned 
 in the paper Pastor Dreygerivolf s Note-Book, No. XXV below, were definitely 
 intended to promote worship of the Blessed Sacrament ; and doubtless with a little 
 trouble much might be found in documents of the fifteenth century to illustrate 
 the progress of this devotion in Germany, and something perhaps in Italy.]
 
 THE CHRISTIAN ALTAR ^'j 
 
 ment-house apart from the altar, whilst the hosts 'pro conunntii- 
 cantibus ' were reserved in the tabernacle which was on the high altar. 
 But (speaking, of course, generally and with due reserve made for any 
 exceptional regions in these or in earlier days) frequent communion 
 has been at no time, in the periods with which we are mainly con- 
 cerned, the common rule among country-folk, riisticani, pagani, or 
 what we may please to call them ; and so in country churches the 
 inconveniences of the old arrangement have not been so acutely felt 
 as in the towns, and the reservation of the Sacrament, even in the 
 old-style mediaeval loculi, has survived in some quarters till a late 
 period, almost or even quite to the general crash at the end of the 
 eighteenth century. 
 
 Due consideration of all the ' moments ' of the case and of the 
 body of facts available can, I think, issue in no other conclusion than 
 the one indicated above : that it is only in recent times — those 
 excluded from discussion in this paper — that the idea of giving un- 
 mistakable prominence to the actual and real conditorium of the 
 Blessed Sacrament in relation to the altar has come, in a generally 
 recognized way, to be the problem that has to be solved by architect 
 and designer in regard to the high altar of a church. 
 
 To deal with ' Rome ' is always to enter on dangerous ground ; if 
 only in that we all and always seem to be wanting to point a moral, 
 of one kind or another, when our discourse is occupied with that 
 theme. There are many reasons besides ; but this is apparently 
 a constant one. I remember many years ago the late dean Stanley 
 wrote a short series of articles for Good Words, mainly designed for 
 the use of our northern neighbours, on Rome, modern Rome, as 
 a living witness to the simplicity of early Christianity. They were 
 written with his usual persuasive ingenuity and charm ; it all read so 
 easily. There was the Pope, for instance, in his simple white habit : 
 the dean had much that was effective to say on this. But it was 
 a disconcerting thought if one happened to remember that the first 
 time a colour is mentioned as specifically the Pope's own for his dress, 
 it was red ; and red it continued for centuries. But then, as an 
 excellent clergyman (deceased), who was almost as good as a journalist, 
 has said : ' The man of facts is a bore ; he has such a way of tripping 
 one up.' I feel the want at this moment of a tractate on the history 
 of the Christian altar in Rome from the beginning till now, written 
 by a ' man of facts ' ; for I am in fear that without it, even in the few 
 words that follow, I may just be humbly following dean Stanley's 
 example ; and the worst of it is, I feel there is a ' moral ' dogging 
 my steps too, whether I will or not. 
 
 First of all, to recognize the Roman high altar of the present day
 
 38 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 for what it really is, we must eliminate the Roman churches of the 
 religious orders ; they represent, in this point at all events, not Rome 
 but themselves. Turning to the real Roman churches of Rome I find 
 that the French chapters who rebuilt their high altars in the eighteenth 
 century, and designated their new altars described above as 'a la 
 romaine ', knew well what they were doing and saying. There was, 
 however, one feature usually lacking in these French copies,^ the 
 ciborium or baldaquin. And as I look at the high altar of the genuine 
 Roman type I seem to recognize there, in a degree and manner found 
 nowhere else, a singular survival of the ideas and forms of our first 
 period. ' But the six candlesticks and crucifix ? ' some one may say. 
 If we really want to form a just opinion as to comparative or relative 
 fidelity to, or conservation of, an original type or tradition, the only 
 sensible, reasonable, indeed possible, term of comparison for the 
 ' Roman ' altar of to-day is not the Christian altar simply as it was 
 thirteen or fourteen hundred years ago, but prevalent modern forms. 
 In spite of the six candlesticks and crucifix I think only one answer 
 is possible. 
 
 Before ending I will ask, what of that prescription in the Caere- 
 moniale Episcoporum as to the reservation of the Blessed Sacrament, 
 not at the high altar of cathedrals, but at a side altar? It is not 
 prescription by mere arbitrary fiat, but a prescription that has been 
 derived from Roman practice. Somehow it recalls to me an item 
 of ' discipline ' now passed and gone — the ' loctdus m inuro '. Is there 
 some actual and real connexion between this and that? Or is this 
 rapprochement merely wayward and irrational fancy on my part ? 
 
 ^ But not in the ' Roman ' altars put up by the Maurists, who seem to have set the 
 fashion (e.g. Bee, before the close of the seventeenth century ; St-Germain-des- 
 Pr^s, a very interesting example, in 1704), as Val-de-Grace set the fashion to the 
 Maurists.
 
 Ill 
 
 THE EARLIEST ROMAN MASS BOOK ^ 
 
 Where the sacred liturgy is concerned, Catholics are for the most 
 part content to take in an even, not to say indifferent, spirit the good 
 that comes to them, without enquiring too particularly how it came. 
 They are content in a general way with the fact that they are in the 
 current and stream of an uninterrupted tradition, the source of which 
 is to be found in the apostolic age itself. Still, it should be even 
 for them a subject of interest to ascertain in some measure the steps 
 by which the mass book in use to-day came to be what it is ; and to 
 trace the gradual accretions that have gathered round the primitive 
 kernel. Although there is no reason to despair of the substantial 
 accomplishment of this task some day, the process must be slow and 
 painful, for few subjects of investigation are more obscure than the 
 origins of the Christian liturgy, and the steps whereby various types 
 of divine service were developed in different churches ; few subjects 
 afford such wide scope for free conjecture or arbitrary assertion. The 
 rule is general that no contemporary record was made, public or 
 private, marking the chief steps or phases of the evolution. At most, 
 traditional names — St Basil or St Chrysostom, St Gelasius or St 
 Gregory — have become attached to special mass books or liturgies ; 
 even more vaguely still, an apostolic attribution — for instance, St James, 
 St Mark — serves to point out the church in which the liturgy so named 
 was in use. The case of the Roman rite differs from the rest only in 
 this, that the ancient extant materials are more abundant, and that 
 in the case of this rite, beyond any other, serious and more or less 
 critical attempts have been made to recover a lost history. Moreover, 
 
 * From the Dublin Review, Octohtr 1894. [This paper was originally penned 
 as a review of the Rev. H. A. Wilson's new edition of The Gelasian S acramentary 
 (Oxford : Clarendon Press, 1894) and of an article by Dom Suitbert Baumer in the 
 Munich Historisches Jahrbuch (vol. xiv, 1893, pp. 241-301) entitled ^ Ueber das 
 sogenamite Sacramentarium Gelasianum '. It is proper now to state that that article 
 from beginning to end is the result of full and complete collaboration of Dom 
 Baumer and myself. Those who have had knowledge of us both will not be at 
 a loss, I think, to understand or characterize what was the sort of contribution each 
 brought to the common task. It seems to me unnecessary to explain in any way 
 here the reasons determining me to efface myself; but it is right to say that certain 
 matters which were designedly but just opened in the German article were by 
 arrangement reserved to be dealt with by me in this English one.]
 
 40 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 though no Church shewed itself more solicitous in what, for want of 
 a better term, we may call patristic times, to guard its own rite from 
 foreign admixture, the earliest extant books and detailed accounts of 
 the rite are due to the curiosity or the zeal with which aliens were led 
 to enquire into its specific features, or to propagate its forms and texts 
 in their own land. 
 
 Three early mass books of the Roman Church, or, as they were 
 called, Sacramentaries (books of the sacraments, of the divine mysteries), 
 are extant, now usually called the Leonine, Gelasian, and Gregorian. 
 Whatever discussion may arise as to the exact propriety of the 
 names which thus pass current, they have at least the merit and 
 advantage of clearly indicating three successive stages of liturgical 
 development in the Roman Church. It must not be supposed that 
 these mass books present, on opening, just the same appearance as 
 a missal of the present day. They comprise only what was then said 
 by the celebrant himself : collects, secrets, post-communions, prefaces, 
 the canon. The epistles and gospels, and all the sung portions of the 
 mass, were to be found in separate books, and formed no part of 
 the missal itself. On the other hand the Ritual and the Pontifical 
 had then no existence ; and the contents of these books — the rites of 
 ordination, consecration of a church, the sacraments of baptism and 
 confirmation, which then formed a great feature of the special rites 
 of Holy Week and Pentecost, the unction of the sick, &c. — were in 
 those centuries comprised in the * Book of the Sacraments ', or missal. 
 
 The earliest of these Roman sacramentaries, the so-called Leonine, 
 has no claim to be a formal mass book. It is indeed ranged according 
 to months, but it shews hardly so much outline of order in its contents 
 as even this would imply. The collection is ample, two, three, a dozen, 
 or even more masses being given for the same feast ; but it can evidently 
 pretend to be no more than a body of materials brought together by 
 a private hand. 
 
 The second, what has been called the Gelasian Sacramentary, presents 
 quite another character. It is an ordered collection in the form of 
 three books. Speaking from the bulk of the contents of each book, 
 the first contains the missal and other offices connected with the eccle- 
 siastical year ; the second, masses for saints' days ; the third book 
 presents (together with miscellaneous prayers, benedictions, &c.) a 
 large body of votive masses and a certain number for Sundays and 
 weekdays. As yet a special mass had not been formally assigned 
 to each Sunday after Epiphany and Pentecost ; such Sunday masses 
 were therefore a collection from which the celebrant could, during 
 those seasons, select at discretion. The title expressly describes the 
 volume as the Book of the Sacraments of the Roman Church.
 
 GELASIAN MASS BOOK 41 
 
 In the last, the Gregorian Sacramentary, in the earliest and purest 
 form in which it occurs,^ the whole is comprised in a single book ; the 
 saints' days are no longer treated as outside the ecclesiastical year, but 
 are ranged as an integral part of it ; the collection of masses for 
 Sundays and weekdays and the votive masses have disappeared. In 
 the Gelasian there are, as a rule, two collects for each mass (though 
 sometimes three, and sometimes, especially for saints' days, only one) ; 
 in the Gregorian a single collect is the rule. The special prefaces 
 and variants of the canon, very numerous in the Gelasian, are, with 
 one or two exceptions, those of our present missal. Many traces of 
 an early age, visible in the Gelasian book, and much verbal elaboration, 
 have been swept away. The powerful hand of a reformer has passed 
 over the Roman rite, reducing it to a simplicity which seems baldness 
 in comparison with the earlier superabundant wealth of forms shewn 
 in the Leonine and Gelasian books. 
 
 It was in this shape that Pope Hadrian I, some time between the 
 years 784 and 791, sent to Charles the Great the Sacramentary 
 " arranged long ago by our holy predecessor the God-inspired ideifluo) 
 Gregory ', as the Pope says in the letter announcing its dispatch. 
 But this book was not destined long to remain in the state in which it 
 came from Rome ; an addition was soon made to it, trebling its bulk 
 and making it considerably larger indeed than the Gdasiamivi. The 
 compiler of this Carolingian Supplement was careful to insert between 
 the original book and his own compilation a preface giving an account 
 of his work and of his reasons for undertaking it. This preface, as 
 was natural in the case of a mass book designed for practical use 
 and not for the satisfaction of literary or antiquarian curiosity, soon 
 fell out of the manuscripts ; the two portions continued separate and 
 unmixed for a time, longer here, shorter there, according to the char- 
 acter or ideas of the individual copyist, or of those who directed him. 
 By and by, as was inevitable, practical requirements felt by all pre- 
 vailed over a literary or pious scruple, and the various items of the 
 Supplement were inserted at the most convenient places in the original 
 book. Though in this or that isolated later manuscript traces of the 
 primitive distinction may still be found, the true Gregoriaimm and 
 the Supplement were, by the close of the tenth century, so fused into 
 one whole that it was impossible to distinguish any longer the com- 
 ponent parts of what now passed as the Gregorian Sacramentary. 
 
 ^ [It is to be remembered that what follows was written at a time when the purest 
 form of the ' Gregorian Sacramentary ' was known to us only as it stands in print in 
 Muratori's text, ending with col. 138, the rest being assumed to be part of the 
 Carolingian (or ' Alcuin's ') Supplement. See below, Paper No. IV, p. 63 note I and 
 p. 75 note 1.]
 
 42 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 And it is the book thus fused which, practically speaking, forms 
 the Roman missal of the present day. 
 
 Unfortunately, few liturgists of later times have been careful to 
 observe the distinction between the original book and the additions, 
 and nearly all writers have used the term ' Gregorian Sacramentary ' 
 to designate, not the book sent to Charles from Rome, but the whole 
 compilation as afterwards enlarged. Now, however, that M. Duchesne 
 has introduced the convenient term sacramentaire d'Hadrien for the 
 book sent by that Pope to Charles, it is not likely that the term 
 ' Gregorian Sacramentary ' will in future be employed so improperly 
 as has been hitherto the case. But a further point is also gained, for 
 it is now possible to enter into the discussion of a much more difficult 
 question, the justice and applicability of the titles ' Gelasian ' and 
 * Gregorian ' given to the sacramentaries which pass under these names, 
 both as regards the specific question whether they were personally 
 compiled by, or by order of, Gelasius and Gregory, and also the more 
 general question whether the missals so called are substantially Roman 
 missals of a date that may be reasonably assigned to the beginning of 
 the sixth century and the beginning of the seventh respectively. 
 
 And first, to take the sacramentary passing under the name of 
 Gregory. The question was raised early in the eighteenth century, 
 but with inadequate knowledge of the evidence, whether the Grego- 
 riamiin is not to be attributed rather to Pope Gregory II (715-731), 
 or Gregory III (731-741), than to Gregory the Great. Although it is 
 true, as the last editor of the Gelasianum points out/ that neither 
 St Bede nor the Liber pontific alls mentions the work, yet this is only 
 a half light, since Bede's disciple, Archbishop Egbert of York (732-766), 
 not merely says that St Gregory sent his mass book to England 
 by St Augustine, but that he himself had also inspected this same 
 work of St Gregory in Rome ; moreover, at least half a century 
 earlier, Aldhelm, in referring the canon of the mass to St Gregory 
 (whose own, as a composition, it certainly was not), gives us clearly 
 enough to understand that the missal he was familiar with came to 
 him as St Gregory's.^ Whether the Gregorian mass book thus known 
 to Egbert and Aldhelm was that which bore this title in Rome about 
 790, and was sent by Hadrian to Charles the Great, need not here be 
 considered. It is for the present purpose enough to ascertain, on the 
 authority of evidence unknown to the first writer who started the 
 doubt, that the Gregory to whom the missal was attributed must be 
 Gregory the Great. 
 
 By a general acquiescence of the learned, rather than by consent 
 
 ' p. Ix, note. 
 
 ■^ [As to this question see Supplementary Note A to No. V below.]
 
 GELASIAN MASS BOOK 43 
 
 after any specific and recent critical investigation, the Gelasianwn is 
 commonly allowed to pass either as an actual production of Pope 
 Gelasius I (492-496), or at least as dating from about his time. The 
 recent work of abbe Duchesne, entitled Origines du culte chritien, 
 has, however, definitely raised the question whether the sacramentary 
 passing under the name ' Gelasian ', though incontestably in substance 
 a Roman missal, and the earliest official mass book of the Roman 
 Church, has yet any right to be considered as the sixth-century mass 
 book of that Church. The manuscript itself (which, following Mr Wilson, 
 it will be convenient to call, from its present resting place, the Vatican 
 manuscript ^), by consent of competent palaeographers, was written in 
 the seventh century or at the beginning of the eighth, seemingly for 
 the abbey of St- Denis. Examining the manuscript as it stands, 
 Duchesne finds that it does not contain the masses for Thursdays in 
 Lent instituted by Pope Gregory II (71 5-730 ; but it has the feast of 
 the Exaltation of the Holy Cross, which was doubtless, he thinks, 
 introduced after the recovery of the true Cross by Heraclius in 6a8. 
 ' There is, therefore, an uncertainty of about a century (628-731) as to 
 the date of the Roman original of our sacramentary.' He concludes 
 generally that ' it is drawn from official books that were in use at Rome 
 about the end of the seventh century', and that it 'was imported into 
 France some considerable time before Pope Hadrian (772), and some 
 considerable time after St Gregory' (604). On the other hand, the author 
 points out how Roman features have been obliterated from this book : 
 ' all Roman topographical indications have disappeared ; not one of 
 the Roman basilicas is mentioned.^ All prayers relating to certain 
 offices proper to Roman observance — the mass of St Anastasia on 
 Christmas Day, the Greater Litany (April 25), the processions of the 
 Easter vespers, the coUectae, or assemblies at certain feasts — have 
 been suppressed. It presents the Roman ecclesiastical year, Roman 
 formulae, but adapted to the use of countries at a distance from Rome.' 
 This is not all ; it is also marked by numerous Galilean additions and 
 
 * [This Vatican MS, Regin. 316, is to-day unique, but the witness of the Gallic 
 * C elasiaiium of the eighth century ' is, in its contents and in the details of its text, 
 enough to shew that the form in which the Roman Gelasiaiium is found in MS 
 Regin. 316 must have been acceptable or even popular in influential quarters in 
 France during the first half of the eighth century. Dom VVilmart has, however, 
 recently edited from the Reims MS No. 8 (C. 142) of the eleventh century two leaves 
 of the eighth century which by some curious chance were used and bound up as 
 fly-leaves in the eleventh. The handwriting is of the type now commonly called 
 Corbie Script. These two leaves (first printed by M. Loriquet in 1904) give a list of 
 contents of another copy of the Gelasianimi as found in MS. Regin. 316, in which, 
 however, an attempt was made to co-ordinate the ordination forms so curiously scat- 
 tered in the Vatican manuscript. See Dom Wilmart's article L Index liturgique de 
 Saint-Thierry in Revue Be'nddictine, Oct. 1913, pp. 437-450.] 
 
 " For the force of this remark it is enough to refer to the missal now in general 
 use, and the Roman stations therein regularly noted.
 
 44 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 modifications ; and such additions are not by way of mere appended 
 supplement, but are woven into the very texture of the book. 
 
 The sum, therefore, is this : that the book called the Gelasianum 
 represents the (or a) mass book in use in Rome towards the close of 
 the seventh century. This conclusion is based on the assumption that 
 certain feasts or days now found in the Vatican manuscript must have 
 stood in the Roman original from which that manuscript was derived. 
 The question whether it stands removed by one or more stages from 
 the Roman original, ' model or framework rather ', and whether it may 
 not be at the least a copy of a copy with many an intermediate alteration 
 derived not merely from Gallican but also from later Roman sources, 
 does not suggest itself in the author's pages ; although the absence of 
 certain Roman features, and the interweaving of Gallicanisms in the 
 Roman groundwork, are not calculated prima facie to recommend 
 the assumption of a direct Roman original. 
 
 Of course if there be good reason, drawn from other considerations 
 (of positive testimony there is none), for supposing that a missal of the 
 type represented by the Gelasianum was in actual use in Rome at the 
 end of the seventh century, there is less cause to seek for any other 
 explanation of the presence of these feasts of late introduction than the 
 simple one of a direct copy. But for the fact of such use I see no 
 other argument than a positive afifirmation. Unquestionably such an 
 affirmation on the part of a scholar of M. Duchesne's eminence and 
 proved capacity is sufficient ground for meeting it, not indeed with 
 the mere silence of acquiescence, but with a full consideration and 
 examination of the case, conducted with a prepossession in its favour ; 
 and sufficient reason for not rejecting it until difficulties occur of suffi- 
 cient force to raise a well founded doubt whether the author himself 
 has realized all that this assertion on this single point involves of 
 contradiction to the current history of the time. 
 
 And first of all, if the Gelasianum be a sacramentary in use in Rome 
 at the close of the seventh century, what are we to think of the Gre- 
 gorianum} M. Duchesne, in another connexion, answers the question 
 thus : ' It is essentially a book for the stations ', in other words, ' for 
 use only on festival days or days of solemn assembly ' ; ' it is the Pope's 
 book, it contains the prayers which the Pope has to pronounce at the 
 ceremonies over which he ordinarily presides.' The proof for this is 
 that it gives masses only for feasts, or seasons like Lent and Advent ; 
 no masses for ordinary Sundays, no votive masses ; nothing for 
 weddings or funerals, or the veiling of virgins, or reconciliation of 
 penitents. Accustomed as we are, and so long have been, to many of 
 these luxuries, this may appear conclusive ; but, strange as it may 
 sound to some ears, there is a question to the point which demands
 
 GELASIAN MASS BOOK 45 
 
 an answer : Why must all these things be found in a Roman missal 
 of, say, the time of St Gregory the Great ? Why, for instance, should 
 St Gregory deem special masses for these ' private solemnities ', for 
 rain or fair weather, or Sundays after Pentecost, more necessary than 
 the Greeks do at this day or have done at any time during the last 
 fifteen hundred years ? 
 
 Gathering up the indications thrown out by M. Duchesne, we are 
 given to understand that there were in use in Rome at the close of the 
 seventh century two missals, dififering widely in their contents, in the 
 character and degree of their variables, in the number of collects at 
 mass, and in the prayers not only of each mass, but also for the 
 sacraments : a smaller missal for the Pope, a much larger book for the 
 rest of the clergy. And here questions arise which demand notice, if 
 not solution, before the novel theory thus broached can be well 
 admitted ; questions, however, not in any way touched on by the 
 author. And they are the more urgent inasmuch as they do not 
 proceed from a mere comparison of book and book, or the confronting 
 of text and text, written under circumstances of which we know 
 hardly anything by persons of whom we can know still less ; but are 
 concerned with the public policy of a great prince like Charlemagne, 
 whose individual attention was largely devoted to what may be called 
 the Department of Public Worship and Instruction, and who, in 
 carrying out a measure in which he was by inclination deeply interested, 
 viz. the introduction of the Roman mass book throughout his realm, 
 may be presumed to have acted in accordance with the dictates of 
 sound reason, and in a manner calculated to secure the objects he had 
 in view. Moreover, it is to be noted that Charlemagne, no less than 
 his advisers, was perfectly well acquainted from personal observation 
 with the actual liturgy and observance in Rome. We are naturally 
 led, therefore, to enquire what at this time (the second half of the eighth 
 century) can have been the position of the Gelasianum, said to have 
 been the mass book of the clergy at the close of the seventh century. 
 If it was still in Charles's day the clergy's mass book, how came 
 Charles, in the intent to secure uniformity and conformity with Roman 
 practice, to adopt for the use of the clergy throughout his dominions 
 a book not in common use in Rome itself, but proper only for the 
 Pope, adding, moreover, a new supplement unknown in Rome ? If, on 
 the other hand, the Gelasiamnn had now fallen into disuse in Rome, 
 and was superseded by the imposition for general use of the imperfect 
 papal mass book, supplemented by additional offices, Sunday and 
 votive masses, &c., required for ordinary use by the clergy in the 
 parish churches, the action taken is still more inexplicable. We are 
 reduced to conclude that Hadrian failed to send to Charles the supple-
 
 46 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 ment to the Gregorian mass book in use in Rome by the clergy, and 
 Charles in his turn (though constantly sending trusty envoys to the 
 Pope, whose interest it was to comply with his behest, and especially 
 with a demand so little burdensome) failed to ask for that supplement. 
 Or, indeed, is it that the novel theory of the use at the same time in 
 Rome of two different missals has no historical basis, and is no more 
 than a deduction from liturgical texts capable of another explanation, 
 and a deduction also running counter to, and making merely unintelli- 
 gible, the actions and measures of Charlemagne ? 
 
 It must be some considerations of this kind which, in penning his 
 article on the Gelasianum, prompted Dom Suitbert Baumer, a monk 
 of Beuron, to write as follows : 
 
 Duchesne's way of treating the subject is new and interesting, but also (in 
 some measure) not to the point ; this freshness is attractive, and the respect 
 felt for the talent and learning of the author makes most welcome the light 
 which the reader cannot but hope will be thereby thrown on the subject. 
 When, however, an attempt is made to bring the suggestions and remarks, 
 scattered here and there, into harmony mth the fundamental conditions of 
 the problem that has to be discussed, the reader soon begins to feel that, 
 although Duchesne's text reads easily, yet on examination it is difficult to 
 bring into consistency with ascertained facts the new theory which is rather 
 sketched or shadowed out than developed, much less established. Hence 
 the necessity of finding some other way out of the difficulty at one's own risk 
 and peril. 
 
 In the following pages Dom Baumer's article is drawn on without 
 scruple as a serious attempt to grapple with the difficulties involved 
 in the history of the Gclasiamim, without knowledge of which it is 
 impossible to form an opinion as to the value of the contribution made 
 to the subject by the Rev. H. A. Wilson's edition recently issued from 
 the Clarendon Press. And, what is of much more general interest, in 
 the history of this Gelasianum lies the history of the missal in actual 
 daily use in our churches. 
 
 It is to be observed that Duchesne restricts his enquiry to very 
 narrow limits, hardly going beyond the four corners of the book the 
 age of which is to be investigated. But such partial method is not 
 likely to lead to solid and satisfactory results. It is necessary to take 
 a view of the whole of the facts bearing on the subject, and to see what 
 is known, or can be reasonably deduced, from authentic documents as 
 to the history and fortunes of this book — a side of the question which, 
 it may be said, has been hitherto almost entirely neglected. 
 
 Dom Baumer gives first an exposition of the facts that can be posi- 
 tively known, proceeding to what must be conjecture and combination
 
 GELASIAN MASS BOOK 47 
 
 only after the conditions of the problem to be solved are distinctly 
 ascertained. 
 
 We start with the certain fact of the existence of a sacramentary 
 which to writers of the first half of the ninth century in France was 
 commonly known under the name of the ' Gelasian '. Whether they 
 were right or wrong in so designating the sacramentary, one point at 
 any rate is certain from the very name they gave it, viz. their belief 
 that it was of Roman origin and dated from a time anterior to the 
 ordering of the missal then in use in Rome, attributed to St Gregory 
 the Great. And here it is well at the commencement to bear in mind 
 a suggestion of common sense which, in the work of minute critical 
 examination or handling of mere texts, seems only too readily and too 
 commonly forgotten, namely, that if the sacramentary called ' Gela- 
 sian ' had any considerable circulation in the country in which it is so 
 frequently spoken of, that is, the Prankish Empire (in Rome it is not 
 mentioned until a later date), it is in the last degree improbable that 
 the oldest manuscripts now existing were the most ancient then to be 
 found ; or to put the case more definitely, it is only reasonable to 
 suppose that, at a time when it was still a living rite, those who first 
 spoke of the Gclasiamim had in hand manuscripts (perhaps many) older 
 (perhaps much older) than any which have survived not merely the 
 disuse of the rite, but the neglect and innumerable accidents of more 
 than a thousand years. 
 
 Was, however, this so-called Gelasian mass book largely used and 
 widely spread in Gaul ? This is a question which Dom Baumer has 
 been the first to discuss in all its bearings ; and on the answer to it the 
 whole history of present liturgical practice hinges. On the theories 
 current on the subject, which assume the practical universality of the 
 Gallican rite in Charles's kingdom in the middle of the eighth century, 
 it has long been a puzzle to read, in an inventory of the church stuff 
 and library of the Abbey of St-Riquier, near Abbeville, dated 831,^ 
 that the monastery was provided for church use with nineteen ' Gelasian 
 missals ', whilst there were, besides, only three ' Gregorian ' and one 
 ' Gregorian and Gelasian missal recently arranged by Albinus ' (that is, 
 Alcuin). And this is the more singular since the abbat, by whose care 
 the monastery was practically refounded, enriched with ornaments, and 
 furnished with a large collection of books, was Angilbert,- son-in-law, 
 friend, counsellor, and minister of Charles, and intimately mixed up 
 in the measures, secular and religious, of that great and autocratic 
 
 ^ The list of books is, doubtless, like that of church stuff, in the main a repetition 
 of one taken in the first years of the century. Unfortunately, Angilbert's own list 
 of that date, whilst detailed as to church stuff, only gives the number of the books. 
 
 " [See No. XIV below.]
 
 48 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 ruler. In a now lost library catalogue of Cologne, of the year 833, 
 there was mention of a Gelasian missal ; two others are found 
 more than a century later in the library of Lorsch, near Worms. 
 But it is not merely in the libraries of monasteries or cathedrals that 
 there is evidence of its use ; it is also found in obscure country villages. 
 The inventories of half a dozen such churches in the diocese of Reims, 
 taken about the year 850, still exist. Of these six churches, three 
 have only a ' Gregorian ' missal ; two possess both a ' Gregorian ' and 
 a ' Gelasian ' book ; ^ in the sixth the Gelasian book alone was in use. 
 It is to be remembered that of the documents most proper to reveal to 
 us the actual state of things in this matter, that is inventories, not 
 a score now exist dating from the ninth century, out of hundreds, 
 or more probably many thousands, actually taken ; whilst the some- 
 what less rare library catalogues are generally sparing in distinguishing 
 the kinds of missals they more often mention than particularly describe. 
 It is worthy of notice also that in the extant lists, whether of churches 
 or libraries, there is not a single mention of a book to be plausibly 
 identified with a ' Galilean ' missal. Account must also be taken of 
 manuscripts, which (as will be seen later) must certainly belong to the 
 class of missals called in the inventories ' Gelasian '. The oldest, the 
 Vatican MS, first published by Tommasi, and now re-edited by 
 Mr Wilson, was of Paris ; another seems to come from the ' north of 
 France ' ; ^ another apparently from the eastern districts of the present 
 Switzerland. Of manuscripts less well known, but without doubt 
 falling into this pre-Gregorian class,^ one occurs at Gellone, or 
 St-Guillem-du-Desert, near Aniane, north-west of Montpellier, others 
 at Angouleme, and probably at Reichenau, on the lake of Constance.* 
 There is therefore documentary evidence of the existence, previous to 
 the ninth century, and in an earlier or later form, of the book desig- 
 nated ' Gelasian ' along the whole northern and eastern portions of 
 
 ^ There can be no doubt that the 'missale cum evangeliis et lectionibus ' at Vieil- 
 St-Remy was a Gregorian book. 
 
 ^ The Martyrology in the same volume, on which this conclusion is based, seems 
 to point to the district of the present Belgian provinces of Hainaut and Namur ; and 
 with this the Irish indications also well accord. 
 
 ^ [It is to be remembered again that at the time this was written our igno- 
 rance of the MSS of Gellone and Angouleme, &;c. — and indeed of what has 
 since been called the ' Gelasianum of the eighth century ' — was all but complete. 
 The Appendix (pp. 317-371) of Mr. Wilson's edition of the Gelasian Sacramentary 
 gave an accurate list of the contents of two of the three MSS used by Gerbert, but 
 printed by him in such a way as to make it impossible to say what precisely they 
 did contain, or what was the order of their contents. Mr. Wilson's Appendix was 
 the basis and starting point from which it was now possible to investigate this class 
 of Sacramentaries.] 
 
 * M one's manuscripts of ' shortened Gregorian ' books evidently belong to the 
 Gelasian class {Lateinische tmd griechische Messen pp. 122 sqq.). In Addit. MS 
 29276 is a Gelasian scrap of the eighth century ; another, Add. MS 37518.
 
 GELASIAN MASS BOOK 49 
 
 Charlemagne's Prankish kingdom ; and also traces, though much 
 fewer and less marked, in those south-western districts comprising the 
 kingdom of Aquitaine. 
 
 An item in the inventory of St-Riquier now calls for attention, the 
 ' Gregorian and Gelasian missal recently arranged by Alcuin '. Alcuin 
 had not merely been, as abbat of St-Josse-sur-Mer, a neighbour (some- 
 what of an absentee neighbour doubtless) of the monastery of 
 St-Riquier, but his letters also shew that he was a friend and intimate 
 of the house, and that he had been engaged for the monks in revising, 
 in accordance with the more correct taste of the time, the barbarous 
 style of the old Life of their founder, St Richarius ; so that we can be 
 under no temptation to think that when the monks of St-Riquier 
 attributed to Alcuin (an old and close friend also of their own abbat 
 Angilbert) the compilation of a missal in their own possession, they 
 were speaking on mere report, or otherwise than by real and personal 
 knowledge of the facts.^ What, then, is this Gelasiano-Gregorian 
 compilation for which Alcuin is responsible? Here it is well to adopt 
 Dom Baumer's words : 
 
 The Gregorian sacramentary has not come down to us without change in 
 just the form in which it was sent by Hadrian to Charles. All known manu- 
 scripts shew an edition of the Gregorianum largely augmented from other 
 sources. All ' Gregorian ' books, whether they bear Gregory's name on the 
 title, or whether they are merely designated as ' Roman ', amidst infinite 
 variety in minor details, shew practically the same body of texts and order of 
 prayers. In a word, one and only one edition of Pope Hadrian's Gregorianum 
 now exists — an edition enriched with additional matter and adapted to usages 
 widely spread in the Frankish kingdom; and in this form only was the 
 Gregorianum naturalized among the Frankish clergy and people. 
 
 It has already been pointed out that this enlarged Gregorian sacra- 
 mentary exists in manuscripts which for the present purpose may be 
 divided into three classes: (i) those in which the additional matter is 
 kept distinct and separate from the original matter by a Preface 
 {Hucusque praecedens, &c,), and frequently a detailed list of the addi- 
 tions ; (2) manuscripts in which, though the original matter and the 
 additions are still kept separate, yet the Preface and list of chapters, 
 which in the former class draw so clear and unmistakable a line of 
 division, have disappeared ; (3) the largest and ever-increasing class, in 
 which the sacramentary sent by Pope Hadrian is fused with the addi- 
 tions so as to form an indivisible whole, which it is no longer possible 
 to resolve into its constituent elements. 
 
 Mt is not at all improbable that the book list comes from the very hand of 
 Angilbert, a special affection for whom Alcuin's letters so abundantly testify. 
 i«i E
 
 50 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 The Preface, therefore, in which the compiler of the Supplement 
 gives an account of his work and of the reasons for it, is a document 
 which prima facie has the strongest claims to an attentive hearing ; 
 the more so inasmuch as it is a case of the rarest occurrence to find an 
 actual account by the author himself of a liturgical compilation. 
 A Quignon, a Robinet, has let us into his confidence ; Cranmer has 
 explained the leading ideas which led him to substitute the Book of 
 Common Prayer for the Missal. But these are, after all, matters of 
 quite sectional interest compared with the constitution of this Caro- 
 lingian mass book, which, a comparatively short time after its appear- 
 ance, became, and has to this day continued, the great official prayer book 
 of the whole Western Church. The fate of the Preface, and its neglect 
 by the learned, has been singular. In all the early manuscripts it is 
 anonymous; but when first printed, in 1571, the editor, Pamelius, on 
 the authority of a single manuscript of a date so late as the eleventh 
 century, attached to it the name of a personage who died nearly 
 a century after the introduction of the Gregoriamim into France.^ 
 Dom Menard was the first, some seventy years later, to examine it 
 with attention ; and he could find no better course than to reject it as 
 ' absurd ', because it ran counter to certain not unnatural prejudices 
 as to what a Roman mass book of the eighth century ought to be. 
 Ernst Ranke was the first to restore the credit of the Preface by taking 
 it seriously, and was rewarded for his pains by many a valuable hint. 
 Duchesne has somewhat too hastily thrown over the Preface entirely 
 to the care of a future historian of the Gregorianum. To Dr Probst it 
 is difficulty and darkness.^ It is singular that centuries have been 
 allowed to pass, and that still a full examination of this document 
 should have been omitted. But, as in the case of many another episode 
 of liturgical history, there is here a tendency only too marked among 
 persons engaged in these enquiries to take up a position in some corner 
 of ritual research, to the neglect of the wise warning of one who spoke 
 with the knowledge that comes from experience : ' We must penetrate 
 into history if, in the subject of liturgy, we are to arrive at clearness, 
 fixity, certainty in our conclusions.' 
 
 Let us, then, see what the compiler, to whom we owe our present 
 missal, and much else in the Pontifical and Ritual, has to say for him- 
 self It is this : ' The foregoing sacramentary {sacravientoriim libellus) 
 up to this point is known to have been put forth {constat esse editus) 
 by the Blessed Pope Gregory, except those items which the reader will 
 
 ' The book of Pamelius still remains the only one which shews the Preface in its 
 proper place in the sacramentary ; and even his print gives names not warranted 
 by the manuscripts. It seems unnecessary to burden the discussion any further with 
 the names of Rodradus and Grimoldus, which may be considered as disposed of. 
 
 ' [See further as to this Preface No. XV below.]
 
 GELASIAN MASS BOOK 51 
 
 find marked at the beginning with a dagger ivirgula), the Nativity 
 and Assumption of the Blessed Virgin, but chiefly in Lent ' ; also the 
 mass of St Gregory. Moreover, by the carelessness of scribes, the text 
 had become corrupt, so that the book (libellus) was no longer in the 
 state in which it had left St Gregory's hands {ut ab aiitJiore siio est 
 cditus). This defect, he says, he has made good, and corrected ; and 
 he appeals with considerable confidence to his work as proof that he 
 had restored the original and true reading (quern cum prudens lector 
 studiose pcrlcgerit verum nos dicerc ilico comprobabit). First of all, 
 then, it is clear that the writer had submitted the sacramentary sent 
 from Rome to a critical examination ; that (although this was unneces- 
 sary for practical purposes) his scholarly instincts, combined perhaps 
 with a veneration for the great St Gregory, induced him, without 
 moving them from their proper place in the book, to distinguish by 
 a mark later additions from the work of Gregory himself ; moreover, 
 he restored the text to what he felt assured was its original purity. 
 The writer does not here state in so many words that he used earlier 
 manuscripts to correct the text in his hands ; but in view of the 
 terms he uses, of the delicate circumstances attending the correction of 
 a liturgical book proceeding from such an ' author ', of his care to mark 
 later insertions (and those who are best acquainted with the uncertainty 
 attending the date of the introduction of new feasts into particular 
 churches will best estimate the difficulty of that task), it is not 
 unreasonable to suppose that the revision was conducted on the lines 
 of collation with older manuscripts, and that the reviser had means 
 within his reach for such collation. These processes were perfectly 
 well known at the time ; and the value of older or good manuscripts 
 was perfectly well appreciated. 
 
 After describing his work on the Gregorian sacramentary, the writer 
 proceeds to give an account of the Supplement added by himself: 
 
 But since there are other materials which Holy Church necessarily {tieces- 
 sario) uses, and which the aforesaid Father [Gregory], seeing that they had 
 been already put forth by others, left aside {praetermisit), we have thought it 
 worth while to gather them like spring flowers of the meadows, and collect 
 them together, and place them in this book apart, but corrected and amended 
 and headed with their titles, so that the reader may find in this work all 
 things which we have thought necessary for our times, although we had found 
 a great many also embodied in other sacramentaries {sacra me nioruvi libellis). 
 But for the purpose of separation we have placed this little preface in the 
 middle, so that it may form the close of one book [Gregory's] and the 
 beginning of the other [his own] ; to the intent that, one book being before 
 the preface and the other after it {Jiinc itide ordinabiliter eisdem positis libeUis\ 
 every one may know what was put forth by Blessed Gregory and what by 
 
 E 2
 
 52 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 other Fathers. . . . Let the reader be assured that we have inserted nothing 
 but what has been written with great accuracy and care by men of excellent 
 learning and the highest repute {nisi ea quae a probatissimis ei eruditissimis 
 magna diligentia exarata sunt viris). 
 
 After stating that he had given a collection of special mass prefaces 
 at the end of the book, he continues : ' We also add the benedictions 
 to be said by the bishop over the people ; also, what is not to be found 
 in the aforesaid book of Blessed Gregory, ordination forms for minor 
 orders.' 
 
 The materials, therefore, for this supplement, ex multis inulta, as he 
 says, were gathered by the writer from other missals, but he took the 
 pains to give as correct a text as possible. A certain embarrassment 
 of tone is observable as soon as he comes to speak of this his own 
 work ; as, indeed, it was a strong measure to add for official liturgical 
 use an appendix of prayers, selected on individual judgement, to a sacra- 
 mentary believed to be the actual work of one at that time so greatly 
 venerated as Gregory the Great, and an Appendix, too, of about twice 
 the length of Gregory's whole book. The suggestion, that St Gregory 
 omitted the offices given in the appendix ' because he saw that they 
 had been already put forth by others ', will not bear examination. 
 And, indeed, the writer passes on quickly from St Gregory's intentions 
 to others with which he must have been much better acquainted, his 
 own. * We ' saw that these additions were ' necessary for oiir times, 
 he says ; he also says, it is true, that ' holy Church necessarily uses 
 them ', but goes on to explain, as we shall see, that by this latter 
 ' necessity ' he only means, ' if you are bent on using these forms you 
 may, but there is no necessity in the sense of need, for St Gregory's 
 libelhis is a sufficient missal without my additions.' 
 
 This is how he develops his own intentions in compiling the 
 supplement : 
 
 And as we thought it was not at all decent or possible to pay no regard to 
 the wishes of those who look to find these so excellent and varied holy 
 Q\i%txydXiC&%{et quoniam exchidendos tantarum quaesitores diver sarumque institu- 
 tio7tu77i sanctarum nequaquam dignum vel possibile esse censuimus\ we would at 
 any rate satisfy the most worthy desires of all these persons by the present 
 abundant collection. If it please any one to accept what, without any desire 
 of imposing ourselves on others (sine fastu arrogantiae), we have collected 
 with pious affection and the greatest care, we beg him not to be of mind 
 ungrateful for our toil, but with us to render thanks to the Giver of all good 
 things. But if he consider our collection a superfluity and not necessary for 
 himself, let him use the work of the aforesaid Father alone, which in not 
 a tittle may he reject without peril to himself; and let him also tolerate those 
 who demand [our supplement] and wish piously to use it. For, not for the
 
 GELASIAN MASS BOOK 53 
 
 thankless and the scornful, but for the zealous and the devout have we 
 brought together this collection in which he to whom these prayers are dear 
 and familiar {cui animo sedent) may find wherewith he may worthily and with 
 a mind unruffled' pay to our Lord his due vows, and perform the service of 
 
 divine worship Moreover, we entreat those to whom they are acceptable, 
 
 to receive with charity the collection of prefaces added at the end of the 
 volume, and sing them ; but we beg they be neither adopted nor sung by 
 those who, understanding, do not like them, or who, willing to receive, do 
 not understand them. ^ 
 
 The writer ends by asking copyists of his volume to pray for him who 
 had taken so much care for the benefit of many, and— a last request— 
 'pray copy correctly, or else my diligent emendation will have been 
 
 in vain '. 
 
 What is the value of this document, what is its real meaning, and 
 what is its authorship ? The author, though he has been careful to 
 suppress his name, and to give no direct indication of his rank and 
 position, and has only shewn that he was at all events a scholar, must 
 have been a person of the highest consideration. For this the facts 
 themselves speak. In this recension, and in this recension only, was 
 the Gregorian sacramentary adopted, in accordance with the will of 
 Charles the Great, throughout his empire. This recension spread 
 immediately ; and at some date, which may perhaps never be ascer- 
 tainable, though probably during the course of the ninth century, it 
 was adopted by the Roman Church, thus explaining the existence of 
 so many Gallican features in the present Roman rite. Humble as is 
 the tone, and simple as are the words of the compiler, there can be 
 nothing less than supreme power in the background. No work of 
 private venture, dependent for adoption on the mere appreciation or 
 taste of individuals, could, in those days of parchment and written 
 books, have obtained within a few decades so universal and so exclusive 
 a recognition. It was an official undertaking, and it is hardly too 
 much to call the Preface Hucusque a State Paper of the time. 
 
 To understand the full force and value of the document it is neces- 
 sary to scan its words closely, and note the meaning that underlies its 
 smooth and apologetic phrases, (i) It appears that the use of the 
 Gregoriamim was not to be optional ; whatever else was used, or not 
 used, the book sent by Hadrian to Charles must be. On this point 
 
 ' Placabiliter. It may be said ' in a way pleasing to God ' would be more exact ; 
 but, even so, the idea would, after all, be no other than that given in the text. 
 Persons who recall the circumstances issuing in the establishment of the Romano- 
 Lyonese use will be well able to enter into the sense of placabiliter here. 
 
 * Compare ' Quamvis enim melius sit bene facere quam nosse, prius tamen est 
 nosse quam facere ' : so Charles, in his circular letter De litteris colemlis, issued 
 between 780 and fioo (J/. G. Capit. i 79).
 
 54 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 a note is struck quite out of accord with the tone of the rest of the 
 document ; here for a moment the veil is lifted, and the force behind 
 is seen — ' reject it at your peril '. This was to be the book of the 
 future at any rate. (2) However the writer, in freeing himself from 
 consideration of the Gregorianum and passing on to his own work, 
 may have found it convenient to speak of the offices in his Supplement 
 being ' necessarily ' used in the Church, the sequel makes it perfectly 
 clear that the use of the Supplement was to be considered optional, 
 and according to the discretion of the individual ; and the libellus of 
 the Blessed Pope Gregory is contemplated as a mass book complete 
 in itself, and containing all that was needful. (3) The writer leaves 
 us in no doubt as to the reasons for his compilation and its object. 
 Habit and tradition had rooted in the minds and hearts of the clergy 
 these masses and solemn observances which he had gathered so amply 
 from other sacramentaries ; the compiler knew this as a fact, animo 
 sedent, and the extraordinary success which has attended his work is 
 the best proof that his words are true, and that the ' seekers ' after 
 these ' so excellent and varied holy observances ' were a powerful 
 majority. 
 
 And who was the compiler ? It is evident from the circumstances 
 of the case that it can be no one else than a man in direct relation 
 with governing circles, in other words in the confidence of Charlemagne 
 himself. Moreover, only to a scholar of the first rank would he entrust 
 a task vastly more important than the compilation of the book of 
 Homilies which he assigned to Paul Warnefrid, a man only second in 
 eminence to Alcuin. Only two or three men can suggest themselves 
 as fit instruments for such a task, which was hardly less important 
 than the revision of the Biblical text itself. And no name occurs more 
 readily or more reasonably to the mind than that of Alcuin. If earlier 
 and better manuscripts were required, who so likely to be acquainted 
 with these as the former head of the school at York — whence, a few 
 years later, he drew manuscripts to aid him in his revision of the Bible ; 
 who well knew, too, the richly stored and, as yet, intact English 
 libraries largely gathered from Rome and Italy in the course of the 
 seventh century ? Moreover, a spirit makes itself felt in the preface 
 characteristic of the Alcuin who reveals himself in his correspondence, 
 betraying an almost nervous anxiety to be beforehand with friction, 
 to lessen risk of conflict. When it is found, moreover, on contem- 
 porary testimony above suspicion, that Alcuin did in fact carry out such 
 a work as the combination of the Gregorian and Gelasian, the newer and 
 older, Roman sacramentaries, little doubt can remain as to the answer 
 to the question. Who is the author of the Preface Hticusquc, and who is 
 the compiler of the Supplement attached to the Gregoriaimvi sent by
 
 GELASIAN MASS BOOK 55 
 
 Pope Hadrian I to Charles the Great ? ^ Just as, later, Alcuin was 
 chosen by Charles to carry out a correction of the Bible which was 
 meant to issue in the disuse of the ancient versions and in a certain 
 uniformity of the copies of the sacred text in future, so too the same 
 scholar was chosen by Charles for the task of preparing a corrected 
 text of the mass book in use in Rome, to be imposed for the purpose 
 of securing a greater liturgical uniformity and conformity with actual 
 Roman practice throughout his dominions ; and was entrusted with the 
 further task of facilitating the adoption of the new mass book by the 
 addition of a supplement, giving a selection of older materials, largely 
 Roman, which had fallen into disuse in Rome, but had maintained 
 themselves in the realm of the Franks, modified indeed and fused with 
 Gallican elements. The words of M. Samuel Berger in describing 
 Alcuin's work on the Bible may be fitly adapted to the present case. 
 A Visigoth such as Theodulph of Orleans, independent in mind and 
 character, and son of a land which had for centuries been separated 
 from the rest of Gaul, must remain a stranger in the empire of Charle- 
 magne. The discipline and perseverance (it may be added, the prac- 
 tical sense) of an Anglo-Saxon such as Alcuin could better serve the 
 powerful will and clear thought of such a prince as Charles the Great. 
 In liturgy, after Alcuin, all is changed ; a levelling hand has passed 
 over the particularism that before prevailed ; liturgical texts assume 
 a more uniform tenor, their colour is less varied and local. The older 
 liturgies have almost everywhere been put out of use, and the copies of 
 the missal become uniform : under reserve, of course, of very numerous 
 variations of detail and continual minor alterations. But at least this 
 result was achieved : since Alcuin, the only missal in use is the Gela- 
 siano-Gregorian compilation. The older liturgies, the pure Roman, 
 the Gallican, and at length the Mozarabic disappear, to give place to 
 a common and universally accepted rite based, as its main factor, on 
 Roman observance. And that is what Charlemagne had willed should 
 be. In a word, it is the Englishman Alcuin who has been the instru- 
 ment to settle the structure and tenor henceforth of the liturgy of the 
 Western Church. 
 
 ' As to Alcuin's personal opinion on the desirability of new liturgical compilations, 
 as such, his letter to Archbishop Eanbald of York is explicit enough. Eanbald's 
 desire for a newly arranged missal may not improbably have been prompted by 
 what was taking place under the direction of Charlemagne. 'Have you not', he 
 says, * an abundance of libelli sacratorii arranged in the Roman fashion ? You have 
 also enough larger sacramentaries of the older use. What need is there to draw up 
 new when the old suffice.'' (Haddan and Stubbs iii p. 508.) But Alcuin, with 
 all his qualities, had, like Erasmus, a strong sense of the value of powerful and pay- 
 ing patronage. It was not an Alcuin who would directly thwart the will of Charles 
 the Great in a matter such as this. The passage is also interesting as shewing the 
 existence at York of both Gelasian and Gregorian books at this time.
 
 ^6 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 The interest of the discussion is, however, deeper than such as may 
 concern a mere personal question ; nor for Catholics, indeed, is it the 
 disinterment of the mere fossils of a buried past. In this London of 
 the present day we are still ' Gelasian ', * Gregorian ', ' Gallican ', 
 though it may be unawares. In the churches of the secular (and most 
 of the regular) clergy we may still hear the lessons * according to 
 Gelasius ' ; in the churches of some among the religious orders (the 
 Dominicans, for instance), ' according to Gregory ' ; and in both cases 
 a blessing of the paschal candle, which neither in word nor in deed is any 
 part of the genuine Roman rite at all, but an importation of the most 
 popular Gallican form. These existent anomalies lead us back to what 
 is the turning point in the development of Western liturgy. The con- 
 siderations which have been dwelt on enable us at last to realize the 
 import of those frequent notices of the existence of the ' Gelasian ' 
 missal which meet us through the whole region from the shores of the 
 northern sea along the German frontier up to the borders of north- 
 eastern Italy, and to form some adequate idea of the prevalence in the 
 Prankish kingdom of this earlier type of Roman missal. Only one 
 interpretation can be put on plain and patent facts. On the one hand 
 stands Charles's desire for uniformity, by means of a greater conformity 
 with the practice of the Apostolic See, in observance, in song, in rites, 
 as part of a policy long and steadily pursued. On the other hand we 
 have (what is in itself a derogation from the desired ideal) the com- 
 pilation of an addition to the Roman missal sent to him, an addition 
 made on the express ground that those who are to use this missal will 
 look for and demand the masses, offices, functions contained in the 
 Supplement and largely drawn from the Gelasiamun. The conclusion 
 is inevitable that this earlier Roman mass book was, at the close of the 
 eighth century, the dominant rite throughout these regions which 
 formed the backbone of the Carolingian monarchy and the main seat of 
 power of the ruling house, and that the Gallican rite had in these 
 quarters by slow degrees given place to it ; though that rite very pro- 
 bably still remained, in a great measure, the use of those south-western 
 districts of France which were a dependent rather than a ruling 
 fraction of the kingdom. 
 
 But can the book thus entitled, whether rightly or wrongly, ' Gela- 
 sian ' be identified with any extant manuscript ? The so-called Leonine 
 sacramentary, though Roman, is a mere collection of materials ; and, 
 confronted with Alcuin's supplement, shews that it cannot be the book 
 sought for. Besides the Gregorian, there is only one other book which 
 claims to be the Book of the Sacraments, or missal of the Roman 
 Church, the earliest manuscript of which, and the only one known of 
 that recension, is now re-edited by the Rev. H. A. Wilson. Comparing
 
 GELASIAN MASS BOOK 51 
 
 the text of this book and the Supplement, it is evident that Alcuin 
 derived a large proportion of his material from a book belonging to 
 this class, and that here we have in substance one of the ' Gelasian ' 
 missals mentioned in the ninth century, which, previous to that date, 
 had become denizen in Gaul. 
 
 In the light of the facts thus ascertained, we may revert to the 
 remarks of M. Duchesne on this manuscript, and his statement that it 
 was copied from a Roman original some time between the years 628 
 and 731. It seems to be overlooked in some quarters that, after all, 
 Duchesne only touches on this question of the particular Gelasianum 
 so far as his immediate purpose requires, and that, in the vagueness so 
 common in the treatment of liturgical questions, it is very necessary to 
 recall to enquirers such simple facts as data to work back from ; and it 
 is not the fault of that writer, whose whole book would seem to teach 
 quite another lesson, if a starting point is by some readers taken for the 
 conclusion of the whole matter. But what is now in question is a point 
 which Duchesne does not discuss, viz. when did the Gelasian book first 
 find its way into Gaul ? And here it would seem that the mere obvious 
 facts of the case postulate that this must have taken place at some 
 date considerably earlier than the age of the oldest existing manuscript, 
 namely the close of the seventh or beginning of the eighth century. 
 The space of some seventy, eighty, or hundred years is far too limited 
 to allow of so wide a spread in the Prankish kingdom of a new and 
 non-native mass book. The period 650-750 was largely, too, one of 
 civil disturbance and foreign invasion, with a weakened central autho- 
 rity, or with rulers, civil and ecclesiastical alike, interesting themselves 
 not overmuch in ecclesiastical life or the progress of religion. In this 
 case the book imported from abroad was imposed neither by statesman 
 and prelate nor by monarch. No record is left of the gradual steps by 
 which the Gelasianum obtained so wide a popularity on this side of 
 the Alps ; we are confronted with the completed fact, which has to be 
 •explained by such general considerations as a knowledge of the times 
 and the then common mode of procedure shew to be just. Whether 
 the initiative came from above or below, from bishop or individual 
 priest or abbat, zealous for novelty, or prepossessed by education or 
 taste for the fashions of Rome, we know not. A large freedom then 
 existed in such matters. It may be that the book thus brought from 
 Rome was more methodized, more complete than any that at the time 
 was in use in Gaul ; the extant Galilean books make this not 
 unlikely ; and thus, quite apart from its origin, it may have had in 
 itself, in the eyes of those who adopted it, a strong practical recom- 
 mendation. It must have thus spread from church to church, diocese 
 to diocese, left to make its own way by steps that cannot now be
 
 58 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 determined, in its progress incorporating elements derived from 
 rites already existing in these regions, and in its turn contributing- 
 elements to the mass books already there in use. And this considera- 
 tion again furnishes striking evidence how widely the Roman books 
 must have been spread in the Prankish kingdom already in the seventh 
 century, and shews in what manner they were appreciated.^ Four 
 extant missals of that or the immediately succeeding age have hitherto 
 passed as representing the liturgy of the Galilean rite.^ Just as 
 Galilean elements are found fused with the original Roman book in 
 the earliest manuscript of the Gelasiamnn, so in these ' GalHcan ' 
 missals, on the Galilean foundation there have been worked in Roman 
 prayers, Roman offices, in a way which shews that in those centuries 
 it is no longer correct to speak in the strict sense of the Galilean rite 
 in these Gallic lands, but at most of a Romanized Galilean, so deeply 
 are the only extant books penetrated with Romanism. We may take 
 them one by one according to the summary account of the case as 
 given by Duchesne. First, in the so-called Missale Gothiaun, or 
 sacramentary of Autun, the purest of the four, ' all the formulae are 
 arranged according to the order of the Gallican mass ; but many of 
 them (as regards the text), especially in the masses in honour of the 
 saints, are Roman formulae.' Secondly, in the Missale Gallicamim 
 vetiis, ' there is, as in the Autun sacramentary, a large proportion of 
 Roman elements.' Thirdly, in the so-called Missale Francorinn, which 
 in the thirteenth century was preserved in the Abbey of St Denis, the 
 Roman element is so strong, and the Gallican so subordinate, that 
 M. Duchesne has removed it from the series of Gallican books in order 
 to class it with the Roman. As regards the fourth manuscript, the 
 Sacramcntarium Gallicanum, or missal of Bobbio, the masses con- 
 tained in it shew Gallican formulae up to the preface. Henceforward 
 they appear to have been said according to ' the Roman form given 
 at the beginning of the book '? 
 
 ^ The question of any influence of the Gregoriamim in France in the seventh 
 century and first half of the eighth is a subject which deserves a special and minute 
 investigation. 
 
 ^ I say nothing of the pure Gallican masses first edited by F. J. Mone, which 
 belong to an earlier period. The Reichenau MS 253 at Karlsruhe is a palimpsest ; 
 the leaves of a Gallican libellus niissalis have been used for copying the commentary 
 of Jerome on St Matthew. This copy was made partly before the end of the seventh 
 century, partly in the eighth. Delisle {Anciens Sacramentaires No. viii) has taken 
 the age of the Jerome manuscript for the age of the mass book ; Duchesne {Origines 
 ed. 4 p. 154) simply quotes Delisle. Mone considers the mass book to have been 
 written in any case not later than the middle of the sixth century {Lateinische 
 tmdgr.Messen pp. 10, 151-152). [The question of the date of the two handwritings, 
 has now been cleared up in Dom Wilmart's article in Revtie Benid., Oct. 191 1, 
 pp. 377 sqq. ; he assigns the missal fragments to A. D. 650, or a little earlier.] 
 
 ' There can be now no doubt that the missal is of Irish compilation, not improbably 
 at Bobbio itself. Duchesne was not aware of the intimate connexion between it and 
 the original portion of the Stowe Missal.
 
 GELASIAN MASS BOOK 59 
 
 On review we find, therefore : (i) actual evidence of the Gclasianum 
 in use in a wide stretch of the Prankish kingdom ; (2) its use to a large 
 extent in the compilation of the supplement to the Gregorianum ; (3) 
 the statement of the compiler that this was done because the book 
 thus used was so popular ; (4) evidence of its influence in all extant 
 missals of the Galilean rite of the seventh and eighth centuries. To 
 whichever side of the problem we turn, we are met with the same 
 evidence, clear and unmistakable, of this widely spread Romanizing 
 tendency in the liturgy of Gallican churches in the seventh and eighth 
 centuries, and already not in slight and modest beginnings, but in an 
 advanced stage of development. Until the day shall come when, by 
 discovery of new or unexpected sources of information, we are assured 
 of a sudden outbreak of enthusiasm for Roman rites and practices in 
 the Prankish kingdom some time during the course of the seventh 
 century — a revolution of which there is no trace in the historical 
 monuments of that age — we must have recourse to an explanation 
 consonant both with the dictates of good sense and with what is known 
 as to the methods of the time, and postulate a period long enough to 
 allow of the gradual extension and popularization of the new rite, 
 bringing its introduction into connexion with the efforts of so many 
 Gallican Councils of the sixth century to effect at once a greater 
 liturgical uniformity at home, and, in some respects, an approximation 
 to the practices existing in Rome. A full and deliberate survey of 
 all the circumstances of the case leads to the conclusion of P. J. Mone 
 (who was almost the first to insist on the necessity of carrying on 
 liturgical investigations with a continual reference to the history of the 
 time), that the introduction of the Gelasianum into Gaul must be 
 thrown back into the sixth century. And indeed this is a conclusion 
 in no wise contradicted by the internal evidence of the earliest extant 
 manuscript of that missal, which evidently embodies a discipline, order, 
 and rite well corresponding with that age.^ 
 
 ' There exists, so far as I know, the description of only one missal of the sixth 
 century, a missal compiled by Maximian, archbishop of Ravenna (546-556/7) ; the 
 account is given, too, by a thorough-paced antiquary who had himself examined 
 it. It was evidently in two books — on& per afttii circulu»i, the second for masses of 
 saints — and omitted the votive masses which comprise the bulk of the third book in 
 the Gelasianum, the cotidian masses (in which those for Sundays may be included) 
 being placed in the first book. Maximian (says Agnellus, the biographer of the 
 archbishops of Ravenna, writing about 840) 'edidit namque missales per totum 
 circulum anni et sanctorum omnium. Cotidianis namque et quadragesimalibus 
 temporibus, vel quicquid ad ecclesiac ritum i)ertinet, omnia ibi sine dubio invenietis '. 
 He says these missales formed a goodly volume — 'grande volumen ' {A/on. Germ. 
 SS. Rer. Langobard. p. 332). The writer's Latin is his own, and is untouched by 
 the Carolingian revival, and he is magniloquent ; but his meaning is clear enough; 
 and whilst it is impossible to bring this description into agreement with either the 
 Leonine or Gregorian books, it accords easily enough with the Gelasian type.
 
 6o LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 [In the original article there followed some remarks on the new 
 edition of the Gelasian Sacramentary which, as now of no interest, are 
 here omitted.] 
 
 To any one who follows with attention recent literature on the 
 subject of early liturgy, it is evident that M. Duchesne's book on the 
 ' Origins of Christian Worship ' has set ideas on the subject all in 
 disarray. There is in our days a desire, perhaps excessive, to be up 
 to date and be critical, scientific ; but then this book makes it so 
 difficult to know what view to take on so many points of important 
 detail. And indeed there is much excuse for the puzzled attitude of 
 mind of the specialists, which exists in fact, however decorously it 
 may be concealed from the eye of the profane. Duchesne goes along 
 his own road, in irregular and unsystematic fashion ; he points with 
 the finger now in this direction, now in that, and there are interesting 
 conjunctures when the indications seem to be almost contradictory. 
 Sometimes he simply disregards the bypaths he himself points out ; 
 sometimes he enters upon them, but only to stop short provokingly 
 just at the point where his guidance is most needed. There runs 
 through his rapid survey something of a good-humoured contempt for 
 his audience which is not a little disconcerting ; and he probably knew 
 them well. The Origines is a book which, though professing by its 
 form to be a work of popularization, can only be used as it should be 
 by those best able to form an opinion for themselves ; and it will be 
 most highly valued, be found most useful, and be most frequently 
 consulted, by those least at the author's mercy. 
 
 A reaction from an exaggerated traditionalism, as exemplified in 
 the methods of the first volume of Dom Gueranger's Institutions 
 liturgiqjies, was inevitable ; and it was natural that it should manifest 
 itself most clearly in France. The reaction which has, in fact, ensued 
 shews, like such movements generally, a tendency on its side to 
 exaggeration, though doubtless even by exaggeration it has greatly 
 helped to bring into clear relief the problems that have to be dealt 
 with, and to disengage in many respects bare truth of fact. The 
 question of the origins of the Roman mass book is only one item of 
 a subject which, if satisfactory and fairly sure results are to be arrived 
 at, must be studied not merely with exactness in isolated points of 
 detail, but as a whole in all its bearings. 
 
 The charming book on the ' History of the Roman Breviary ', by 
 M. Pierre Batiffol, probably marks a term of reaction, although for 
 a time it is to be expected that the many persons who would desire to 
 appear on the level of scientific progress at little cost to themselves 
 will readily appropriate, without further enquiry, the newest theories.
 
 GELASIAN MASS BOOK 6i 
 
 There are not wanting signs, however, that a sober review of the whole 
 evidence must issue, as regards the earliest Roman mass books, in 
 a recognition that the traditional names 'Gelasian' and 'Gregorian' 
 represent, as applied to the books hitherto passing under those names, 
 a practical truth, the neglect of which must turn the history of the 
 liturgy in the West into a mere enigma ; and that the Gelasianuvi is 
 substantially the Roman mass book of the sixth century. 
 
 The foregoing article was in type when the unexpected intelligence 
 arrived of the death of Dom Baumer. He had already finished his 
 work on the history of the Breviary, which is passing through the 
 press, and he was about to address himself to his further task of the 
 early history of the Roman, or rather Western, Liturgy. The mate- 
 rials gathered during a long course of years were in hand, the plan 
 was sketched, and the work had been so far meditated on and thought 
 out, that a few months would have sufficed for its completion.^ By 
 his death sacred learning suffers a heavy loss ; there is no one ready 
 to take his place. To his brethren in religion, to his friends, the loss 
 is more grievous still of one who was so truly simple of heart and 
 single of eye ; so upright, so penetrated with the loving fear of God. 
 
 ^ [So I wrote in the summer of 1894, not anticipating the surprise in store for me 
 in the following year on the recovery first of Charles's Gregorimiiim in the genuine 
 form as described in the Hucusque, and, secondly, of the Gallic ' Gelasianum of the 
 eighth century ' ; with the consequent necessity of a thorough reconsideration of the 
 whole complex of questions affecting the history of the Roman Sacramentaries from 
 the sixth century to the tenth. Neither Dom Baumer nor I realized in 1894, and 
 he never lived to know, how ignorant we actually were of the mass books themselves, 
 or how essentially necessary, as a preliminary to the history of the Roman mass 
 itself, was the laborious work of a history of those books, which could only be 
 written after a mastery of them in all their details.]
 
 IV 
 
 ON SOME EARLY MANUSCRIPTS OF THE 
 GREGORIANUM^ 
 
 The notes on which the following paper is based were taken during 
 the first half of the year 1895, a considerable portion of which was 
 devoted to a minute examination of the mass books of an earlier date 
 than the tenth century in the Vatican Library, the Bibliotheque 
 Nationale, and at Cambrai. The object was personal : viz. if possible 
 to satisfy my mind in regard to a certain number of questions on the 
 answers to which must depend the history of public worship and sacred 
 rites in western Europe from the sixth century to the tenth. As, 
 for instance, these : (i) Is it possible to recognize with certainty the 
 Gregorianwn in the actual state in which it was sent by Pope Hadrian 
 to Charles, and to define with exactness its contents ? (2) If so, what 
 MSS present that text in its most authentic tradition and purest form ? 
 (3) What is to be thought of such books as e. g. the Gregorianuni of 
 Menard ; can they be said to represent in any degree better the 
 mass book, and practice, of Rome about the year 800 than did, say, 
 the missals of Auxerre or Beauvais, Sens or Paris in 1760? (4) The 
 exact nature and text of Greg thus determined, in what sort of relation 
 does it stand to Gelas ; and, in particular, were these two books ever 
 in use at the same time in Rome, or did the one displace the other, 
 as, say, the Second Prayer Book of Edward VI displaced the First ? 
 (5) In what degree can the use of Greg be traced in the extant MSS 
 of both types of Gelas, viz. the earlier type represented by the 
 Vatican MS, or the later Gallic type which I have called 'the eighth- 
 century recension' (= ^ Gelas saec. viii ') ; or traced even in 'Galilean' 
 and ' Mozarabic ' books ? (6) Finally, by what steps, in exact detail, 
 did the book consisting of the Gregorianuni and the Carolingian 
 Supplement come to take the form presented by the type of missal 
 common in the eleventh and twelfth centuries ? 
 
 The interest attaching to these investigations is not merely liturgical. 
 Much more than this is in question, and much that to many persons 
 may appear more interesting. They involve the elucidation of one of 
 
 ' Y xom i\\& Journal of Theological Studies, Apn\ 1903.
 
 MSS OF THE GREGORIANUM 63 
 
 the most instructive and least known chapters of Merovingian history 
 which will, perhaps better than any other single line of enquiry, exhibit 
 the gradual process of preparation for the Carolingian revival with its 
 Roman aspirations of every kind, and preference for Roman models ; 
 and will shew that this was no sudden outburst, but the result ot 
 a movement that with slow but sure steps had been maturing for nearly 
 two centuries. But the proof of all this for the assurance and the 
 purposes of the historian can be given only after much detailed 
 technical work on the part of the liturgist. The aim of the present 
 note is to make some slight contribution to this object by an attempt 
 to answer the first question raised above, and also the second so far 
 as the MSS investigated by me, in combination with the description 
 of others by Delisle and Ebner, will allow.^ 
 
 The MSS that I have examined for the purpose fall into two 
 classes : 
 
 I. Those which contain the Gregorianum ^ only, without the Caro- 
 lingian Supplement: viz. the Cambrai MS 164 (old numbering, 159), 
 written for the Church of Cambrai in the episcopate of bishop Hildoard, 
 {790-816) (see Delisle, note 2 of the last page oi Mhnoire sur d'anciais 
 Sacrame7itaires) ; and the Paris B. N. lat. 2292 (Delisle, op. cit. No. 
 xxiii), presented by bishop John of Arezzo to the abbey of Nonantola, 
 
 ^ [I think it well in this reprint to state here at once that even a cursory examina- 
 tion of the MSS of Charles's Gregorianum would have conclusively shewn that the 
 ' Sacramentaire d'Hadrien ' embodied in it contained not only masses and the 
 sacramental rites of Holy Week and Pentecost (in Muratori's edition up to col. 13S ; 
 see above p. 41 n. i), but also the subsidiary offices and prayers required for the 
 pastoral ministry of an ordinary priest (col. 241-272). Had this simple consultation 
 of the MSS, whether in Paris or in Rome, been resorted to, the theory that the 
 Gregorianum is the Pope's book, propagated as it has been in four French and 
 three English editions of the Origines du cultc chritien, and in the late Bishop of 
 Salisbury's Ministry of Grace, would, it is only rational to suppose, never have been 
 heard of. The absence of Sunday masses in the ' Sacramentaire d'Hadrien' 
 would have remained an ' outstanding difficulty ' ; and an ' outstanding difficulty ' it 
 is still. But the terms of its solution must be such as are compatible with the three 
 following statements of matter of fact : 
 
 {a) the sets of masses for the Sundays after Epiphany, Easter, and Pentecost 
 existed (as we now know from the Monte Cassino palimpsest) in the Gregorianum 
 in use in Rome at the close of the seventh century ; 
 
 {b) such sets of masses were absent from the Gregorianum sent by Pope 
 Hadrian I to Charles in the late years of the eighth century; 
 
 (c) the sets of masses for the Sundays after Epiphany, Easter, and Pentecost 
 embodied by Alcuin in his Supplement were textually the same as those mentioned 
 in {a). 
 
 In other words, the question really raised by the facts is, in simple form, this ; we 
 know on unimpeachable evidence that Pope Hadrian I executed a reform of the 
 Roman books for the Divine Office ; did he also reform the Missal ?] 
 
 * In using the terms Gregorianum and Gelasianum I do not wish to beg questions. 
 While believing that both do represent substantially what is the truth, I would gladly 
 use any conventional designations that might be agreed on. See the last two 
 pages of the article ' Ueber das sogenannte Sacrameniarium Gelasianum ' in the 
 Hist. Jahrbuchyiw': ' In dieser Untersuchung,' &c. (p. 300); which, indeed, are 
 only a German translation of an English original.
 
 64 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 near Modena, about the seventh decade of the ninth century. These 
 two MSS will be designated Ca and Non respectively. 
 
 II. Those which contain Greg and the Carolingian Supplement. 
 These MSS contain also, on fly-leaves or at the beginning and end of the 
 various MSS, much additional matter, generally by other and later 
 hands. Such additions are of primary importance for the history and 
 development of the missal from the ninth to the eleventh century, for 
 they lay bare the economy of later mediaeval liturgy, in Missal, Ritual, 
 Pontifical. The MSS to be reviewed are : 
 
 1. Vat. Regin. '^o^'] {Reg)} 
 
 2. Vat. Ottobon. 313, from Paris, Delisle No. xxxv {Ott). 
 
 3. Paris B, N. lat. 12050, the missal of the priest Rodradus, Delisle 
 No. xxii (Rodr). 
 
 4. Paris B. N. lat. 2812, from Aries, Delisle No. xxxvi (Arel). 
 
 5. Paris B. N. lat. 9429, from Beauvais, Delisle No. lii {Belv). 
 
 All these MSS are assigned to the ninth century except Belv, which 
 is stated to be of the tenth.^ 
 
 As Ca is practically unknown, and Rodr presents features of special 
 
 ^ [This is the MS from which the print in Muratori's Littcrgia Romana Vetus 
 was made. Mention of it will be sought for in vain in Delisle's Memoire sur 
 d'andefts Sac7-a7nentaires. The last person, to my knowledge, who records that he 
 used it was Vezzosi, the editor of Tommasi, in the middle of the eighteenth century. 
 In the nineteenth it was given up for lost by the custodians of the Vatican Library 
 themselves. Ebner (p. 241) tells us how, on the occasion of two literary visits to 
 Rome, his repeated efforts and insistence resulted only in assurances from Mgr 
 Carini, the prefect, and Father Bollig, a librarian (and, by the way, a liturgist), 
 that it could not be found. How I 'found' it is described in the ' Liturgical Note ' 
 in the Book of Cerne p. 238. Ten minutes' examination sufficed to tell me that the 
 ' Pope Hadrian ' mentioned at the Exultet was Pope Hadrian II (867-872), successor 
 of Nicholas I (858-867), whose name had been erased, not Hadrian I ; and that the 
 MS therefore is not, as had been often stated, of the late eighth century and of 
 Charles's own day, but of the ninth, and, as I should venture to think, of about the 
 middle of that century.] 
 
 ^ The following MSS described or mentioned by Delisle, and Ebner Iter Italictim, 
 not examined by me, may (and some certainly do) contain Greg as found in the 
 MSS mentioned in the text: l. Autun, Seminary Library, MS 19 bis^ Delisle 
 No. xvi. 2. Reims, Town Libr., MS 320-272 (213 [E 320], I believe, of the 
 present catalogue), Delisle No. xxi. 3. Le Mans, Town Libr., MS T]., Delisle 
 No. xxxi. 4. Florence, Laurentian Libr., MS Aedil. 121, Delisle No. xhx ; Ebner, 
 pp. 29-30, 385. 5. Verona, Chapter Libr., MS 91, Delisle No. xxvi ; Ebner, pp. 
 290-291. 6. Verona, Chapter Libr., MS 86, Delisle No. xxv ; Ebner, pp. 286-288. 
 7. Mainz, Seminary Libr.; Baumer, p. 255. 8. Cologne, Cathedral Libr., MS 
 137, Delisle No. xxxix ; Ebner, p. 383. 9. Donaueschingen, MS 191, Delisle 
 No. xli. In company with Dom Baumer I saw this MS some eleven or twelve years 
 ago, but cannot rt member its arrangement ; I doubt if it can be of so early a date 
 {c. 830) as he is disposed to assign to it. There is a possibility that 10. Monza, MS 
 
 in the Treasury, Ebner, p. 105 ; 11. Chapter Libr. — — -, Ebner, p. 107 ; and 12. 
 
 IOC 
 
 one of the Essen MSS at Diisseldorf (Delisle No. xl ; see Baumer in Hist. Jahrb. 
 1893, p. 258), may belong to this class ; as would also 13. the Senlis Sacramentary, 
 Paris Bibl. de Ste-Genevi6ve, MS latin BB, 20, Delisle No. xxxii, but for the dis- 
 placement of the ordinations (evidently a Gallicanized set) which are placed between 
 Mur. ii col. 240 and the prefaces.
 
 MSS OF THE GREGORIANUM 6$ 
 
 interest, some observations on these two books are necessary before 
 proceeding further. Ca is at once distinguished from every Carolingian 
 Sacramentary that I have seen, or found described (except the later 
 Cambrai MS 162-163, old numbering 158, also saec. ix), by the shape 
 of the volume, tall and narrow, nearly three times as high as broad 
 (295 X 103 millim.). The original MS consists of ff. 35''-203 ; ff. a-35* 
 and 204-245 comprise supplementary matter added by various hands 
 in the ninth century. Though of mean appearance compared with its 
 congeners, this MS was intended, so far as the ideas of the Cambrai 
 School ^ could go in that direction, as a * Prachtexemplar '. In the 
 centre of ff. 35^ -^6 and 37 over a space 220 x 72 millim. surrounded 
 by red lines, the vellum is purple ; f. 35'' offers the title in gold and 
 white characters, disposed in fourteen lines as follows, the words or 
 parts of words printed in italics being in gold : ' In nomine, dm hie 
 sa|cramentorv ^ | de circulo ] anni \ exposito \ a sco Gregorio j Papa 
 
 ' The days were long since past when (as Traube says, Perrona Scottorum in 
 Sitziingsber. d. kgl. buyer. Akad.,phil.-hist. Classe, 1900, p. 493) Peronne, St-Riquier, 
 Corbie, those three monasteries on the Somme, were literary centres animated by a 
 common Irish spirit. When the Cambrai MS 164 was being written, Corbie under 
 Adalard, and St-Riquier through Angilbert, looked to Rome, not to Ireland, for 
 their culture, and the representation of Irish influences in those quarters had passed 
 to Cambrai. Thus the most ancient extant MS of the ' Hibernensis ', still at 
 Cambrai, was written there during the episcopate of Hildoard's predecessor Alberic 
 (t 790?) ; a MS now at Petrograd (Q. ii 5), for the most part also excerpts from 
 the Canons, contains a set of twenty verses (printed M. G. Poet. Latin, i 41 1-4 12) 
 which the Irishman Dungal addresses to Hildoard, in which he describes himself as 
 ' exiguum et famulum . . . tuum'. It is not improbable that the letter from Dungal 
 (first printed by Jaffe from a Harl. MS, and since by Diimmler in M. G. Epp. iv 
 578) to a bishop not named, from whom he received an allowance, was addressed 
 to Hildoard. Another Petrograd MS (F. i 7, saec. viii) contains an * Egloga ' 
 from St Gregory's Moralia of Lathcen filius Baith (? the Irish prince, s. vii), see 
 Neues Archiv v 246. Did this also come from Cambrai ? I may be considered as 
 giving way unduly to imagination if, remembering the literary jealousies, friendships, 
 and coteries in the days of Charles and Lewis, I suggest that, whilst the Carolingian 
 Supplement is naturally found at St-Riquier, its absence is as natural at Cambrai 
 (the solitary ' Scottic' MS at St-Riquier early in the ninth century, Traube, p. 529, 
 was probably a relic of the o\A fonds). The comparatively poor and mean form and 
 style of the two sacramentaries at Cambrai suggested at once when I saw them the 
 usual character of the more ordinary Irish codices. The initials, neat, and of good 
 effect from their mere lines, may doubtless tell their tale to the expert ; although I 
 noticed in MS 164 but one initial of the common Irish type with dots, fol. 175''. 
 
 ''■ It is impossible here to discuss the question what was the precise text of the 
 title of the book sent from Rome, which, as found in MSS, has, it seems to me, 
 little, if any, real value for the elucidation of the history of the Gregorianum. 
 But, if this title be discussed at all, the evidence of Ca on this point is not to 
 be lightly dismissed. The ' //^^r sacramentorum ' of most MSS is not improbably 
 a correction suggested by the niceness of the later Carolingian scholars, who would 
 scout a * Hie ' or * Incipit Sacramentorum '. The noun on which this genitive 
 depends is commonly suppressed in the earliest liturgical documents : ' ordine quo 
 in Sacramentorum continetur ', Ordo Rom. i § 32, of. § 39 ; ' sicut in Sacramentorum 
 commemoratur ', Angouleme Sacramentary B. N. lat. 816 (hereafter called yi«^) 
 f. 47*, cf. Muratori ii 401 ; St-Amand Ordo in Duchesne Origines, 2^ 6d. p. 459, 
 3« p. 476. The ' Incipit Sacramentorium ' of A'on (see Delisle No. xxiii) is probably 
 only a scribe's correction of the MS before him (the ' i ' is inserted, small, in the 
 
 1856 p
 
 66 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Roma|no editu | ex authen\tico libra \ Bibliothecae | cubiculi s]criptum.' 
 The rest of f. o^^ and ff. 36, 37 are occupied with the Canon (to 
 ' miserere nobis ' inclusive, Mur. ii 6). On f. 203^ at the end of the 
 ' Oratio ad ordinandum pontificem ' (Mur. ii 271-273)^ after five lines 
 blank is the following colophon (already printed by Delisle) on alter- 
 nate lines, in red, by the usual rubricist of the MS, traced in a character 
 that grows larger and more emphatic as he proceeds : ' Hildoardus | 
 praesul. anno | xxii. sui onus | episcopatum | hunc libellum | sacra- 
 mentorum | fieri promul|gauit '. The date commonly assigned as that 
 of Hildoard's accession to the see of Cambrai is 790 ; if this be correct 
 the MS would date from 811 or 812; it cannot be later than 817, 
 when Halitgar was already bishop. Hildoard's last known act was to 
 obtain from Lewis the Pious a confirmation of the possessions of his 
 church dated April 15, 816; his death is commonly assigned to July 4 
 of that year. In any case the MS of Greg which he caused to be 
 written^ is the earliest copy yet known. It seems hardly open to 
 doubt that this ' libellus sacramentorum ' is the only Prankish example 
 still in existence (the case of Non is different as will be explained later) 
 of the missal used by those persons (and the writer of the Hucusque 
 preface tells us there were such) who thought the Carolingian Supple- 
 ment ' superfluous ' and ' not necessary ', did not need it and did not 
 have it, but were content to ' use only ' the ' opusculum ' of the ' blessed 
 Pope Gregory '. The interesting question arises whether Hildoard's 
 MS derives directly or indirectly from the identical Gregoriajtum sent 
 into France by Hadrian before it received its Prankish supplement. 
 I have been able to find nothing whatever in the MS proper to supply 
 an answer one way or the other, or to take it (for textual and critical 
 purposes) out of the category of MSS which derive from a date subse- 
 quent to the addition of the Supplement, and I believe we must be 
 content not to know.-^ So far as its text is concerned, it abounds in 
 
 lower member of the ' R ') ; ' Sacramenttrium ' is a form I do not remember to have 
 seen in ninth-century documents. Cf. ' Explicit Sacramentorum a S. Greg, papa Rom. 
 aeditum ' in the Modena Sacramentary (Ebner, p. 96) ; this evidently goes back on 
 the Hticusqiie preface only, and has no independent value as testimony. Note also 
 how the colophon of Ca, like the Hucusque^ calls Greg ?i 'libellus' not a 'liber'. 
 
 ^ The prayer Praesta (= Gelas iii 93, first collect) appears in Mur. ii 272 
 through a mistake ; it is written in Reg by a later hand to fill up the last five lines 
 of the page. It does not appear in any other MSI have seen ; but Arel, as well as 
 Crt, leaves a space of five blank lines here. Praesta seems to be found after the 
 ' Orat. ad ord. pont.' in the Modena MS (Ebner, p. 96). It is no part of Greg. 
 
 '^ The pompous ' fieri promulgavit ' doubtless has no further meaning ; cf. the 
 ' Albericus . . . fieri rogavit ' of the colophon of the Cambrai MS of the 
 * Hibernensis'. 
 
 ' It may be of interest to state that, though divided into two volumes, the Cambrai 
 MSS 162, 163 form a single Sacramentary ; vol. i contains the matter of Greg in 
 Mur. ii I 138 with a body of masses of common of saints at the end ; vol. ii presents 
 a fusion of the rest of Greg and of the Supplement in an order I have not noticed 
 -elsewhere. The general character of this Sacramentary is perhaps sufficiently
 
 MSS OF THE GREGORIANUM 67 
 
 solecisms and grammatical errors ; ^ of these, however, the ' anno xxii 
 sui onus episcopatum ' is one somewhat too extravagant to be taken 
 as a fair specimen. Instances of the scribe's carelessness, too, are not 
 uncommon.^ Still, when all deductions are made, this MS, as I hope 
 may appear later, will be found of primary value as a witness to the 
 genuine text of Greg as it was sent into France by Hadrian. 
 
 Rodr is in some respects the most interesting and instructive of 
 the early Gregorian Sacramentaries, It is not the production of an 
 official scribe ; nor is it written for some solemn church ; nor does 
 it represent the needs (or fancied needs) of a young Levite, brought 
 up from childhood in the routine of a cathedral school, when about 
 to receive the order of priesthood and use the missal for the first time 
 himself. Rodradus was a man of mature years, seemingly of easy means ; 
 whether a layman or a cleric long in orders who hesitated to take upon 
 himself priestly responsibility, is not certain ; but certain it is that he was 
 a man whose scruples could be overcome only through the exercise of 
 extreme pressure on the part of his bishop : * victus Hilmeradi antistitis 
 (of Amiens) iussionibus, et vinctus episcopalis autoritatis excommunica- 
 tionibus,' as he himself says. In Rodradus's missal Greg (ff. i9''-io2'^), 
 and the Supplement with its Preface (ff. 102^-201'*), are kept separate 
 and intact ; there follows (ff. 201^-248'') a body of additional matter 
 which shews how prayers and formularies endeared to the Frankish 
 clergy by long habit (' cui animo sedent ') came back in the ninth 
 century with ever increasing volume into public use, and what a devout 
 person like Rodradus who accepted the burden of the sacred ministry 
 only with fear and trembling — ' trepidus suscepi ' are his words — 
 thought in the year 853 ' necessary ' (so far as his mass book was 
 concerned) for its performance.^ 
 
 indicated by the fact that it has twelve lessons on Holy Saturday (cf. the eighth- 
 century recension of Gelas in Wilson Ge/asian Sacrametitary pp. 334-335)- These 
 volumes present doubtless the next stage of the development of Greg in the Church 
 of Cambrai. 
 
 ^ Commonly * oratione ' for ' oratio ' ; ' incipiunt orationes cotidianas ' ; ' uigilia 
 adsumptio S Mar.' ; but these things are much more common in MSS of Charles's 
 days and of the earlier decades of the ninth century than appears from our smooth 
 prints. The study of the Sacramentaries from this point of view would probably 
 repay the philologist. For the 'ad complendum ' of the other MSS of Greg, Ca 
 regularly uses the form 'ad completam ' ; but once, f. 70*, * ad c6pl£)'. 
 
 * F'or instance : 'et oblationem ' for ' et oratio' ; omission of * lohannis Thome 
 lacobi ' from the Canon ; of ' Per Christum Dom. nostrum ' before ' Per quem haec 
 omnia ' at close of Canon ; of ' nostris' after ' debitoribus ' in the Lord's Prayer ; of 
 ' spiritum sapientiae et intellectus' in the prayer 'ad infantes consignandos ' (Mur. 
 ii 65) ; ' post vela«^/um altare ' (for ' vela/um '). 
 
 ' Ff. 201^-248^ comprise roughly: ordinations, ff. 201-204; votive masses 
 (Trinity, Wisdom, &c.), ff. 205-207 ; masses for vigil and day of the new feast of 
 All Saints, a common of evangelists, ff. 208-209 ; masses for various occasions like 
 those at the end of Book iii of Gelas, ff. 210-216; masses for dead, ff. 217-219 ; 
 proper masses of saints, largely from Gelas, ff. 220-228 ; common of saints, 
 
 F 2
 
 68 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 In comparing the MSS to be reviewed, it will be convenient to 
 consider first the portion of Greg in Muratori ii 7-138, 241-372 ; 
 and only afterwards the forms of ordination and their position in the 
 MSS. Reg as being printed in Mur. affords the simplest and easiest 
 means of comparison. Gclas also is cited in I-VI from Muratori. 
 
 I. In Ott the prayers are the same, and in the same order, as in Reg, 
 except that : 
 
 {a) it adds to the masses of the first three Sundays in Lent ^ and of 
 Passion Sunday a ' super populum ' Da nobis quaesumus Due perseveran- 
 tem (Mur. ii 47, note d) ; this is the ' super populum ' of the following 
 Tuesday in Reg and also in Ott itself. In like manner, to the third 
 Sunday of Lent is added (ii 39, note ti) a ' super populum ' which in 
 both MSS is that of the Thursday following ; 
 
 {b) it adds on Palm Sunday a ' Benedictio in Palmis ' Deus cuius 
 Filius pro salute (ii 51, note z) ; I cannot trace this further back ; 
 
 (c) it adds a ' super populum ' Purijica q. Due to the mass of Palm 
 Sunday (ii 52, note b) ; this is the ' ad populum ' at this day in Gelas 
 (i 546), and in ' Gelas saec. viii ' (Wilson, p. 332, Aug f. 32*) ; 
 
 {d) it adds to the ' oration es pro peste ' (better, according to the 
 MSS, 'or. de mortalitate ') a prayer entitled 'super oblata ' Subveniat 
 nobis (ii 269, note k) ; this is the ' secret ' of the mass ' tempore 
 quod absit mortalitatis' in Gelas (i 712), and in the three ' Gelas saec. 
 viii ' MSS R (Wilson, p. 255, and Gerbert, p. 305, there referred to) ; 
 Ang f. 165* ; and Paris B. N. lat. 2296, f. 42^ 
 
 II. In Ca the prayers are the same, and in the same order, as in 
 Reg, except that on the Epiphany the seventh ' alia oratio ' Illumina 
 and the 'super oblata' Ecclesiae iuae (ii 18, 16) exchange places 
 in Ca. 
 
 Moreover, Ca does not contain the prayer Salutaris tui of the mass 
 of the Monday of the first week of Lent '(ii 31). 
 
 III. In Rodr the prayers are the same, and in the same order, as in 
 Reg, except that : 
 
 {a) Fifth week of Lent, Saturday, for ' super obi.' Cunctis nos (ii 51), 
 
 ff. 228-233 ; masses, again, for special occasions and of a personal cast, ff. 234-242 ; 
 a collection of 'apologiaesacerdotis', fF. 243-245 ; finally, along' Ordo ad visitandum 
 et inungendum infirmum', fif. 246-248. At fol. 222* is a mass of Invention of Holy 
 Cross, with a long preface, which affords a good example of the way in which the 
 barbarism of Merovingian liturgical composition was corrected in Rodradus's more 
 cultured days ; the original text of this preface is to be found in the Angouleme Sacr. 
 Paris B. N. lat. 816 f. 69* (Rodradus, or the corrector whom he copied, has changed 
 ' cuius ligni mysteriis saluari credimus omnes' of the Ang text into 'c. 1. mysterio 
 saluari nos credimus '). 
 
 ' [In the paper as originally printed I mentioned the addition of a ' super populum' 
 on Passion Sunday only. Mr. H. A. Wilson has kindly called my attention to the 
 fact that a ' super populum ' is added on the first three Sundays of Lent also.]
 
 MSS OF THE GREGORIANUM 69 
 
 Rodr f. 47* has Praesta q. o. D. ut ieiun. ; this latter in Gclas (i 531) 
 is the ' secret ' of Wednesday, but of Saturday in ' Gclas saec. viii ' 
 R and 5" in Wilson, p. '3,'3^^ ; Aug f. 31''; Godelgaudus, in U. Chevalier 
 Bibliothcqicc liturgiqiic vii p. 323. 
 
 {b) Assumption, for ' sup. obi.' Suhveniat (ii 1 14) Rodr f. 75^' has 
 Intercessio q. Due b. Marine ; and Sitbveniat follows as ' alia '. Intercessio 
 (which in Gelas is the ' secret ' of masses of St Fabian and of St Rufus, 
 i 638, 664), adapted, is made the ' secret' of Assumption in ' Gelas saec. 
 viii ' {R and S in Wilson, p. 353 ; Aug f. 87=^ ; Godclg p. 340 ; B. N. lat. 
 2296, f. 22'' breaks off imperfect in the mass of the Assumption, but 
 begins with the collect Concede a.s R, S, Aug, and Godelg] Concede 
 is the Ambrosian 'super sindonem ' for Assumption). 
 
 {c) SS. Cornelius and Cypr., for 'super obi.' Adesto (ii 119) Rodr 
 f. 77'' has Plebis tuae Domine mimera, Adesto being made an ' alia ' 
 collect. This is the arrangement in Ang f 92^, and apparently in ^. 
 
 {d) The mass of Exalt, of H. Cross found in Reg, Ott, &c., has 
 caused trouble in more than one MS. It is enough to read the first 
 line of the ' super obi.' Teste Christi Dni n. corpore saginati to see that 
 the prayer is an ' ad complendum '. The present Roman missal has 
 overcome the difficulty by reading in accordance with good sense 
 but counter to all ancient authority ' saginandi '. Rodr has adopted 
 more radical measures, but also done better, by making /. C. D. n. c. s. 
 a first ' ad compl.' and that in Reg, &c., a second. For ' super obi.' 
 Rodr has adopted the ' seer.' Devotas of the mass of Exalt, of H. 
 Cr. in Gelas (i 667) and ' Gelas saec. viii ' {R, S, in Wilson, p. 356, 
 Ang f. 9a*) .1 
 
 (e) At f. 101^ Rodr inserts between the ' oratio ad ordinand. pont.' 
 (ii 271-272) and the Hitctisqne preface to the Supplement, with the 
 rubric ' v non. mai. Inuentio s. crucis ', the mass for that feast in Gelas 
 i 645-646, which is also simply adopted in ' Gelas saec. viii '.- 
 
 (/) Finally, in the ' Orationes pro peccatis ' the prayer Praesta at 
 the head of col. 250 of Mur. ii is placed in Rodr after Exaudi, the 
 third prayer of that col. 
 
 The case seems clear : not merely is Reg in all these items supported 
 by Ca, Ott, &c., but the changes in Rodr evidently shew themselves 
 to be so many instances of the discarded Gclas (and, as appears from 
 {a) above, the eighth-century recension, not the earlier form) asserting 
 itself even in a text which professes formally to be a copy of Greg. 
 
 ^ The ' Gelas saec. viii ' (Wilson, p. 356) probably gives a clue to the solution of 
 the difficulties ; but this is a matter that cannot be dealt with now. 
 
 * In Rodr this same mass for the feast of the Inv. of H. Cr. (the absence of 
 which from Greg seems to have been keenly felt in the Gallic lands) is repeated 
 later with a special preface (see supra, p. 67, n. 3).
 
 70 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 IV. In Bclv ^ the prayers are the same, and in the same order, as 
 in Reg, except that : 
 
 (^) it omits the special preface Qid tit dc hostc (ii 9) for the mass 
 ' ad sanctam Anastasiam ' on Christmas Day ; 
 
 {b) it omits the fifth and sixth ' aliae orationes ' of that feast, O. s. D. 
 qui hwic diem, and D. qui hnm. snhst. (ii 11). 
 
 V. Ai'el. — I did not examine this MS prayer by prayer, but only 
 noted the order of contents according to the rubrics ; this order is that 
 of Reg. 
 
 VI. Non ^ shews the following differences from Reg : — 
 
 (a) for the mass ' in Oct. Dom.' and ' or. in alia dominica ' (ii 15-16) 
 are substituted ' Dominica prima post natale Domini ', ' Dom. 2^ p.n. D.' 
 (cf. Supplement in Mur. ii 158-159) ; and after the Epiphany, sepa- 
 rately intercalated among the feasts of Saints, are Dom. i to 6 ' post 
 Theophan.' (ibid. 159-161). The subject of the Sunday masses of 
 Non will be again adverted to when the North Italian group of Greg 
 MSS is considered later. 
 
 (d) The masses of St Agatha and St Valentine are omitted. 
 
 (c) Between Nativ. B. V. and SS. Prot. et Hyacinth, (ii 118) a mass 
 ' S. Gorgonii mart.' is inserted (so too in ' Gelas saec. viii ' MS wS, 
 Wilson p. ^^^, and Ang ff. 91-92; Gorgonius is a Gelas feast, i 667). 
 
 (d) The order of the masses of Sept. 14, SS. Cornel, and Cypr. 
 and Exalt. S, Cr. in Greg, is inverted in No?i, and precedence is 
 given to Exalt. S. Cr. as in ' Gelas saec. viii ' MS S, Wilson p. ^^6, and 
 Ang f. 92^ In MS R the mass of SS. Corn, and Cypr. is suppressed, 
 and Exalt. S. Cr. is alone honoured on this day, Wilson p. 199. 
 
 (e) On Sept. 16 the mass of St Euphemia is given under the com- 
 bined title ' Nat. S. Euphem. virg. Lucie et Geminiani ', and the mass 
 of SS. L. and G. in Greg is omitted in Non. I know of no other 
 instance of this arrangement. 
 
 (/) The September Ember-days and the ' die dom. vacat.' mass 
 (ii 122-124) are omitted (see below, p. 74, note 2). 
 
 (g) Before SS. Cosmas and Damian (ii 124) are added masses of the 
 vigil and feast of St Matthew, and of St Maurice and Companions ; 
 after St Mark Pope (ii 126), a mass of St Denis ; between St Callistus 
 and St Caesarius (ii 126), masses of St Luke, and of the vigil and feast 
 of SS. Simon and Jude, and of vigil and feast of All Saints. — Of these, 
 the masses of All Saints date from the ninth century or the last years 
 of the eighth ; that of St Denis may (just possibly) be of some interest 
 
 ^ Two leaves are missing between ff. yy and 78 (from Mdue benignus, Mur. ii 246, 
 to populi tut ne phis, 250). 
 
 ''■ A leaf is missing between ff. 34 and 35 (from 'ad compl.' offer, vi', Mur. ii 38 
 to 40, line 7, ab imminentibus).
 
 MSS OF THE GREGORIANUM 71 
 
 in reference to the origin of the MS ; ^ the text of those of SS. Matthew, 
 Simon and Jude, and Luke, is the same as in MSS R, S, and Ajtg 
 of ' Gelas saec. viii '. I know of a mass of St Maurice only in Ang 
 f. 94"*, but the prayers are different (St Maurice is also in the Missalc 
 Gothicnvi, in the Ambrosian, and in the Padua MS, Ebner, p. 127). 
 
 (//) Several masses throughout the volume have special prefaces. 
 
 {i) Finally, the ' oratio ad ordinand. pont.' (Mur. ii 271-272) is 
 incorporated among the forms of ordination. 
 
 Thus, though the prayers and order of Greg as found in Ca, Reg, 
 Ott, Rodr, Belv (and Arel as limited above) are still preserved in 
 Non^ this MS shows a further stage in the process of incorporating 
 GalHcan-Gelasian matter into Greg. 
 
 In regard to the forms of ordination of Greg and the place assigned 
 to them, the following is the evidence of the MSS examined. 
 
 In Ca, Reg, Ott, Rodr, they are those given in Mur. ii 357-361, 
 and they are placed between the Canon (ii 1-6) and the masses 
 (ii 7 sqq.). 
 
 This was also the order in Belv when that MS first left the hands of 
 the copyist ; but changes were immediately made which obscure though 
 they do not obliterate the original features. The MS in its present 
 mutilated state begins with the words ' ab eterna damnatione ' of the 
 Canon (ii 3), which is continued almost to the end of f 2, where after 
 Agnus Dei, &c. (as Mur. ii 6), in the same line is the rubric ' Benedictio 
 episcoporum ', and there follow on the rest of this page and on ff. 4 
 and 8 the forms of ordination, Mur. ii "^^"i-^J^ i , in their proper sequence, 
 and with their text intact. On fif. 3, 5, 6, and 7 are inserted by, as 
 I think, the same scribe and rubricist, forms for minor orders as 
 follows : fif. 3 and 5 = Mur. ii 405 {Ostiarins cum ordiiiatur to end 
 of c. 408), and then ' Capitulum S. Gregorii ' Siciit qjti invitatus to 
 ac mamitergium (Menard p. 234; Migne P. L. 78. 219-220); f 6*"'' 
 * Ad subdiac. ordinand.' ExJiibcatiir in conspcctn to conscquatiir (Menard, 
 pp. 234-235 ; Migne col. 220) ; there immediately follows, in the last 
 two lines of f. 6^, the title 'In nomine Doviini. Incipit', &c., con- 
 tinued on f 7^^, as in Mur. ii i, to dignnni et iiistiini est. These inserted 
 non- 6^;-^^ ordinations go back of course to the Galilean set in Gelas bk. i 
 no. 95, cf. 96. It would appear, therefore, that the scribe first copied 
 Greg as he found it before him in the order now found in Ca, Reg, &c. 
 
 Arel. The original MS now begins f 9* with the words ' ab omni 
 perturbatione securi ' of the Canon (Mur. ii 6) and the masses follow. 
 
 ^ A space of two lines left for the rubricist was never filled in ; and the first line 
 of the collect is in red.
 
 72 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 If the original MS when perfect contained the ordinations they must 
 have been placed before the Canon. The forms for minor orders, 
 practically the same as those in Belv, are found ff. 5^-8 in a hand 
 hardly later (it would seem) than that of the original scribe. 
 
 Non begins with the Canon, which is followed by the forms of 
 ordination, all in the original hand, and thus disposed : the ' Bened. 
 episc* and 'Or. ad ordinand. presb.' as Mur. ii 357-360, but the 
 ' Or. ad ord. pont.' which is the last item in the other MSS (ii 271-272) 
 is in Non inserted before the ' super obi.' ii 358, with, however, omission 
 of that part of the explanatory rubric ' Or. ad . . . initium est ' which 
 would have made the insertion intelligible. After these, and under the 
 title ' Incipit ordo de sacris ordinibus benedicendis ' (cf. Mur. ii 405)> 
 come forms for orders up to subdeacon inclusive similar to those in 
 Belv and Arel. Then, with the title ' ad ordinandum diaconem ', the 
 remaining Greg form (Mur. ii 360-361). Non in this particular of 
 the ordinations again shews an advance on the other MSS. 
 
 The testimony of the MSS enumerated p. 64 n. 2 supra, on the 
 points hitherto considered, so far as it can be ascertained from the 
 descriptions of Delisle and Ebner, appears to be as follows : 
 
 {a) In regard to the place of the Greg forms of ordination, they are 
 placed between the Canon and the body of masses in Nos. i, 3, 4, 
 6, 7 ; the masses immediately follow the Canon in 2, 10, 11 (and 13) ; 
 5 is imperfect ; as to 8, 9, 12 information is wanting.^ 
 
 {b) As regards the remainder of Greg (Mur. ii 7-138 and 241- 
 272) the descriptions in Delisle of i, 2, 3 (and, except the ordina- 
 tions, of 13 also) raise a strong presumption that they offer the same 
 book as Reg. No. 4 shews, according to Ebner (pp. 29, 30), the same 
 ' arrangement and contents ' as Reg^ except that ' numerous prefaces 
 have been embodied in the text'. If I rightly understand Ebner 
 (p. 290), No. 5, imperfect, affords the same text as Reg in Mur. ii 
 116-138 + 241-272, except that the masses of Exalt. S. Crucis and 
 St Nicomedes (Mur. ii 119-120) are wanting (or is it only that a leaf 
 is missing?). His description of No. 6 is of course defective, yet, 
 taking all the circumstances into consideration, it seems little doubtful 
 that this MS is, like No. 5, a copy of Greg of the type of MS Reg. 
 No. 7 shews ' exactly the same disposition of its contents ' as Reg 
 (Ebner, p. 388). As to Nos. 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 further information is 
 required before any definite statement can be made. 
 
 The question arises whether the book thus limited is complete, or 
 
 ' In MS Bodl. Auct. D. i 20 (Delisle No. xxxviii), though the MS seems not to 
 agree with Reg, the ordinations (bishop, priest, deacon, only) come between the 
 Canon and the masses.
 
 MSS OF THE GREGORIANUM 73 
 
 whether any other items not now found in Reg were contained in the 
 original MS of the Grcgorianum that was sent from Rome to Charles 
 by the hands of 'John the monk and abbat '. If the witness of the 
 MSS is to be taken as decisive in such a question, the only items, 
 so far as I can see, on behalf of which a claim can be raised that calls 
 for any consideration, are contained in a group of Greg MSS which 
 I may call the North Italian group. 
 
 The question raised by this group of MSS is : Did Greg as sent by 
 Hadrian comprise, besides the matter of Reg, a body of Sunday masses 
 (after Christmas, Epiphany, Easter, Pentecost) corresponding to Nos. 
 vii-xlii in Muratori's print of the Carolingian Supplement (coll. 158- 
 176)? Their absence from Rodr seemed to Menard to be so 'in- 
 credible' and 'absurd ' a feature as to be a main consideration in lead- 
 ing him to choose for his print his 'Codex S. Eligii ' (B. N. lat. 12051, 
 Delisle No. li), with the result of involving the whole subject of the 
 early Roman Liturgy in confusion and darkness, and making it for 
 subsequent enquirers a region ' ubi sempiternus horror inhabitat '. The 
 mere fact that the compiler of the Carolingian Supplement thought 
 proper to include in it the body of Sunday masses Nos. vii-xlii 
 raises of itself a strong presumption that such masses were not con- 
 tained in the Grcgorianum as sent into France. But there is still room 
 for the supposition that this was only an omission ; and it might be 
 urged that the MSS of the ' North Italian group ', so far as their 
 •contents are yet known, countenance this supposition. The Verona 
 MSS 91 and 86 may be taken as typical : immediately after the end of 
 Greg comes a section headed ' Incipiunt orationes ad missam diebus 
 dominicorum' containing^ masses for Sundays after Epiphany (4?), 
 (?oct. of) Easter (4?, 5), (? oct. of) Pentecost (5?), oct. of Apostles 
 Peter and Paul (5), Laurence (5), Michaelmas (8). 2 
 
 The Gospel capitulars of the eighth and ninth centuries shew a two- 
 fold arrangement distinguished by the mode of counting Sundays after 
 Pentecost : one class reckons simply Sundays 1-24 (or 25, 26) after 
 
 ' I am obliged here to combine the information in Ebner, pp. 287, 290. 
 
 F I 
 
 * Cf. Monza MS — ^— saec. ix/x : post oct. Pasch. 1-4; post Pentec. 1-6; post 
 
 nat, Apost. 1-6; post Laur. 1-5 (?) ; post Angeli, 1-8 (Ebner, p. 108). — Padua Bibl. 
 capit. MS D. 47 ; post Epiph. 1-4; post oct. Pasch. 1-4 ; post Pentec. ebd. 2-5 ; 
 post nat. Apost. i ; post oct. Apost. 1-5 ; post nat. Laur. 1-4; post S. Angeli, 1-9 
 (ibid. pp. 123-127). In this last MS the Sundays are intercalated among the feasts 
 of Saints as in Cr^^and ' Gelas saec. viii '. It appears to be the most interesting 
 of all the MSS catalogued by Ebner; though (speaking with the reserve imposed 
 on one who has not seen the MS) I cannot but think that Ebner's assignment of it 
 to the class of the ' gregorianisirtes Gelasianum ' (= * Gelas saec. viii ') is due to a 
 misunderstanding. It seems to be Greg. But he is probably right (p. 380) in viewing 
 it as a member (the earliest and, I would add, a most revolutionary member) of the 
 * North Italian group '. The Roman topographical notes are hardly a sign of the 
 purity of the text.
 
 74 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Pentecost ; the other, Sundays after Pentecost, Peter and Paul, Lau- 
 rence, Michaelmas (' post S. Angeli ' ; some capitulars reckon ' post 
 Cypriani ' instead of ' post Angeli '). Of the two modes the latter 
 bears on the face of it evidence of Roman origin or connexion, even if 
 there were not actual evidence that the origin of the other is not Roman 
 but Prankish. Not merely is this ' other ' the system adopted in the 
 eighth-century recension of Gelas (MSS i?, vS, Aug, Paris MS lat. 
 2296), but Amalar, a curious and inquiring person, leaves us no doubt 
 on the subject. In compiling his antiphonar for the Office, he found 
 in some MSS a body of what he calls ' antiphons taken from the 
 cotidian gospels '. No one who carefully examines and follows Amalar's 
 treatise will, I think, fail to come to the conclusion that Tommasi 
 {0pp. iv 297 sqq. and his note A) rightly identifies these with the 
 antiphons for Sundays 1-24 after Pentecost in his St-Gall MS (' Hart- 
 ker ', just published in facsimile). ' As to these antiphons,' writes Amalar^ 
 ' I asked the masters (= cantors) of the Roman Church whether they 
 sang them. " Certainly not ", they replied. But our masters (in France) 
 avouch that they received them from the first masters who taught the 
 Roman chant within the Prankish dominions. God alone knows who- 
 are the deceivers here, who the deceived ; and whether the Romans 
 never sang them, or have simply let them fall out of use through their 
 own negligence and indifference ; in any case we sing them, not only 
 on account of their wording (for their words are truly salutary), but 
 also on account of the high repute of our cantors, who, in the art and 
 practice of Church song, proudly point to their own pre-eminence.' ^ 
 
 The Modena MS Bibl. capit. ii 7, ' saec. ix-x ', shews (Ebner^ 
 pp. 94-96) a Gregorianwn considerably more interpolated than Non, 
 and considerably altered. At the end is a body of Sunday masses ; 
 those after Pentecost are numbered 1-24, thus betraying the influence 
 of the Carolingian Supplement. But in the four MSS mentioned above, 
 these Sundays bear a distinctly Roman label. If the text of these 
 masses proved, on examination, to be different from that of the corre- 
 sponding masses in the Supplement, a case would be made out for 
 considering them really part of Greg as used in Rome in Hadrian's 
 time, and therefore for regarding Reg and its congeners as, so far, 
 incomplete. Until the necessary information is forthcoming the 
 question must be left open.^ 
 
 ^ ' Qui gloriantur magisterio se uti cantilenae exercitationis ', Amalar. de ord. 
 Antipk. cap. 68. If the Roman deacon John badly lost his temper over this matter 
 of Church song (Baumer Gesch. d. Breviers pp. 233-235), there was much to excuse 
 him. 
 
 - We are now in a position to understand the economy of Non, which it may 
 be well to explain here. The original MS ends f. loi^. A later scribe (saec. xi,. 
 I think), without the loss of a line, continues the MS with the title 'Incipiunt misse 
 in diebus dominicis a pentecosten usque ad aduentum Domini ' ; then follows (in.
 
 MSS OF THE GREGORIANUM 75 
 
 But whatever the answer on the point of detail thus reserved, it is, 
 I think, already clear that, taking into account the whole body of 
 ' Gregorian ' MSS of the ninth and tenth centuries, one class of them, 
 and one only, preserves the Grcgoriatmvi^ the actual book, sent by 
 Hadrian to Charles, viz. that represented in print by Reg — when, of 
 course, that print is restored to the order of the manuscript itself, viz. 
 Mur. ii coll. 1-6 ; 357-361 ; 7-138 and 241-272.^ I would add, 
 moreover, that from this book alone - can the rites and formularies, and 
 the authentic text of the prayers, in use in the Roman Church at the 
 close of the eighth centuiy be ascertained ; and all other texts such 
 as those printed by Pamelius, Rocca, Menard, or presented in the 
 whole body of known MSS of the ninth and tenth centuries, can claim 
 to represent the use of the Roman Church only in so far as they coincide 
 with the MSS of the class represented in print by Reg^^ At the same 
 
 more than one hand seemingly) the series Dom. 1-24, incorporating the masses of the 
 September Ember-days omitted by the original scribe of the MS (see p. 70 supra). 
 The masses for Sundays after Easter do not appear in the MS. The omission of the 
 (7r^^ masses of the September Ember-days makes it probable that, varying the prac- 
 tice observed for the Sundays after Christmas and Epiphany, which are intercalated 
 among the Saints' days, the person for whom the book was written reserved the 
 Sundays after Easter and Pentecost (including the September Ember masses) for a 
 special series at the end of Greg as now found in the Verona MSS 91 and 86. 
 Whether this series was ever actually written, and the MS has since been mutilated, 
 must remain uncertain. Delisle, from the handwriting, considers the MS to be of 
 French origin ; if this be so it would acquire, from the liturgical point of view, an 
 additional interest, inasmuch as it so far departs from both the true and the corrupt 
 types of Greg then current in France, that it must have been written under particular 
 instructions to suit the practice of the region for which it was intended. 
 
 ^ [It is to be remembered that in all probability the Litiirgia Romana Veins 
 largely partook of the nature of a printer's speculation ; and that in any case Mura- 
 tori never saw the MSS AV^and C// used for the edition, but only copies (' utriusque 
 Codicis apographum ' is Muratori's tenn for them) sent by his friend Giuseppe 
 Bianchini the Oratorian ; who, as I should, for myself, say without hesitation, sent 
 Greg to Muratori in the form of a prepared edition as we find it (but of course in 
 a correct order) in the printed volume. Nor does it even appear that Murator 
 corrected the proof-sheets of Greg with these copies. If it does not of itself appear 
 obvious to a modem student that Muratori (of whom it has been said without undue 
 exaggeration that he was for Italy a Congregation of St-Maur in himself) could not 
 have been responsible for the absurd pagination of the volume, I would here suggest 
 two additional considerations which may help to that conclusion : (i) that in his 
 introductory Dissertation (col. 80) he expressly states that he intends to print the 
 Preface Huctisqtie immediately before the Blessing of the Paschal Candle (' ante 
 Benedictionem Cerei '), that is, in its proper place before the first item of the Supple- 
 ment, where the writer of the Preface states explicitly that it should come, and 
 where no editor in his right mind could help placing it ; (2) that Vezzosi, who, as 
 he says, often examined Reg, and corrects Muratori's number (' non 335 sed 337 '), 
 and who presumes to indulge in injurious remarks and insinuations against Mura- 
 tori, says not one word as to the mistake in the print which has misled those who 
 have used ' Muratori' from that day to this. Is it not a reasonable inference, in 
 view of the known circumstances connected with the edition, that Vezzosi was 
 cognizant of further facts (now no longer known) which made it impossible for him 
 to tax Muratori with this first and greatest defect of the volume ?] 
 
 - Of course the Ordo Romanus must be the main source for merely rubrical 
 directions. 
 
 ' The words in the text are purposely made, both for inclusion and exclusion, as
 
 76 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 time it is to be observed that one valuable and useful instrument of 
 criticism still exists, which, in points of detail, enables us to get behind 
 all the extant MSS of Greg. This is the ' eighth-century recension ' of 
 Gelas, the important r61e of which in the evolution of Western liturgy 
 has not as yet been duly appreciated. This work, more than anything 
 else, not merely facilitated Charles's measures in regard to the mass 
 book, but rendered them inevitable. 
 
 definite as I can make them. I know that they go beyond what is warranted by 
 anything adduced in this paper, and I recognize what the statement made implies for 
 the history and chronology of a number of sacred rites. But I believe they express 
 the conclusion to which, as precise information increases, liturgists will come ; and 
 it is at any rate important that such a thesis should be brought, if necessary, to the 
 test of a detailed and formal discussion on the basis of the fullest knowledge of the 
 evidence, if, that is to say, the study of Western liturgy of the seventh to the tenth 
 century is to emerge from its present stage of impressionism. And I am the more 
 insistent on this point when I read (to adduce but one instance) what a writer so 
 careful as Friedrich D. Wiegand, whose vision is so clear, and who sees so much, 
 says of the Gregoriamim {Die Stellung des apostolischen Symbols, &.C., i 291-293, 
 296-297) ; in saying this I quite bear in mind what is said (p. 73 supra) as to the 
 Sunday masses, Nos. vii-xlii, of the Supplement.
 
 V 
 
 ON THE 
 EARLY TEXTS OF THE ROMAN CANON » 
 
 It is proposed in this paper to examine the various readings of the 
 early texts of the Roman Canon as contained in the mass books from 
 the seventh to the ninth century, with a view to ascertain how they 
 may fall into classes or families ; and to indicate briefly some of the 
 questions which the results of the comparison raise. 
 
 The Canon is unfortunately wanting in the Leonianum. 
 
 The texts to be considered are those in the following books : 
 
 1. The Bobbio Missal, Paris B. N. lat. 13246, Delisle MSmoire 
 No. vi (cited as Bo). 
 
 2. The Stowe Missal, now in the Library of the Royal Irish 
 Academy (Si).^ 
 
 3. The Missale Francorum, MS Vat. Regin. 257, Delisle No. iv (Fr). 
 
 4. The Gelasiamini, MS Vat. Regin. 316, Delisle No. ii (GV). 
 
 5. Rheinau MS 30 at Zurich, Wilson's R, Delisle No. ix (R). 
 
 6. St Gall MS 348, Wilson's S, Delisle No. x {S). 
 
 7. The Angoul^me Sacramentary, Paris B. N. lat. 816, Delisle 
 No. XV (Ang). 
 
 8. The Gellone Sacramentary, Paris B. N. lat. 12048, Delisle No. vii 
 {Cell). 
 
 9. Paris B. N. lat. 2296, a MS which, though of late date and widely 
 departing from its congeners, must be classed with the MSS of the 
 eighth-century revision of Gelas ; Delisle No. xliv (2296). 
 
 10. Cambrai MS 164, see supra, pp. 6^, 64 [Co). 
 
 11. MS Vat. Regin. 337 {Reg). 
 
 12. MS Vat. Ottobon. 313, Delisle No. xxxv [Ott). 
 
 [13. To these must now be added the Monte Cassino palimpsest. 
 This is Cod. Casin. 271, al. 348. It is hereafter designated Cass. 
 
 As this manuscript is either unknown or ignored, and as it is of 
 the very first importance for all questions connected with the Grego- 
 rianum, I deal with it in detail at once here. 
 
 Mention was first made of it in the year 1834 by K. Blume, the 
 
 ' From The Journal 0/ Theological Studies, ]\x\y 1903. 
 
 * Unfortunately in his account of the Fulda MS (see Book of C erne pp. 235-236) 
 Witzel gives only those portions of the Canon that were strange to him.
 
 78 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 lifelong friend of G. H. Pertz, in his Iter Italiciim vol. iv. It was 
 doubtless through Blume that Bunsen became acquainted with the 
 MS; he obtained extracts from it, and in 1854 printed them in his 
 Analecta Antc-Nicaena iii 298-300 (cf. his remarks at p. 60). But all 
 this seems wholly to have escaped the persons most concerned, until 
 mention was made of this palimpsest in the original print of this article 
 {Journal of Theol. Studies, July 1903 : see p. 79 below). How my 
 friend Dom Andre Wilmart independently learned of its existence, is 
 explained by him in the note 4, p. 293, of his article now to be 
 mentioned. 
 
 Dom Wilmart, in company with M. I'Abb^ Eugene Tisserant of the 
 Vatican Library, spent the Eastertide of 1909 in subjecting the 
 palimpsest to a careful scrutiny, the results of which he published in 
 an article in the Revue Bhiedictine for July 1909 (xxvi p. 281 sqq.) 
 entitled Un Missel Grdgorien Ancien. 
 
 Cass is a manuscript of the Gregorianum of about the year 700, 
 and it comes from the neighbourhood of Rome, indeed was not 
 improbably written in Rome itself.] 
 
 Nos. 7, 9, 10, II, 12 have been examined by me. Thanks to the 
 extreme kindness of M. Omont, Conservateur of the Department of 
 MSS at the Bibliotheque Nationale, and of M. de la Ronciere, Con- 
 servateur adjoint, a friend was able to take for me at once photographs 
 of I and 8. The readings of 4, 5, 6 are taken from Wilson's edition of 
 the Gelasianum iii 16 and appended notes. For 2 I follow the edition 
 of Dr MacCarthy {Transactions of the Royal Irish Academy, Literature 
 and Antiquities xxvii 208-219, 220), which among other advantages has 
 that of distinguishing by difference of type the original text from that 
 of the interpolator Moelcaich ; Dr MacCarthy has also recovered a not 
 inconsiderable portion of the erased original at a critical point (p. 210, 
 footnote on f. 24'^).^ For 3 I use Tommasi's own edition (1680), but 
 Mgr G. Mercati has kindly re-examined the MS for some minutiae as 
 to which I desired further security. Besides this, all the editions of the 
 various missals — Mabillon, Vezzosi, Warren, &c. — have been always 
 under my eye. I refrain from entering on questions as to the dates of 
 the various MSS ; the object of this paper is to enquire what the texts 
 themselves have to say as to their own history ; for dates of MSS 
 Delisle can be referred to. The current spelling is used, except on 
 one or two occasions, and variants merely orthographical are as a rule 
 disregarded. But here discrimination is necessary ; incorrect forms 
 sometimes supply precisely the most valuable indications of the inter- 
 
 ' H. B. Soc. xxxi (1906) is a facsimile reproduction of the Stowe Missal. — By 
 some mischance the words * pro spe salutis et incolumitatis suae' have fallen out of 
 the reconstruction in Zeitschrijtf. katholische Theologie (1892) p. 481 1. 10.
 
 THE ROMAN CANON 79 
 
 relations of the MSS. But both for clearness and for eventual sure- 
 ness in conclusions division of labour is best observed, and the part of 
 the palaeographer or the philologist is best reserved for the expert ; 
 who, however, on his side must not be unmindful of the liturgical 
 conditions of the problem. In saying this I have particularly in view 
 Bo} So far as the MSS of Greg are concerned I have thought it 
 better not to complicate a case perhaps already sufficiently involved 
 by adducing readings from any other MSS than Ca, Reg, Ott ; the 
 first of these recommends itself by its date, whilst Reg and Ott 
 represent (so far as I have seen, and speaking generally) the extreme 
 of conservatism and the extreme of innovation in their respective 
 renderings of the Greg Canon. The Ambrosian Canon is not brought 
 into the comparison, as this would only entail unnecessary and un- 
 profitable elaboration. It affords, however, a small number of parti- 
 cularly interesting readings, and these will be adduced in their place ; - 
 but that Canon as a whole can be usefully dealt with, I venture to 
 think, only as part of a formal and systematic analysis of the 
 Ambrosian mass book. 
 
 The only other texts that need be mentioned here are MS O 83 of 
 the Prague Chapter Library, and MS B viii of the Vallicellana which 
 seems for the present at least inaccessible (Ebner Qtiellen u. Unters. 
 p. 205 n. i). But as the latter according to Tommasi (ed. Vezzosi v, 
 p. xxxv, 2nd pagination) was ' undecimo ut serius, decimo ut citius saec. 
 scriptum ', it is not likely to be of use for the present purpose. The 
 former, according to Ebner (pp. 379-380, 366-368 note i), is a MS of 
 the eighth-century recension of Gelas. When the evidence of the MSS 
 of this class is reviewed, it will, I think, plainly appear that the absence 
 of the collation of a single MS of the group is not likely to affect in 
 any appreciable degree the results obtained. There remains the Monte 
 Cassino palimpsest, the only hope left, apparently, of a text of the 
 Canon of an earlier type than any which has appeared in print. Of 
 its character I know nothing ; ^ but it will in any case be useful to take 
 stock of what can be known on the subject before that MS is edited. 
 
 On a collation of the [thirteen] texts available {a) it is found that a 
 certain number of readings are unique ; several of these are mere and 
 obvious blunders of the scribe ; a few are of interest in themselves ; 
 not one, I think, is likely to prove of any real value for the history of 
 the Canon, {b) When these unique readings are removed, and that 
 
 ^ But I may observe that Bo substitutes ' o ' for ' u ' more commonly than usual : 
 e. g. writing not merely ' incolomitatis ', ' inmacolatam ', but ' conctae ', ' in conspecto ', 
 'sereno vulto ', ' seo ' (= seu). See MacCarthy On the Stoice Missal p. 242. 
 
 ^ For the Biasca MS Ceriani's print is used; for the Bergamo MS that of 
 Solesmes. Both MSS appear to be saec. ix/x. 
 
 ' [These words, it is to be remembered, were written in 1903.]
 
 8o LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 late work, the ' Gelas saec. viii ', is left out of account, the readings of the 
 other MSS on being tabulated fall into two classes or families, the one 
 represented by Bo, St, Fr, the other by G V, Cass, Ca, Reg, Ott. {c) It 
 then appears that the readings of the group of * Gelas saec. viii ' MSS 
 (viz. Nos. ^,6, 7, 8, 9) follow on the whole (as might be expected) the 
 second of these two classes, but many readings of the other class are 
 found sometimes in one, sometimes in more than one MS of the group. 
 
 The kernel of the present inquiry manifestly lies in the readings 
 contemplated under {b) ; those under [a) and {c) being of altogether 
 secondary consideration. I propose therefore to throw into a Table 
 the readings contemplated under {b) ; to relegate to the foot of the 
 page those under {c) in so far as they differ from GV \ and to collect 
 the unique readings in a note at the end of the paper. After a few 
 remarks on the results of the collation as shown by the Table, it will 
 be necessary to consider particularly the small number of variants 
 between Reg and Ott with a view to determine which gives the purer 
 tradition. One of these variants is of sufficient importance to call for 
 special treatment. From Muratori's print (col. 4) it would appear as 
 if the Memento of the Dead were contained in both MSS. This is not 
 the case. After ' repleamur. Per Christum Dominum nostrum ', Regy 
 omitting entirely the Memento, passes directly on to ' Nobis quoque 
 peccatoribus '. Moreover Ca agrees in this point with Reg. As is 
 well known G V presents the same feature. All the texts of the 
 Memento of the Dead will therefore be excluded from the following 
 Table. A consideration of the question attaching to this Memento 
 will form the closing section of this paper. 
 
 [There are six readings (Nos. 3, 6, 7, 21,^ 30, '3,'^ in which GV 
 differs from the consentient testimony of Ca, Reg, and Ott. The 
 surviving fragment of the Monte Cassino text of the Canon covers 
 the first four of these readings ; and in all four cases it agrees with 
 Ca, Reg, and Ott as against G V. Now the Monte Cassino palimpsest 
 is a MS of about the same date as G V, namely of about the year 
 700. Moreover, whilst G V gives a French text (coming it would 
 seem from Paris or the neighbourhood), the Monte Cassino palim- 
 psest comes from the neighbourhood of Rome, and was not im- 
 probably written in Rome itself. Seeing that this Italian (= Roman) 
 text of c. 700 is in agreement with the text sent from Rome to 
 Charles the Great nearly a hundred years later, there can no longer 
 be any doubt that the readings of G V, where they differ from the 
 consentient testimony of the Monte Cassino palimpsest, Ca, Reg, and 
 Ott, are what may be called French corruptions. I have therefore no 
 longer any hesitation in constructing from these five MSS {G V, Ca, 
 ^ As to this reading of Ca, see p. 85 note 3 below.
 
 THE ROMAN CANON 8i 
 
 Reg, Ott, and Cass), and printing in extenso, what I believe to be the 
 actual text of the Roman Canon in use in the seventh century : nay, 
 the text of St Gregory's own Canon ; for in my opinion the reasonable 
 —the only reasonable— conclusion from the evidence now available is 
 that the Sacramentary, generally, which is called ' Gregorian ', comes 
 from Pope Gregory the Great, and is his revision of the Roman Mass 
 Book. 
 As regards the five columns of the following Table : — 
 
 1. Its main constituent is col. 4 which gives the text of the Gre- 
 gorian Canon on the basis of G V, Cass, Ca, Reg, Ott. At the foot of 
 the page are given two sets of variants : first, the * Readings of " Gelas 
 saec. viii " MSS in so far as differing from G V ; secondly, the 
 variants of the five Gregorian MSS among themselves. 
 
 2. The left-hand page of the Table gives in three columns the 
 variants of Bo, St, Fr from the normal text of the Gregorian Canon 
 as found in column 4. Since the items of the text printed on the 
 left-hand page are numbered 1-38, these numbers are also introduced 
 into the continuous text of col. 4 at the corresponding points, so that 
 the Table on the left-hand page can be easily compared with that 
 of the Gregorian Canon. 
 
 3. In col. 5 are given the readings of such parts of the Canon of 
 the present Roman Missal as differ from the text of the Gregorian 
 Canon (col. 4). 
 
 4. As I have aimed at giving in this paper all the variants of the 
 eight MSS dealt with, the reader is in a position to reconstruct for 
 himself, at the cost of a little trouble, the full text of any one of them ; 
 namely by substituting in the running text of the Gregorian Canon 
 the variants of any individual MS as given in {a) the Table ; {b) the list 
 of ' Unique Readings', note 2 p. 103 below ; and {c) note 3 p. 90.^] 
 
 ' For the various texts of the Memento of the Dead see p. 97 n. 3.— I have 
 taken no notice in the Table itself of the names added to the recitals in the ' Com- 
 municantes' in the different MSS (Hilary, Martin, Benedict, &c.) and in the 
 ' Nobis quoque peccatoribus '. As these texts are inedited I notice that GtV/ in the 
 ' Communicantes ' adds after ' Damiani ' * helarii, marthini, agustini, gregorii, 
 geronimi, benedicti ', and that Ang adds after ' Anastasia ' (in the ' Nobis quoque') 
 'genouefa, scolastica '. The Canon of 2296 breaks off imperfect with the word 
 'Uarnaba'; in the 'Communicantes' of this MS the additional names after 
 ' Damiani ' are, I think, Hilary (orig. hand), Augustine, Jerome only, but here 
 I cannot speak with certainty. 
 
 I think it well to repeat that I intend also to exclude from the Table variants that 
 are no more than orthographical curiosities and barbarisms due to the scribe of any 
 single MS and peculiar to that MS. Thus at the beginning of the Canon Bo reads 
 ' acceptum ubeas ' ; again, Bo reads ' totum orhem terrarum ', but I take no notice 
 of this in the Table, as it is a mere barbarism and of no critical value.
 
 82 
 
 Bo 
 
 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 Si 
 
 accepta ^ habeas 
 
 acceptu(m ?) ^ habeas 
 
 1. acceptum habeas^ 
 
 2. pro ecclesia tua sancta 
 
 catholica 
 
 3. una cum devotissimo 
 
 famulo tuo ill.' papa 
 
 nostro sedis 
 
 apostolicae 
 
 et antistite nostro 
 
 et omnibus orthodoxis 
 
 atque catholicae 
 
 fidei cultoribus 
 
 4. tibi reddunt 
 
 5. Communicantes [two vari- 
 
 ables inserted] " sed et 
 memoriam 
 
 6. inprimis gloriosae 
 
 semper virginis 
 
 7. Petri Pauli . . . 
 Cliti 
 
 8. Hanc igitur oblationem 
 
 servitutis nostrae sed 
 et cunctae familiae tuae 
 quam tibi offerimus in 
 honorem 
 
 nominis* 
 tui Deus, 
 
 quaesumus Domine 
 
 ^ 'acceptum abeas ' Bo. Is it certain that the original script of ^/ recovered by 
 Dr MacCarthy, p. 210 footnote to fol. 24% had 'accepta'? Cf. No. 25 where the 
 original scribe of S/ reads twice ' acceptu ' (cf. notes 2 and 23 as to B'r.). 
 
 ^ ' "acceptu " clarissime sed " ha " (ad calcem lineae) videtur scriptum in rasura : 
 porro littera abrasa quantum video " m " est.' So Mgr G. Mercati. 
 
 * A space of three letters in which ' ill ' is written by another hand. This is not 
 recorded in note 3 p. 90 below. 
 
 * The words in brackets are restorations taken from the text of the interpolator 
 Moelcaich. 
 
 ** See MacCarthy, p. 21 1 line 8 and note b on fol. 24^ ; the variable for Christmas 
 is that of Ge/as i 4 not that of Greg^ col. 8. 
 
 * [Cf. from an Irish liturgical fragment of Reichenau assigned to the ninth 
 century : ' . . . nos quoque hodiernam diem in honorem tui sancti nominis et in 
 commemoratione beatissimorum martirum con ceteris Sanctis annua festivitate per- 
 colimus alteribus tue pietates adsistimus ', &c. (/. T. S. v p. 64). This passage just 
 precedes ' the recital of institution ' : it is, in combination with the passages in the 
 Table, an interesting example of the gradual and progressive way in which the Irish 
 corrupted ancient liturgical texts to suit their own type of piety.] The Fr text ' pro 
 peccatis . . . mereamur' is utilized for the ' Hanc igitur' of the ' Missa pro peccatis' 
 in the Carolingian Supplement to Greg', Muratori ii 200. It is evident that the three 
 formulae of the ' Hanc igitur' in Bo, Si, Fr are closely related ; indeed the text of 
 
 Fr 
 
 pro tua sancta ecclesia 
 
 = st 
 
 catholica 
 
 
 u. c. beatissimo 
 
 u. c. 
 
 f. t. N. p. 
 
 
 n. episcopo s. 
 a. 
 
 
 [e. 0. 0. 
 
 0. 0. 
 
 a. apostolicae 
 f.] * c. 
 
 a. apostolicae 
 f. c. 
 
 [et abbate nostro N. 
 
 
 episcopo]* 
 = Bo 
 
 ^Bo 
 
 C, [seven varia- 
 
 C. 
 
 bles] <sed> 5 e. 
 
 s. e. 
 
 m. 
 
 m. 
 
 ^Bo 
 
 = Bo 
 
 Petri et Pauli . . . 
 
 = Bo 
 
 Ancliti 
 
 Ancleti 
 
 H. i. 0. 
 
 H. i. 0. 
 
 s. n. s. 
 
 s. n. s. 
 
 e. c. f. t. 
 
 e. c. f. t. 
 
 q. t. 0. i. 
 
 honorem Domini 
 
 q. t. 0. i. 
 honore Domini 
 
 nostri J. C. et in com- 
 
 
 memorationem bea- 
 
 beati 
 
 torum martyrum tuo- 
 rum m hac ecclesia 
 quam famulus tuus 
 
 martyris tui illi et pro 
 peccatis atque offen- 
 sionibus nostris ut 
 
 ad honorem nominis® 
 
 omnium delictorum 
 
 gloriae tuae edificavit, 
 
 nostrorum remissio- 
 
 
 nem consequi merea- 
 
 
 mur," 
 
 q.D. 
 
 q.D.
 
 THE ROMAN CANON 
 
 83 
 
 Gregorian Canon 
 
 Te igitur, clementissime Pater, per lesum Christum 
 Filium tuum Dominum nostrum, supplices rogamus 
 .^et petimus uti 1. accepta habeas et benedicas haec 
 dona, haec munera, haec sancta sacrificia illibata ; in 
 primis quae tibi offerimus 2, pro ecclesia tua sancta 
 catholica, quam pacificare, custodire, adunare et regere 
 digneris toto orbe terrarum, 3. una cum ^ beatissimo ' 
 famulo tuo papa nostro ° illo." 
 
 Memento, Domine, famulorum famularumque tua- 
 rum*^, et omnium "circumadstantium, quorum tibi 
 fides cognita est, et nota devotio,^ *^qui tibi offerunt 
 hoc sacrificium laudis pro se suisque omnibus, pro 
 redemptione animarum suarum, pro spa salutis et 
 incolumitatis suae, 4. 8 tibi reddunt vota sua aeterno 
 Deo vivo et vero. 
 
 5. Communicantes et memoriam venerantes 6. in 
 primis gloriosae semper* virginis Mariae, genitricis 
 Dei et Domini nostri lesu Christi, sed et beatorum 
 apostolorum ac martyrum tuorum 7. ^ Petri, Pauli,' 
 Andreae, lacobi, loannis, Thomae, lacobi, Philippi, 
 Bartholomaei, Matthaei, Simonis et Thaddaei, Lini, 
 Cleti, Clementis, Xysti, Cornelii, Cypriani, Laurentii, 
 Chrysogoni, loannis et Pauli, Cosmae et Damiani,*"' et 
 omnium sanctorum tuorum ; quorum meritis precibus- 
 que concedas ut in omnibus protectionis tuae muniamur 
 auxilio. ' Per Christum Dominum nostrum i. 
 
 8. Hanc igitur oblationem servitutis nostrae, sed et 
 cunctae familiae tuae, quaesumus, Domine, 9. ut 
 
 Roman Missal 
 
 ^ cm. ' beatissimo ' 
 •= ' N. et antistite nostro 
 N., et omnibus orthodoxis, 
 atque catholicae et apo- 
 stolicae fidei cultoribus' 
 d add. ' N. et N.' 
 « ' circumstantium ' 
 ^ praem. ' pro quibus 
 tibi offerimus, vel ' 
 8 'tibique' 
 
 h ' Petri et Pauli ' 
 
 i ' Per eumdem ' 
 J ' Amen ' 
 
 Readings «/' Gelas saec. viii' MSS in so far as differing from GV. 
 (For the corrector of S see Wilson's notes to Gelas, iii 16): — 
 
 On No. 3: [a) 'beatissimo' and 'nostro' interlined by another hand Ang; 
 (b) ' episcopo ' omitted R, S, Cell; ' et antistite illo' (with 'nostro' interlined by 
 another hand) Ang\ {c) R, S, Ang, 2296, omit ' et omnibus . . . cultoribus ' ; Cell 
 and corrector of 5 as {St ] (' et . . . cultoribus '). 
 
 On No. 6 : ' semper ' S, Cell ; ' que ' erased in Ang, 2296. 
 
 On No. 7 : ' Petri Pauli ' R, S, Ang, Cell, 2296, 
 
 ^ So CasSy Ca, Reg] GV and Ott omit 'beatissimo'. 
 
 - GV adds 'et antistite nostro illo episcopo'. ' Et omnibus orthodoxis atque 
 catholici fide cultoribus. Memento, Deus, rege nostro cum omni populo ' is interlined 
 in Tironian notes (Wilson p. 238 n, 11). Ott adds ' et antistite n. illo, et o. o. a. 
 c. e. a. f. c.', as in Rom. Missal above. See p. 95 below. 
 
 ' Ott adds ' pro quibus tibi offerimus, vel ', as Rom. Missal above. .See p. 95 
 below. 
 
 * So Cass, Ca, Reg, Ott; (7Fhas 'semperque '. 
 
 ^ So Cass, Ca, Reg, Ott; GVhAs ' Petri et Pauli' (and see No. 7, .S7). 
 
 ■• G'^'adds 'Dionysii, Rustici et Eleutherii, Hilarii, Martini, Augustini, Gregorii, 
 Hieronymi, Benedicti'. [Bo after 'Damiani' has ' Helarii, Martini, Ambrosi, 
 Augustini, Gregorii, Hieronimi, Benedicti '. Fr has ' Helarii, Martini ' only.] 
 
 G Q,
 
 84 
 
 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 lo. 
 
 II. 
 
 12. 
 
 13- 
 
 14. 
 
 15- 
 
 16. 
 17- 
 
 19. 
 20. 
 
 21. 
 
 Bo 
 ut placatus accipias 
 
 ['ac' elided; 'sus' added 
 
 in marg. by another hand] '' 
 ab aeterna damnatione 
 
 nos eripe (? = eripi) 
 Quam oblationem te ^ 
 
 Deus 
 facere digneris quae 
 
 nobis corpus et sanguis 
 
 fiatio 
 dilectissimi Filii tui Domini 
 
 autem " Dei nostri 
 accepit panem 
 elevatis'^ oculis ['suis' in- 
 terlined by another hand] 
 in caelos " 
 
 gratias agens bene 
 
 dixit 
 accepit et hunc praeclarum 
 
 calicem 
 ex eo omnes 
 calix sancti sanguinis 
 
 mei" 
 in remissione 
 
 St 
 
 Fr 
 
 ' u. p, suscipias ^ 
 
 = st 
 
 a. a. d. 
 
 = st 
 
 n. eripias 
 
 
 = Bo 
 
 Q. 0. tu 
 
 
 D. 
 
 f. dignare que (=quae) 
 
 f. dignare quae 
 
 n. c. e. s. 
 
 n. c. e. s. 
 
 f.i« 
 
 f. 
 
 d. F. t. Domi- 
 
 = Bo 
 
 ni" nostri 
 
 
 accipit'^ p. 
 
 = st 
 
 e. 0. suis 
 
 = st 
 
 ad caelum et " 
 
 ad caelum 
 
 tibi g. egit b. 
 
 = st 
 
 accipit'^ e. h. p. 
 
 = Si 
 
 c, 
 e. hoc ^^ 0. 
 
 = st 
 
 = Bo 
 
 calix sanguinis 
 
 
 mei 
 
 in remissionem 
 
 = 5/ 
 
 Fr becomes intelligible only when brought into juxtaposition with St The form 
 ' Hanc igitur . . . quam offerimus /'« honoretn ', &c., does not occur in Leon or Greg\ 
 and but once in Gelas, viz. iii 95, one of the collection of masses for the dead of 
 Gelas, as to the late and non-Roman origin of which see Book of Ceme"^^. i6<)-'2.'ji ; 
 and iii 95 happens to be one of the masses that incorporate part of a prayer of a 
 mass for the dead in the Toledo missal at the close of the eighth century cited by 
 Elipandus, not now found in Moz., but adapted into a preface in St (MacCarthy, 
 p. 232, Warren, p. 248). [This Toledan text is now printed from eleventh- 
 century MSS by Dom Ferotin in the Liber Ordiman (Paris, 1904) col. 422 ; it occurs 
 in the * Post pridie ' of the Missa Generalis Defunctorum.] I may be allowed to 
 repeat here with some further extension and precision what I have said elsewhere 
 {Book of Cerfie p. 260) : the more closely the texts of Leoft and Gelas are examined, 
 the more thoroughly they are investigated, the more imperatively does the question 
 impose itself whether the Irish were not concerned in the manipulations to which 
 these Roman books were subjected in Gaul and in Northern Italy in the seventh 
 century. In this connexion the ' collectio ad panis fractionem ', unique in Gallican 
 books, in M. Goth. No. xxxvi, is not to be overlooked ; see Forbes's note k, p. 99 ; 
 it is really an * early anticipation ' of Ott (see p. 95 (t)). 
 
 ' *ut placatus suscipias' Biasca and Bergamo MSS oi Ambros. 
 
 ' For the continuation of the text of 5/, see infra p. 103 note 2, No. 10. 
 
 ® ' u ' interlined over ' e ' by another hand. 
 
 " ' facere digneris. Quae nobis corpus et sanguis fiat ' Biasca and Bergamo MSS 
 of Ambros ; MacCarthy, p. 213, prints St ' facere : dignareque nobis ', treating ' que ' 
 as ' and ' (see his footnote) ; in view of the texts this appears clearly a misappre- 
 hension. See p. 90 note 3. 
 
 ^' See p. 90 note 3. Both the Biasca and Bergamo MSS of Ambros have 
 ' autem '. In St there is here an erasure. 
 
 " Doubtless a mere orthographical variant, but in view of the affinities of Si and 
 Fr it seems to be one worth recording (cf. No. 18). 
 
 ^' Mabillon prints ' [&] elevatis' ; ' et' is not in the MS nor in St, Fr, &c. 
 
 " * Ad caelos' Biasca and Bergamo MSS oi Ambros. See p. 90 note 3. 
 
 '» Cf. No. 14. 
 
 '® i.e. the Vulgate reading of Matt, xxvi 27 ; but cf. Sabatier iti loc. ('hoc ' is the 
 reading of the fragment of the Canon in the de Sacravientis, as to which see p. 93 
 infra.) 
 
 " See p. 90 note 3 ; and on ' sancti sanguinis ' p. 91 note i.
 
 THE ROMAN CANON 
 
 85 
 
 Gregorian Canon 
 placatus accipias, diesque nostros in tua pace disponas, 
 atque 10. ab aeterna damnatione nos eripi et in electo- 
 rum tuorum iubeas grege numerari. Per Christum 
 Dominum nostrum.'' 
 
 II. Quam oblationein tu, Deus, in omnibus, quaesu- 
 mus, benedictam, adscriptam, ratam, rationabilem, 
 acceptabilemque 12. faccre digneris ; ut nobis corpus 
 et sanguis fiat 13. dilectissinii Filii tui ' Domini Dei* 
 nostri lesu Christi. Qui pridie quam pateretur, 14. ac- 
 cepit panem in sanctas ac venerabiles manus suas, 
 15. ™elevatis oculis 16. in caelum ad te Deum Patrem 
 suum omnipotentem, 17. tibi gratias agens, benedixit, 
 fregit, ° dedit discipulis suis dicens : Accipite et man- 
 ducate ex hoc omnes. Hoc est enim'' corpus meum. 
 Simili modo "posteaquam caenatum est, 18. accipiens 
 et hunc praeclarum calicem in sanctas ac venerabiles 
 manus suas, item tibi gratias agens, benedixit, p dedit 
 discipulis suis, dicens: Accipite et bibite 19. ex eo 
 omnes. Hie est enim 20. calix sanguinis mei, novi et 
 aetemi testamenti, mysterium fidei ; qui pro vobis et 
 pro multis effundetur 21. in remissionem* peccatorum. 
 
 Roman Missal 
 
 ^ ' Amen ' 
 
 1 ' Domini nostri ' 
 
 ™ ' et elevatis ' 
 ° 'deditque' 
 
 " * postquam ' [This is 
 the reading of Fr : see 
 p. 103 note 2, no. 13.] 
 
 P' deditque' 
 
 Readings of Gelas saec. viiV MSS in so far as differing from GV .• — 
 
 On No. 10: 'eripias' R, ^ (?) ; 'eripi' Ang but the second 'i' on erasure ; 
 ^eripe' Gell and Sacr. Godelgaiidi (Mdnard Notae p. 16, Migne P. L. 78. 276). 
 On No. 13 : ' Domini nostri ' R, S, Gell. 
 On No. 21 : 'in remissionem ' S, Gell ; ' in remissione ^ R\ 'in remission ' Ang. 
 
 > Ott omits ' Dei '. 
 
 * Reg reads 'Hoc est corpus meum' (without 'enim'). Although this is a 
 *■ unique ' reading I take note of it here on account of the (theological) importance 
 of the clause itself. But in view of the consentient witness of all the other MSS here 
 dealt with (and, it may be added, of the pseudo-Ambrosian de Sacramentis lib. iv 
 cap. 5) there can be no reasonable doubt that the omission of 'enim ' in Reg'\% due 
 only to a momentary want of attention on the part of the scribe, and has no textual 
 importance or value. 
 
 ' So Cass, Ca, Reg, Ott; GV has 'remissione* (see also No. 21, Bo). [So my 
 note written in 1903. Mr. H. A. Wilson, The Gregorian Sacramentary (191 5) p. 3 
 note 6, says that Ca here reads ' remissione '. In any case this could not affect 
 the one fact that is of any importance, namely, that the consentient testimony of 
 Ca, Reg, Ott, as against G V, is supported by Cass (see p. 80 above).]
 
 86 
 
 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Bo 
 
 22. in mei memoriain 
 
 ' faci[ae]tes ' ^* 
 
 23. Christi Filii tui Domini 
 
 nostri 
 
 24. vultu aspicere dignare " 
 
 25. et acceptum^^ habere 
 
 sicuti acceptum habere 
 dignatus es 
 
 26. Supplices te rogamus 
 
 27. per manus sancti 
 
 angeli tui "^^ 
 
 28. in sublimi altario tuo 
 
 29. ex hoc altari participatio- 
 
 nis"^ 
 
 Si 
 
 1. m." m. 
 facialis 
 
 Bo 
 
 = Bo 
 
 e. acceptu h. 
 
 s. accepto ' 
 
 d. e. 
 
 S. t. r. 
 
 et petimus 
 =^ Bo 
 
 \. s. altari t. 
 e. h. a. sanctificatio- 
 nis2« 
 
 Fr 
 
 1. m. m. 
 facietis *** 
 
 = Bo 
 
 = Bo 
 
 e. acceptu ^^ h. 
 
 s. acceptu h. 
 
 d. e. 
 
 = St 
 = Bo 
 
 = St 
 
 ^^ So the MS reads at present. Mabillon prints 'facietis'; I think the original' 
 script was ' faciatis '. 
 
 *® [The last line of this page of the MS of St (in the original hand) ends 
 with ' in mei '. Another hand (whether Moelcaich's or that of some other scribe is a 
 question for the palaeographer) has added in two additional lines in the lower 
 margin of the page and two in the upper margin of the next page : ' memoriam 
 faciatis, passionem meam predicabitis, resurrectionem meam adnuntiabitis, adven- 
 tum meum sperabitis donee iterum veniam ad vos de caelis.' The original hand 
 resumes with the first line of the page : * Unde et memores '. 
 
 The Ambrosian Canon as settled on the basis of the earliest MSS (Ceriani Notitia 
 Liturgiae Ambrosianae., 1895, pp. 9-10) reads : ' in meam commemorationem facietis, 
 mortem meam praedicabitis ', &c., as in the margins of St (see above), except that 
 its final clause runs : ' donee iterum de caelis veniam ad vos '. 
 
 But the St variant will trouble no one who is acquainted with (to use Dom 
 Gueranger's word in another connexion) the Old Irish mania for amending, after a 
 fashion, liturgical texts which are quite good in themselves. There seems no valid 
 reason, so far as liturgical and historical considerations go, why such an Ambrosian 
 text may not have been known in Ireland in the seventh or eighth or ninth century. 
 For the Irish in the region of Milan in the middle of the ninth century see Traube's 
 ' O Roma nobilis' {Abhandl. d. k. buyer. Akad.der Wiss., philol.-hist. CI. xix, 1891) 
 pp. 349 sqq. — Sir G. F. Warner has now assigned the date of the original hand of 
 St, and also of Moelcaich's additions, to the first decade of the ninth century 
 (H. B.Soc, vol. xxxii, 191 5, pp. xxxvi-xxxvii).] 
 
 =° So, clearly, in the MS. 
 
 '^^ Cf. 'sereno vultu digneris respicere' Bo p. 358 ; ' ita nos dignare respicere ', 
 p. 380. See p. 90 note 3. 
 
 ''^ ' acceptu abere ' Bo, I think ; the abbreviation is clear in the next line (cf. 
 No. i). As to St, in these Irish texts 'o' and ' u' are interchangeable. 
 
 23 ^^ . I (( Acceptu . . . acceptu " clarissime, sine compendio, neque in rasura.' 
 So Mgr G. Mercati. 
 
 "^^ Cf. ' Ascendat oratio nostra per manus sancti angeli tui ad divinum altare tuum, 
 Domine ' Bo p. 351, ed. G. H. Forbes, p. 311. [The fragment of Roman Canon 
 of the ' Missa Romensis ' in the Mozarabic Liber Ordimim (ed. Fdrotin, col. 228), 
 although it is a Gregorian text, reads : ' per manus sancti angeli tui '.] 
 
 *' See p. 90 note 3. 
 
 " Ambros : * ex hac altaris sanctificatione* Biasca MS ; 'ex hoc altari sanctifica-
 
 THE ROMAN CANON 
 
 87 
 
 Gregorian Canon 
 Haec quotiescumque feceritis 22. in mei memoriam 
 facietis.' 
 
 Unde et memores isumus", Domine, nos ""tui servi, 
 set et plebs tua sancta, 23. 'Christi Filii tui ' Domini 
 Dei nostri tarn beatae passionis, necnon et ab inferis 
 resurrectionis, sed et in caelos' gloriosae ascensionis, 
 offerimus praeclarae maiestati tuae de tuis donis ac 
 datis hostiam puram, hostiam sanctam, hostiam im- 
 maculatam, panem sanctum vitae aeternae, et calicem 
 salutis perpetuae. Supra quae propitio ac sereno 
 24. vultu respicere digneris, 25. et accepta habere, 
 sicuti accepta habere dignatus es munera pueri tui 
 iusti Abel, et sacrificium* patriarchae nostri Abrahae, 
 et quod tibi obtulit summus sacerdos tuus Melchise- 
 dech, sanctum sacrificium, immaculatam hostiam. 
 
 26. Supplices te rogamus, omnipotens Deus, iube 
 haec perferri 27. per manus '^angeli tui 28. in sub- 
 lime altare tuum, in conspectu* divinae maiestatis 
 tuae, ut quotquot 29. ex hac altaris participatione sa- 
 crosanctum Filii tui corpus et sanguinem sumpserimus, 
 omni benedictione caelesti et gratia repleamur. ^Per 
 Christum Dominum nostrum^." 
 
 ^ Nobis quoque peccatoribus, famulis tuis, de multi- 
 
 Roman Missal 
 
 1 om. ' sumus ' 
 ■^ ' servi tui ' 
 '* 'eiusdem C. F.' 
 * ' Domini nostri ' [See 
 No. 23, Bo, S/, Fk] 
 
 " ' sancti angeli tui * 
 [See No. 27, Bo, S/, Fr.] 
 
 ^ * Per eumdem Chr. 
 D. n.' 
 ^ ' Amen ' 
 ^ praem, ' Memento 
 
 Readings of ' Gelas saec. viii' MSS in so far as differing from GV .• — 
 
 On No. 22 : ' faciatis ' R; ' meae memoriam facietis ' Cell. 
 
 On No. 23 : ' Domini nostri ^ R ; so too Ang originally, but * Dei ' interlined by 
 same hand. 
 
 On No. 24 : 'dignare ' R. 
 
 On No. 28 : 'in sublime altare tuo ' Ang (originally ; but ' o ' altered to ' u '), Cell. 
 
 On No. 29 : 'ex hoc altaris participatione ' 6" (corrected to ' hac ') ; ' participa- 
 tiones ' ? GelL 
 
 ^ GVhas ' faciaetis ' : see also No. 22, Bo. 
 
 * O// omits ' sumus ' : see p. 95 (e). 
 
 ' Ca 'caelis '. See p. 103 note 2, No. 18. 
 
 * Cass breaks off with ' sacri . . .' (of the word 'sacrificium', imperfect). 
 
 * O// ' conspectum ' : see p. 95 (/). 
 
 * The 'Amen' is in GV ed. Wilson (not in Tommasi, 1680, p, 198; nor in 
 Vezzosi, 1 75 1, p. 175) ; also in A", 6", 2296. Not in Bo, Fr, Gell, Ang, Ca, Reg, 
 Ott. — St has not the conclusion ' P. Chr. D. n '. 
 
 For the text of the Memento of the Dead at this point in Ott and other MSS see 
 below p. 96 note 3, and p. 97 note 3. It is omitted by GV, Ca, Reg.
 
 88 
 
 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Bo 
 
 30. partem aliquam societatis 
 donare digneris 
 
 31 
 
 32. 
 
 33' 
 
 Perpetua^^Agne Cecilia Fe- 
 licitate, Anastasia, Agatha, 
 Lucia, Eogenia 
 intra quorum nos consortio 
 ' non stimatur meritis sed 
 veniam qufsomus 
 largitur admitte ' 
 
 33*. [No 'Amen'] 
 
 34. '^Divino magisterio edocti 
 
 et divina institutione 
 audemus dicere 
 
 35. Libera nos 
 
 Domine ab omni malo 
 praeterito praesenti et 
 luturo^o 
 
 36. et intercedente pro nobis 
 
 beata et gloriosa semper- 
 que virgine 
 Maria beatis 
 apostolis tuis Petro et 
 Paulo da 
 
 propitius ^* 
 
 St 
 p. a. et. societatem 
 d. dignare 
 
 P. Agna C. 
 F. An. 
 Ag. L. 
 
 i, q. n. consortia 
 
 non estimatis meritis sed 
 veniam ^** quessumus 
 largitoradmitte[Moel- 
 caich alters to * esti- 
 mamur '] 
 
 = Bo 
 
 29 D. m. e. 
 e. d. i. 
 formati a. d. 
 
 = Bo 
 
 e. intercedentibus p. n. 
 
 beatis 
 a. t. P. e. 
 
 P. Patricio d. 
 
 P- 
 
 Fr 
 
 p. a. et societatem 
 d. digneris " 
 
 St-GallMS 1394'*'' 
 =5/ 
 
 = Bo 
 
 = Sf [except : 
 
 et Patricio 
 (episcopo)] 
 
 tionis ' Bergamo MS and 'codd. alii veteres et edd. antiquae Missalis Ambrosiani' 
 (so Ceriani Notitia Liturgiae Ambrosianae p. 70). 
 
 " Fr breaks off at this word, imperfect. 
 
 *® [A later hand has written over ' Per ' of * Perpetua '' felic ' (without, however, 
 deleting the ' Felicitate ' below), and has further 'doctored' the name 'Agne', 
 though I cannot make ' Agatha ' (see the Gregorian Canon) out of the correction. 
 See as to this list of names Supplementary Note A, p. 104 below.] 
 
 ^^ [Dr MacCarthy and Sir G. F.Warner read 'venia' as the original script, 
 i.e. treat the abbreviation mark over ' a ' as an addition by Moelcaich. From the 
 facsimile it seems to me to come from the original scribe ; and ' venia;« ', like the 
 readings (e)stima;««r', ' meritij ', goes back on the same correction (= corrup- 
 tion) of the genuine Roman text, whether originally by a Gallic or an Irish hand, 
 as that found in GV, for which see p. 89 'on No. 33', and note 4.] 
 
 ***> Warren Liturgy of Celtic Ch. p. 177, MacCarthy Stowe Missal y>- 234. 
 
 " From this point St offers only a rescript of the interpolator Moelcaich. 
 The form in St occurs in Missale Gothicum p. 228 (missa in cathedra S. Petri) ; 
 another variant ibid. p. 297 (a Missa Dominicalis : ' D. m. docti et salutaribus 
 monitis instituti a. d.'), this last being found also in Moz. 276. 83-85 (sixth Sunday 
 after Pentecost) and 430. 21-23 (missa plurimorum martyrum). The genuine 
 Visigothic formulae of preface to the Lord's Prayer are of a quite different cast, and 
 the various forms mentioned above are to be referred to the preface in Gelas and 
 Greg for their original, and all date from the seventh century. The influence of 
 this Gelas-Greg preface is also perceptible in Moz. 315. 59-65 (in Cathedra 
 St Petri), 333. 79-80 (in Nativ. S. Job. Bapt.), 364. 96 (Assumption), 437. 96 (missa 
 unius virg.) ; and possibly 273. 18, the fourth Sunday after Pentecost. 
 
 ^ See p. 90 note 3. 
 
 ^ See p. 90 note 3.
 
 THE ROMAN CANON 
 
 89 
 
 Gregorian Canon 
 tudine miserationum tuarum sperantibus, 30. partem 
 aliquam et societatem ' donare digneris cum tuis 
 Sanctis apostolis et martyribus, cum loanne, Stephano, 
 Matthia, Barnaba, Ignatio, Alexandre, Marcellino, 
 Petro, 31. Felicitate, Perpetua, Agatha, Lucia*, Agne, 
 Caecilia, Anastasia, et y cum omnibus Sanctis tuis : 
 32. intra quorum nos consortium,^ 33. non aesti- 
 mator meriti,* sed veniae, quaesumus, largitor ad- 
 mitte. Per Christum Dominum nostrum. Per quern 
 haec omnia, Domine, semper bona creas, sanctificas, 
 vivificas, benedicis et praestas nobis : per ipsum, et 
 cum ipso, et in ipso est tibi Deo Patri omnipotenti in 
 unitate Spiritus sancti omnis honor et gloria, per 
 omnia saecula saeculorum. Amen. 
 
 Oremus. 34. Praeceptis salutaribus moniti et divina 
 institutione formati audemus dicere : 
 
 Pater noster . . . libera nos a malo.^^ 
 
 35. Libera nos, quaesumus, Domine, ab omnibus 
 maiis praeteritis, praesentibus et futuris, 36. et inter- 
 cedente^ beata et gloriosa semper '' virgine Dei genetrice 
 Maria, '^et beatis apostolis tuis Petro et Paulo ''(Pat- 
 
 Roman Missal 
 etiam,Domine,famulorum 
 famularumque tuarum N. 
 et N.,quinospraecesserunt 
 cum signo fidei, et dormi- 
 unt in somno pacis {rubric : 
 ' . . . orat aliquantulum, 
 pro iis defunctis, pro qui- 
 bus orare intendit . . . '). 
 Ipsis, Domine, et omnibus 
 in Christo quiescentibus, 
 locum refrigerii, lucis et 
 pacis, ut indulgeas depre- 
 camur. Per eumdem 
 Christum Dominum nos- 
 trum. Amen. 
 
 Nobis quoque ', etc. 
 [For the Memento in the 
 Roman Mass in saecc. 
 vii-ix see pp. 96 sqq. 
 below.] 
 
 y om. * cum ' 
 
 " 'Amen' 
 
 * ' cum 
 ^ ' atque 
 
 Andrea 
 omnibus Sanctis ' 
 
 et 
 
 Readings <p/"' Gelas saec. viii'' MSS in so far as differing from GV : — 
 
 On No. 30 : ' et societatem ' A', 2296 ; S doubtful ; ' societatis ' altered by another 
 hand to ' et societatem ' Ang. 
 
 On No. 32 : ' consortio' R, Cell. 
 
 On No. 33: 'non gstimamur meritis sed ueniam qs largitor emitt(as?)' Ang 
 (corrected by another hand to agree with Greg) ; ' non estimatur meritis sed ueniam 
 quaesumus largitur admitte' Cell; R and S as the t7r^^ Canon (but in S 'the last 
 syllable of "estimator" is written over an erasure.' Wilson, p. 239, note 70). 
 
 On No. 35 : y^w^ originally written ' Libera nos quaesumus Domine' ; 'quaesu- 
 mus ' erased and interlined by the same hand after ' Domine '. 
 
 On No. 36 : ' pro nobis' omitted R,Ang, erased S ; ' semperque ' A' ; * que ' erased 
 .S", Ang\ ' et beatis ' on an erasure, and ' apostolis tuis ' omitted ..S" ; ' atque Andrea ' 
 omitted S, Aug, Gell (but 'atque Andrea cum omnibus Sanctis' has been added in 
 margin of 5) ; R after ' Andrea' adds 'et beatis confessoribus tuis illis'. 
 
 "^ GV has * partem aliquam societatis '. 
 
 ' For Aldhelm on the order of these names see Supplementary Note A at the 
 end of this paper. 
 
 ' 6'Fhas now ' consortia', and the word is so printed by Tommasi, 1680, p. 198, 
 and Vezzosi, 1751, p. 175 ; but 'consortium' was apparently first written (Wilson, 
 p. 239, note 69). Cf. No. 32. 
 
 ^ GV has ' non stimamur meritis sed veniam . . . ' : cf. No. 33, Bo, St. 
 
 ^ ' Amen ' Oit. 
 
 * c; F has * et intercedente pro nobis ' ; Ca, Reg, Ott ' et intercedente ' only ; Cass 
 is here wanting : but in view of the fact, on the one hand, of the agreement of the 
 three Gregorian witnesses, and the support elsewhere given to them by Cass, and, 
 on the other hand, seeing that ' pro nobis ' is found in Bo, St and the St Gall MS 
 1394, it seems most probable that the words 'pro nobis' are in GV nn Hibemo- 
 Gallican addition to the Roman text. 
 
 '' So Ca, Reg; GV and Ott have 'semperque'; the remark in the last note 
 applies to this case also.
 
 90 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Bo 
 
 27. pacem tuam in diebus no- 
 
 stris 
 38. et a peccato simus semper 
 
 liberi 
 
 St 
 = Bo 
 
 St Gall MS 1394 
 = Bo 
 
 e. a peccatis semper 
 simus 1. 
 
 On a review of the foregoing Table, it will be seen that whilst as 
 a whole the Canon of Bo must be classed with St and Fr} yet in 
 a certain number of its readings (see Nos. 3, 9, 10?, 15, 17 'agens', 19, 
 29 in part, 30, 36 in part) '^ it deserts these two MSS and agrees with 
 the other class, as represented by GV. A question therefore arises : 
 has Bo adopted certain readings of the G V class, its original having in 
 these items agreed with St and Fi- ; or did its original belong to the 
 G V class and has Bo modified that original by the adoption of St 
 readings ? Not to dwell on the general tendency to approximate to 
 the current practice of Rome which is a dominant feature in the history 
 of Western Liturgy viewed as a whole, and manifests itself too in the 
 hands of the correctors of Bo^ there is the broad fact, obvious on the 
 face of the Table, that the agreements with G V are the exceptions, 
 dissent from it is the rule. To take, on the other hand, an item of 
 detail : that a scribe, with the correct form ' accepta ' familiar to him 
 from practice and lying under his eye, should, in the exercise of his 
 choice of readings to be adopted from the St-Fr text, change it to 
 'acceptum' (see Nos. i and 25), is surely an assumption much less 
 reasonable than that of descent from a common vitiated ancestor. 
 The natural conclusion, in face of the facts, and the only safe working 
 hypothesis, is that the original of Bo belonged to the St class, but that 
 in this particular MS certain readings of the GV class have been 
 adopted. Indeed (unless there be some feature of the case that escapes 
 
 ^ In comparing the readings oi Bo, St, Fr, the list of itm'ca p. 103 note 2 infra, 
 should not be forgotten. 
 
 * Nos. 3 and 21 have no bearing here. 
 
 ' The following is a list of corrections of the text of Bo by other hands designed 
 to bring the MS as first written into conformity with the GV text (the references 
 are to the numbers in the Table) : No. 3 * devotissimo' elided ; No. 9 see Table ; 
 No. 12 'quae' changed to ' ut ' ; No. 13 'autem' elided; No. 15 see Table; 
 No. 20 'sancti' elided ; No. 22 see note 18 in Table; see p. 103 note 2, No. 18 ; 
 No. 24 ' aspicere dignare ' changed to ' respicere digneris ' ; No. 29 ' hoc ' to ' hac ' 
 (but 'altari participationis' is not corrected) ; No. 31 see Table, note 28 ; No. 34, 
 after ' Oremus' (and without erasing ' divino . . .' of original hand, as in Table) : 
 ' I'receptis salutaribus moniti et divina institutione formati audemus dicere' (so 
 Mabillon ; from the photograph in my hands I cannot decipher the interlineation 
 and words in margin); No. 35 ' malo ', &c., changed to the plural; No. 36 ' dei 
 genitrice' inserted before ' Maria', and 'et' before 'beatis'. But it will be seen 
 from Nos. 9 and 15 that the corrections were not all in one direction (15 cannot 
 come from the Ambrosian text, and hence therefore neither, it may be assumed, 
 does 9). It may be worth while to note that the ' s ' of ' caelos ' (No. 16) has been 
 elided (cf. Ceriani Notitia p. 65). On No. 3 see further p. 82 note 3 above.
 
 THE ROMAN CANON 91 
 
 Gregorian Canon I Roman Missal 
 
 que Andrea),* dapropitius 37. pacem in diebus nostris, | 
 
 ut ope misericordiae tuae adiuti, 38. et a peccato' j 
 
 simus <= semper liberi {or ' liber i semper'),' et ab omni 1 ^ 'semper liberi' 
 
 perturbatione securi. Per. 1 
 
 Readings of ' Gel as saec. viii ' MSS in so far as differing from GV ; — 
 
 On No. 38 : i", 'o ' of ' peccato' over erasure ; R and Gell as GV^ except that 
 Gell reads ' ad ' for ' a '. — R and S have, like G y, ' liberi semper'. 
 
 * G F, Reg, Oil have ' atque Andrea ' ; of the ' Ge/as saec. viii ' texts R has, but ..V, 
 Ang, Gell have not, the words, which are also omitted in Ca. In the absence of 
 Cass the question must remain open. For the addition in Oil between ' Andrea ' 
 and 'da propitius' see p. 95 {g) below. 
 
 * GF' peccatis'. 
 
 ^ GV and Ca have ' liberi semper ' ; Reg and Oil have ' semper liberi ' : cf. No. 38. 
 Roman Missal has ' semper liberi '. On the whole the evidence seems in favour of 
 ' semper liberi '. 
 
 me) to assume the contrary would be perversity. I therefore take Bo 
 as in its origin a member of the Si, not of the G V, class. 
 
 Next, within the group Bo, St, Fr, certain minutiae deserve attention. 
 Although on the whole St and Fr agree as against Bo, yet No. 13 
 (perhaps also 7 and 11, cf. also i, 20, 22, 30) shews that Fr is not the 
 mere reproduction of a St text, that no one of these MSS directly 
 descends from one of the others — as indeed might be expected from 
 the fact that one of them is found in Ireland, one in France, one in 
 Northern Italy— and that all three descend from an ultimate original 
 that lies some distance behind them. For although Fr agrees very 
 closely with St, yet its original must have embodied at least one 
 feature (No. 13) characteristic of the original of Bo (i.e. in which this 
 original differed from the original of St). On the other hand, the close 
 affinity as well as the ultimate common origin of Bo and St is evidenced 
 by a feature proper to these two MSS, viz. the existence of the word 
 ' sancti ' before ' sanguinis ' in the recital of institution ;^ and for a second 
 case see No. 11 : ' quam oblationem te Deus in omnibus quaesumus 
 benedictam . . . facere digneris ', instead of ' ^'7/ '. The ultimate common 
 origin (from a single ancestor) of the text of the Canon as found in 
 Bo, St, Fr, may therefore, I think, be taken as sufficiently established. 
 
 * [For 'sanctus sanguis' as a characteristically Irish expression see Book of 
 Cerne pp. 247, 248 (No. 14) and p. 282 n. i ; for ' sacrosanctus sanguis' see ibid. 
 No. 49. That ' sanctus sanguis ' should be found no less than three times in the book 
 called the Missale Gothicum is natural enough, since that book is (as its contents 
 shew) a Missal of Autun, and therefore had its origin in the region of that great 
 centre of Irishry, Luxeuil. — To the testimonies cited in Cerne add that St Colum- 
 banus in the last clause but one of his Rule writes thus : ' pro quibus Salvator 
 noster lesus sanciu/n efFudit sanguinem , . .' (Migne P. L. 80. 224 C).J
 
 92 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Of the two recensions of the Canon evidenced by the Table, which 
 is the earlier? Taking first the indications afforded by the MSS, I still 
 believe the view put forward in the article on the Stowe Missal in the 
 Zeitschr.f. kath. Theologie in 1892 (pp. 489-490) to be just, viz. that, 
 when we find in the seventh century at Bobbio, a monastery founded 
 by the Irish, a ' Missa Romensis ' which is identical with a mass found in 
 Ireland containing a coimnemoratio defwictoriivi (or diptychs) specially 
 designed for Ireland and dating from about the year 630-40,^ the con- 
 clusion seems inevitable that these two mass texts derive from a 
 common progenitor current either in Ireland or among the Irish in quite 
 the early years of the seventh century. On the other hand, when the 
 question of the earlier recension of the Gelasiamini {G V) comes to be 
 dealt with, it will, I believe, clearly appear that the MS from which the 
 single extant copy of Gelas (G V) derives, left Rome not after, but before, 
 the masses of the Blessed Virgin and Holy Cross were embodied in it, 
 i. e. at the latest in the early years of the seventh century. But even if 
 this be so, it does not necessarily follow that the text of the Cancm 
 found in this single extant MS of Gelas (G V) was the text contained 
 in the Roman original from which it descends. In GV (written at the 
 close of the seventh century or early in the eighth) the text of the 
 Gelasiamim has evidently been manipulated, and much foreign matter 
 has been inserted. Among the changes it is quite possible that a text 
 of the Canon of the type found in the Monte Cassino palimpsest and 
 in the Greg MSS of the ninth century may have been substituted 
 for the text which existed in the Roman manuscript of Gelas brought 
 into France a century earlier.^ So far, then, as the general evidence 
 
 ' [The evidence as to the age of the diptychs is simple : they give (fol. 30'' and 
 fol. 31'^) the names of a number of Irish bishops and abbats of the close of the fifth 
 century, of the sixth, and a few of the early years of the seventh. The latest names 
 are those of Laurence, Mellitus and Justus of Canterbury, and of that Irish bishop 
 Dagan ' mentioned twice in the Letter of Laurentius, Mellitus and Justus to the Irish 
 bishops and abbats, the opening of which is preserved in Bede, H. jE". ii 4' 
 (MacCarthy, p. 217 note s). The first name (or names?) at fol. 31*^ is ' Maile 
 Ruen'. The names that follow this one are again those of early bishops or abbats. 
 These two words ' Maile Ruen ' have been cause of hot dispute. Dr MacCarthy 
 will have it that 'Maile' is the bishop of Ardagh 487, and that 'Ruen' is 'the 
 phonetic form of Ruadain ' ; Dr Whitley Stokes will have it that 'Maelruen' is a 
 person of the later part of the eighth century. Whichever way the dispute be 
 settled the date and age of the diptychs cannot be affected. If Maile Ruen be an 
 eighth-century personage, it can only be said that the scribe of the Stowe Missal, 
 writing in the early years of the ninth century, added, for some reason or other, to 
 the original diptychs of c. 630-640 an isolated name of a contemporary of his own. 
 The one point of importance is that these diptychs indicate (if they do not certainly 
 evidence) that the scribe of St had before him a missal written at the latest about 
 the middle of the seventh century.] 
 
 * I need only mention the (? parallel) case of the ' baptismal ' creed. It is 
 impossible to touch on any problem presented by these early books without 
 involving the case of other problems. But each is best dealt with, first of all, 
 separately, on its own merits. By and by will come the summing up of the whole 
 matter.
 
 THE ROMAN CANON 93 
 
 afforded by the MSS is concerned, it points to an attestation of the 
 Bo, Si, Fr text earlier than that which can be adduced with any 
 confidence on behalf of the text now found in GV, for in the one case 
 we can, through the combined evidence of three MSS, trace back the 
 original of their Canon to a MS at the latest of the first years of the 
 seventh century, whilst in the other we have no security that the text 
 of the Canon in the one existing MS may not have been (as so much 
 else certainly was) introduced later, and in France. 
 
 On turning to seek for any indications of anteriority that may exist 
 in the texts themselves, I call attention to a note by Dr MacCarthy on 
 the ' Supplices te rogamus et peiinms' of St (see No. 26 of the Table), 
 and the omission from Bo of the last two words. He writes : 'The 
 insertion arose perhaps from the scribe remembering " rogamus et peti- 
 mus" in the opening of the Canon ' (p. 315 note b on fol. 27"). This 
 may possibly be the case ; at the same time Dr MacCarthy had not 
 observed that Fr has the same reading, and (as it is no mere copy of 
 the original of St) affords independent testimony. And another ex- 
 planation is possible. It will be observed that St and Fr (No. 9) read 
 ' Hanc igitur oblationem . . . quaesumus . . . ut placatus ^^^cipias ' ; 
 and that the original ' accipias ' of Bo is corrected to ' jf/^jcipias ', thus 
 shewing that the Si reading of the Canon at this point was known and 
 indeed preferred, if not that the type of text afforded by St was as 
 a whole current, in the circle in which the corrector lived. Moreover, 
 not merely do Si, Fr agree in reading ' supplices te rogamus et peii- 
 mus \ but they continue (and herein are supported by Bo) '.. . iube 
 haec perferri ... in sublime altar/ (altar/^ Bo) iuo ' (No. 28). Now the 
 fragment of the Canon quoted in the pseudo-Ambrosian treatise de 
 Sacrameniis lib. iv cap. 6 reads : ' et petimus et precamur ut hanc obla- 
 tionem suscipias in sublimi altari tuo . . . sicut suscipere dignatus es ', &c. 
 (see for another case note 16 to the Table). In view of the persistency 
 of the tradition of verbal minutiae evident in the various early MSS of the 
 Canon, in spite of all their variants, I think it will be allowed that these 
 resemblances, if slight, are not to be lightly dismissed as just accidental, 
 but are rather to be viewed as indications possessing a positive and 
 substantive value. This is not all. The ' Hanc igitur ' is one of the 
 few variable clauses of the Roman Canon, thus affording means of veri- 
 fication ; and I think there are distinct indications that ' suscipias ' 
 was the word used in the ' Hanc igitur ' of the original G V. The detail 
 is thrown into a footnote.^ 
 
 » In Grez all the ' Hanc igitur ' formulae read ' ut placatus accipias '. In Gelas 
 i 24. 26, iii 24, 49, 50, 52 (second form), 53, 54, 73. 106 read ' suscipias . 1 40, 45, 
 8q, 94? 98, 7co, probably ,oi, 102, io6, iii 52 (first form), 93, 98, 99. 103 read 
 'accipias'. It is unnecessary to mention other variant forms here. As regard:.
 
 94 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 The indications therefore uniformly point to the conclusion that the 
 o-roup Bo, St, Fr imply an earlier recension of the Roman Canon, 
 whilst the group GVa.nd the ninth-century MSS of the Gregorianum 
 present a later one. On this several interesting questions suggest them- 
 selves ; but the time, I think, is not yet come to deal with them, or to 
 enter formally on the subject of what I may call the Antiquities of the 
 Roman Canon ; certainly this is not the place to do so, the object of 
 this paper being merely to disengage the elementary facts that, on an 
 analysis of the early texts, emerge from apparent confusion. I propose 
 to distinguish the two recensions as recension A (that of the group Bo, 
 St, Fr) and recension B ; and at any rate it seems undesirable in future 
 to designate the text of the Canon in G^ F as ' Gelasian ' ; if a descriptive 
 name must be given to it, this, it would seem, should rather be ' Gre- 
 gorian '. I should like also to be beforehand with any suggestion that 
 the Ambrosian Canon is the source for recension A of the peculiar 
 readings common to the two : a comparison of recension A as a whole 
 and the Ambrosian Canon as a whole, as known in the early MSS, 
 
 i 89, &c., the closing numbers of the first book of Gelas are, as a whole, Gallican 
 interpolations ; whilst iii 93, 98, 99, 103 belong to that series of masses of the dead 
 which I have elsewhere pointed out (see Book of Cerne pp. 269-272) as being also 
 of late date and not part of the original Roman copy. There remain i 40, 45 and 
 iii 52 (first form). 
 
 {a) The ' Hanc igitur' of Gelas i 39 and i 40 (for Holy Thursday) are with slight 
 variants the same. The corresponding ' H. ig.' of Greg (col. 55) is either an 
 abridgement of these or the original on which they are built up. If the purport of 
 the additional clause ' ut per multa curricula ', &c., and the nature of the feast be 
 taken into consideration together, it will not be doubted, I think, that the second 
 alternative is the true explanation, and the improvements of i 39 and 40 are a 
 barbarous conception. 
 
 {b) Ifthe'H. ig.' of 6^^^ i 45 (*ad missaminnocte', Holy Saturday) be compared 
 with Leo7i 24. 30-25. 2 and Gregco\. 66, it will, I think, again appear that the text of 
 Greg is that on which the other two (with their * ascription in the book of the living ') 
 are built up. 
 
 (<:) Once more, \{ Gelas iii 52 first form (nuptial mass) be compared with Z£'o« 141. 
 3-8, and Greg col. 245, it is again clear that Greg is either an abridgement or the 
 original of the other two. It will be observed that the additional element in Leon 
 and Gelas ' sic (eam) consortio maritali tuo munere copulatam desiderata sobole 
 gaudere perficias atque ad optatam seriem cum suo coniuge provehas benignus 
 annorum ' is pieced up out of the nuptial blessing of Greg (' quae maritali iungenda 
 est consortio ', ' ad optatam perveniat senectutem '). 
 
 In every case therefore the formulae of 'Hanc igitur* which read 'placatus 
 accipias ' betray marks of derivation, of later date. The masses of book iii which 
 have * suscipias ' in the ' H. ig.' need not be particularly examined ; some of these 
 are without doubt Gallican interpolations. It is otherwise with i 24, 26. These, 
 one the mass for Saturday of Lent Ember-days with a ' Hanc igitur ' for the newly 
 ordained, the other for the third Sunday of Lent and first Sunday of the Scrutinies 
 with a ' Hanc igitur ' for the ' electi ', are both most authentic and ancient portions 
 of Gelas, and both read ' suscipias '. 
 
 Such treatment as it were by scraps in a note is eminently unsatisfactory, but may 
 at least serve to illustrate the need of minute and close examination and comparison 
 of the texts oi Leon, Gelas, Greg, and not the least of L^eon which contains, I believe, 
 certainly some texts (in the form there found) of a date very little if at all earlier than 
 the single extant MS itself.
 
 \ 
 
 I 
 
 THE ROMAN CANON 95 
 
 shews that this is not the case, but only that the latter exhibits a few 
 readings that are characteristic of A as compared with B. 
 
 The variants between Reg and 0/t have now to be considered in 
 order to determine, if possible, which is the more authentic text of 
 recension B of the Roman Canon. 
 
 (a) It is evident that the words ' et antistite nostro illo ' in Oil (see 
 No. 3 of the Table) are an addition, and that Ca and Rig, with the 
 mere mention of ' papa nostro illo ', preserve at this point the original 
 
 Roman text 
 
 {b} The clause in Otf 'et omnibus orthodoxis atque catholicae et 
 apostolicae fidei cultoribus' (No. 3) is wanting in Ca and Rig. The 
 observations of the Micrologus on this clause in his chapter 13, Quiif 
 supcrflumn sit in canone, are just : ' after the name of the Pope or their 
 own Bishop (he says) some are wont to add the clause " et omnibus . . . 
 cultoribus " ; but this is superfluous. The very next words, " Memento 
 Domine famulorum famularumque tuarum ". allow us to commemorate 
 all the living, as many as we will.' It may be added that all these 
 ' orthodox adherents of the Catholic and Apostolic Faith ' and no 
 others had already been prayed for as ' Thy Holy Catholic Church ". 
 When, moreover, it is seen that Reg is supported in the entire omission 
 of these words, not only by Ca but also by 6^ f^ as representing the 
 seventh century, and by R, S, Ang, 2296 as representing the eighth ; 
 that the MSS in which the clause is represented vary in their readings ; 
 and that in Ott alone of the texts reviewed is it found in full ; the natural 
 conclusion seems to be that it formed no part of the text of the Roman 
 Canon, but was an interpolation made in A. 
 
 {c) Ott stands alone in prefixing to the clause ' qui tibi offerunt ' 
 the words ' pro quibus tibi offerimus vel ', which in the MS are written 
 by the original hand and as if an integral part of the text.^ There is 
 
 no need to say they are an interpolation. 
 
 {d) Ott reads (see No. 13, and cf. readings of 'Gclas saec. viii') : 'dilec- 
 
 tissimi Filii tui Domini nostri ', Reg ' d. F. t. Dn. Dei n.' 
 
 {e) Ott reads ' Unde et memores Domine ' ; all the other MSS, as 
 
 originally written, read ' U. et m. sumus D.' (The word ' sumus' has 
 
 been erased in S, Aug, 2296, and Ca.) 
 
 (/) Ott reads (perhaps only by a slip of the scribe) ' in conspectum 
 
 divinae maiestatis tuae' ; the other MSS ' in conspectu d. m. t.' 
 
 {g) In the Libera after the Lord's Prayer. Ott reads ' atque Andrea 
 
 [then occurs an erasure of the space of about fifteen letters] - necnon et 
 
 > The addition is made in a later hand in Ant;, but in the same order and terms 
 as in Ott. See also the ' collectio ad panis fractionem ' of M. Coin, xxxvi 
 
 MMr H A. Wilson writes to me thus under date of Nov. 23, 1914 : As to the 
 addition to the Libera which appears in Ott, it seems to me that the erasure
 
 g6 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 beato Dionysio martyre tuo atque pontifice cum sociis suis Rustico et 
 Eleutherio et beato Chlodoaldo confessore tuo et omnibus Sanctis da 
 propitius pacem ' ; Re£- reads ' atque Andrea da propitius pacem '. 
 That the text of OU is not pure is obvious.^ 
 
 The conclusion to be drawn cannot be doubtful ; viz. that of the two 
 MSS Reg- preserves the genuine Greg text of the Canon, and Oii offers 
 a corrupt text. But it is interesting to observe that (a), {b), {c), (d), (e), 
 and the ' et omnibus Sanctis ' of (g) are found in the present Roman 
 Canon, which must therefore descend from a MS of the type of Oit, 
 and consequently may be (since Oti was a Paris manuscript) the 
 Parisian recension in the ninth century of the text of Greg. 
 
 Finally, the question of the Memento of the Dead remains to be 
 considered. It is wanting in Ca and Reg, the best witnesses to the 
 text of Greg ; in GV, the earliest extant copy of recension B of the 
 Canon ; also in 5 and 2296, MSS of ' Ge/as saec. viii '. Gell has the single 
 word ' Memento'.^ A7ig gives a quite different text.^ This is not all. 
 Amalar's lengthy comment on the Canon {De offic. iii capp. 25, a6 
 written about 827-832) passes directly from the clause * Supplices . . . 
 repleamur' (ed. Hittorp, 1610, col. 425 D) to ' Nobis quoque peccatori- 
 bus' (col. 426 E), and says nothing of the Memento. It is also absent 
 from two expositions of the mass, which embody the text of the Canon 
 
 between " Andrea " and " necnon " is to be accounted for by the words " et omnibus 
 Sanctis " having been written after " Andrea " as well as after " confessoribus " ; the 
 space is almost exactly the same which the words occupy three lines below/ and 
 there are, he adds, traces of the tops of some of the letters.] 
 
 1 The considerable variation in the texts of the MSS at this point (see No. 36) 
 seems to evidence successive interpolations. It looks as if 6"/ most nearly preserved 
 the original text ; cf. the omission of 'et' before *beatis' in Bo (Mabillon has 'et ' 
 in error). 
 
 ^ This is mentioned by Martene, De ani. eccl. rit. lib. I cap. 4 art. viii § 24. 
 
 ^ As follows : ' Memento mei Uomine banc tibi sancte pater licet meis manibus 
 offerantur quia nee inuocationem tui nominis dignus sum et quia per sanctum atque 
 sanctificatum filii tui nominis oblationes offerantur. sicut incensum in conspectu 
 tuo cum odore suauitatis accendatur et eorum nomina qui nos praecesserunt cum 
 signo fidei per xpm diim nostrum (fol. 119). [This is the earlier, and original, form 
 of the prayer, which (reduced more or less to the rules of grammar, but not always 
 of sense) is entered by a later hand in Ott in margin opposite the Memento of the 
 dead. The form in Oti is as follows (I take the text from Wilson The Gregorian 
 Sacraineiitary in footnote at page 4) : ' M. m. queso D. [Pet] miserere et licet hec 
 sacrificia indignis manibus meis tibi offer(an)tur qui nee invocare d. s. nomen 
 sanctum tuum queso iam quia in honore gloriosi f. t. Domini Dei nostri tibi offeruntur 
 s. i. i. c. divine maiestatis tue (c.) o. s. accendantur meque emundatum a delictis 
 omnibus tibi Deo soli inmaculatum concede famulari p. x. d. n.' This may also 
 serve as an example of the ' improvements ' in piety as well as in style in vogue in 
 the higher quarters at the time when Ott was written ; it will be observed that in 
 the formula of Ott the dead are entirely forgotten, and the prayer becomes one of 
 the priest on behalf of himself alone.] With slight revisions the prayer in this form 
 found its way into this place of the Canon of many later Sacramentaries, see Ebner, 
 p. 419, Bona Rer. liturg. ii c. 14 § i ; ' sed et haec inconsulto hie posita est' says 
 Bona. Ang, where it really embodies a Memento of the Dead, explains how the 
 anomaly arose.
 
 THE ROMAN CANON 97 
 
 printed by Gerbert from a MS of the tenth century.^ One of these 
 expositions, he says, commonly has this note in copies found in south- 
 western Germany and Switzerland : ' expositio haec a coenobio S. 
 Dionysii venit.' - From the time of abbat Fulrad (died 784) St-Denis 
 had cells in Alsace through which such a document could easily pass 
 to monasteries of that region. The tract is thus of interest as shewing 
 at Paris a text with a different tradition from Ott. On the other hand 
 Ott is supported by Bo, St, Fr as testimony for the seventh century 
 and by R for the eighth.^ 
 
 * Mon. litufg. Aleman. ii 280, 288. 
 ' Ibid. p. 282 n. I. 
 
 ' [In this note I propose to give a conspectus of the forms of the Memento of the 
 Dead in the early MSS {Ang is already accounted for in note 3 p. 96 above) : — 
 
 1. For the Greg mass for the dead (Mur. ii 270) : ' Super Dipticia. Memento 
 etiam, Domine, famulorum tuorum (illornm) qui nos praecesserunt et dormiunt in 
 somno pacis. Post lectionem. Istis et omnibus, Domine, in Christo quiescentibus 
 locum refrigerii, lucis et pacis indulgentiam deprecamur. Per Dominum '. 
 
 2. In ^^ : ' M. e. D. et eorum nomina qui n. p. cum signum fidei et d. i. s. p. 
 Coffimemoratio defunctonim. Ipsis e. o. in Chr. q. 1. r. 1. et p. ut indulgeas d. P. 
 Christum D. nostrum '. 
 
 3. In St: * M. e. D. et eorum nomina q. n. p. cum signo fidei et d. i. s. p. cum 
 omnibus (a lengthy addition, with diptychs, for which see MacCarthy, pp. 215-218 
 1. 6 : the Roman Memento is resumed at line 7 thus :) Ipsis et o. in Chr. q. 1. r. 1. 
 et p. ut indulgeas d. '. ^ 
 
 4. \x\ Fr: ' M. e. D. et eorum nomina q. n. p. cum signo fidei et d. i. s. p. Ipsis, 
 D. et o. in Chr. q. 1. r. 1. et p. ut indulgeas deprecamur. Per Christum Dominum 
 nostrum '. — There can be little doubt that according to the rite of i^r the names were 
 said after ' eorum ', and that the word ' nomina ' is really here a rubric. In Bo and 
 St the names are recited at a later point, and the word 'nomina ' is made (and this 
 would be quite in the Irish liturgical manner) an integral part of the text. 
 
 5. In Ott : * M. e. D. f. famularumque tuarum ill. et ill. q. n. p. cum signo fidei et 
 d. i. s. p. Ipsis et o. i. Chr. q. 1. r. 1. et p. ut indulgeas d. Per Christum Dominum 
 nostrum '.—And this, with the addition of ' Domine ' after ' Ipsis ', is the form in 
 which the Memento of the Dead has found a permanent location in the Roman 
 Canon of to-day. 
 
 I add a few miscellaneous notes, 
 
 6. The Missale Gallicanu7n in its first Advent mass embodies the Roman 
 Memento of the Dead in the 'post nomina' prayer (i.e. the special prayer in the 
 Gallican rite said after the recital of the names of living and dead). It is as follows : 
 ' Placare, Domine, quaesumus, humilitatis nostrae precibus et hostiis : et ubi nulla 
 suppetunt suffragia meritorum, tuae nobis indulgentiae succurre praesidiis : et 
 eorum nomina q. n. p. cum signo fidei et d. in s. p.; ipsis et o. in Chr. q. 1. r. 1. et p. 
 ut indulgeas deprecamur. Per '. The words ' Placare . . . praesidiis ' are merely a 
 copy of the ' secret ' of Gelas ii 80 ; the rest, based on the Roman Memento of the 
 Dead, is an original Gaulish composition. As it stands of course it makes nonsense, 
 but it may be adduced here as a useful example of Merovingian liturgical style of the 
 seventh century, many specimens of which are embodied in 6^Fand ought to be 
 printed in all the original barbarism of the MS, for this gives their authentic form. 
 
 7. R gives the Mem. of the Dead in two places : in the usual place, and also 
 immediately after the Mem. of the Living. This latter phenomenon has been the 
 cause or occasion of far-reaching speculations, stretching up even to 'primitive' 
 antiquity, among the liturgiological experts of the last two generations. I have 
 touched upon the question at pp. 112-113 below. 
 
 The text of these two Mementos of the Dead is as follows: {a) that after the 
 commemoration of the living : ' M. e. D. et animabus famulorum famularumque 
 tuarum fidelium catholicorum in Christo quiescentium, qui nos praecesserunt, illorum 
 et illarum, qui per eleemosynam et confessionem tibi reddunt vota sua', &c. (as in 
 
 1B58 Yi
 
 98 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Were a literary production in question, the clause, in face of such 
 MS evidence, would doubtless be pronounced spurious, an interpolation 
 which (like the clause ' omnibus orthodoxis . . . cultoribus ') arose in A 
 and passed thence to Ott. The case is not so easily settled where 
 liturgical texts are concerned. Circumspection is needed to avoid con- 
 clusions that may be as false as they are facile. External circumstances, 
 too, have to be taken into account. These texts were for practical use 
 in very varying circumstances ; they were widely spread, from Ireland 
 to Calabria ; they made a very direct and intimate appeal to persons 
 and races of very different minds, temperaments, traditions. 
 
 I have elsewhere pointed out^ that the terminology of the Memento 
 of the Dead under discussion is not native Spanish, French, Irish, but 
 Roman, or Romano-African, if that be preferred. Nor, until the body 
 of evidence there brought together is challenged and the case generally 
 put on some other footing, do I see how the Roman origin of the clause 
 can well be doubted although (whilst it figures in the earliest attesta- 
 tions of the Roman Canon, Bo, Sf, Fr) it be absent from many MSS of 
 the period (750-850) in which the Gregorian mass book was generally 
 propagated in France : absent from the Canon, that is, for it appears 
 in all these MSS (with some slight variants) in the special mass for the 
 dead. Still, its absence from the C^non is a difficulty which calls for an 
 explanation. This I will endeavour to give in some measure at least, 
 though necessarily by way only of briefest indication. 
 
 The Lyons deacon Florus (died c. 860) writes categorically thus : 
 After the words ' qui nos praecesserunt cum signo fidei et dormiunt 
 in somno pacis ' ' it was the ancient custom, whicJi is also still observed 
 by the Roman Church (sicut etiam Romana agit ecclesia),- immediately 
 to recite the names of the dead from the diptychs, that is the tabulae, 
 and then, after they have been read, the clause " Ipsis et omnibus " is 
 said.'^ Unfortunately Gallic and other liturgical expositors or partisans 
 have had a trick of squaring the facts to their fancies in these matters. 
 
 Canon in com. of living, {b) The Mem. of Dead in usual place in the Canon is 
 exactly as in Fr, no. 4 above (see Wilson Gelas. Sacr. p. 238 n. 13 and p. 239 n. 62). 
 
 8. The treatment of the word ' nomina ' as part of the text (though this makes 
 nonsense) is perpetuated in the texts of later centuries, the solecism from habit 
 passing unnoticed by skilled and unskilled alike. See however the correction of an 
 expositor in Gerbert Mon. lit. Alevian. ii 165 'et eorum nominum qui'. The 
 Micrologus (Bemold of Constance, a really scholarly person) at the end of the 
 eleventh century has at cap. 23 ' M. e. D. et eorum nomina qui ' (Migne/". L. 151. 
 994 B ; cf. also cap. 13 ibid. 985 D)]. 
 
 * Book of C erne pp. 267-273. 
 
 ' ' Pseudo-Alcuin ' (saec. 10 or ii) betters Florus thus : ' sicut etiam usque hodie 
 Romana agit ecclesia' Hittorp 289 E. As to the use made (^ Florus in ' Pseudo- 
 Alcuin ' and the groundlessness of the ascription of the Treves ' Liber Officiorum ' 
 to any ' Amalar ', see Ad. Franz Die Messe im deutschen Mittelalter (Freiburg, 
 Herder, 1902) pp. 368 sqq. 
 
 ' Opusculum de expositione jntssae, cap, 70 (Migne P. /.. 1 19. 62).
 
 THE ROMAN CANON 99 
 
 This is shewn in all ages from the general introduction of Gregorianism 
 in the ninth century to the 're-establishment of the Roman rite' in France 
 in the nineteenth. It is necessary therefore to scan the statements of 
 this class of writers somewhat closely. A difficulty at once suggests 
 itself. If the statement of Florus be correct, how comes it that the 
 Ordo Romanus I (a document which, so far as I have been able to 
 test it, proves itself eminently and singularly trustworthy) not only 
 says nothing of the reading of the diptychs but describes the recital of 
 the Canon in a way which excludes such observance? The ninth 
 century produced on this side of the Alps very many ritual tracts 
 explanatory of the Roman rite, called forth by the liturgical changes 
 of the time. Some embody personal reminiscences of what the writer 
 had seen in Rome or had heard from those who had been there, and 
 notice matters elsewhere taken for granted, or deliberately ignored or 
 even misrepresented.^ Two of these tracts supply an explanation 
 which at least fits the facts. One says that on week-days, from Monday 
 to Saturday, masses for the dead are said, and the names of the 
 dead are commemorated in the mass ; but such masses are not to be 
 said on Sundays, nor are the names of the dead recited on that day, 
 but only the names of the living.^ The second, an exposition of the 
 mass by question and answer, says : after the ' Supplices te rogamus ' 
 ' come two prayers, one " super dipticios " (viz. " Memento . . . somno 
 pacis ") and one (" Ipsis . . . deprecamur ") after the recitation of the 
 names, and this on week-days, that is on working-days (?) only '— ' et 
 hoc cottidianis, id est in agendis tantummodo diebus'.^ If this be so, 
 and the Memento of the Dead was not made in the Canon on Sundays 
 in the then rite of Rome (and I see no reason for discrediting the state- 
 ment, except the novelty of the idea to the modern mind), it helps to 
 explain how it is that this Memento is absent from some at least of 
 our Sacramentaries (e.g. Ca^), whilst it is found in the meaner, every- 
 day codices like Bo, St. 
 
 * For instance, as regards the Gloria in excelsis. 
 - Gerbert Mon. liiun^. Alema7i. ii 173. 
 
 » Ibid. p. 165. The passage quoted in the text is cited in Du Cange under 
 Agendii ; I have ventured on a risky rendering of the word which at any rate makes 
 sense. I do not think the text can mean ' on week-days, atid then only in masses 
 for the dead' (i.e. ' in agendis mortuorum '). 
 
 * I have said (p. 65 above) Ca is a ' Prachtexemplar '. The supplementary matter 
 added by later hands sufficiently shews, I think, that it was specially designed for the 
 use of the bishop. It comprises, roughly, the following items rfT. 2-24^ benedictions ; 
 flf. 24'*-25 prefaces ' in unius confessoris ', and of St Vedast, ' or post confirmationem ', 
 and 'Deus qui apostolis' (Mur. ii 91), a 'Benedictio' and 'Absolutio' (long and 
 ' Gallican ') ; ff. 26-33'' ordinations (ostiar to priest) ; fT. 34-35'' miscellanies ; f. 204* 
 mass of All Saints (also found at f. 240») ; ff. 204^-205 'Or ad infantes consignan- 
 dos'; ff. 206-221** prefaces and benedictions; ff. 222-239'' 'ordo ad inungendum 
 infirmum ' with prayers for agony, funeral, masses of dead ; ff. 239''-24ia masses for 
 ' Dom. post ascensionem' and vigil and feast of All Saints; ff. 24i''-245 more 
 
 II 1
 
 loo LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Another consideration suggests itself. The Memento of the Dead 
 was just the point where difficulty would be most probably found in 
 popularizing the Roman rite in Gaul in the seventh and eighth cen- 
 turies. In the end, indeed, the old native custom asserted itself in 
 those regions, though in extra-liturgical fashion. I proceed to explain. 
 The ' diptychs ', which accident has left embodied in some texts of the 
 Liturgies, Eastern and Western, ' St James ', ' Stowe ', make a con- 
 siderable figure in the pages of the Ritualists (to use Maskell's favourite 
 term). But in fact (apart from their interest for that article of the 
 creed, the Communion of Saints) they belong to the department of 
 ecclesiastical etiquette rather than popular religion.^ Even to the Irish 
 of the ninth century the ' Stowe ' diptychs, native though the names 
 be, must have been as much a list of forgotten worthies as they were 
 to Witzel centuries later — ' nostris obscurissima saeculis ', * nostris 
 temporibus ignotissima ' are the words he uses in regard to them. 
 
 The recital of the names of the dead in Gaul in the seventh century 
 had quite a different character ; one living, intimate, personal. Through- 
 out the land it was, too, a prominent feature of the service on those 
 days precisely when the Churches were full, Sundays, feast days. They 
 were read aloud so that all present might hear, distinct and apart from 
 the text of any prayer. From the collection of ' nomina ' prayers 
 in the Gallican missals, it is clear that the names of saints that form 
 the substance of the 'diptychs' were no part of the names recited;- but 
 these prayers continually dwell on the names of the dead, friends or 
 relatives known to all, ' our dear ones ' as the Gallican formulae are 
 never weary of calling them with that strong affection and deep sense 
 of family relationship that, inherited from a remote past, characterizes 
 
 benedictions. If (as I think appears from this review) the additions have generally 
 the special requirements of the bishop in view, this MS was intended for use pre- 
 cisely on days (be they Sundays or feasts) when the Memento of the Dead in the 
 Canon was omitted. 
 
 Whether the commemoration of the dead was in fact thus passed over at Cambrai, 
 even by Bishop Hildoard, by whose order the volume was written, is another matter. 
 In the Gesta episcopoj-mii Canieracefisiwn {Mon. Germ. SS. vii 415) one fact, and one 
 fact only, is recorded of Hildoard, viz. that 'he caused two handsomely carved ivory 
 tabulae to be made in the twelfth year of his episcopate (801-802) as appears on the 
 same tabulae '. Was he providing thus for the continuance in his church of its 
 traditional practice of reciting publicly the names of the dead on Sundays and feasts, 
 no less than on other days ? The idea seems not unreasonable. If so, here would 
 be another explanation of the omission of the Memento in Ca. 
 
 ' [On this point see what is said in The Littcrgical Homilies of Narsai 
 (Cambridge Texts and Studies) p. 113, of. 105-106.] 
 
 ^ But from Moz. 15. 12-23, 27. 83, 345. 9, 435. 44 it is clear that names of 
 saints had been recited. The saints are mentioned once in (the print of) 
 Bp, and this text arrested the attention of G. H. Forbes for the reasons he 
 explains, p. 348 note j. But the whole mass in which this mention occurs ('missa 
 pro principe ') is not a part of the original MS ; it is written by another hand on an 
 inserted leaf.
 
 THE ROMAN CANON toi 
 
 the French people still. It is no accident that All Souls day originated 
 in France. This public recital of the names of their dead and recom- 
 mendation to the prayers of all in the seventh century touched the 
 nature and piety of those Gallic people in their tenderest point. 
 
 The Roman method was a complete contrast. When read without 
 preconceived notions, or parti pris derived from present practice (of 
 which later), the very text of the Memento shews that a simple mention 
 of the names as an integral part of the celebrant's prayer is all that is 
 contemplated : ' Remember Thy servants, so and so, who have gone 
 before us with the sign of faith.' There is no room here for the 
 formal recital of any *diptychs', or lists of names as in Gaul. Nor 
 does there seem anything to bar the conclusion naturally suggested by 
 the documents that, at least from the seventh century, the names of 
 the dead were in the rite of Rome commemorated in the Canon silently 
 by the celebrant as at present. 
 
 This silent recital and no more is what was offered in the seventh, 
 •eighth, and ninth centuries to those in Gaul adopting the Roman rite 
 in place of the touching solemnities hitherto observed. The result of 
 the shock of the new system and the old, the foreign custom and the 
 native, was a compromise, the precise steps of which it may, or may not, 
 be possible one day to trace in detail ; but its nature is seen in those 
 mediaeval bidding prayers and the prone that continues still to-day, 
 in which this section of the Galilean mass is perpetuated much in its 
 ancient form and almost in its old position.^ It can be no cause for 
 surprise if the Sacramentaries of the period of transition, the eighth 
 and ninth centuries, bear traces of the conflict of two incompatible 
 practices, and if the Memento of the Dead be absent from the Canon 
 of not a few of them. 
 
 Having proceeded so far, I may before concluding glance at another 
 point. Whilst the prayers of the Galilean books, Richenov, Goth, Gaily 
 are rich in detail for the ' recitation of the names ', the Bobbio missal is 
 
 1 [The canons 50 and 51 of the great Council of Frankfort of 794 dealt with the 
 practice of this period of transition. They read : (50) ' Ut confecta sacra mystena 
 in missarum solemniis omnes generaliter pacem ad invicem praebeant ; (5i> /^^ 
 non recitandis nominibus, antequam oblatio offeratur' (M. G. Conal.n 171). ihese 
 prescriptions go back on Nos. 53 and 54 of Charles's ' Admonitio generalis of 
 23 March 789, which however make their purport quite clear : (53) In decretalibus 
 Innocenti papae, ut pax detur ab omnibus, confectis Chnsti sacramentis ; (54) 
 Mtem eiusdem, ut nomina publice non recitentur ante precem sacerdotalem 
 {M G. Capit. i 57). With the adoption of the Roman rite, some priests, and perhaps 
 bishops also, continued to recite the 'names' and to give the 'pax' at their 
 accustomed place in the Gallican mass, i.e. before the Canon. The object of the 
 two canons of the Council of Frankfort was to secure that in quarters in which the 
 Roman rite was adopted the ' names ' should be said and the ' pax ' given m their 
 (Roman) places, namely the ' names ' (of offerers) at an early point of the Canon, the 
 ■' pax ' immediately before the communion.]
 
 I02 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 as markedly sparing in them. But such as the material is it offers 
 a singular medley. The ' nomina ' motif occurs in five masses only : 
 pp. 232, 34H, drawn from the Mzssak Goihiciini, thus a Galilean source ; 
 p. 359 rewritten from Moz, thus Visigothic ; thirdly in the ' missa pro 
 principe ', p. 379, which (as stated above) is no part of the original book, 
 is a mention of ' sanctorum nomina' only. Finally in a mass/r^ vivis 
 et defiinctis is a text proper to the Bobiensc^ found in none of the other 
 MSS. This is, if I mistake not, a genuine piece of Irish work betraying 
 the style and method of a race whose influence is of such incalculable 
 religious importance in the seventh century as the medium through 
 which the transition from one rite, practice, observance, to another was 
 most easily brought about, and the age of fusion of very disparate 
 religious elements was most effectively prepared. This is the text : 
 ' . . . tam pro vivis quam et solutis debito mortis . . . quorum animas 
 ad memorandum conscripsinms vel quorum nomina sjiper^ sanctum 
 altarium scripta adcst evidcnter' (p. 363). Here is a middle term, 
 a mere reference to a list of names lying on or near the altar-table, 
 which does not belong to either use, Roman or Galilean, but shews 
 a sort of compromise between the two. 
 
 To sum up the whole enquiry instituted in this paper : — 
 (i) The early texts of the Roman Canon fall into two classes or 
 recensions ('A' and ' B '). 
 
 (2) A, which seems the earlier, can be traced back (among the Irish) 
 to the early years of the seventh century. 
 
 (3) The first attestation of B is in the only extant MS of the older 
 recension of Gelas, and in the contemporary Monte Cassino palimpsest 
 of Greg. These two MSS offer the same type of text as the MSS of 
 Greg of the ninth century. 
 
 (4) Both A and B existed in France in the seventh century. 
 
 (5) Of the two copies (from Reg and from Ott) of the Canon of 
 Greg, printed by Muratori, Reg is the purer ; but the Canon in the 
 
 ' In the Galilean books the expression is: ^ ante altare tuum nomina recitantur' 
 {Ric/tenoii missa iv, cf. Goth No. Ixx) ; ' hos quos recitatio commemoravit 
 ante sanctum altare' {Goth No. xxvii). In Moz ^ ante altare' 257. 99; coram 
 altario' 317. 100, 441. loi (this is the text copied in Bo). The formula 'oblationis 
 sacratarum virginum' in Leon with its mention of the recitation of their names 
 'before' the altar, ' quarum ante sanctum altare tuum oblata nomina recitantur' 
 (36. 22-23) has no bearing on the questions relating to the seventh and eighth 
 centuries under discussion here. [Formulae akin to that of the mass 'pro vivis et 
 defunctis' in the Bobiense are found at a much later date. The following are 
 examples from Italy, Spain, and Germany. In a later Bobbio missal, Bibl. 
 Ambros. Cod. D. 84 part. inf. (of s. x/xi) a hand of s. xi ex. has entered in the 
 margin at the Memento of the Dead: 'et quorum vel quarum nomina apud me 
 scripta retinentur' (Ebner p. 81).— In the Canon of a Missal of Monte Cassino, or 
 the neighbourhood, now in the Bibl. Vallicellana, Cod. C. 32 {s. xi), the Memento 
 runs : ' quorum vel quarum nomina scripta habemus et quorum vel quarum 
 elemosinas accepimus, et eorum qui nos praecesserunt ', &c. (ibid. p. 203). — The
 
 THE ROMAN CANON 103 
 
 present Roman missal descends from a text like that in Ott (a MS of 
 the church of Paris). 
 
 (6) The Memento of the Dead, found in the Canon of Ott but not in 
 that of Reg, is an element of native Roman origin ; but it is an element 
 of the Mass for the Dead, and not of the Canon. 
 
 (7) In Rome itself, both before and after the introduction of recen- 
 sion B, the Memento of the Dead was not said at public (Sunday and 
 festal) masses. It came into regular use in Rome, in every mass as 
 now, not before the ninth century.^ 
 
 The unique readings of the various MSS are appended in a foot- 
 note.2 
 
 interesting ' Missa omnimoda ' in the eleventh-century Silos MS of the Mozarabic 
 Liber Ordinum (but in this MS only), in the very lengthy 'embolismus' after the 
 Lord's Prayer (=the 'Libera nos quaesumus ' of the Roman mass) reads thus: 
 ' . . . quorum spiritus de hac luce migrare fecisti quorumque nomina penes nos 
 adnotata sunt et super altaria tua posita esse videntur' (col. 241). — Finally, 
 a formula in the so-called ' Missa Flacci Illyrici' (now known to be a MS of the 
 eleventh century, preserved at Wolfenbiittel) entitled * Item pro salute vivorum et 
 mortuorum ', intended to be said at the Memento of the Dead in the Canon, runs 
 thus : ' et quorum corpora hie et ubique requiescunt, et quorum nomina hie in libro 
 vitae scripta esse videntur', &c. (Martene De ant. eccl. n't. lib. i, cap. iv, art. xii, 
 Ordo iv ; p. 185 col. i of the ed. Bassani (Venetiis) 1788J. Here we have, of 
 course, the beginnings of that ritual use of the Liber vitae in the mass described in 
 the Rites of Durham and elsewhere.] 
 
 ^ [See Supplementary Note C for further remarks as to the non-recital of the 
 Memento of the Dead in the Canon according to the Roman rite and practice.] 
 
 "^ The following are the unique readings of the MSS additional to any already 
 given in the Table ; although some are mere blunders, I have thought it best to 
 record them. 
 
 I. Oi Bo, St, Fr: 1. supplices te rogamus St. 2. et unare St. 3. tot«;« orbe;« 
 terrarum Bo. 4. after 'episcopo' (see No. 3 of Table): Hie recitantur nomina 
 vivorum St (MacCarthy p. 210 note on f. 24*). 5. Memento etiavi Domine famu- 
 lorum tuorum N. famularumque tuarum (i.e. the living) St. 6. beat/jj/worum 
 apostolorum Bo. 7. Thomae et Jacobi St\ Thomae Ite7n Jacobi Gell. 8. et 
 omnium sanctorum tuorum qui per iitiiverso inundo passi sunt propter 7tome7i 
 tuu7n Domine seo confessoribus tuis quorum meritis Bo. 9. muniamur auxxWum Bo. 
 ID. placatus suscipias (cf. No. 8 of Table) eumque atque omnem populum ab 
 idolorum cultura eripias et ad te Deum verum Patrem omnipotentem convertas 
 dies {^w^que nostros St. (and at end 'Per dominum nostrum'), ii. et ad te St. 
 12. i^r omits '^;r/i0i;- ^wi^^j'' after 'manducate'. 13. postquam/r. 14. caenatum 
 (no 'est') St. 15. (chalice) in sanctas et venerabiles Fr. 15a effund/tur Bo. 
 16. /nde et memores Fr. 17. nos servi tui St. 18. In Bo 'celos' of 'in celos 
 gloriosae ascensionis ' has been changed to ' cel/s ' by another hand ; Ca also 
 reads ' caeh's '. [The same reading appears in the printed text oi GV but this 
 is an error. H.A.W.] iS'^ maiestati^- Bo. 19. jube perferri (omits ' haec ') St. 
 20. omni benedictione (omits ' caelesti ') et gratia ^/. 21. Between 'somnopacis' 
 and ' Ipsis ' of Memento of Dead, rubric : Commemoratio defunctorum Bo. 22. In 
 ' Nob. quoque pecc' : donare dX'gnare ; and martyribus cum Petro Paulo Patricio 
 cum lohanne St. 23. Before 'Libera nos' is the rubric: Post Pater noster Bo. 
 23* ope;// misericordie Bo. 
 
 II. Of ^ Gelas saec. viii': 24, Gell omits ' et benedicas '. 25. Ang inserts: 
 Memento Domine famulo tuo rege nostro illo before the usual Memento of the 
 Living; cf. an interlineation in Tironian notes at this place in GV: Memento Deus 
 rege nostro cum omni populo (Wilson p. 238 note li). 26. R inserts between 
 ' incolumitatis suae ' and ' tibi reddunt ' : Metnento etiam Domine et animabus 
 
 famulorutn famularumque tuarum fidelium cat/iolicorum in Christo quiescentium.
 
 I04 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 
 
 Note A 
 
 (See p. 89 note 2) 
 
 St Aldhehn and the Gregorian Canon. 
 
 [In an article on this subject by Dom A. Manser in the Revue 
 Bdnidictine xxviii (Jan. 191 1) pp. 90-95, the writer proposes the theory 
 that the Irish MSS Bo and St preserve at least in one item the genuine 
 text of Gregory's revision of the Canon. He argues thus : — 
 
 Aldhelm in his (prose) Tractatus de laudibus virginitaiis c. 42 
 writes : * Mihi quoque operae pretium videtur, ut sanctae Agathae 
 rumores castissimae virginis Luciae praeconia subsequantur, quas 
 praeceptor et paedagogus noster Gregorius in canone cotidiano, 
 quando missarum sollemnia celebrantur, pariter copulasse cognoscitur 
 hoc modo in catalogo martyrum ponens : Felicitate, Anastasia, Agatke, 
 Liicia, quatenus nequaquam litterarum serie sequestrentur quae con- 
 tribuli populo apud Siciliam genitae^ simul caelesti gloria gratu- 
 lantur '. Now the series ' Felicitate, Anastasia, Agatha, Lucia is that 
 found in Bo and St, thus : * Perpetua, Agne, Cecilia, Felicitate^ 
 Anastasia, Agatha, Lucia' : while all the other MSS have ' Felicitate, 
 Perpetua, Agatha, Lucia, Agnete, Cecilia, Anastasia '. 
 
 qui nos praecesserunt, illorum et illarum, qui per eleemosynam et confessionem. 
 27. Ang appends to the ' Hanc igitur' ol GV the following with the rubric 'Item 
 infra actionem ' : Hanc igitur oblationem qttam tibihac si indignus pro emendatione 
 icitiorufn et remissione peccatorum meorum offero et pro gloria mariyrjim et con- 
 Jessorum et pro salute uiuorum uel requiein defunctoriim, propitius aspiciendo 
 sanctifices sanctijicando benedicas. Per quern te sjippliciter deprecamur diesque 
 nostros in tua pace disponas per xpiii dnni nfm. This is the original of the marginal 
 entry by later hand in Ott (see Muratori ii, col. 3 note k). 28. gregez/z numerari 
 Cell. 29. Hoc est corpus meum Reg, see p. 85 note 2 ; Hie est enim calix sanguis 
 mei noui Gell, 30. ad inferis ; sed et in c§lo Cell. 31. panem sanctae vitae 
 aeternae R. 32. jube et perferri Cell. 33. omn^ benedictione celesta? Gell ; omnem ? 
 benediction^;;/ S. 34. de multitudine;;; Gell. 35. Anastasia cum ('et' added by 
 another hand) Ang. 36, prestos R. 37. Before Lord's Prayer, rubric: Orat R. 
 38. Before ' Libera nos ', rubric : Sequittir oratio Ang ; Item sequitnr oratio S, 
 Cell. 
 
 The following, though not tmica, must also be mentioned here : 39. ' ut ' omitted 
 before ' placatus accipias' R, 2296. 40. dispone (for 'disponas') A' and Sacr. 
 Godelgaud (see Menard Notae p. 15, Migne P. L. 78. 276). 41. Simik modo 
 Bo, Gell. 42. novi aeterni testamenti R, S, Gell (and Bergamo MS of Ambros). 
 43. efiFund/tur Bo, Gell. 44. praeclarae majestatix Bo, Gell. 45. benedicks et 
 praestas Bo, Gell. 46. ope;// misericordiae Bo, Cell. 
 
 ' That is, Agatha and Lucia only, of whom the former, as he goes on to explain, 
 was of Catania, the latter of Syracuse.
 
 THE ROMAN CANON 105 
 
 The question arises : Do the Irish texts Bo and St preserve Gregory's 
 text of the Canon here ? or is the different order in Bo-St merely an 
 instance of the Irish method of improving upon liturgical texts ? Cass 
 {and so too Fr) is wanting here ; but in view of the witness which 
 Cass elsewhere gives to the conservation of the genuine Roman text 
 of c. 700 by MSS like Ca, Reg, and (with some exceptions) G [' and 
 Ott, it seems to me not open to doubt that, whilst the actual Canon 
 text familiar to Aldhelm (as reported in the passage cited above) was 
 of the type Bo-St, this order of the four women saints was merely a local 
 Irish corruption, and that Aldhelm does not here preserve the reading 
 of the genuine, Roman, Gregorian text of St Gregory. Aldhelm 
 indeed knows of Gregory by tradition as the author of the Canon he 
 uses : but this is no sufficient proof that the order of the four names 
 as given by him is Gregory's order, still less is it proof that Bo, St 
 preserve St Gregory's text of the Roman Canon. No one acquainted 
 with the religious condition of England in the later decades of the 
 seventh century can feel surprise at the use there of a Roman Canon 
 touched up after the Irish fashion. 
 
 One point deserves special attention, namely, the separation in 
 Bo-St of the names Felicitas and Perpetua. Are there any reasonable 
 grounds for supposing that this familiar pair of saints were separated 
 in the Canon at Rome in or before St Gregory's time ? I do not know 
 of any : on the contrary, in the ancient Roman Calendar for the year 
 354, written out by Philocalus the calligrapher of Pope Damasus, we 
 find the two saints commemorated together on March 7 : ' non. Martias 
 Perpetuae et Felicitatis Africae.' The entry shews that the cult 
 (except St Cyprian, the only African cult in this calendar) had 
 already at this date established itself in Rome. A special mass for 
 the two saints on March 7 is found in the Gelasian Sacramentary 
 (ii 13), the secret of which gives the names in the order found in the 
 Gregorian MSS of the Canon, viz. 'Felicitas, Perpetua'. It would 
 appear, then, that the conjunction of the two names is a Roman 
 feature ; their separation is, I would suggest, an Irish ' improvement '.] 
 
 Note B 
 
 (See pp. 94-95) 
 
 Questions on Recensions A and B. 
 
 [Now that the text of the ' Gregorian Canon ' has, I trust, been with 
 some sense of security accurately fixed, it is possible, without risk of 
 ' proceeding confusedly ' to enter on difficulties or questions even the 
 mention of which was withheld when this paper was first published.
 
 io6 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 As it then stood the paper suggested the existence of an earlier and a 
 later recension, or type of text — a ' Gregorian ' and a ' pre-Gregorian ', 
 if that designation be preferred. 
 
 I have no intention of formally discussing here the difficulties or 
 questions referred to above ; but I think it proper to mention two such 
 cases as samples, one lying on the surface of the earlier text, the other 
 residing in the character of the text itself. 
 
 (a) All the three witnesses to the earlier type of text contain the 
 clause ' diesque nostros ', &c., the introduction of which into the Roman 
 Canon is, on what seems the good authority of the notice of Gregory 
 in the Lzdcr Pontijicalis, to be attributed to Gregory himself.^ In 
 view of the date of the MSS of Bo^ St, and Fr, there seems no 
 reason for surprise at such an addition. So far as Fr is concerned^ 
 it seems practically certain, on investigation of the ' sources ' of the 
 prayers contained in that missal, that its compiler must have been 
 acquainted with the Gregorian Sacramentary, just as his contem- 
 porary, the person responsible for the text of 6^ F (as appears from 
 prayers in that book, quite apart from the text of the Canon), must 
 have been acquainted with and have used that Sacramentary also. 
 As regards Bo^ I do not see where the difficulty is likely to arise, 
 believing as I do that this is an Italian (i. e. a Bobbio) MS, and seeing 
 that the compilation itself bears strong marks of Irish influence and 
 workmanship. As to St, Sir G. F. Warner has now told us that its 
 original script, and also the script of Moelcaich, date from the first 
 years of the ninth century. 
 
 {h) The other case is No. 29 of the Table. In the first place the 
 variants shewn by Bo and St-Fr are in themselves an indication 
 that they are independent attempts to ' improve ', to put into a 
 ' better form ', an original text which for some reason or other was 
 considered ' difficult ', or not sufficiently explicit. Moreover, taking 
 the readings as they stand, it is easy to see how an original text ' ex 
 hac altaris participatione ' could and would have been corrected by 
 Irish or Gallic hands into ' ex hoc altari participationis ' {Bo), or ' ex 
 hoc altari sanctificationis ' {St, Fr) \ but not so easy to understand 
 why an original Roman text in either of these two forms should have 
 been corrected into ' ex hac altaris participatione '. More than this : 
 
 * According to Duchesne's view the notice of Gregory in the Liber Pontificalis is 
 practically by a contemporary (see Lib. Pont. ed. Duchesne, i p. ccxxxii) ; on the 
 other hand Mommsen (see the edition of the Lib. Pont, in Man. Germ. Hist. pp. xiii 
 to xviii) upholds Waitz's view that the writer was not of an earlier date than the 
 latter part of the seventh century. The Neapolitan MS, written at Bobbio, shews 
 that this notice of Gregory was known in that monastery in the later years of the 
 seventh century (see Duchesne, i p. clxxvi ; Mommsen, p. Ixxxv ; and also, for 
 England, W. Levison Nenes Archiv xxxv pp. 341-342, 348-350).
 
 I 
 
 THE ROMAN CANON 107 
 
 a friend has pointed out to me two cases of a similar construction 
 in formulae which are indubitably Roman, namely the forms for the 
 blessing of the oil on Holy Thursday and for the blessing of the font 
 on Saturday. In the Gelasian Sacramentary we read : ' Emitte, quae- 
 sumus, Domine, Spiritum sanctum Paraclitum decaelis in hanc pingue- 
 dincm^ old' (ed. Wilson p. 70 1. 9 ; the Gregorian text is ' in hanc 
 pinguedinem olivac \ Muratori ii 55) ; and ' Descendat in hanc 
 plenitudinem fontis virtus Spiritus tui ' (Wilson p. 86 1. 11; so also Greg 
 ii 64). In both these cases we have an example of the figure known 
 as ' hypallage '. The idiomatic character of the expressions lies in the 
 fact that in each the attribute ' hanc ' is grammatically construed with 
 a noun which it does not properly qualify. The result is (as frequently 
 in cases of hypallage) a certain vagueness of expression corresponding 
 to a want of definiteness in the conception. We might resolve ' in 
 hanc plenitudinem fontis ' into ' in plenitudinem huius fontis ', or ' in 
 hunc plenum fontem ' ; but in neither case is the result quite satis- 
 factory : still less satisfactory would be ' in pinguedinem huius olei '. 
 The construction ' ex hac altaris participatione ' (whatever the exact 
 idea intended) is a real grammatical parallel to these two examples 
 taken from genuine Roman formulae ; and it is capable of being 
 resolved into either ' ex huius altaris participatione ', or ' ex hoc altari 
 participationis ' (as in Bo, and also — but with ' sanctificationis ' for 
 ' participationis ' — in St, Fr). Thus in Bo, St, and Fr we have for 
 an equivocal, but thoroughly Latin and Roman, construction one that 
 admits of no possible ambiguity. 
 
 It appears to me, then, that the ' ex hac altaris participatione ' of 
 the Gregorian Canon preserves the genuine Roman reading. Indeed 
 the secret of i 13 in Gelas (the mass for Septuagesima Sunday) 
 offers a direct parallel : * Concede nobis . . . tuis servire semper 
 altaribns, et eoruin perpetua participatione salvari '. The versions 
 in Bo, St, Fr (with the Ambrosian Canon) are no more than seventh- 
 century attempts to do what has been done by some modern 
 translators of the Canon into English, namely to resolve an equivocal 
 Latin idiom into simple and unambiguous terms. As experience has 
 taught me the utility and instructiveness, for the purposes of the 
 liturgical enquirer, of modern translations of the Roman Canon, I take 
 three such translations of our passage — not specially selected, but 
 found in books which happen to be at hand. (1) In TJic Roman 
 Missal for the use of the Laity, bearing the imprimatur of Cardinal 
 Wiseman : ' as many as by participation at this altar '. {%) In 
 The Sacrifice of the Mass by Fr Gavin S.J., bearing the imprimatur 
 
 ^ The MS has *in hac plnguedine ' ; but the solecism does not affect the point 
 here under consideration.
 
 io8 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 of Cardinal Vaughan : ' as many of us as by participating in this altar* 
 (4th ed. p. 140). (3) In Messrs R. and T. Washbourne's latest Latin- 
 English Missal (1913), with the imprimatur of the Vicar General of 
 the Archdiocese of Westminster : ' that as many of us as partake, in 
 this holy Communion, of the most sacred Body and Blood of Thy 
 Son ', — without mention of the altar at all. 
 
 I have two more remarks to make ; these are of a general character, 
 and are designed to bring out clearly questions which will have to be 
 considered in the future. 
 
 (i) In reviewing the list of variants on the left-hand page of the 
 Table, other items (e. g. Nos. 34 and -i,^ ; see p. 88 n. 29, and Book of 
 Cerne p. 264 no. 57) will suggest themselves as being also Hiberno- 
 Gallican modifications of the genuine Roman text. The question may 
 then be raised whether the whole of the variants of the texts Bo, St, 
 and Fr are not such mere modifications of the Gregorian Canon. This 
 view doubtless may deserve discussion. But when all the items are 
 reviewed, and the relative considerations are taken into account, I see 
 no reason to modify the view that the group Bo, St, Fr preserve at 
 least elements of an earlier recension of the Roman Canon. 
 
 (2) It would follow that Gregory's work on the Canon consisted of 
 a comparatively few verbal corrections of the Canon in use before his 
 time. But in regard to this question there is another and widely 
 different view which may be easily and best learnt from two quite 
 recent writers, Dr A. Baumstark and Dr Buchwald. Columns D and 
 E of the Table (pp. 187-190) of Dr Baumstark's Litiirgia Roniana 
 e Litiirgia delP Esarcato (Rome, Pustet, 1904) will put the reader at a 
 glance in possession of Gregory's work on the Canon, which, according 
 to this view, consisted {a) in putting at the beginning what was pre- 
 viously at the end ; {b) in omitting an Epiklesis and prayer for the 
 communicants. Dr Buchwald, whilst adopting Dr Baumstark's general 
 notions, enters in addition into the fullest minutiae of Gregory's opera- 
 tions on the text of the Canon, and shews him to us — just as if we 
 were looking over his shoulder — busy over his shred-and-patch-work, 
 using up and distributing in his new Canon bits of the eliminated 
 Epiklesis. (See Weidenauer Stiidien i, Wien, Leo-Gesellschaft, 1906 ; ^ 
 the whole of pp. 51-56 is worth reading.) 
 
 It was necessary, but here it is also enough, to mention the existence 
 of this view of Gregory's work on the Roman Canon, and so leave the 
 matter. But it may be useful to add that, according to the theory 
 of the school represented by the two writers just cited, the Roman 
 Canon as it existed up to the close of the sixth century was free from 
 
 * Weidenau is the Austrian ecclesiastical seminary of the diocese of Breslau, 
 and the Stiuiien are published under the direction of the Professors.
 
 THE ROMAN CANON 109 
 
 all the difficulties that, with the present text, now embarrass the 
 theologian, all of which are thus due to the curious and, it would 
 seem, somewhat perverse reforming activity of the greatest of the 
 Popes.] 
 
 Note C 
 
 (See p. 103 note i) 
 
 The Memento of the Dead. 
 
 [At present the Memento of the Dead is, according to the Rite of the 
 Roman Church, said in the Canon at every mass. In this Note 
 I propose to add further details with a view to shewing that this was 
 not the case until a comparatively late date. 
 
 In \\\t. Journal of Theological Studies, October 1912 (vol. xiv p. 45), I reverted to 
 this question and drew attention to further evidences that the Memento of the Dead 
 was not said in public masses (i.e. those of Sundays and feast-days) and formed no 
 part of the Canon of the Mass in Rome. I reprint this note here : 
 
 The case has been set out in they. T. S. iv 571 sqq., cf. xii 391 (<?). I now 
 carry this matter back further and also approach it from another side. In the 
 Penitential of Theodore (a source for the history of liturgy which has not yet been 
 exhausted ; or perhaps the value of which is not yet fully recognized) lib. ii cap. v, 
 De Missa defunctorum § 4, is found this somewhat enigmatical pronouncement : 
 ' Missae (or ' missas ') quoque monachorum fieri per singxilas septimanas et nomina 
 recitare mos est' (Haddan and Stubbs Councils iii p. 194). In the so-called 
 ' Canones S. Gregorii urbis Romae', first edited by Kunstmann [Die lateinischen 
 Ponilentialbiicher der Angclsachsen, Mainz 1844, p. 129), is a canon (No. 108 
 p. 138) which runs thus: ' Missam monachorum per singulas septimanas nomina 
 recitare. Secundum Romanos die dominico nomina mortuorum non recitantur 
 ad missam.' Kunstmann edits these Canons of St Gregory from a St Emmeram 
 MS, which he describes (p. 29) as written in ' Anglo-Saxon ' script, and he assigns 
 it (p. 28) to the end of the eighth or, at latest, the beginning of the ninth century. 
 Whether this MS be with the other St Emmeram MSS now at Munich I cannot 
 tell,* and it is clear that H. J. Schmitz, who had searched so sedulously for MSS 
 of Penitentials, had never seen it, and speaks only after Kunstmann {Die Buss- 
 biicher tmd das kanonische Bussverfahren, Diisseldorf, 1898, p. 522). This piece 
 was reprinted by VVasserschleben(^«jj<7n/««w^i'«, i85i,p. 160) from Kunstmann's 
 text, with collation of another copy, Paris MS 2123 s. ix, which, however, he 
 considers affords a less authentic text than the MS used by Kunstmann. From 
 Wasserschleben's edition of the ' Canones ' it appears that this whole document is 
 to be referred, canon by canon, for its original and source to Theodore ; to which 
 its text also affords at times a useful explanation or gloss, inasmuch as the script 
 of the St Emmeram MS, no less than the title itself of the document, shews that 
 it must have been drawn up in England and at a date certainly not far removed 
 from the redaction of the document known to us as Theodore's Penitential. That 
 the canon 108 is an authentic and trustworthy gloss of the relative text of 
 Theodore I do not, for myself, in view of the other testimonies as to the non- 
 recital of names of dead in the Sunday mass at Rome, see any ground for 
 doubting ; and England, in the first, or even second, half of the eighth century 
 
 * [1916. — It is the Munich MS lat. 14780, olim Em. e. 2 (see Neues Archiv ix, 
 1884, p. 564)-]
 
 no LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 would be as good and trustworthy a source of information in regard to Roman 
 liturgical practice as could possibly be found. 
 
 The meaning attached by the person responsible for the redaction of ' Theodore's 
 Penitential ' to the passage quoted from it above is quite another matter ; but I 
 would suggest that the tenor of the enquiry put to Theodore was of this kind : 
 * The monks say masses for the dead every day of the week, and recite the names 
 of dead, Sundays included, which the Romans do not do ; what are we to say as 
 to the continuance of this local, this English, practice ? ' And Theodore's answer 
 was to the efifect : ' Leave the monks in peace and let them go on in their own 
 way.' 
 
 I now add further details bearing on the same question. 
 
 On the introduction of the Gregorianum in France as the official mass book by 
 Charles, the Canon was recited as found in the manuscript sent by Hadrian— that is 
 to say without any Memento of the Dead — and as in Rome : at least in some, the 
 ruling, quarters. But this by no means satisfied others who had been accus- 
 tomed to say the Memento of the Dead in the Roman Canon in all masses, 
 as had been done, in some quarters at least in France and among the Irish, 
 from a date as early as the seventh century. This dissatisfaction finds a very 
 definite expression in canon 39 of the Council of Chalon-sur-Saone in 813 : 
 ' Visum praeterea nobis est ut in omnibus missarum soUemnibus pro defunctorum 
 spiritibus loco competenti Dominus deprecetiir. Sicut enini nulla dies excipitur 
 qua non pro viventibus et pro quibuslibet necessitatibus Dominus deprecetur, 
 ita nimiriim nulla dies excipi debet quin pro animabus fidelium preces Domino 
 in missarum sollemnibus fundantur' {M. G. ConciLvizZx). It is to be observed that 
 the subscriptions to the Council are not extant, but in the proem (p. 271) its 
 members are described (p. 274) as ' episcopi et abbates totius Galliae Lugdunen- 
 sis ', which would practically mean the four ecclesiastical provinces of Lyons, Sens 
 (which comprises Paris, whence comes our Sacramentary Oti which has the 
 Memento of Dead in its text of the Canon), Rouen and Tours ; but, as a separate 
 Council was at the same date held at Tours, it is probable that in fact only the 
 three provinces of Lyons, Sens, and Rouen were represented at Chalon. How far 
 this argumentative canon, with its reasons of congruence, was actually carried into 
 execution is another matter. It is certain, however, that the Roman practice of not 
 saying the Memento of the Dead was also observed, and very commonly observed. 
 The rubrics of a MS of St-Gall No. 150, of the ninth century, printed by the late 
 Weihbischof Schmitz {Die Bussbiicher vol. ii, Diisseldorf, 1898, pp. 188-189),^ 
 though in the common ' Sacristy- Latin ' style, are clear enough on the point. At 
 pp. 344-350 of this MS is an Ordo Missae, in the Canon of which are these rubrics : 
 first at the Memento of the Living : ' Hie nomina vivorum memorentur si volueris. 
 Sed non Dominica die nisi ceteris diebus' (p. 188). The Memento of the Dead is 
 introduced by this rubric (p. 189) : ' Hae orationes que dicuntur una super Dipticius, 
 altera post lectionem Nominum et hoc cottidianis vel in agendis tantum modo diebus. 
 Memento etiam ', &c. (Then follows the text of the Memento of the Dead.) It may 
 be noticed in passing how this rubrician, this authoritative expert in Liturgy, extends 
 the Roman rule as to the Memento of the Dead to the Memento of the Living ; the 
 manner and method of this class of reformer is the same in all ages ; and some day, 
 when the real history of the liturgies has been made a little clearer than at present, 
 it will be a story by itself — truly interesting and instructive — to detail the works and 
 workings of this kind of reformer and their efifect on the developement of divine 
 worship among Christians. But this by the way as to a task in some future 
 generation : I resume my task here. 
 
 * For the original contents of this MS see ibid. p. 175.
 
 THE ROMAN CANON iii 
 
 The now lost Pontifical of bishop Prudentius of Troyes, of about the middle of the 
 ninth century — who may be esteemed (I think) a good witness for the practice of 
 the Palace Chapel for the date when his Pontifical was compiled — has this rubric at 
 the end of its Burial Service ; ' Die autem dominico non celebrentur agenda 
 mortuorum (= no funerals), nee nomina eorum recitentur ad missam, sed tantum 
 regum . . . et sacerdotum vel pro omni populo Christiano oblata vel vota reddantur, 
 Defunctorum autem qui moriuntur die dominico Christus Filius Dei ipse det eis 
 requiem qui semetipsum pro ipsis vel pro universo genere humane hostiam obtulit ' 
 (Martene de ant. eccl. rit. lib. iii cap. xv Ordo ii). This is not indeed ' Sacristy- 
 Latin ', but the writer might have expressed himself more clearly. I am disposed to 
 think the conclusion may be justly drawn from it that according to the Rite of the 
 Palace, by the fifth decade at all events of the ninth century, the Memento of the 
 Dead was said at Sunday masses as well as at others ; but that the only names 
 mentioned were those of very ' high ' personages : Royalty and Episcopacy, Crown 
 and Mitre, alone were allowed to figure ; a derogation of this sort from the Roman 
 rule in this matter would be quite in accord with the tendencies that had developed 
 in Court Circles and the Palace Chapel since the death of Charlemagne. 
 
 A missal later in date by some hundred and fifty or two hundred years, but 
 Italian this time, is much more conservative and (what Prudentius is not) quite 
 clear, precise, and business-like in its directions ; it has this rubric introduc- 
 tory to the Memento of the Dead in the Canon : ' Hec non dicit in dominicis diebus 
 nee in aliis festivitatibus maioribus ' (Florence, Bibl. Laurenziana MS Aedil. 123 
 s. xi ; it came from the Cathedral of Florence ; Ebner, pp. 34-35). 
 
 I here give, without making any particular search, a list of MSS of the Gregoria- 
 num the Canon of which does not contain the Memento of the Dead ; it may be 
 convenient as a starting point for any person disposed to enquire further, and 
 doubtless with proper search it might be largely added to.^ 
 
 Saec. IX. 
 
 I. The Cambrai MS 164, formerly 164, and 2. the MS Vat. Regin. 337 are 
 mentioned above (p. Z"] note 6). 
 
 3. Le Mans Sacramentary, Library of Le Mans, MS No. Tj (Delisle No. xxxi; 
 
 Netzer, Introduction de la Messe romaine en France sous les Carolingiens, 
 Paris 1910, p. 95). 
 
 4. Mainz, Seminar-Bibliothek (Ebner, p. 388; Delisle No. xlv, *x« siecle'). 
 
 5. Verona, Bibl. Capit. Ixxxvi (81) (Ebner, pp. 286-288, cf. 388; Delisle No.xxv). 
 
 Saec. IX/X. 
 
 6. Modena Cod. ii 7 (Muratori i col. 71 ; Ebner, p. 94 ; Delisle No. xxiv). 
 
 Saec. X. 
 
 7. Sacramentary of Worms, Paris Bibl. de I'Arsenal MS 610 (Delisle No. 1). 
 
 8. Corbie Sacramentary, the ' Codex S. Eligii ' edited by Menard, Paris B.N. MS 
 
 lat. 1205 1 (Delisle No. Ii ; Netzer p. 106). 
 
 9. St-Gall MS 342 (Delisle No. cvi ' xi« siecle ' ; Ebner p. 421 n. 3). 
 
 10. Zurich MS 71 from Rheinau (Delisle No. civ 'xi^ siecle'; Ebner, p. 421 n. 3). 
 
 ^ Nearly all are enumerated by Ebner, p. 421 note 3 ; but I think a formal list, 
 with references, will be convenient to enquirers. Martin Gerbert ( Vetus Liturgia 
 Alemannica i 366) mentions several MSS which did not give a Memento of the 
 Dead in the Canon. As I do not know whether these exist to-day, or where they 
 may be found, no notice is taken of them in the list above. His remarks on the 
 question pp. 366-368 are still interesting.
 
 112 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Saec. XI. 
 
 11. Bobbio Missal now Bibl. Ambros. Cod. D. 84 part. inf. (Ebner p. 80 : Mementos 
 
 of both Living and Dead are added in margin by a later hand s. xi ex. ; The 
 Memento of the Dead has also these words : ' et quorum vel quarum nomina 
 apud me scripta retinentur '. 
 
 12. Bologna, Bibl. dell' Universitk, cod. 1084, probably South German (Ebner 
 
 pp. 6-7 ; at p. 421 note 3 ' j. x ' ; or ' xi in.', p. 6). 
 
 13. Rome Cod. Vat. Pal. 494 from Zell in the 'archdiocese' of Mainz (Ebner pp. 
 
 246-247, of. p. 386). 
 
 14. Munich MS lat 10077 olim Pal. 774, from the Palatine Library at Mannheim 
 
 (Ebner p. 421 n. 3 ; Netces Archiv. ix 549). 
 
 15. The Memento of the Dead was not found in the Sacramentary used by the 
 
 compiler of that pitfall for the unwary, Hittorp's ' Ordo Romanus ' (see 
 Hittorp col. 63, ed. 1610). 
 
 16. Finally it may be observed that the Florence MS Bibl. Nazionale Cod. B A 2 
 
 saec. X, perhaps a South German MS, in entering the Memento of the Dead 
 after the ' Nobis quoque peccatoribus ' (Ebner p. 43, cf p. 423) seems to shew 
 that the scribe had before him as Vorlage a MS the Canon of which did not 
 contain the Memento. 
 
 It will be seen then that the practice of saying the Roman Canon without the 
 Memento of the Dead, in accordance with the ancient and native Roman custom, 
 must have lasted in some quarters much later than we should have been prepared 
 to expect. Yet it is singular how slowly the liturgists, the experts and savants of 
 the modem world, have been able to come to a realization of the facts. Menard, on 
 finding its absence in the MS he was editing (No. 8 above), took the course of just 
 inserting it (see Migne P. L. 78. 26, 280 ; orig. ed. p. 3, Notae p. 20) ' exeditis ' as 
 he calls it, which in practice meant that he brought it up to date to accord with the 
 Roman Missal of his own time, for he could not consider Rocca's print in itself a 
 proper make-weight to his own MS of St-Eloi. When Mabillon found it was not 
 in the Worms Sacramentary (No. 7 above) he easily explained its absence thus : 
 * il etait supplee par les diptiques qui estoient exposez ou recitez au pretre ' (Delisle 
 p. 174). It is pathetic to read the pages (421-423) in which Ebner deals 
 with this question. It almost makes me wish that, instead of being content to send 
 me the MS draft of the ten pages or so (pp. 374-384) of his book, he had sent me 
 the continuation ; but our interchange of letters ceased in the later days of May 
 1895, before I had been to Cambrai and when all I could do was to refer him to 
 Delisle's note, Mhn. sur cVanc. Sacramentaires p. 400. Our correspondence was 
 never resumed ; and his fast failing health doubtless made him concentrate himself 
 on the completion of his volume. Of the just interpretation to be put on the absence 
 of the Memento of the Dead from so many MSS of the Canon he has no inkling 
 though the phenomenon, as he says more than once, seems to him as indeed 
 'strange' (p. 421). His explanation in brief is that put in clear and easy terms by 
 M. Netzer (p. 240): ' L'absence complete du Memento des morts' (in two of 
 his MSS) is, he says, ' tres significative. Elle corrobore la conclusion de la savante 
 dissertation des auteurs de la Paliographie tmisicale (tome v p. yj) qui afifirment 
 que,primitivement, la m^moire des d^funts ne se faisait point k cet endroit du Canon 
 mais a la suite du Memento des vivants, ce qui explique la presence de Vetiain 
 dans ce deuxieme Memento '. 
 
 The origin of this idea is to be traced back to the publication in 1847 by H. A. 
 Daniel of the second volume of his Codex liturgicus ecclesiae universae. In that
 
 THE ROMAN CANON 113 
 
 volume he gives (pp. 12-21) on opposite pages what he calls ' Ordo et Canon 
 Missae Gregorianus' and 'Ordo et Canon Missae Gelasianus'. In the latter he 
 prints the Memento of the Dead not only in its usual place, but also (p. 15: in 
 brackets) immediately after the Memento of the Living as found in the Rheinau MS 
 ' of Gelas saec. viii ' (Wilson's R : see for the text p. 97 n. 3. 7{b) above). Daniel, in 
 his ' Adnotationes ' on these two Canons (pp. 38-39), reviews the opinions of previous 
 writers who had noticed the omission of the Memento of the Dead from the Canon 
 in early MSS of the Roman Sacramentaries, Muratori, Mdnard, Assemani, Vezzosi, 
 and then offers a suggestion of his own, namely, that the Memento of the Dead was 
 ' ut ita dicam, Canonis pars fortuita atque adventitia '. 
 
 This idea seems not to have commended itself to later experts, who have accord- 
 ingly excogitated explanations of their own, whereof that cited above from 
 M. Netzer is one. As will have been seen from all that has been written above, 
 I wholly range myself on the side of Daniel, and differ from him only in being more 
 precise and definite. 
 
 The history of the Memento of the Dead in the mass appears to 
 me to be in outline this : — 
 
 1. Up to the fourth century any mention of the dead was comprised 
 in that long prayer ' for all sorts and conditions of men ' said at the 
 beginning of the Mass of the Faithful. This prayer was at a later 
 date transferred to the Eucharistic prayer, of which it was made the 
 concluding section ; and this is now called by the liturgical experts 
 ' The Great Intercession '. 
 
 2. This transfer was already effected by the middle of the fourth 
 century in that great centre of liturgical novelty, the Church of 
 Jerusalem. Moreover, this church had already adopted, or more 
 probably initiated, another novelty, namely the public recital in the 
 * Great Intercession ' of the names of certain dead persons intended to 
 be specially prayed for. 
 
 3. From this centre the new devotion spread. Our earliest witness 
 for this is the Sacramentary of Serapion, bishop of Thmuis in the 
 Nile Delta. In Egypt, however, as is clear from the whole future 
 history of its native liturgy (that called ' St Mark ' and ' St Cyril '), the 
 novelty of placing a ' Great Intercession ' after the consecration of 
 the eucharistic elements found no acceptance or admission. 
 
 4. But it was otherwise with the whole of that great region north of 
 Jerusalem, the Greek-speaking portions of the patriarchate of Antioch, 
 extending on the one side to the shores of the Black Sea, on the other 
 throughout the Balkan Peninsula. This of course included the 
 Imperial City of Constantinople, the centre alike of civil and eccle- 
 siastical pre-eminence throughout the Eastern Empire ; and hence in 
 the course of time the Jerusalem practice of c. 350 has become the 
 practice — the 'quod ubique' — throughout the great Orthodox Church 
 of the East.
 
 114 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 5. In the West, as in the East, in the earliest period the Mass of 
 the Faithful began with the long ' prayer for all sorts and conditions 
 of men '. When the novelty of reciting the names of particular 
 persons, started in the East, was adopted in the West, the churches of 
 Gaul and Spain, with at least some parts of northern Italy, attached 
 the recital of names — of living offerers and of dead persons — to that 
 part of the ' prayer for all sorts and conditions ' in which the offerers 
 and the dead had been traditionally mentioned. 
 
 6. The Church of Rome, however, taking (as individual churches 
 did in those days) its own line, instituted the practice of mentioning 
 the names of ' offerers ' at the early point in the Eucharistic prayer 
 (i.e. the Canon) at which the offerings were mentioned. 
 
 7. As to mention of the dead in the liturgy of the Church of Rome, 
 we know nothing as to whether their names were recited at all in the 
 public masses ; though it must be said that from analogy it is not 
 impossible, perhaps not improbable, that they were mentioned in the 
 prayer ' for all sorts and conditions ' in the early part of the Mass of 
 the Faithful, just as in Gaul and Spain. 
 
 8. Throughout the West, at some period unknown, a clean sweep 
 was made of this great prayer ' for all sorts and conditions '. 
 
 9. But in the liturgy of Gaul and Spain a reminiscence of it was 
 preserved, namely in the so-called 'post nomina* prayers of those 
 liturgies, which occur precisely at that point in the service at which 
 the old prayer ' for all sorts and conditions ' had been said. The 
 ' post nomina ' prayer is quite brief ; the object of it is first the 
 ' offerers' (i.e. those of the congregation who have offered bread and 
 wine for the sacrifice), and then very particularly the dead, whose 
 names had just been publicly read out. 
 
 10. In Rome, the prayer for the 'offerers' had been long since 
 provided for with the recital of their names in the early part of the 
 Eucharistic prayer, namely at the same place as in the present Roman 
 Canon (' Commemoratio pro vivis ') : see no. 6 above. 
 
 11. This being so, and the abolition of the old prayer ' for all sorts 
 and conditions ' being absolute and complete in Rome, it is evident 
 that, should it be determined to maintain in the public masses the 
 recital of names and prayers for the dead, some special place would 
 have to be found for this commemoration. That is one alternative. 
 
 12. But there is another, namely the letting fall altogether of this 
 recital and prayer for the dead in public masses. The testimony alike 
 of our earlier MSS of the Roman Canon (which can be shewn to give 
 the actual use of the Church of Rome itself) and of competent 
 witnesses in the seventh, eighth, and ninth centuries to actual Roman 
 practice, shews that the second alternative was the one adopted : the
 
 THE ROMAN CANON 115 
 
 commemoration of the dead in the Canon being relegated to the 
 special masses for the dead, as shewn in the Gregoriamim. 
 
 13. There remains the consideration of the introduction of the 
 Memento of the Dead as an integral part of the Canon, to be said at 
 every mass, in the Irish and Gallic mass books. This has been dealt 
 with above (pp. 100-102) ; but the matter is so important as an illus- 
 tration of a general law that I revert to it and permit myself, at the 
 cost of a repetition, to give here a sentence from the Paper (No. VI) 
 which follows the present one. The words were written as long ago 
 as 1899. 
 
 'The history of Liturgy must remain a hopeless and irrational 
 tangle so long as there is a failure to recognize freely and fully the 
 cardinal factors that dominate, and must dominate, the whole subject, 
 the varying natures, spirits and tendencies of the races and peoples 
 that have found a home in the Christian Church.' 
 
 14. Finally, when (by the seventh century) the Roman Canon had 
 been adopted in Franco-Gallic and Irish circles, the men composing 
 these circles embodied the Roman Memento of the Dead as an 
 integral part of the Canon, to be said at all masses. This process 
 was repeated in the ninth century, after the introduction of the 
 Gregoriamim by Charles as the official mass book (cf. the Canon of 
 the Council of Chalon, of 814, cited at p. no above); so that the 
 Memento of the Dead became a regular part of the Canon at all 
 masses. This extension of its use was eventually adopted by Rome 
 itself (where it had previously been employed only in masses for the 
 dead) : and the Memento of the Dead now stands in the Missal as an 
 integral portion of the Canon. Its position is that first assigned to it 
 in their Canon by Irish and Gallic improvers in the seventh century ; 
 namely, between the prayer ' Supplices ' and the ' Nobis quoque pecca- 
 toribus'. It is to be observed also that the form in which the 
 Memento of the Dead has been now embodied in the Roman Canon 
 is that which was settled by those Hiberno- Gallic improvers of the 
 seventh century.] 
 
 I 2
 
 VI 
 
 KYRIE ELEISON 
 A LITURGICAL CONSULTATION ^ 
 
 PART I 
 
 Some time ago I received an enquiry couched in these terms : 
 * I do not know the evidence (or reason for concluding) that Kyrie 
 eleison was not an original part of the Roman Rite. (I attribute its 
 introduction into the Galilean Rite m great part to the Council of 
 Vaison, but it was then [a. d. 529] part of the Roman Rite at the 
 Choir as well as at Mass apparently.)' This question arose out of 
 a statement I had made that the Kyrie was not a native element 
 of the Roman mass. My attention was arrested by an expression at 
 the close of the five queries which followed the one that I have 
 copied. * I dare say ', wrote my correspondent, ' some of these questions 
 will reveal my ignorance,' The word ' ignorance ' drew me, and for 
 this reason : such study as I have been able to give to the subject 
 which is called Liturgy, but which (agreeing with a certain book- 
 seller who knew his public) I prefer to call Christian Worship, has 
 brought home to me with ever increasing force a sense of my real 
 ignorance of its history. ' Here is a kindred spirit,' said I, ' who has 
 learnt something too.' 
 
 It was the word * ignorance ', then, let drop by my correspondent, 
 that made me try, for my own instruction also, to draw out a formal 
 answer to his first question. The substance of this answer, somewhat 
 amplified, makes up the present paper. I cannot think that it will be 
 ' interesting ', as the word goes now, to anybody ; but here and there 
 there may be one who may like * to know ' what I too like ' to know '. 
 Besides, in view of ' our press ', can an apology be needed nowadays 
 for printing anything ? 
 
 First, however, since our question, copied above, reads as it were 
 a little louche, it will be well here to put it into form, so that we 
 may be clear as to what it is that has to be discussed. I throw it 
 thus into two branches : {a) What is the extant early evidence (or 
 reason for concluding) as to the use of the Kyrie eleison at mass 
 
 ' From the Downside Review, December 1899, and March 1900.
 
 KYRIE ELEISON ii; 
 
 in the Roman Church? {b) What evidence is there, or ground 
 for supposing, that the Kyrie was an original part of the Roman 
 Rite ? By ' original ' is here understood ' of native origin ', * not 
 borrowed from any other Church ', or, simply (as some people find 
 figures easy for ' fixing '), ' of the second century, or third century '. 
 
 We may not begin our Consultation without a rough preliminary 
 review of what previous writers have said on the subject. This is 
 a tiresome habit that I have acquired, I confess. Yet often the 
 results are instructive. We begin with Bona. How thoroughly 
 Italian he is here (lib. ii c. 4) in his discursiveness and want of 
 exact method ; but he is himself in the abundance of, then, most 
 rare informations ; how he surveys the ground, penetrating even into 
 the then remoter corners of it ; yet of what little use he is now for 
 our immediate purpose. But we must carefully take note of one thing, 
 which, however, Bona's successors seem to pass over in silence— except, 
 of course, Claude de Vert. Arrian writes : ' invoking God we pray to 
 Him ''Kyrie eleison"'} This is quite primitive testimony. It is 
 a pity, however, for our purpose, that Arrian was a pagan and was 
 speaking of his co-religionists only. Let us run quickly through 
 Le Brun, Giorgi, Krazer and the rest; they are all in singular 
 agreement in having so little to say on the subject, and helping us, 
 I may say, not at all. But there is another source of tradition from 
 which is drawn, I fancy, much of the dogmatic teaching on our 
 subject current in the orthodox liturgical schools, I mean Claude 
 <ie Vert. This man had a fertile imagination ; he has now a bad 
 name, above all in those schools. But there are plenty of examples 
 of so curious an anomaly ; the subject need not concern us here. To 
 Theraize and Bocquillot, de Vert's ingenuities 2 in reference to the 
 Kyrie were unknown, whilst nothing can be more simple and, so far 
 as it goes, more solid than the teaching on this subject of the Blessed 
 Giuseppe Maria Tommasi, prince of liturgists (1691). But they were 
 
 ' Dissertat. Epictet. ii 7 (ed. Schweighaeuser i 202). On this passage Upton 
 remarks • ' Notissima fonnula, in Christiana ecclesia iam usque a primis temporibus 
 usurpata ' (ibid, ii p. 402). What a pity he did not give contemporary, or even 
 later, examples. Ducange thinks the expression was borrowed by Arrian ' ex 
 Christianismi forte usu '. There seems reason then for institutmg an enquiry mto 
 the subject. [Will no one give us a little tract to tell us how and m what 
 context the expression occurs in the Christian writers, say, from the Apostolic 
 Fathers to about the time of Nicaea ? More than one passage of the Psalms affords 
 an inviting start. 1 had hoped that such a thing would have been done before this, 
 and would now express formally a vani in this matter.] 
 
 ^ Ciremonies de PE^lise (1713) iii 50-58, iv 40-49- Naturally the discussions 
 in vol. iii of Caspari's Utigedruckte . . Qucllen zur Gesch.des Tattf symbols (1875) as 
 to the late date at which Latin became the current language of the Christian com- 
 munity in Rome have had their part in inducing the belief in many quarters at the 
 present time that the Kyrie eleison in the Roman mass is a survival from the 
 primitive liturgy of that community.
 
 ii8 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 taken up in excellent little Manuals such as those of Grancolas and 
 Leodecrar Mayer ; and so liturgical tradition on our point has been 
 formed, until it now seems to have crystallized into a sort of accepted 
 fact. But, to judge by later exponents, the system assumes that 
 knowledge on several points of detail which precisely we do not, sa 
 far as I can see, possess — which it should be the object of liturgical 
 enquiry really to obtain, or recognize as not obtainable. 
 
 Let us try then to make our own way, and venture on our own 
 Consultation, but bearing always in mind what those who have gone 
 before have already done. 
 
 It will be best to start with the document mentioned by my cor- 
 respondent, the third canon of the Council of Vaison (529). In the 
 last number of this Review, attention was called, following MM. 
 Seignobos and Langlois,^ to the all-importance in historical investiga- 
 tions of ' the document '. This, of course, is obvious. Yet only within 
 the last two or three generations has the verity in its full force come 
 home, even to specialists, that the document is ' the teaching thing ', 
 to which enquirers are, and must inexorably be, in the first place 
 at least, absolutely subject. From what I see and read I am con- 
 vinced that this verity has even now come home to comparatively 
 very few Catholics ; whilst ability, or perhaps patience, to realize 
 the full import of a ' document' submitted, is even more rare amongst 
 us. This may, in some measure, perhaps, be explained by what 
 I have next to say. With the recognition of this value of the 
 document, another verity has come to be apprehended, namely, that 
 it has a great deal more to tell than has, in the former more 
 superficial, or the superior, mode of treating it, been commonly recog- 
 nized. This, however, is conditioned, as a rule, by submission to 
 a discipline whereby our wishes, prepossessions, desires, hopes, are 
 put on one side for the nonce ; whilst the faculty of observation and 
 attention is exerted to the utmost in listening to its every word, 
 listening even to its omissions, observing the turn of every phrase, 
 catching if possible its least accent : so as to gather up and possess 
 all that it has to tell us. ' Mere stuff! ' I hear from the lips of an 
 impatient, not to say petulant, friend. Still I go my way, and ask : 
 Can I do something of this that I have been saying with our Vaison 
 document ? I cannot tell ; but I can try. If I make a botch of the 
 operation, others, happier, more keen of sight, more just of sense, will 
 come along and mend the botch I make. 
 
 In regard to the Council of Vaison, held in 529, it is well to remark 
 that the bishops present came from the region (speaking roughlyy 
 
 * See No. XXVII, below: ' Historical Critics and the Critical Art',
 
 KYRIE ELEISON 119 
 
 of modern Provence. Also in view of the fact that to some the 
 very word ' Gallican ' is a bugbear, whilst to others it is sweet as 
 * Mesopotamia ', it should be added that these bishops precisely had 
 nothing to do with the Gallicanism of the now widespread realm of 
 the Franks; that the great man they looked up to was the Most 
 Illustrious Prefect Liberius ; in other words these people were a 
 Romanizing, not a Gallicanizing, set. 
 
 The following is so much of the third canon of the Council as 
 concerns us : 
 
 Et quia tarn in sede apostolica quam etiam per tolas Orientales atque 
 Italiae provincias dulcis et nimium salutaris consuetudo est intromissa ut 
 Kyrie eleison frequentius cum grandi affectu et compunctione dicatur, placuit 
 etiam nobis ut in omnibus ecclesiis nostris ista tarn sancta consuetudo et ad 
 matutinum et ad missas et ad vesperam Deo propitio intromittatur. 
 
 The points which seem to deserve attention here are : 
 (i) The geographical extension of the practice of saying Kyric 
 eleison : ' In the Apostolic See and through all the provinces of the 
 East and of Italy.' Now the fifth canon of this Council, prescribing 
 the introduction of the Szc?<i crat, says it was in use ' not only in the 
 Apostolic See but also through the whole East and all Africa and 
 Italy '. I know it can be said that the fathers of the Council merely 
 forgot Africa in the third canon ; that its omission was only an 
 accident ; for which view I have no doubt ingenuity may find half a 
 dozen reasons, equally good, leading to the conclusion that we should 
 pay no attention to the difference in the wording of the two canons. 
 Our business at present, however, is with none of these things, but 
 simply and solely to note accurately the Council's words. As a fact, 
 in regard to the geographical extension of Kyrie eleison and Sicut 
 erai, the Council does make a difference. 
 
 (2) The services at which Kyrie eleison was used. The fathers 
 prescribe that in their region it is to be said at matins (= lauds), 
 mass, and vespers. As regards the rest of the world it only says 
 that it was \ised frequentius, without explaining precisely whether by 
 this is meant that the repetitions were numerous ; or that it was used 
 often, at two or three or more services, on the same day ; or 
 whether that vague word was simply intended to cover more than 
 one use. But here again the Council does, as a fact, make a dis- 
 tinction in terms when describing current practice and prescribing 
 its own. 
 
 (3) The words * cum grandi affectu et compunctione ' seem to indicate 
 that the Kyrie was sung by the body of the people. 
 
 (4) The origin of the practice. The Council says : ' consuetudo
 
 lao LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 est intromissa ', and prescribes ' ut ista consuetude intromittatur '. 
 I can conceive some one working on intromittere, turning the word 
 inside out, and finding in it an indication of popular devotional (and 
 therefore probably recent) origin, as in the case of so many of our 
 present sacred rites. It is enough, however, to observe that in contrast 
 to the variation of phraseology under (i) and (a) above, here we have 
 an almost slavish iteration ; ' the custom has been introduced there, 
 let the custom be introduced here '. Thus it happens, that where we 
 might hope for some guidance from the Council in the precise point 
 which is the object of our enquiry, it simply brings us up to a blank 
 wall. It has only one word to utter, ' custom ' ; whether ancient or 
 recent it does not say. It places, for our purpose, their own land 
 which now adopts the custom, and other places where it already 
 exists, on the same footing. This is unfortunate. 
 
 Foiled here, let us turn and see whether the venerable Christian 
 antiquity at large will throw the required light on the origins of the 
 Kyrie in the mass. This task is made easy for us by one of those 
 invaluable persons, our forerunners. I mean the Prelate Probst. 
 I know he has been smartly called ' the muddy-minded Probst '. To 
 say truth, some of these current judgements seem to require much 
 revisal. Probst's books are long, and what is called long-winded, 
 certainly ; but how much more useful and, with all their blunders 
 and ignorances, less misleading than much more lauded liturgical 
 works. For instance, those of Dom Gueranger, who has not merely 
 left behind him a heap of ruins, but has also (speaking from the 
 ground of liturgical science) carefully led those who were pleased to 
 follow him out into an arid desert where the oases are only mirages. 
 But the simple-minded and modest ex-professor of Tubingen has 
 done what few have done in our days ; read through page by page, 
 pen in hand, the Fathers of the first five centuries, with one single 
 object. It is, I think, the fault of people themselves if they cannot 
 profit by his books, though these books are tiresome reading. But 
 a consideration such as this need not deter us from taking up his 
 Liturgie der drei ersten christlichen Jahrhunderte, and finding in it 
 just the information we now seek. 
 
 In Cyprian there is nothing about the Kyrie (pp. 219 sqq.) ; nor 
 in Hippolytus and Novatian (pp. 207 sqq.); nor in Tertullian 
 (pp. 1 90 sqq.) ; nor in the second book of the Apostolic Constitutions 
 (P- 175)* I^ut here we must stop for a moment: a prayer is men- 
 tioned, Ap. Const, ii 57, as said by a deacon at the time of the 
 offertory, for the entire Church, the whole world, &c., &c. Th. 
 Harnack {Der christliche Gemeindegottesdienst p. 482) infers that
 
 KYRIE ELEISON lai 
 
 the people intervened in this prayer with ' Kyrie cleison or such like ' 
 (p. 477). It might be nicely observed that the text of the Apostolic 
 Constitutions does not say the people responded ; and that Th. 
 Harnack's foible is to see them taking as large a share in public 
 worship as may be. I remark that the passage cited does not occur 
 in the Syriac Didaskalia (Bunsen Analecta Ante-Nicaena ii 280), and 
 is one of those items in which, as Funk says {Die apostolischen Kon- 
 stitutionen p. l^j), the interpolator to whom we owe the Apostolic 
 Constitutions has brought the third-century text into conformity with 
 the practices of his own time. This settles the question and brings 
 Ap. Const, ii into agreement with the rest of the evidence of the third 
 century. Whether this interpolator worked in the latter part of the 
 fourth century, or early in the fifth, is of no importance for our 
 purpose.^ There is no sign or trace of the Kyric in Origen (Probst, 
 pp. 152 sqq.), Clement of Alexandria (pp. 135 sqq.), nor, in a word, 
 in Irenaeus, the Apologists, or the Apostolic Fathers. 
 
 For the fourth century we may, in the same way, take Probst's 
 Liturgie des vierten JahrJmnderts, and say that neither does Eusebius 
 of Caesarea,^ nor Cyril of Jerusalem, Athanasius, Basil, nor do the 
 two Gregorys witness to the liturgical use of the Kyrie eleison. 
 
 Our first clear attestation of such use is in the so-called Clementine 
 Liturgy in the eighth book of the Apostolic Constitutions ; and here, 
 as it seems, it is used in the same manner as in the Greek Church 
 at the present day. We can at once realize this form by aid of the 
 later portion of the Litany of the Saints, assuming a deacon to 
 proclaim the ' Ut Ecclesiam tuam ', &c., ' Ut Domnum Apostolicum ', 
 &c., and other like suffrages, and the people to say after each pro- 
 clamation 'Miserere Domine' instead of 'Miserere nobis'. This 
 attestation in the Apostolic Constitutions viii brings us, as I believe 
 is generally agreed for liturgical purposes, to a date somewhere in 
 the second half of the fourth century, and to the neighbourhood of 
 Antioch. It could be no cause for wonder, in these circumstances, 
 if traces of the same practice be found in the writings of St John 
 Chrysostom. 
 
 To sum up: it cannot be said that the witness of venerable 
 antiquity is such as to counteract any unfavourable impression as 
 to the traditional, or rather untraditional, character of the Kyrie 
 eleison at mass that may have been produced on the enquirer's mind 
 
 ^ [Thus as written in Nov. 1899 : I should now prefer to word the passage 'This 
 settles . . . purpose ' thus : ' This settles the question ; and accordingly Ap. 
 Const, ii 57 is to be viewed as evidence for (possible or probable) use of Kyrie 
 eleison not in the third, but in the fourth, century.' I have since considered the 
 case in detail {st& Journal of Theological Studies^ October, 1912, pp. 55 sqq.] 
 
 ' But cf. p. 51 ; from which nothing can, however, be deduced for the liturgy.
 
 122 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 by the sober and reserved expression of the fathers of the Council 
 of Vaison — ' consuetrtdo est intromissa\ For in the first three hundred 
 and fifty years of the Christian Church we do not find any trace of 
 the h'turgical use of the Kyrie eleison at all. 
 
 It is sometimes stated that the Good Friday prayers in the Roman 
 missal are a solitary survival of the ' prayers of the faithful ', said (it 
 is suggested) at one time in the old Roman mass between the 
 Domimis vobiscuvi before our present ' Offertory ' and the Secret. 
 If this be so, may not such a parallelism at Rome with the Greek 
 ' prayers of the faithful ', reaching back to a time long antecedent 
 to the redaction of the earliest extant Roman mass books, raise 
 a presumption in favour of the extreme antiquity of the Kyrie 
 eleison in Rome, and of its being an original element of the Roman 
 rite ? 
 
 But on looking at these Good Friday prayers it is evident they are 
 not ' prayers of the faithful ' at all ; but * prayers for the faithful ', 
 which is quite a different thing. According to Eastern practice the 
 deacon does the work and service of propounding to the people the 
 theme ; they answer Kyrie eleison, ' O Lord, have mercy ' : a prayer, 
 short indeed, but all-sufficient for the case. They, the people, alone, 
 say the prayer ; it is emphatically, solely, the prayer of the people. 
 All this takes place so far independently of the priest's part in the 
 service that his part and that of the deacon and people can be 
 separated so as each to form a distinct service of worship in itself. 
 But in our Good Friday prayers the priest himself propounds the 
 theme to the people ; then he alone makes the prayer ; the people's 
 part being no more, in its form at least, than an articulate assent to 
 him, 'Amen, so be it '. In spite of possible dialectical manipulations 
 with a purpose, this word Amen, of its nature, is not, and cannot be, 
 a prayer. 
 
 In sum : there is no analogy between the Good Friday Roman 
 prayers and those Eastern prayers of the faithful of which the Kyrie 
 eleison is the very essence. In these circumstances the question 
 whether the Good Friday prayers are a survival of some ancient 
 general practice in Rome can have no bearing on the present discus- 
 sion. But I believe it to be important to observe the difference 
 brought out by contrasting the two forms of prayer just discussed 
 and compared, and see how in the one the people, so far as voiced 
 prayer is concerned, are something in the forms of public worship, 
 in the other as nearly as possible nothing. And in this latter liturgical 
 note I recognize historically the true, genuine Roman tendency and 
 spirit.
 
 KYRIE ELEISON 1^3 
 
 The history of Liturgy must remain a hopeless and irrational 
 tangle so long as there is a failure to recognize freely and fully the 
 cardinal factors that dominate, and must dominate, the whole subject, 
 namely, the varying natures, spirits, and tendencies of the races and 
 peoples that have found a home in the Christian Church. The study 
 of Liturgy, whatever else it may be, must also be a study in religious 
 psychology. 
 
 These Good Friday prayers lead us up at last to the first clear 
 attestation of the use of Kyrie eleison in the Roman mass. The 
 text is so hackneyed that it seems to have lost almost all its origmal 
 sense for the reader. Still I will recite it once more. It is St Gregory's 
 famous letter to John, bishop of Syracuse,^ the whole tenor of which 
 shows that it relates to the mass, not to the Office. Gregory begins 
 his letter thus : 
 
 Some one coming from Sicily has told me that some of his friends, 
 whether Greeks or Latins I know not, full of zeal, of course {quasi sub zelo), for 
 the Holy Roman Church, grumble about my measures, saying : ' A nice way, 
 surely, to put the Church of Constantinople in its place, when he is foUowmg 
 its customs in everything.' I said to him : ' What are these said customs we 
 follow ? ' He replied : * Why, you have ordered [among other thmgs] Kyne 
 eleison to be said {did statuistis): And I answered : ' In none of these thmgs 
 have we followed the example of any other Church,' 
 
 Taking the text as it stands, the plain man, having no theories or 
 preconceived notions on the subject, but attending only to what is 
 thus said, and knowing no more about the matter, might, and I thmk 
 naturally would, draw the conclusion that Gregory himself had intro- 
 duced the Kyrie eleison into the mass at Rome. 
 
 The following passage gives the way in which Gregory defends 
 himself against the charge of having followed the Constantinopolitan 
 custom as regards the Kyrie : 
 
 We have neither said, nor do we say, Kyrie eleison as it is said by the 
 Greeks. For among them, all [the people] sing it {diaint) together ; but with 
 us it is sung by the clerks, and the people answer (a populo resporuietur). And 
 Chrisie eleiso?t, which is never sung by the Greeks, is [with us] sung as many 
 times ' [as Kyrie eleison\ But in non-festal masses we omit some things 
 usually sung [with the Kyrie\ and sing only Kyrie eleison and ChHste eleison, 
 so that we may be engaged somewhat longer in these words of supplication. 
 
 ^ Lib. ix 12 of the Maurist edition; lib. vii 64 of Goussanville's ; lib. ix 26 of 
 Ewald-Hartmann's, and assigned to October 598. 
 
 ' Ewald-Hartmann have 'totidem v<7cibus ', and no variant reading. I am 
 obstinate enough to prefer the old ' sumpsimus'.
 
 124 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 This passage suggests the following observations : 
 
 (i) If, as said above, we take the words of St Gregory just as they 
 stand, we observe that he nowhere denies the statement made, that 
 he had ordered the Kyrie eleison to be said — in other words, had 
 introduced it. He only says he has not imitated any other Church 
 in this point, and explains why. After his explanation in detail on 
 the various items complained of, he adds these words : ' In what 
 therefore have we followed the customs of the Greeks, since we have 
 either renewed our old customs [that had lapsed] ^ or have established 
 new and useful ones, in which however we cannot be shown to imitate 
 others? ' It is easy to indulge in conjecture, but impossible from these 
 last words to conclude anything certain as to the antiquity of the 
 Kyrie eleison in the Roman mass. 
 
 (2) From the ' aliqna quae did solent ' it is clear that on feast days 
 the Kyrie was used with a theme, as among the Greeks, and not as 
 in our present mass ; ^ but there is nothing to shew whether the 
 theme was proclaimed by the deacon, as in the East. 
 
 (3) When the ' aligua' were omitted, that is on most days of the 
 year, the clerks sang Kyrie eleison^ and the people repeated the words, 
 just as is done in singing the Litany of the Saints at the present day. 
 But it will be observed that, as compared with the Greek practice, 
 the initiative in prayer is taken from the people and transferred to 
 officials, the singers, subdeacons and inferior clerics. When next 
 information is to be had as to the singing of the Kyrie of the mass 
 in Rome, at the end of the eighth century, the people take no part 
 in it at all. 
 
 (4) The fixation of number in Rome in 598 is not unworthy of 
 note. Some persons may be inclined to see here an instance of the 
 tendency to formalism, legalism, which is a feature of the historical 
 Roman Church. 
 
 Once more, in this first attestation of the use of Kyrie eleison in 
 
 * Personally, I think St Gregory may here have in mind the ' subdiaconos 
 spoliatos procedere' ; but the discussion of this point is not necessary for the 
 present purpose. 
 
 * [And in fact the method of the Greek litanies— theme propounded (by 
 deacon) and response by people— is precisely that found in the litany preserved by 
 Alcuin and called by him Deprecatio Gelasii (i.e. of Pope Gelasius I). I have 
 discussed this document in i\\& Journal of Theological Studies (April 191 1, pp. 407 
 sqq.), and I there concluded {a) that it is a Roman document, {b) that there seems 
 to be no reasonable ground for questioning its attribution to Gelasius. A year later 
 Professor W. Meyer discussed the question at length {Nachrichten d. k. Gesell ch. 
 d. Wissensch. zu Gbttingen, philol.-hist. Klasse, 1912) from quite another point of 
 view, namely that of the philologist, and he came to the same conclusion : nor do 
 I see how, from the standpoint of the liturgist, anyone who has really made a study 
 of Roman, Galilean, Spanish, Irish liturgical style can come to any other conclusion 
 than that the litany is (as Alcuin gives to be understood) of Roman origin.]
 
 KYRIE ELEISON 135 
 
 the Roman mass there is nothing that can indicate ever so faintly 
 that it was ancient, native tradition, or that it formed part of the 
 original Roman rite. On the contrary, it, as well as the evolution 
 of the Kyrie use in Rome itself between the years 600 and 800, would 
 seem to point to an opposite conclusion. 
 
 The space available bids me stop here. In summing up the results 
 of the enquiry as a whole it will be necessary to take into account 
 some points not as yet adverted to. 
 
 Postscript 
 20 December 1899 
 
 Since this article was in print, the Testamenimn Domini nostri 
 yesH Chrisii {ed. I. Ephr. II Rahmani, Moguntiae, Kirchheim, 1899) 
 has come to my hands as a Christmas present from my friend Dom 
 Gasquet. I have to note that whilst in the account of the mass 
 (bk. i cap. 23 pp. 37 sqq.) there is no word or indication of a 
 diaconal litany and prayer of the faithful, yet among the chapters 
 dealing with the office of deacon (bk. i capp. 33-38) is one (cap. 35 
 pp. 83-89) containing a long diaconal litany. Without anticipating 
 what competent judges may have to say as to the date or dates of 
 the document as a whole, I may remark that the evidence of the 
 Testamentum as to the use of the Kyrie does not seem to me to 
 point to a conclusion on the subject different from that suggested by 
 the other Christian documents of the first three centuries. In other 
 words, bk. i cap. '3^^ seems a later addition, and not part of the early 
 elements of this work. 
 
 The Testamentum^ therefore, does not call for any modification of 
 what is written above. 
 
 PART II 
 
 Nothing, I know, can be more tedious than enquiries such as that 
 on which I am engaged. They commonly issue only in shewing how 
 very little we know, or perhaps can know, in regard to the subject 
 discussed. To most people the utility of this result is not obvious. 
 Few persons will recognize at once the advantages of freedom from 
 the dominance of the school of historical impressionists, who have 
 many powerful allies. Such freedom is to be wrought out by faithful- 
 ness in minimis. By and by it may dawn on the intent, practical
 
 136 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 people, whose strong impulse is to be always 'proving' something, 
 especially with a view to the discomfiture of their neighbours, that they 
 may be usefully occupied in seeing into the value and the quality of 
 their own ' proofs '. Revelations on that score await many of us, 
 I opine, in many quarters : me, in my small way, here, perhaps. At 
 any rate, I push forward. 
 
 In the first part of this Consultation it was pointed out that the 
 evidence for the liturgical use of the Kyrie eleison in the East is late, 
 not reaching back further than the second half of the fourth century. 
 The next step is to review in the briefest manner the evidence for 
 its earliest history in Gaul. I again start with the third canon of the 
 Council of Vaison, 
 
 Is there any evidence whether and how this decree was carried out ? 
 So far as the Kyrie at lauds and vespers is concerned, the answer is : 
 Yes, but only for the city of Aries ; no more. In the Rule for monks, 
 drawn up by St Caesarius and circulated by him (as his nephew, abbat 
 Tetradius, says) after he became bishop (503), it is prescribed that 
 lauds on Sunday should end with Te Deum, Gloria in Excelsis, and 
 capitelhim (Holstenius Cod. Reg. ed. Rom. ii 93 ; ed. Paris, ii ^6 ; 
 Migne 67. 1102). In the more lengthy but confused and imperfect 
 directions as to the Office given in Caesarius's Rule for nuns, and 
 drawn up apparently not earlier than 529, more probably in 534 
 (C. F. Arnold Caesarius von Ar elate p. 518) there is also no mention 
 of the Kyrie eleison ; the capitellnni or capitella still forming the con- 
 clusion of the hours {A A. SS. Boll. Jan. 12, in Palme's reprint, ii 
 17-18 ; this portion of the Rule is not printed in Migne). 
 
 It appears, therefore (if the accepted dating of the relative section 
 of the Rule for nuns be correct), that St Caesarius did not put into 
 execution, in his sister's monastery, his own decree of Vaison of 529, 
 but preserved intact the old custom of Lerins. How that decree as to 
 the Kyrie in the Office was carried out, may be learnt from the somewhat 
 later Rule drawn up for a monastery of monks in Aries by St Aurelian 
 (bishop 546-553),apparentlyin the earliest years of his episcopate. From 
 this we learn that it was said three times at the beginning of each Office, 
 three times after the psalms, and three times at the close — that is, after 
 the old traditional ending, the capitelhmt {Sic in omni opere Dei tertia 
 vicCy &c. ; as a full example, terce on Easter day, ad tertiam ter 
 Kyrie eleison^ &c., Holsten. Cod. Reg. ed. Rom. ii p. 109 ; ed. Paris, 
 p. 66 ; Migne 68. 393). Ferial lauds are an exception, Kyrie being 
 said twelve times at the close (ibid. p. iii ; p. 67; col. 395). It will be 
 seen that there is already here some advance on the prescription of 
 Vaison ; the Kyrie is added not merely at lauds and vespers but at 
 every Office.
 
 KYRIE ELEISON 127 
 
 But if at Aries itself, the see of the metropolitan and president, the 
 Vaison decree did not remain a dead letter, I cannot find anywhere 
 else in Gaul the least trace of its observance, so far as the Office is 
 concerned. Gregory of Tours, in his gossipy books, speaks once of 
 the Kyrie, and that is only to report what a deacon of his heard in 
 Rome ; whilst he frequently and currently mentions the native Gallican 
 invention, the capitcllum. It is useless to crowd this page with 
 references, since the excellent Indices verboriitn of Bruno Krusch to 
 his volumes of the Scriptorcs rcriivi Merovingicarmn will guide an 
 enquirer to at least a sufficient number of ' testimonies '. From three 
 or four passages it is evident that the capitella ended the Office as in 
 the Rules of St Caesarius. But this was not the Gallican practice only, 
 for it seems clear that the Irish monks who settled in the country said 
 at the Office the capitella (though in a somewhat different form) with- 
 out Kyrie eleison. How long the practice continued at Aries there is 
 no evidence to shew. But it may be safely said that the use of the 
 Kyrie in the Office, so far as Gaul at large is concerned, had to wait 
 for the introduction of the Rule of St Benedict into that land in the 
 seventh century, and the gradual spread of its observance. We still 
 then are not able to get behind the Council of Vaison and the 
 year 539. 
 
 Perhaps it may be as well to explain in a few words what these capitella 
 are and what is their history, so far at least as I can understand the matter. 
 Their nature is indicated in canon 30 of the great Council of Agde in 506, 
 at which the Gothic dominions in Gaul, extending up to Tours, were repre- 
 sented and over which St Caesarius presided. This canon orders that at 
 the end {in conclusione) of lauds and vespers, after the hymns, capitella de 
 psalmis be said. This is precisely the arrangement at all the hours (and 
 not at lauds and vespers only) described in the Rules of St Caesarius, and 
 it is probably derived from Lerins, the order of which he says (in his Rule 
 for nuns) that he follows in his directions as to the Office. There seems 
 to be a marked distinction between these capitella (which I will, for the 
 sake of clearness, call the Gallican form) and the Irish or Columbanian 
 form. The Gallican form strictly answers to the versicles and responses of 
 the preces in the Breviary. A lengthy example of a pure Gallican set of 
 capitella ex psalmis is printed by Martene from a Laon MS in his De ecclesiae 
 ritibusWh. iv c. 8. — In the Rule of St Columban the capitelhnn is described 
 as versiculonmi augmentum, and each verse is a special supplication for 
 some definite class of people. St Columban's description corresponds very 
 well with the text found in the Bangor Antiphonary fol. 20 vo-21 vo 
 (Henry Bradshaw Soc. vol. x p. 22-23); though in the Bangor book it 
 would seem evident that some customary invitation or monition by the 
 officiant (like e.g. Or emus pro benefactoribus, <^c.) is there wanting, and each 
 response is followed by a short prayer or collect, of which St Columban
 
 T28 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 says nothing. In the Appendix to the Antiphonary the editor has given 
 (p. 64) a good late Carolingian representative of this Irish or Columbanian 
 form. Amalar De ecd. rit. iv 4 explains how, even before his time, that is 
 by the beginning of the ninth century, the two forms had become com- 
 bined, the first few verses being composed of a versicle and a response, 
 both from the psalms, the subsequent verses being composed of an invita- 
 tion or monition to prayer for some definite class of people, and a people's 
 response drawn from the psalms. Examples in brief of this Carolingian 
 combination are to be found in the Roman Missal after the psalm Deus in 
 adiiitormm on Rogation Days, where the first four verses are what I have 
 called Gallican capitella, and those which follow, Irish or Columbanian ; or 
 in the morning and evening services of the Book of Common Prayer, after 
 the second Our Father^ the first verse representing the Gallican, the second 
 the Columbanian form. From Amalar's account, it is clear that the intro- 
 duction of the capitellum was one of the earliest modifications to which the 
 Roman Office was subjected on its adoption in the kingdom of the Franks. 
 And hence it has in course of time found its way into the Roman Office of 
 Rome, forming the original element of what we call the preces, though it is 
 now somewhat overshadowed by yet later additions like the Credo and the 
 Confiteor. 
 
 As the idea of a ' litany ' has become to us inseparably connected 
 with the Rogations, as the Rogations are a custom of Gallican origin, 
 and as the idea of the Kyrie suggests itself unbidden to the mind in con- 
 nexion with ' litany ', it is in place to see whether there is anything in 
 the original testimonies of the fifth and sixth centuries to prove the 
 use of the Kyrie, or indeed of a litany at all in our modern sense, on 
 the Rogation days ; or even to countenance such a notion. First it is 
 to be observed that the word ' litany ' in the fifth century conveyed 
 quite a different meaning from what it does to us. The first instance of 
 its use that I can find is in a law relating to Constantinople, of the 
 year 396, in the Theodosian Code lib. xvi tit. 5 1. 30, where, as any- 
 one who will consider the terms of this law will see, it simply means 
 a private prayer meeting ; as, say, among various sects of Dissenters 
 at the present day, minus, however, in this case, the minister. To 
 Sidonius Apollinaris less than a hundred years later, and in Gaul, it 
 suggested {Epist. v 7) simply and only a penitential idea generally. 
 A hundred years later still, to Venantius Fortunatus ' litany ' could 
 simply mean short commons. Dissatisfied with the provision made 
 for him by a friend, he writes : ' I thought I was to have my fill at four 
 o'clock, and am still waiting about at eight ; I have found your ban- 
 quets were more like fasting fare and your morning meals no better 
 than a litany' {Carvi. vii 15). When, then, the Council of Orleans of 
 511 begins one of its canons with the words : ' The Rogations, that is 
 the litanies ', it is not to be inferred straightway that what we call
 
 KYRIE ELEISON 129 
 
 litanies were then sung on Rogation days ; the words may only mean, 
 * Rogations, that is penitential supplications '. 
 
 And, indeed, so far as I can read, there is no indication whatever 
 that litanies were at the first institution sung on these three days at 
 all. The original documents give quite a different impression. Sidonius 
 Apollinaris, though he says his friend St Mamertus, bishop of Vienne, 
 invenit, iiistitnit, invexit, 'invented, introduced, and established' the 
 ' solemnity of the Rogations ', also tells us that rogations for fine weather 
 had been in use in the diocese of Vienne before his time, but were 
 attended to only in an off-hand sort of way — vagae, tepentes, infre- 
 qiicntcs . . . oscitabtuidae siipplicationcs ; but that Mamertus fixed 
 and regularized them, and made them a very serious business 
 indeed — iehmaUtr, oratitr, psallitur, fletur : their new observance was 
 in fasting and prayer, and the singing of psalms and weeping tears 
 of sorrow (Ep. v 14). See also £p. vii i, addressed to Mamertus 
 himself. 
 
 Avitus, successor (c. 494-517) of Mamertus in the see of Vienne, 
 uses much the same form of expression. Mamertus, he says, ' fixed 
 all that on this day the world in its invocations says of psalms and 
 prayers ' {dejinivit qiddqiiid hodie psalmis ac precibus viujidus inclamat. 
 Opera, ed. R. Peiper, M. G. Aiictt. Antiquiss. vi part 2 p. no). And 
 again, when mentioning that the Rogations had spread from Vienne to 
 other churches, though observed on other days, he adds that this does 
 not matter, provided that the psalms are sung with annual penitential 
 observance {dummodo psalmorum officia lacrimaruin functionibiis annuls 
 persolverentiir. Ibid. p. in). 
 
 St Caesarius of Aries, in his two sermons for Rogations (Migne 39. 
 2076-2079), describes the devotional exercises of those days again 
 and again in the same words as Sidonius Apollinaris and St Avitus : 
 lege7ido, psallcndo vcl or undo ; or ieiiinando, orando et psallendo ; or he 
 warns those who tiecipsi psalhmt nee alios psallere vel orarepermittnnt ; 
 and adds or are studeamns et psallere. In providing, some years after 
 the Suevi had passed from Arianism to Catholicity, for the introduc- 
 tion among them of practices common among the orthodox, the 
 Council of Braga of 572 prescribes in regard to the Rogations that 
 ' neighbouring churches uniting together and for three days perambu- 
 lating the churches of the saints with psalms, should celebrate the 
 litanies ' : here ' litanies ' again evidently means only ' rogations ' or 
 ' supplications ' in a general sense. 
 
 In a word, so far as the original testimonies go, the substance of the 
 devotion of the Rogations was psalm-singing, with, perhaps, the 
 prayers or collects which in some quarters accompanied the singing of 
 psalms. Such use of the psalms would concord with the character of 
 
 1158 K
 
 I30 
 
 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 the capitella, the native GaUican equivalent of St Benedict's ' Htany ', 
 the Kyrie eleison. The Rogations, then, so far as we can know any- 
 thing positively of them in the fifth or sixth century, afford no ground 
 for concluding that the Kyrie was in use in Gaul. 
 
 St Benedict's use of the word ' litany ' having been mentioned, it will 
 not be out of place to add a few words on the meaning he attached to that 
 term. With him we are no longer in Gaul, but in the region of Rome, and 
 we may not be surprised if he uses the word in a sense different from that 
 of the GaUican writers, just as missa means one thing to him, another thing 
 to Saints Caesarius and Aurelian. It has been already pointed out that in 
 the Eastern diaconal litanies the prayer consists of the two words Kyrie 
 eleison sung by the people. This is quite in accordance with the notion 
 that must have been in St Benedict's mind when he wrote cap. 9 of the 
 Rule : ' and the supplication of the litany, that is Kyrie eleison '. Having 
 thus on first mentioning the matter in cap. 9 explained precisely what it is 
 that he means to be said, he had afterwards no hesitation in using, for 
 brevity, in cc. 12, 13, 17, the words litania and Kyrie eleison as equivalents. 
 But this does not afford a ground for concluding that ' litany ' was the 
 technical word for the Kyrie eleison in Middle Italy at the beginning of the 
 sixth century. 
 
 St Gregory's use of the word ' litany ' at the close of that century has to 
 be carefully distinguished from St Benedict's. It would take too much 
 space to explain the whole case, but it may be added that the word seems 
 to have suggested to that Pope's mind, as a matter of course, the idea of 
 a penitential procession. This is evident from the first of the series of 
 letters as to the use of the pallium by the bishops of Ravenna. But in the 
 progress of the correspondence, though the word is not changed, another 
 sense is put into it, namely, that of a public procession amidst the applause 
 of the people, without any thought of prayer at all, much like the Papal 
 procession from the palace to the church of the station described in the 
 first Roman Ordo. So much may suffice to shew that it is necessary to 
 take careful account of times, places, and circumstances, if we would avoid 
 error in assigning its due meaning to the word ' litany ' in any given case. 
 
 Is there any better evidence of the early or the general use of the 
 Kyrie at mass in Gaul than of its use in the Office or at Rogations ? 
 
 We have no information whatever as to the way in which the decree 
 of Vaison was carried out in the mass at Aries ; and it is to be 
 remembered that in any case this decree would apply only to a small 
 part of south-eastern Gaul. 
 
 The evidence (and, with the exception of the Bobbio Missal, the 
 sole piece of evidence) in regard to the whole of the lands comprised 
 under the term Gaul, whether under the rule of Goths, Burgundians, 
 or Franks, is found in the first of two letters attributed to St Ger- 
 manus, bishop of Paris {^Sh'Sl^)^ explanatory of the order of the
 
 KYRIE ELEISON 131 
 
 mass as known to the writer.^ He tells us that before the prophecy 
 (the first of the three lessons of the mass), and between the epistle and 
 gospel, the Aius was sung in Greek and Latin ; that it ended with 
 Amcii ; and that then three small choir-boys {tres parviili) sang in 
 unison {ore iino) Kyrie eleisoii ; so far as appears, once only. What 
 was this Aiitsl The text has not survived ; but this much is certain, 
 that it was a text beginning with ' Agios,' or ' Aros '. A text with 
 this incipit occurs in the Mozarabic mass, but it has no Kyrie after it. 
 Some writers have asserted that it is the Trisagion of the Constanti- 
 nopolitan liturgy (the ' Agios o Theos ', &c., of our Good Friday Office); 
 and a reason can, I think, be shewn for believing this conclusion to be 
 a correct one. 
 
 The most recent authoritative writers who deal with the question agree 
 in declaring iheAius to be the 'Trisagion '. But by 'Trisagion', one writer 
 means one thing, another something quite different, a third two different 
 things, whilst one says it was sung twice, another in one place that it was 
 sung three times, and in another place four times ; to say nothing of other 
 complications which I need not here describe. But all agree in taking no 
 notice of such divergence of opinion among themselves, and in refraining 
 from giving any reason why the Aius should be one thing rather than 
 another thing. I feel in these circumstances bound to give a reason for 
 my opinion, if I express one at all, for I do not wish to add to the existing 
 confusion. 
 
 First, by ' Trisagion ' I mean that hymn, ' Holy God, Holy Strong, Holy 
 Immortal ', which is sung in the Constantinopolitan liturgy before the 
 epistle. The considerations that move me to think this is the Gallican 
 Aius are as follows. The 'Agios o Theos' of our Good Friday Office is 
 simply this hymn of the Constantinopolitan liturgy treated according to 
 St Germanus's description of the Gallican Aius, but without the Amen. 
 How and when did the 'Agios o Theos' find its way into the Roman 
 books ? It seems to have been part of the Good Friday Office in Rome in 
 the twelfth century, and probably in the eleventh, so far as I can under- 
 stand the somewhat confused accounts of Tommasi and Vezzosi ; this is 
 countenanced by an expression in a letter of Gregory VII {Regist. viii i) ; 
 and it was certainly in use in the early days of the eleventh century at 
 Farfa, close to Rome. On the other hand it was certainly no part of the 
 Roman rite in the ninth century. The earliest distinct attestation that 
 I can find of it is (for Good Friday) in the Pontifical of Prudentius of 
 Troyes (846-861), at a time when the reaction against the once fashionable 
 
 ^ [The MS of these letters, long considered lost, still exists, though it is 
 not at present available. A friend who has seen it tells me it is of the eleventh 
 century, not of the eighth, as Martene gives to be understood. It may be as well 
 to add in passing that, after full consideration, I have come to the conclusion that 
 this document is not of the sixth century, and therefore not by Germanus of Paris, 
 but a production of the second half of the seventh or even, it may be, of the early 
 eighth century.] 
 
 K 2
 
 132 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Roman ritual movement was in full course.^ One mark of this reaction is 
 the steady way in which old native usages began to revive, and reasserted 
 themselves, making for themselves a home in the very heart of the Roman 
 books. I suggest that the ' Agios o Theos ' which thus appears in the 
 middle of the ninth century in France, is simply a revival, in another 
 settint^, of a feature of the old Gallican mass. I am further inclined to this 
 opinion inasmuch as the first adumbration of the Reproaches, of which the 
 'Agios' now forms a part, is found, so far as I can see, in the Bobbio 
 Missal. It is in this missal also (Mabillon Mus. Ital i 281-282) that the 
 name of the Aius is twice mentioned, and the prayer (p. 281) after the first 
 mention contains indications, if I mistake not, which point to the Constan- 
 tinopolitan hymn. It begins : Tu sumfue Deus, a'ios, ipse sanctus, omni- 
 potens Sabaoih, qui venisti ab excelsis pati pro nobis, miserere nobis tu trinae 
 potentiae Pater indite. An allusion (as in the words ' qui venisti ' &c.) to Peter 
 the Fuller's addition, ' who wast crucified for us ', need not cause surprise.'^ 
 
 The ' Trisagion ' seems to have been introduced into the Constanti- 
 nopolitan liturgy about the middle of the fifth century.-^ As to the 
 source of its introduction into Gaul, we are not without indications, 
 faint though they be. The unique MS containing the letters fathered 
 on Germanus of Paris (who was of Autun, and abbat there before he 
 became bishop) was found at Autun. This city was in the Burgundian 
 
 ^ [This Pontifical of Prudentius has disappeared. Martene seemingly never 
 saw the original MS, but only a copy then in the hands of Jean Deslyons, that 
 curious and interesting Dean of Senlis who was the author of Traitez singuliers et 
 nouveaux cofiire le Paganisvie dii Roy-Boit, &;c., &c. This, or another, copy was 
 also in the hands of Jacques de Sainte-Beuve when was writing h'lsDe Extrema 
 Unctione (1686), and he cites it freely in that work. I have failed in all attempts 
 to recover either the original or a copy. For liturgical purposes it would, in all 
 probability, be highly important to recover this volume. Prudentius, though so 
 important a personage in France, was, it is to be remembered, a Spaniard. 1 hope 
 to enter on a discussion of the whole question of Prudentius and the Liturgy 
 later.] 
 
 ^ It may be as well to say that the identification of the Aius with the Sanctus, 
 Sanctus, Saftctus, is subject, so far as I can see, to the gravest difficulties. I ought 
 to add that in my opinion G. H. Forbes is quite right in deriving the * Reproaches ' 
 of the Bobbio Missal from Spain. 
 
 ^ [Dom Connolly supplies me with the following note on this point : * Nestorius 
 in his Liber Heraclidis, preserved in a Syriac translation (ed. Bedjan, pp. 499 
 sqq.), seems to say that the Trisagion came into use at Constantinople during 
 the period between the Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon. Because the populace 
 held heretical views of God the Son and refused Him the epithet "immortal", 
 " God Himself gave them a formula of supplication . . . that they should say : 
 Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal, have mercy on us". Evidently based on 
 this is the Nestorian tradition that the Trisagion was delivered by angels to a 
 certain presbyter of Constantinople in the reign of Theodosius II. The story is told 
 by Abraham Bar Lipheh in his Interpretatio Officioruin (c. saec. viii) and by an 
 anonymous writer (of perhaps the ninth century), till recently wrongly identified 
 with George of Arbela (saec. x), in a work entitled Expositio omnium Officiorum. 
 Both of these works are edited and translated in the Corpus scriptorum Christiano- 
 rum orientalium ser. 2 t. xci-xcii. For ps.-George of A. see t. xci (trans.) pp. 149- 
 150 ; for Bar Lipheh, t. xcii (trans.) pp. 153-154. The translation of t. xcii, though 
 printed, still awaits publication owing to the war.']
 
 KYRIE ELEISON 133 
 
 dominions. The other manuscript in which the Atus is mentioned, 
 the Bobbio Missal, has also a Burgundian connexion. Now the Bur- 
 gundian rulers were notable for their close relations with Constantinople. 
 When precisely the A ins was introduced, whether towards the close 
 of the fifth century or early in the sixth, there is no means of con- 
 jecturing ; but it may be safely assumed that it came to Gaul from 
 Constantinople into Burgundy direct ; and that it was not introduced 
 on account of its Kyrie or in any way in connexion with the decree 
 of the Council of Vaison. 
 
 There remains for consideration the Gallican use of the Kyrie in the 
 so-called ' prayers of the faithful ' at mass. Such prayers are distinctly 
 witnessed to in Gaul, by a memorandum appended to the canons of 
 the Council of Lyons (a city also of the Burgundian realm) of about 
 the year 516-523, which mentions the * oratio plebis ' after the Gospel. 
 This prayer is no longer extant. The question has been dealt with 
 with perfect discretion by Duchesne, Origines pp. 1 89-191. The 
 point for notice here is that, as he says, we have in both the parallel 
 examples which he cites distinct evidence of translation from a Con- 
 stantinopolitan text. Here, then, so far as any evidence is available, 
 we are once more brought to the conclusion that the use of the Kyrie 
 in Gaul is more modern, perhaps by at least a century, than its use in 
 the East, and that it is no more than a foreign importation. 
 
 To come now at last to Rome. The text of the Council of Vaison, 
 taken by itself, does not warrant the conclusion that the Kyrie was in 
 use in Rome at both Office and Mass ; only that it may have been so, 
 and that it was certainly said at either one or the other. If the theory 
 put forward by M. Batiffol that the Roman Office was a creation of the 
 seventh and eighth centuries could be accepted without more ado, the 
 case would be easy enough. Unfortunately this is not possible. That 
 writer justly observes, that the Benedictine Office had only a late and 
 remote influence on the Roman ; but he quite omitted to enquire 
 whether the Roman Office had influenced the formation of St Benedict's. 
 This is the more unfortunate since, in the absence of proof to the con- 
 trary, everything conspires to countenance such an idea. The Office 
 sketched in the Rule is the clearest, most detailed, and earliest scheme 
 known in the West. Though its author does not, like Caesarius, state 
 whence he drew it, he assumes familiarity with some already existing 
 Office. This complete and detailed scheme has its birth close to Rome, 
 and is due to one who has lived there. Finally, so soon as we come 
 to know the texts of the Roman and the Benedictine Offices (as 
 distinct from the arrangement of the Psalter) in the ninth century, they 
 are found substantially one and the same. The use of both is certainly
 
 134 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 the same as regards the Kyrie eleison towards the end of the various 
 hours, as appears from a comparison of Amalar de Eccl. Off. iii c. 5, 
 and iv cc. 2, 4, 7, and 23, and de Ord. Antiph. c. 1, for the Roman 
 Office on the one hand, with cc. 9, 10, 12, 13, 17 of the Rule on the 
 other. 
 
 It may well be the case, then, that the Kyrie v^^s. said in the Roman 
 Office at the date of the Council of Vaison. The way is therefore open 
 for the conclusion which I have said the ordinary reader would naturally 
 draw from St Gregory's letter, namely, that this Pontiff himself intro- 
 duced the Kyrie into the Roman mass. Yet this conclusion would 
 be, I think, an unsafe, indeed an incorrect, one. For an ordination form,, 
 which is certainly Roman,^ in the Gelasian Sacramentary (lib. i 20) 
 contains a rubric directing that the mass is to be said at St Peter's, 
 that the introit is first sung, and then the Pope gives out the names of 
 the persons he intends to ordain ; ' after a short interval [to allow of 
 objections] all begin the Kyrie eleison with the litany.' The expression 
 seems to be an equivalent of the Kyrie eleison ' with certain things 
 usually sung ', as mentioned in St Gregory's letter, and of St Benedict's 
 ' supplication of the litany, that is Kyrie eleison '. The forms of ex- 
 pression used in the Benedictine Rule and in the Gelasian Sacramentary 
 are peculiar ; I do not know where to find a parallel to them in the 
 fifth or sixth century ; they both express one and the same idea, look 
 at the things, ' litany ' and Kyrie, from one and the same point of 
 view ; in a word, seem to proceed from one and the same circle. 
 
 But objection may be taken to this rubric as evidence of the use of 
 the Kyrie in the Roman mass before St Gregory, on the ground of 
 Duchesne's theory as to the dates of the early Roman sacramentaries, 
 according to which the Gelasianuin is assigned to the seventh century. 
 It appeared to me from the first that this theory was untenable and 
 could not survive independent investigation, on either the historical or the 
 ritual side. The one feature that really seemed to give it countenance 
 simply disappeared at once when, on examining the long-lost MS Vat. 
 Regin. 337, I for the first time learnt what were really the contents of 
 the Gregorian Mass book sent by Pope Hadrian to Charles the Great.^ 
 It may be mentioned by the way that I was, I believe, the first to 
 examine this manuscript in recent times, and so to know what the 
 Sacravientaire dHadrien actually was. Ehrensberger had indeed come 
 
 ' It is to be observed that the ordination forms found in the early manuscripts of 
 the Cregortanutn are those printed in Muratori ii 357-361 ; the forms at coll. 405 
 sqq. are later and corrupted texts. 
 
 - It in fact comprises not coll. 1-138 only of Muratori's edition, as had been 
 hitherto supposed, but coll. 241-272 also. In these circumstances it becomes 
 difficult indeed to view the Gregoriamim as specifically the Papal Mass book.
 
 KYRIE ELEISON 135 
 
 across Regin. 337 in going through the library shelves for the purpose of 
 compiling his catalogue, though I knew nothing of that, and ' found ' 
 it on my own account, and by the simple expedient of asking for it 
 by the right number given by Giorgi instead of Muratori's wrong one. 
 That was in the year 1895.^ ^y this present time independent 
 enquirers, in Germany at least, have come, or are coming, to the only 
 conclusion that is reasonable when all the factors are taken into 
 proper account, namely, that we have in the Gelasianum (minus, of 
 course, many Gallican elements, most of which I fancy are distinctly 
 identifiable) in substance the Roman missal of the sixth century.^ 
 
 This being so, there is nothing improbable in the supposition that 
 the Council of Vaison of 529, in ordering the use of the Kyrie at 
 lauds, mass, and vespers, was in all three cases simply introducing 
 what was already in practice ' in the Apostolic See '. And this 
 I believe to have been, in fact, the case. 
 
 The following seems to be the history of the Kyrie cleison in the 
 first six centuries, so far as it is revealed by the evidence. 
 
 Kyrie eleison was a pre-Christian religious invocation. It found its 
 way into public Christian services soon after the triumph of the 
 Church, that is in the course of the fourth century.^ This took place, 
 as we should naturally expect, in Greek-speaking regions. Thence it 
 spread to the West, through Italy ; its introduction into Italy falling 
 in the fifth century at the earliest ; probably in the second half rather 
 than in the first. It was imported into Gaul, partly by way of Aries, 
 from Old Rome (and Italy) in the early part of the sixth century ; 
 partly from Constantinople direct, perhaps as early as the close of the 
 
 1 [As Ehrensberger's catalogue of the liturgical MSS of the Vatican Library is 
 here mentioned, I think it well to say, in reference to note i, page 64 above, that 
 I do not wish to imply carelessness on his part (or indeed on the part of his fore- 
 runners, D. Giorgi, Vezzosi and others) for failure to detect and read the erased 
 name of Pope Nicholas I in the Exidtet of Regin. 337 (see his Libri Liturgici Bi- 
 bliothecac Apostolicae Vaticanae nianii scripti^YxWtMx^x Brisgov., 1897, p. 400 11. 5-7). 
 I have long since come to the conclusion that from purely natural causes it is easier 
 for some persons to read and recover erased script than it is for others,] 
 
 * For instance, this is the case in Friedrich VViegand's Die Stellung des aposto- 
 lischen Symbols im kirchlichcn Leben des Mittelalters, the first volume of which 
 reaches me as I am writing. But I take leave to differ from Wiegand's view, that 
 Duchesne's failure to recognize ' diesen ziemlich klaren Sachverhalt ' was due to his 
 opinion as to the credibility of John the Deacon (p. 205). This may be in part the 
 case, but I think it is due much more to reaction against some very modern people, 
 namely, the French legendary Catholic School, dominant for the last fifty years, 
 whose exploits in the domain of history, sacred and secular, ancient and modem, 
 have been trying enough to trouble the judgement of the most patient lover of simple 
 historical truth. Extravagance in one direction is apt to produce exaggeration in 
 another, and in reaction and recoil men are apt to overpass the due limits. 
 
 ' [Of course I do not mean to imply that it was borrowed from pagan 
 practice: it has already been pointed out (p. 117 note i) how desirable it is that 
 some one should give us a Vorgeschichte of the liturgical Kyrie eleison^
 
 136 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 fifth century. But there seem to be substantial reasons for doubting 
 that it was general in Gaul previous to the introduction of the Rule of 
 St Benedict into Gaul in the seventh century and its spread there. 
 As in the case of most ritual novelties, its adoption was probably 
 gradual. 
 
 I may say that, whilst the Roman mass and the African are evidently 
 very nearly akin, in the African Church previous to the Vandal invasion 
 there is no trace whatever of the Kyrie eleison in the mass.
 
 VII 
 
 THE 
 LITANY OF SAINTS IN THE STOWE MISSAL^ 
 
 Ideas in regard to the first attestations and early history of what 
 is designated in the official books of the Roman Church ' the Litanies', 
 but commonly called ' the Litany of the Saints ', seem vague and 
 indefinite. The use of such a series of invocations of saints by name 
 was, for instance, in an article I read not long ago, assumed to have 
 been in existence in Gaul in the sixth century ; and this assumption 
 was used as an instrument in the criticism of the Martyrologitim 
 Hieronymiamun. In the last number (iv i) of the Oriais Christianiis 
 Dr Baumstark has printed (text and translation, pp. ii6-ii9)a' Syrian- 
 Melchite Litany of All the Saints', with a lengthy preliminary 
 dissertation (pp. 98-116, 120). The subject is now therefore on the 
 order of the day. Moreover, what must be the definitive edition of the 
 Stowe Missal is in preparation [so in October 1905; see now H. B. 
 Soc. xxxii] ; and doubtless discussion of some points of detail had 
 better precede than follow on that publication. But the starting- 
 point of an enquiry such as I have indicated is, so far as I can 
 see, precisely the litany which stands at the beginning of the 
 normal mass in that Missal. It has then seemed to me oppor- 
 tune, without waiting for further information, or more light, to 
 lay before those interested in the subject what I have been able 
 to gather in regard to the early history of the ' Litany of the Saints ' 
 in the West, with which Dr Baumstark and his former colleague, 
 Dr Schermann, have not concerned themselves. Such a paper will 
 serve to bring the discussion of this rather obscure matter into some 
 definite form ; and I propose to restrict my remarks, as much as I can, 
 to what is textual, documentary, and, so far, positive. 
 
 Before examining the features of the litany of Stozve, it will be 
 proper to remark on its position and surroundings. This litany 
 appears as an item of what is now called the ' Praeparatio Sacerdotis', 
 viz. the series of non-liturgical prayers which form the priest's personal 
 preparation for saying mass. In the earliest Western books this 
 
 ' From \.\it Journal of Theological Studies, October 1905.
 
 138 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 ' Praeparatio ' is rudimentary, being represented by a single prayer 
 entitled ' Apologia Sacerdotis '. In his edition of the Book of 
 Cerne (pp. xxv-xxvi), Dom Kuypers, in comparing two of these 
 forms of the earliest period, has pointed out that the most ancient 
 examples of the ' Apologia ' represent more than one type of religious 
 mind and feeling. The form given in the Bobbio Missal ^ shews 
 yet a third type of mind, though textually it is related to the 
 two ' Apologiae ' adduced by Dom Kuypers. This is the stage of 
 developement at the close of the seventh century. The ' praeparatio ' 
 which the Stozvc Missal offers (before the interpolations were made 
 by Moelcaich) is something quite different both in form and sub- 
 stance. It is thus composed : (i) a short prayer embodying peni- 
 tential supplications evidently inspired by the litany ; (2) a litany 
 of saints ; (3) a prayer ' ut pro peccatis meis possim intercedere, et 
 adstantis populi peccatorum veniam promereri, ac pacificas singulorum 
 hostias immolare ; me quoque tibi audaciter accedentem non sinas 
 perire ', &c. ; (4) a brief ejaculatory prayer. Item (3) strikes, in the 
 words quoted, a note that is absent from the three ' Apologiae ' men- 
 tioned above. In these the idea of specifically priestly supplication 
 does not find utterance. But the idea is quite in the spirit of those 
 prayers of Eastern liturgies which, beautiful and devout in themselves, 
 repeat with a wearisome iteration the same idea — the unworthiness of 
 the priest himself and the 'tremendous ' nature of the sacrifice. The 
 precise position of the Stowe * Preparatio' in the Western developement 
 must be matter for consideration; but to me it appears to represent 
 the next stage immediately after the simple ' Apologia ' of the seventh 
 century." It must not, however, be forgotten that, with the peculiar 
 character of Irish piety and devotion, a developement of this kind is 
 
 ^ Mabillon Mus. Ital. i 375 ; Muratori Litiirg. Rom. ii 934. 
 
 ^ I do not find an ' Apologia ' in the Gellone Sacrament ary. The Sacramentary 
 of Angouleme, Paris B. N. Lat. 816, f. 70^ has a single 'Apologia' (printed by 
 Martene de ant.eccl. rit. lib. iv cap. 27 § 10) there called ' Accusatio Sacerdotis 
 . . . ante altare ' ; it emphasizes the ideas already found in the Stowe ' Praeparatio ', 
 item (3). In Gerbert {Mon. vet. littirg. Alemantt. i 297) this ' Accusatio ' appears 
 as if a collect of a ' missa propria sacerdotis '. The so-called Missa Flacci Illyrici 
 contains some fifteen or twenty apologies besides a fully developed scheme of prayers 
 for putting on vestments, &c. Perhaps it would be better to say that it is an Ordo 
 Missae ' farced ' with apologies. This document was by its first editor attributed to 
 an early date ; and in this he has been followed by different writers on various 
 grounds ; and in our own day it has been attributed to Alcuin. The recent recovery 
 of the original MS (cod. Helmstad. 115 in the Ducal Library at Wolfenbiittel), 
 which has proved to be of the eleventh century, shews that the judgement of Bona, 
 who assigned the Missa Fl. III. to the tenth or eleventh century, was sound. A 
 similar set of fifteen Apologiae, of somewhat earlier date, is to be found in Menard's 
 Codex S. Eligii (Delisle No. li p. 175 ; Migne P. L. 78. 226-231). For the collection 
 incorporated by Rodradus in his Missal of the middle of the ninth century see above 
 Paper No. IV p. 67 n. 3 ; the collection in the contemporary Pontifical of Prudentius 
 bishop of Troyes (see Martene de aftt. Eccl. rit. lib. i cap. iv art. xii Ordo vi) I 
 hope to deal with some time later.
 
 THE LITANY OF THE SAINTS 139 
 
 likely to be marked and accentuated earlier and more readily in 
 Ireland than perhaps in any other Western country. 
 
 So much of the exact text of the Stowe Litany of Saints as is needful 
 for the present purpose will be given later. But it will be convenient, 
 for the understanding of what follows, to give a summary of it at 
 once ; thus : 
 
 Christe audi nos (three times) 
 
 Kyrie eleison 
 
 Invocations of thirteen saints by name 
 
 Omnes sancti orate pro nobis 
 
 Propitius esto parce nobis Domine 
 
 P. e. libera nos D. 
 
 Ab omni malo 1. n. D. 
 
 Per crucem tuam 1. n. D. 
 
 [Peccatores tej rogamus audi nos (brackets from Moelcaich) 
 
 [?Fili Dei t. r. a. n.] (Moelcaich, see p. 143 "• 3) 
 
 Ut pacem dones r. a. n. 
 
 Agne Dei qui toUis peccata mundi miserere nobis.* 
 
 In this litany it is necessary to distinguish two elements : the m- 
 vocations of individual saints, and the general ' framework '. Each 
 element must be considered separately. I take the names first. The 
 invocations of saints in this Stowe Litany are : Mary, Peter, Paul, 
 Andrew, James, Bartholomew, Thomas, Matthew, James, Thaddaeus, 
 Matthias, Mark, Luke. Inspection of the four lists of Apostles in the 
 New Testament shews that this list, though imperfect, agrees in order 
 with that of Matthew (x 2-4) only.^ The order of the names of the 
 twelve apostles in the diptychs of the Sto^cve Missal (MacCarthy, 
 p. 216) is: John Baptist and Virgin Mary, Peter, Paul, Andrew, 
 James, John, Philip, Bartholomew, Thomas, Matthew, James, Simon, 
 Thaddaeus,^ Matthias, Mark, Luke. This again is the order of 
 Matthew. The litany then, so far as it goes, agrees with the diptychs ; 
 and it is not too much to suppose that when drawing it up the compiler 
 had before him the diptychs and adopted their order. 
 
 But the two Stozve documents do not stand alone. The order of 
 names of Apostles and Evangelists in the litany of MS Reg. 2 A xx,* 
 
 1 See MacCarthy ' On the Stowe Missal ', Transactions of the Royal Irish 
 Academy vol. xxvii (1886) pp. 192-194 and 267 (on fol. 13"). [It is proper, indeed 
 it is necessary, for me to add here that, still to-day, the only intelligible print of the 
 Stowe Missal is Dr MacCarthy's ; and by its aid alone can a reader, who might so 
 wish, follow in the original document what I have to say in this Paper.] 
 
 "^ The order of Luke vi 14-16 is as Matthew's, except that it has ' Matthew, 
 Thomas' instead of 'Thomas, Matthew', and 'Simon, ludas lacobi' instead of 
 ' Thaddaeus, Simon '. ■ . , ^ • x 
 
 ' This is the order of Matth., except that in the diptychs Simon (the Canaanite) 
 comes before, not after, Thaddaeus. After Matthias, Mark, Luke come Stephen 
 and other martyrs. 
 
 * fol. 26* {Boo/c of Cerne pp. 21 1-2 1 2).
 
 140 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 a manuscript of the eighth century, is the same as that in the Stoive 
 diptychs, except that Barnabas is inserted before Mark and Luke. 
 Not merely so ; but this htany adopts the order ' John, Mary ', of 
 the diptychs ; and the case is both in diptychs and in litanies, so far 
 as I can find, in the West, unique.^ But, after thus agreeing in its 
 order of invocations up to Luke with the Stowe diptychs, the litany of 
 a A XX proceeds to subjoin Stephen and the whole twelve names 
 of martyrs appended to the quite different list of Apostles in the 
 Canon of the Roman mass.- 
 
 The question arises which is the borrower? Did the English 
 document borrow the order of Apostles and Evangelists from Ireland, 
 or did Ireland borrow from England ? Several prayers and other 
 documents, English and Irish, of a date presumably earlier than the 
 ninth century, shew enumerations of the Apostles.^ From the prayers 
 giving the names of the Apostles in the Book of Cerne and in MS 
 2 A XX, it appears that only the order in the Roman Canon occurs in 
 prayers in Cerne \ whilst in 3 A xx (and also in Irish books) only the 
 order of Matthew is found. The diptychs of the Mozarabic mass 
 and those of the Church of Aries both adopt the order of Acts i 13. 
 Unless, therefore, further evidence can be adduced to throw a new 
 light on the case, the conclusion seems inevitable that the presence 
 of the Matthew list is to be taken as a probable indication of Irish 
 influence.* 
 
 If there be relationship between the invocations in the litanies of 
 the Stowe ' Praeparatio ' and 2 A xx, much closer is the relationship 
 in the ' framework ' of those litanies. In fact the ' framework ' of the 
 two is identical. There exists yet a third Latin litany which must be 
 mentioned here ; it was first printed from a Fulda MS by G. Witzel 
 (Wicelius) in his Exercitamenta sincerae pietatis, 1555, sign. P. The 
 MS used by Witzel was evidently another copy of the Old Irish 
 Missal of which the only copy now extant is Stowe ; and though, as 
 appears from so much as Witzel prints, the names of the saints invoked 
 in the litany of the ' Praeparatio ' differed, the ' framework ' is identical 
 with that of the litanies in Stowe and 2 A xx. 
 
 But we must not stop here. A Greek litany appearing on the last leaf 
 (f. 200) of the so-called ' Athelstan Psalter ', Cotton MS Galba A xviii,^ 
 
 ' See Supplementary Note B below. 
 
 "^ This use of the Roman Canon probably explains the insertion in 2 A xx of 
 Barnabas. For Barnabas see Duchesne, in Melanges G. B. de Rossi (Rome, 1892) 
 pp. 40-71. 3 ggg Supplementary Note C below. 
 
 \ I should feel disposed to add here as follows : ' with the Stoive diptychs as a 
 primary model. It would therefore follow that our litanies are of a later date than 
 (say) about the year 650.' See above p. 92 n. i. 
 
 ^ In what follows I take no notice of the discussions on the Apostles' Creed, of 
 set purpose. But it may be for persons engaged in that line of enquiry to consider
 
 THE LITANY OF THE SAINTS 141 
 
 has to be taken into account. This manuscript contains on the same 
 leaf the Greek text of the Old Roman Creed, whereof the Latin is 
 found in the Laudian MS of the Acts and (with slight changes) in 
 MS Reg. 2 A XX also. In what I have now to say it will be well to 
 ignore the discussions on the Creed, but proper to obsei-ve that through 
 the documents common to Galba A xviii in Greek and 2 A xx in Latin, 
 viz. the Old Roman Creed and the litany, we come into touch with 
 the earliest age of the English Church. Sir E. M. Thompson, who 
 has described the Galba manuscript,^ considers that the psalter was 
 
 whether, or how far, anything said in this paper may have a bearing on the 
 questions that engage their attention ; e.g. the origin or ' sources ' of the Enumera- 
 tions of Apostles found in connexion with the Creed, the suggested date of the 
 Galba litany in relation to the use (or disuse) of the Old Roman Creed in Rome 
 itself, &c. 
 
 ^ Ancient Manuscripts in the British Museum, Part ii Latin pp. 12-13. Katten- 
 busch Das apostolische Symbol \ 66, following Heurtley, states that the attribution 
 to Athelstan ' has no sort of authority ', but is a mere conjecture of the possessor of 
 the MS in the sixteenth century. There are, however, good and solid grounds for 
 giving credence to this ' Athelstan ' tradition. And first, there seems to be no 
 reasonable cause to doubt that this psalter, Galba A xviii, was a Winchester book. 
 To begin with, it was, within a few years after the suppression of the Cathedral 
 Priory of Winchester, in the possession of a priest named Thomas Dackombe (or 
 Dakomb),a Winchester man then attached to the Cathedral foundation. From 
 entries in several MSS in the British Museum it appears that at or about the time 
 of the dissolution he had acquired a number of MSS once belonging to the Cathedral 
 Priory, and he chose (it may be said in passing) good ones (see Anc. Manuscr. 
 p. 62 ; and ' Gifts of Henry of Blois to Winchester Cathedral ', Paper No. XX below, 
 footnote to the notice of the MS from which the list was printed). This is an 
 indication that the MS was at Winchester at the time of the Suppression. But 
 there is indication that it was there in the eleventh century also, for a leaf 
 of Galba A xviii, that has disappeared since the seventeenth century, had five 
 lines in verse commemorating the gift by Stigand to some church of a rich 
 cross (A71C. Manuscr. p. 12); and from the Winchester Annals, A.D. 1072, it 
 appears that Stigand in fact gave such a cross to Winchester Cathedral. But 
 further : from contemporary entries in several ancient MSS it appears that Athelstan, 
 in giving books to churches— a practice of which he may be said to have been ' fond ' 
 — liked to have inserted in them a record of such gift on his part: for instance, 
 Cotton MS Claud. B v, a gift of Athelstan to Bath ; Otho B ix, a gift to Durham, or 
 rather to St Cuthbert ; Tiberius A ii (a Lobbes book, by the way, which must have 
 been written while Ratherius was there), also Reg. i A xviii, and the MacDumain 
 Gospels at Lambeth, gifts to Christ Church, Canterbury. This being so, the proba- 
 bilities are in favour of the idea— itself an obvious and reasonable one — that when 
 Dackombe made his memorandum ' Psalterium regis Athelstani ', he based it on 
 some record (similar to those in the MSS just mentioned) then found within the 
 covers of the book. As Athelstan gave books to other churches, there could be no 
 reason why the Cathedral Church of his own capital city and residence should not 
 have shared in his gifts ; and it is entirely congruous that he should have bestowed 
 upon it a memento so personal as the psalter used by him for his own private 
 devotions. The inference from all this is obvious, if not indeed conclusive, viz. that 
 the Galba MS with verses commemorating this gift was itself a Winchester book. 
 
 I have made these explanations in full in view of the importance of the MS Galba 
 A xviii, as giving the text of the Old Roman Creed embodied by Marcellus of 
 Ancyra in his letter to Pope Julius in defence of his orthodoxy (Epiphanius 
 Haer. Ixxii 3). It seemed desirable to do what is possible to come to just notions as 
 to the history of this MS, and hence as to the way in which this Creed and the 
 other Greek documents may have come into it. In consideration of all the cir- 
 cumstances, as regards the Creed or the Litany, in Greek or Latin, in England, my 
 own view is that the Greek pieces in Galba A xviii were copied from an English MS
 
 142 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 written abroad in the ninth century, and that the additions (ff. 1-21, 
 120, 178-200) — including of course our Greek litany and the other 
 pieces in Greek — were made in England in the tenth. At the bottom 
 of f. 199^' is the title 'Hie incipiunt Grecorum laetanie ', the litany 
 occupies f. 200=" ; on 200*~^ is first the Our Father with the title ' Hie 
 incipit Pater noster in lingua Grecorum ' ; then the Apostles' Creed 
 with the heading ' Credo Gr.' ; lastly, with the heading ' Sci scs scs ', 
 the ' Sanctus ', also in Greek but breaking off imperfect with the word 
 ' doxis '. The next leaf, which gave the continuation, is now missing. 
 The Greek litany at f. 200^ shews a ' framework ' identical with that 
 of the Latin litanies in Stowe, in MS 2 A xx and in Witzel. 
 
 The Galba manuscript, however, does not stand alone. The Cotton 
 MS Titus D xviii, after giving the conclusion of a piece begun on 
 f. 12% has on the eighth line of f. 12^ a title : ' Ymnus Grecorum ante 
 canonem ', and thereon follows the ' Sanctus ' in Greek and complete. 
 Then : ' Incipit letania Grecorum ' and the first eleven suffrages of 
 the Galba litany, which occupy the rest of the page; f. 13 is blank. 
 From the orthography it may be gathered that this is not a copy 
 made from the Galba leaf.^ The following is a print in parallel 
 columns of the full text of the Greek litany (from the two MSS 
 Galba A xviii and Titus D xviii), with the entire ' framework ' of the 
 Latin litany (from 2 A xx, Stotve, and Witzel) and those invocations 
 of saints which any one of these three Latin texts has in common with 
 the Greek. The words in brackets complete from Stowe and Witzel 
 the cues which are found in 2 A xx. The sign f = items printed by 
 Witzel (W.) ; and * = items not in Stozve (S.). 
 
 Grecorum Laetanie. Laetania. 
 
 Galba A xviii f. 200* MS Reg. 2 A xx f. 26 (in Bk.of Cerne 
 
 Titus D xviii f. 12^^ pp. 211-212); Stowe litany in Mac- 
 
 Carthy, pp. 192, 267 ; Fiilda litany in 
 Witzel Exercit. sig. P. 
 Xpiore, e-rrdKovcTov f]fjuv I t Christe, audi nos [thrice in S. W.J ^ 
 
 "A-yie MixarjX, tv^at virtp fjfiSiv 2 * See Michahel, ora* 
 
 of a date not later than the end of the seventh century, or the early eighth — even, 
 possibly, existing at Winchester itself. 
 
 ^ Doni N. Birt has kindly copied the Greek pieces for me and supplied requisite 
 details. This Titus MS seems of about the twelfth century. As regards orthography, 
 Galba reads, for instance : ' Aie Gabriel euxe yperimon ', ' Pantas yaies euxaste 
 yperimon ', ' fise ymas eyrie ' ; Titus reads : ' Agie Gabriel euche yper imon ', * Panta 
 agies euchaste yper ymon ', ' phise ymas Kyrrie '. 
 
 ^ The invocations found in Titus D xviii end with 'Atto navros kukov. In this MS 
 the invocation 'Ayin Mapin comes before that of Michael — a mere correction of the 
 genuine text in accordance with the religious sense of the time. It is already found 
 in the text of the St Amand Ordo, as to which see Supplementary Note A, p. 151. 
 
 ' Followed in Stowe by ' Kyrie eleison ' ; this ' K. e.' is not in Witzel or in any of 
 the other texts, and is doubtless an addition by the writer of the Stowe litany. 
 
 * Suffrages 2, 3, 4, 5 are not in Stowe or Witzel.
 
 THE LITANY OF THE SAINTS 143 
 
 "\yu Ta^piijX, fv^ai. vnip hl^wv 3 * See Gabrihel, ora 
 
 'hyu 'Pa4)ai,\, (Z^ai xmip ^/xi.; 4 * See Raphael, ora 
 
 5 * See lohannes, ora^ 
 'Aym Mapla, fZiai xmep fitxHv 6 t Sca Maria, ora [pro nobis W.] 
 
 "Ayt€ n/rp6, ti^ai vnip fipS>v 7 t See Petre, ora [pro nobis \V.] 
 
 'Ayte naCXf, ei5|a. vTT.p .7M<^^ 8 t See Paule, ora [pro nobis W.] * 
 
 UdvT€s 01 &yioi,iv^aaetvnipijp^u 9 t Omnes saneti orat[e pro nobis 
 
 S. W.] 
 *lXfa,f 7€voC KUi (b^laai l)fi'a: Kvpu 10 t Propitius esto par[ee nobis Domine 
 
 S. W.] 
 ^l\tm yevoi KaWvrpa^aai fipai Kvpte II t Propitius esto liber[a nos Domine 
 
 S. W.] 
 *An6 itavrhs kokoO Xtrpcotrai hl^as /cupie 12 + Ab omni male liber[a nos Domine 
 
 S. W.] 
 Am ToO aravpov aov XOrpcoo-a. Ij^as <Cpi( 1 3 t Per crucem tuam liber[a nos Do- 
 mine S. W.] 
 'AuapTwXot o-e naprntaXoOfxev, endKovaov 1 4 t Peccatores te rog[amus audi nos 
 
 ' - S W 1 
 
 "Iva ilpnvr)v Scoo-???, (re TrapaKaXoO/xf;/, 1 5 t Ut pacem dones te rog[amus audi 
 
 (iraKovfTov fjfiiv ^^^ S. VV .J 
 
 *Yu rov deoi,,T^ napaKaXovpep.fndicovaov 16 t * Filius Dei te rog[amus audi nos 
 
 *0 6pv6, roG ecoi 6 atpcou ri^v Apapriap* I? t Agnus » Dei qui tollis peccata mundi 
 ToO Koapov, i\ir)(jov fipis miserere nobis.* 
 
 I do not know whether any one is prepared to maintain that the 
 Latin of this litany is the original and the Greek a translation made 
 in Ireland, England, or on the Continent. If arguments should be 
 adduced in favour of this view, they will receive my best attention ; 
 but for myself, I must say here that, after considering the case in its 
 various aspects, I am unable to find any reasonable grounds on which 
 to base such a supposition ; whilst the contrary supposition, that the 
 Greek is the original, and that the Latin is a translation, appears to 
 me to be recommended by considerations both intrinsic and extrinsic. 
 On the assumption that the Greek is the original, a reply to the 
 question 'Whence came this document to England?' can be made 
 with fair certainty : ' From Rome '. 
 
 In the first place, is there any ground for supposing that the four 
 
 1 This invocation is in 2 A xx only : doubtless derived from the S/07i'e diptychs, 
 see above, p. 140. , , ,,.„.. ^. r 
 
 2 Here follow in S f owe, "Witzel, and 2Axx further and differing invocations ot 
 
 saints, for which see p. 147 below. , , , x j . • »u 
 
 ' This suffrage no. 16, according to MaeCarthy (p. 267), does not occur in the 
 litany of S/o7ae as written by the original hand ; it is in Moelcaich's rescript (p. 194) 
 which, however, inserts it de/ore 'Ut pacem', &c. As it is found in the Oreek, 
 2 A xx, and Witzel, its absence from S^owe would be doubtless a mere omission. In 
 Witzel'and Moelcaich 'Fili'. 
 
 ♦ ' tin amartias' Galba A xviii. * ' Agne ', S/owe (p. 267) and Witzel. 
 
 • 2 A XX adds ' Christe audi nos ' ; Moelcaich, the same three times ; it is not 
 noticed by Witzel.
 
 144 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Greek pieces found together in the Galba (or the two in the Titus) 
 manuscript came to England from different quarters, and separately- 
 one from the other ? It is to be remembered that of these four Greek 
 pieces in the Galba manuscript one is the Old Roman Creed. 
 Another is the Sanctus, in which (in both the Galba and the Titus 
 manuscripts) we find the form Kvpios 6 O^os ^al3au>6. This is, of course, 
 the reading of the Old Latin and Vulgate at Is. vi 3 (' Dominus De!(s 
 sabaoth'). It is also the form found in the Roman and Mozarabic 
 liturgies.^ All the Greek liturgies on the other hand (Serapion, the 
 Clementine, James, Basil, Chrysostom, Mark, Alexandrine Basil, 
 Alexandrine Gregory) have ' Lord of Sabaoth ', as in the Hebrew 
 and LXX. The Greek text of the Sanctus in the Galba and Titus 
 manuscripts seems, then, to offer in the words 6 ^eo's an additional 
 indication that it came from Rome — over and above the fact that it is 
 found in the Galba MS together with a Greek text of the Old Roman 
 Creed, and the consequent probability is that it came to England 
 along with that Creed. 
 
 Next, taking the text of the Greek litany in these MSS, we 
 seem again to find internal indications supporting the prima facie 
 probability that it also came from Rome in company with the Greek 
 text of the Old Roman Creed. ^ To say nothing of the names Peter 
 and Paul (the only two saints mentioned besides the Blessed Virgin), 
 two suffrages deserve particular attention : Aia rov aravpov a-ov 
 and *0 a-ixvos rov deov. These are cults both of which are associated 
 in Rome with the name of Pope Sergius (687-701). Sergius was 
 a Syrian of the region of Antioch (and therefore Greek-speaking), 
 though born at Palermo ; he came to Rome at a mature age and, 
 as a skilled musician, was placed under the chief cantor ; five years 
 later he was ordained priest, and seven years after that made pope. 
 The account of him in the Liber Pontificalis shews that he had 
 
 ^ Also in Africa in the latter part of the fifth century. Victor Vitensis writes : 
 ' sicut in mysteriis ore nostro dicimus . . . sanctus sanctus sanctus Dominus Deus 
 Sabaoth' {de per sec. Vandal, iii 23; in Petschenig's edition ii 100). 
 
 '•^ It has been not infrequently stated that the church Office was said in Greek as 
 well as in Latin in England towards the close of the seventh century. I do not 
 know how the statement can be evidenced. Certainly there is nothing to warrant it 
 in the elaborate exposition or argument printed in 1875 by Caspar! {Ungedruckte . . . 
 Qiiellen iii 188-199), who really seems to rely at bottom on the Greek pieces in 
 Galba A xviii as evidence for the fact ; and subsequent writers seem, for their part, 
 to have relied on Caspari. The statement is also repeatedly made (e.g. among the 
 last by Kattenbusch Das apost. Symbol ii 858, in 1900) that the Greek creed of 
 Galba (which is our 'Apostles' Creed') was said 'in the hours, especially at 
 Prime'. But it is to be observed that the Apostles' Creed was not said in the 
 Office in the seventh and eighth centuries ; and that the Greek pieces in Galba 
 have nothing to do with the hours, or any other part of the Office. It would appear 
 therefore that the statement as to the recital of the Office in Greek in England is 
 not warranted by evidence, and is based on nothing else than a misunderstanding.
 
 THE LITANY OF THE SAINTS 145 
 
 a natural bent towards all that concerns the church services, ritual, 
 and song. As is well known he ordered that at the time of the 
 confraction in the mass (i. e. just before the communion) ' Agnus Dei 
 qui tollis peccata mundi miserere nobis ' should be sung by the clergy 
 and people. Some persons have thought that the ' Agnus ' was 
 already before this date in use in the Roman mass, and that Sergius 
 only made some change in the mode or place of singing it ; others, 
 that he first introduced it. These contradictories can each be plausibly 
 maintained, and neither can be shewn to be wrong. All that is of 
 importance here, however, is certain, viz. that the first record of the 
 use of the ' Agnus Dei ' in Rome occurs in the time of Sergius ; and 
 that if it had been indeed in use before, he gave to it an additional 
 importance, inasmuch as by his new arrangement he introduced into 
 the Roman mass a (possible) element of what is called ' eucharistic 
 adoration ' in a way that should be popular and universal, public and 
 unmistakeable. The originality of the action of Sergius in regard 
 to the cult of the Cross in Rome is yet less open to doubt. Sergius, 
 we are told,^ found a case hitherto ' in angulo obscurissimo iacentem ' 
 in the sacristy of St Peter's, which, though of silver, was dirty and 
 black from neglect and age. After prayer he broke the seal, and 
 opening it found within a precious gemmed cross containing a relic 
 of the True Cross. ' Which from that day forward (says his con- 
 temporary biographer) is kissed and adored by all the Christian 
 people in the Lateran basilica on the day of the Exaltation of the 
 Holy Cross.' ^ This is the earliest notice of the public liturgical cult 
 of the True Cross and the feast of the Exaltation in Rome, and there 
 can, I think, be no doubt that Sergius was the real originator of such 
 cult in Rome. 
 
 It may be asked, why, or how, such a Greek piece as this 
 Galba litany comes, or can come, from Rome, the centre of Latin 
 Christianity. Assuming a due appreciation of the state of things in 
 
 ^ Liber pontif. ed. Duchesne i 374. 
 
 "^ [Since this was written the treasure of the ' Sancta Sanctorum' at the Lateran 
 has been opened and the objects it contains have been studied by Fr Grisar S.J. 
 and M. Th. Lauer. Among these objects is a gold and enamelled cross, which 
 former writers identified with the cross found by Sergius ; and M. Lauer seems ready 
 to countenance this identification. See the discussion of Fr Grisar in his // Sancta 
 Sanctormn ed il suo tesoro sacro, Rome, Press of the Civiltci Cattolica, 1907, 
 pp. 73-109 for the cross and the box in which it is contained, pp. 170-172 for the 
 stuff of the cushion on which it rests (German edition Die romische Kapelle Sancta 
 Sanctoruin und ihr Schatz, Freiburg-im-Breisgau, 1908, pp. 56-82 and 127-128 ; 
 pi. ii is a coloured representation of the cross) ; Lauer's account in Iresor dii Sancta 
 Sanctorum vol. xv of the Mhnoires et Monuments, Fondatton Eugene Piot, Paris, 
 Leroux, 1906, pp. 40-49 the cross, 60-66 the bo-x, 108-109 for the stuff of the cushion. 
 It may be remarked as a matter of detail that whilst Sergius's biographer speaks 
 of a jewelled cross, and says nothing of enamels, the cross lately found in the 
 Sancta Sanctorum is an enamelled one and shews no jewels.]
 
 146 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Rome at this period, the proper answer to this question is, it seems to 
 me, a counter question, namely : And why not ? Why not, at any 
 time during the period of some seventy years and more in which the 
 Roman see was occupied by a succession of Popes Greek by race, Greek 
 by language? If we wish to be more precise, Popes recruited from 
 the ranks of those Greek-speaking ' Syrians' who from the first decades 
 of the seventh century had taken refuge in crowds before the victorious 
 advance of Islam, and had made in Sicily and Lower Italy a new 
 home, a new Syrian land, for themselves : people who came largely 
 from the region of Antioch and neighbouring Cilicia. Five such 
 Syrians occupied the papal chair between the years 686 and 730 ; 
 and at this period there must have been abundant occasion for 
 the composition or use at Rome of pious formulae in the Greek 
 tongue. 
 
 We have at any rate these elements : on the one hand a litany in 
 Greek coming (as all the indications shew) from Rome, with evidence 
 in its invocations of the cults of the Cross and of our Lord as the 
 Lamb of God ; on the other a Pope, Greek by race, whose speciality 
 was church services and devotions, under whom the first mention is 
 found of these cults in Rome. If we go a step further, sufficient 
 traces are found of the relations of this Pope with England ; for 
 instance: he consecrated St Willibrord (Nov. 21, 695); he was con- 
 cerned in the accession of Berctwald to the see of Canterbury in 
 some way special enough to call for record in the jejune contemporary 
 biography ; he was in correspondence with Jarrow and Wearmouth. 
 Any one of these occasions might have served to bring to England 
 a litany, the text of which suggests Sergius ; there were doubtless 
 many other such occasions of which we know nothing, and specula- 
 tion as to the real one is useless. There is then, on the basis of 
 ascertainable facts, no ground in reason for surprise either at the 
 origination of a litany in Greek in Rome — even if its form, a litany 
 of saints, be new — or at its contemporary importation into England. 
 To turn our attention now to England, to our insular selves : — it is 
 again mere matter of fact that it is in England that we find the 
 earliest attestations of the existence and use of a litany of saints 
 at all. These attestations are two : (a) in the Vi^a S. Gregorii anti- 
 quissima, by a monk of Whitby, which its first editor (so it is now, 
 I believe, agreed on all hands) rightly assigned to about the year 
 717. The author's words are: ' Iste enim sanctus (i.e. St Gregory 
 the Great) utique per omnem terram tam sanctus habetur ut semper 
 ab omnibus ubique sanctus Gregorius nominatur {sic). Unde letaniis 
 <iuibus Dominum pro nostris imploramus excessibus atque innumeris 
 peccatis quibus eum ofifendimus sanctum Gregorium nobis in ammi-
 
 THE LITANY OF THE SAINTS 147 
 
 niculum vocamus, cum Sanctis scilicet apostolis et martyribus ' (ed. 
 Gasquet, Westminster, 1904, p. 45) ; {b) in canon 17 of the Council of 
 Cloveshoe of 747, by which a similar honour of cult is granted for 
 the future to Gregory's disciple St Augustine the first Archbishop of 
 Canterbury. The synod orders that both feasts ' ab omnibus, sicut 
 decet, honorifice venerantur {sic) ; ita ut uterque dies ab ecclesiasticis 
 et monasterialibus feriatus habeatur ' ; and then for St Augustine in 
 particular it prescribes as follows : ' nomenque eiusdem beati patris 
 et doctoris nostri Augustini in laetaniae decantatione post sancti 
 Gregorii vocationem semper dicatur'. It will not be questioned, 
 
 1 suppose, that the 'litany' mentioned is in both cases a litany of 
 invocation of saints after the modern form and manner. These 
 testimonies stand alone ; and no such attestation is to be found on 
 the Continent (so far as I know) till some years later. 
 
 But we are not left to an inference. The litany of the Stowe Missal^ 
 the litany found by Witzel in a Fulda MS, the litany of 2 A xx, are 
 actual extant specimens of such a Litany of Saints as is described in 
 the two English documents just cited. In regard to one at least, 
 
 2 A XX, I take it (be it said in passing) that certain palaeographical 
 indications in the MS point to its having been written in the first 
 half of the eighth century rather than in the second, and in the earlier 
 part rather than at the close of that half-century. 
 
 I review certain features of each of these litanies. — (i) The writer 
 of the saints' litany in the Stowe ' Praeparatio ' restricts himself to 
 the Blessed Virgin and some of the Apostles, with Matthias, Mark, 
 Luke. (2) The invocations of the litany of 2 A xx begin with three 
 archangels (as in the Greek) ; then come invocations of John the 
 Baptist, the Blessed Virgin, Apostles and Evangelists in the order 
 of the Stowe diptychs, but with the insertion of Barnabas before 
 Mark, followed (after Stephen) by the first order of martyrs (in the 
 ' Communicantes ') of the Roman Canon ; then come seventeen 
 invocations of martyrs, hermits, doctors, and confessors (ending with 
 Benedict), lastly virgins. All of these (except Gregory and Benedict) 
 are names of ancient saints well known in the earliest Western mass 
 books and martyrologies or calendars ; but there are no Irish names. 
 
 (3) In Moelcaich's revision of the original litany of Stowe, after 
 Stephen, Martin, Jerome, Augustine, Gregory, Hilary, Patrick, come 
 twenty invocations of Irish men, and five Irish women saints. 
 
 (4) The litany in Witzcl's Fulda manuscript after Luke has Barnabas, 
 Stephen ; then twenty invocations of well-known martyrs, doctors, 
 confessors (ending with Benedict) ; then Patrick, Secundinus, and 
 twenty-three more names, nostris teniporibus ignotissima (sa)'s Witzel), 
 of men and women, doubtless all Irish. This description suffices 
 
 L a
 
 148 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 to shew the close relationship of the four documents, and the influ- 
 ences determining the differing selection of names in each case. 
 
 On the supposition that the Greek litany came to England, say 
 about 690, there could be nothing to appear surprising in a widespread 
 adoption and rapid propagation of this new form of devotion if we 
 consider the prevailing tone and temper of the English or Irish 
 religious mind at this period. The ejaculatory, litanic, asyndetic, 
 type of prayer is peculiarly suited to the Irish genius. We have 
 only to observe the prayers common among that people from the 
 Lorica of St Patrick downwards. The publication of the Book, of 
 Cerne and of MS 3 A xx affords abundant, and genuine, material for 
 study. But there is more. The Irish masters in the early days of 
 England's conversion were by nature attracted to solitude ; they 
 strove, were even able, to combine this inclination of theirs with the 
 active duties of the apostolate ; and many of their English disciples 
 imbibed much of their spirit. We must not look to the ordinary 
 life of Jarrow and Wearmouth in this matter ; but the Life of 
 St Guthlac by Felix gives a lively presentment of a type of spiritual 
 life that was common in England so long as the influence of the 
 Irish teachers lasted. But if men such as these lived in solitude, 
 they still were not alone ; their world was peopled by spirits, angels, 
 good and bad, all either friends or foes, with whom they were in 
 continual communion or conflict. Given too the particular stage of 
 religious developement in Western Europe, we are bound to believe 
 that in the world thus peopled with spirits, the ancient martyrs and 
 the hermits who had suffered and had conquered in the fight were 
 present too. In such a spiritual atmosphere as this nothing is more 
 easy than to understand (the impulse once given) the developement 
 and rapid spread of such a devotion as that which we call the litany 
 of the saints, with its combination of freedom and variety in the 
 choice of deceased persons to be invoked, and the ease, brevity, and 
 uniformity of the actual prayer itself: ' Ora pro nobis.' On the 
 supposition that the Greek litany reached England in (say) the last 
 decade of the seventh century, I think that (given the then religious 
 state and atmosphere of England) it is not unreasonable to expect 
 that even a dozen years may have sufficed for the propagation of 
 the new devotion among those who still gave the tone to the common 
 religious public of the time. 
 
 From Ireland and England I pass to the Continent. The earliest 
 non-insular example of a litany of saints known to me is contained 
 in the so-called Sacramentary of Gellone, written in the second half 
 of the eighth century, and the best representative of that Gallic com- 
 pilation the ' Gelasianum of the eighth century '. It occurs in the
 
 THE LITANY OF THE SAINTS 149 
 
 baptismal office at foil. 173''-! 92^ of the MS, which has been printed 
 piecemeal by Martene in his dc ant. Eccl. rit. ; namely as Ordo ii of 
 art. 13 of lib. i cap. i, and Ordos vi and vii of art. 18. In the MS 
 these three Ordos of Martene form one continuous whole. This 
 baptismal office occurs in the section of the MS immediately after 
 episcopal and other benedictions and miscellaneous prayers, being 
 followed at once by the order of dedication of a church (also printed 
 by Martene, op. cit., as Ordo i of lib. ii cap. 13). Though a form for 
 solemn baptism at Easter, with all the lenten preparations, it is in 
 the MS but a secondary or supplementary one ; the normal Gelasian 
 baptismal office is given in its proper place in the ecclesiastical year, 
 viz. at fif. 57-62 of the MS. Whether the office at fif. 173-192 be a part 
 of the ' Gelas saec. viii ' as originally compiled or an addition peculiar to 
 this MS does not for our purposes matter ; for in either case it must be 
 a composition drawn up in Gallic lands. The litany of saints is pre- 
 scribed to be said while the bishop is going in procession from the church 
 to the baptistery. It is short, containing but thirteen invocations of 
 saints by name ; but it otherwise recalls the' framework ' of the Galba 
 litany and its congeners, consisting as it does of suffrages J, 9, 11, 14, 
 15, 16, 17 of that litany {plus a final A2(di /los, as in 2 A xx : cf. 
 Moelcaich) — but with the insertion of three petitions for fine weather 
 between 15 and 16. 
 
 We find, then, that by the second half of the eighth century the 
 Galba litany has made its way to the Continent. At this point 
 I stop. To go a step further would be to open up a new period in 
 the history of the litany, adequately to deal with which is beyond 
 my opportunities. I must be content here to say in general terms that 
 in the course of the ninth century and tenth, litanies of saints come 
 into common liturgical use, and are now found in the order for the 
 visitation of the sick also, and among the prayers said for those at 
 the point of death. It is, however, but slowly and gradually that in 
 the manuscripts they obtain admission into the strictly liturgical 
 offices of the body of the Sacramentary itself. In the litanies of the 
 ninth and tenth centuries the order of Apostles is commonly that of 
 the Roman Canon ; very frequently the order is not reducible either 
 to it or to any of the lists in the New Testament. The influence 
 of the order of Matthew (= of the Stozvc diptychs) may still be 
 traced, it would seem, in some cases.^ The Matthew order is found 
 
 * See the litany in the ' Pontifical of St Dunstan ', Martene lib. ii cap. 13 Ordo iv (and 
 perhaps that in the ' Pontifical of Egbert' p. 27) ; in a Fleury MS in Martene lib. iii 
 cap. 15 Ordo i ; in an important Poitiers Pontifical ibid. lib. iv cap. 24 ; in an Anti- 
 phonar described by abbd Eugene Mulier in an article entitled ' Antiphonaire du 
 Mont-Renaud ' in the Bulletin du Comiti arch^ol. de Noyon (and separately Noyon, 
 D. Andrieu.x, 1875, p. 21). All these are MSS of the late ninth, or of the tenth.
 
 150 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 in the Rogation litanies of the Maimale Ambrosiamim, a manuscript 
 of the eleventh century ; this seems to be the earliest Milanese attesta- 
 tion.^ 
 
 In concluding, in order to avoid misconception, so easy in dealing 
 with things so vague and shadowy, and in a case such as this where 
 positive evidence is not to be had, but only indications whereby we 
 may guide ourselves to a just conclusion, I think it is well to add a 
 few words by way of summing up the enquiry so far as it has yet 
 gone. Subject to the production of evidence or the detecting of 
 indications which I have been unable to discern leading to contrary 
 conclusions, I conceive of the case as follows : 
 
 (i) The Galba litany actually came to England from Rome about 
 the last years of the seventh century, and was actually the starting 
 point for the English and Irish developements found in Stoive, i A xx, &c. 
 
 (2) The Irish received this form of litany (that is the * framework ') 
 from the English. 
 
 (3) At first it was a private devotion of individuals, and by and by 
 probably of communities. If it in any way came to form part 
 of the ' services ' of secular priests or monks, this was as yet but 
 in an informal manner, and it was far from having acquired a 
 * liturgical ' character even (I conceive) at the date of the Council of 
 Cloveshoe. 
 
 (4) I think that the English and Irish were the propagators of such 
 litany of the saints in the eighth century in Gaul and Germany. 
 
 (5) The subject of the Roman liturgy in Rome and outside Rome 
 in the seventh and eighth centuries is still involved in obscurities ; 
 with patience and increasing knowledge a good deal may be done 
 to clear these away. Meantime an attitude of reserve is the only 
 one that is reasonable, in regard to the question whether the litany 
 of saints was also developed by Rome herself, or whether (as, in my 
 opinion, was really the case) it was received into her liturgy as already 
 developed from the Franks.^ 
 
 century. The order of the Roman Canon seems generally followed at this time in 
 the litanies of the region Paris-Reims. 
 
 ^ Mamiale Ambrosiamim ex cod. saec. r/ ed. M Magistretti (Milan, Hoepli, 1894) 
 ii 247, 258 (and from a manuscript saec. xiii pp. 47, 129, 164). Some persons may 
 perhaps be disposed to see here a trace of Milanese influence in Ireland ; I should 
 rather think of the influence of the Irish in Milan. But possibly the resemblance 
 has another cause altogether. 
 
 * [To come to a conclusion on (5) and on (6), one way or the other, the document 
 rnust be carefully scrutinized. I take two cases as specimens of the sort of examina- 
 tion I have in mind, first the response <5^a» 'vni(> rjficin', secondly the suffrage 'Atto 
 nairros kukov XvTpuxrai fjfxas. 
 
 (i) It may be said that the form eS^m vntp fjixau is unknown, or alien, to Greek 
 liturgical terminology. The observation is just. But there is another side to the 
 matter. This litany is not a liturgical document ; it is a product of, as it is meant
 
 THE LITANY OF THE SAINTS 151 
 
 (6) The Galba litany was originally drawn up in Greek, the Latin 
 is a translation. 
 
 SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 
 
 Note A 
 
 TJie St-Aviand Or do and its Litany 
 
 [The 
 
 Roman Ordo called ' of St-Amand ' gives in its section vi, 
 devoted to the Lctania viaior (25 April, St Mark's Day), a text of a 
 litany of saints with a ' framework ' as in the litanies dealt with in the 
 foregoing Paper, This Ordo was first printed by Mgr Duchesne in 
 his Origines du Ctdtc cJireticn (1889). Since then it has been, in the 
 
 for, private devotion ; it is a specimen of popular piety. Unfortunately these forms 
 of popular piety are just what we do not commonly find, and perhaps should not 
 expect to find, in the solemn works of the Fathers. But two books, full of illustra- 
 tions of popular religion, and just of the age important for us, do actually exist : 
 the Dialog! of St Gregory the Great for the Latin West, and the Pratum Spiriiuale 
 of John Moschus for the Greek East. From several of the stories told by this 
 latter, we learn that then, as now, among devout and pious persons, the expression 
 'Pray for me' was usual, especially as coming from an ordinary commonplace 
 Christian to a holy priest or monk. Thus cap. 8 (Migne P. G. 87 iii col. 2857 d) 
 Ev^iKrdf vnep (fiov Harepts, Ev^ai vnep €/LioO Ildrep. So too capp. 1 1 7, 137 ; or, cap. 
 55, this form : Ev^al p-m ndrep, cf. cap. 1 49. As in those days the distinction 
 between living ' holy men ' and dead ' saints ' had not been brought into clarity and 
 definiteness by theological speculation and processes or formalities of canonization, 
 Ev^ai xrnip iifMuiv is precisely the form that we ought to be prepared to find, or 
 perhaps ought to expect, in a litanic composition such as that in the Galba MS. 
 
 (2) Let us now for a moment take as our supposition that the Latin is the original 
 and the Greek a translation: how comes it that the Greek corresponding to 'Ab 
 omni malo libera nos ' takes the form 'An-o nnvris kukov Xiirpaxrai rjpas and not a form 
 (in view of the termination of the Lord's prayer piaai fjnas dno tov novijpov) remini- 
 scent of the Lord's prayer? Taking the other point of view that the Greek is the 
 original I would suggest whether Titus ii 14 "iva XvTpoicrrjrai i]fids dno 7ru<7»)y dvofuas 
 might not rather have been in the writer's mind (the Vulgate is ' ut nos redimeret 
 ab omni iniquitate '). But there is more. The stress here is upon 7rn»T()$-, ' omni '. 
 The form to which the Roman ear was, and had long been, accustomed in every 
 mass is 'ab omnidus mah'j ', and this was peculiar to the Roman Liturgy (see 
 Liturgical Note in Boo^ of Cerne, No. 57 p. 264, in which a survey is taken of 
 Western liturgies) ; a form which, if the litany was originally composed in Latin, 
 one would naturally expect to have been adopted in our document which other 
 reasons induce us to locate as of Roman origin. 
 
 Having expressed my opinion in the text at (6) I am not to be understood here as 
 arguing the case, but as pointing out that, if our document is to be understood and 
 justly located, several questions may have to be considered that are not obviously 
 evident on the face of it. I know there is another method of settling critical or 
 obscure cases of this kind ; this method only requires confidence or boldness of 
 tone, a sufficiency of ignorance and a facile pen ; but then thtse are qualities, 
 I think it will be allowed, not conducive to a 'right judgement' in the critical investiga- 
 tion of a document, however effective, or convenient, they may be found in imposing 
 on ' the Philistines '.]
 
 15a LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 various editions, French and English, six times reprinted ; and though 
 the last of these Ordos to appear, it may now be said to enjoy the 
 distinction of being the most vulgarized. Not merely so, but in quite 
 authoritative books of eminent scholars (as for instance the late bishop 
 of Salisbury's Ministry of Grace p. 76), the ' Ordo of St-Amand ' is 
 regularly cited as of primary value and as a first-rate witness for 
 genuine Roman practice. 
 
 If this be so, then, seeing that our Greek-Latin litany in its Latin 
 form would thus be witnessed to as in actual use in Rome towards the 
 end of the eighth century — ' at a date anterior to about the year 800 ', 
 says Duchesne in the introductory notice to his print in Ovigines — and 
 seeing that elsewhere it is stated by him (chapter on ' Les livres de 
 liturgie latine ' § P) that this Ordo gives a ' rituel strictement remain, 
 romain de Rome ', it may be said that we thus have evidence that the 
 Latin form of the litany is the original, and the Greek is a version. 
 We further read in Duchesne : ' C'est done tout-a-fait a la fin du septieme 
 siecle, ou plutot au siecle suivant, que je placerais la redaction de 
 I'ordre tel que nous I'avons.' 
 
 This matter of detail, though not in the way in which I have just 
 put it, has been brought directly before me in a private communica- 
 tion, and in reprinting ' The Litany of Saints in the Stowe Missal ' 
 I feel under an obligation to deal with the case. I am the rather 
 moved to do so inasmuch as, even to understand the conditions in 
 which alone a sound judgement can be formed as to the question of 
 the Litany, it will be necessary to deal with the whole case of the 
 quality and value of the Ordo of St-Amand as an authentic witness 
 to Roman practice ; a task to which I think no liturgist up to now 
 has addressed himself. 
 
 Experience has taught me that if I really wish personally to know 
 and understand just the most important and early documents of our 
 Western Liturgy, there is nothing for it but to undertake for oneself, 
 and one's own particular behoof, the task of ' editing ' them (at least 
 taliter qiialiter) from the MSS. I have had to do this, for instance, 
 with the famous Gregorianum, of which the experts have been talking 
 time out of mind ; and with the ' Gclasianmn of the eighth century ', 
 which is not mentioned by so much as a word in our text-books ; 
 indeed it was only by working through the MSS that I came to learn 
 that such a book existed.^ 
 
 ' I have no hesitation to-day in calling the '■ Gelas saec. viii' compilation 'The 
 Roman Sacramentary of King Pippin' father of Charles the Great. Dom Wilmart 
 hardly exaggerates when he writes as follows in regard to this book : ' Aussi bien, 
 c'est tout ce vieux missel romain form^ en France au vill® siecle par la fusion des 
 deux missels gelasien et gr^gorien qui est le veritable ancetre, le prototype de notre 
 livre de messe. Quand on aura bien fix6 ce point, I'histoire du missel romain sera
 
 THE LITANY OF THE SAINTS 153 
 
 I. The following, then, is the way in which I have proceeded with 
 the ' Ordo of St-Amand '. I have taken section i, as the best means of 
 testing its author's quality. This is also the most important section 
 of all, as it deals with the Mass. Breaking up the Order and Canon 
 of the Mass into a dozen or so of convenient parts (e.g. order of pro- 
 cession of entry, action to end of introit, &c., &c.), I have confronted 
 each part of the text of St-Amand with the corresponding part of all 
 the Ordos known to me. The work on these Ordos, I may say in 
 passing, was done just thirty-six years ago, in order that I might be 
 able to know more or less what I was talking about when I spoke of 
 the old Roman Mass, or its spread in the land of the Franks in the 
 eighth and ninth centuries. It was thus an easy matter to enter at 
 each part of my compilation the account given by the Ordo of 
 St-Amand, so as to be able to take in the texts of all the Ordos uno 
 obtutu, and I was now in a position to come to some opinion on the 
 question whether our document be a genuine Roman production, and 
 drawn up by a practised ceremoniar for practical use, or something else. 
 The Ordos fall into three groups : 
 
 I. Mabillon's First Ordo ^ (based ultimately, I understand, on Cod. 
 Vat. Pal. 487, Tommasi's ' vetustissimus codex', with the collation of 
 a Colbertine MS); Bianchini's,^ from a MS given to the church of 
 Verona by the archdeacon Pacificus, who died 856; Gerbert's print ^ 
 from a Zurich MS. ' saec. ix '. To this class is to be added MS Addit. 
 15222 ff. 28-42, ' of the ninth or tenth century ', which being accessible 
 I collated. This book is a Besan9on MS ; in it the bishops of the 
 province in the eleventh and twelfth centuries subscribed with their 
 own hands their profession of canonical obedience to the metropolitan. 
 The Verona and Zurich MSS seem to me derived from the same 
 original, having in common many little abridgements or omissions, 
 which occur partially also in the Besan9on MS. To these four must 
 be added again the mutilated but valuable letter of the deacon Theo- 
 trochus of Lorsch, giving an account of the part taken by the deacons 
 in the Mass as observed at Fulda. It was first printed from a tenth- 
 
 enfin ecrite, et un enfant en pourra suivre le ddveloppement, tant il est simple 
 malgrd I'apparence ' {Revue Bhiddictine, xxx, 1 91 3, p. 28 note 2). I would, however, 
 add (a) that for the elucidation of the history of the Roman Missal, the Gregorian 
 Sacramentary of Charles the Great must be added, on an equal footing, to the 
 "" Gelasianum of the eighth century'; {b) that, in the last sentence, to the Missal 
 above mentioned by Dom Wilmart the Roman Pontifical and Ritual must be added. 
 I am glad to say that an edition of ' Gelas saec. viii', definitive and satisfying the 
 utmost exigencies of the liturgical scholar, based on all extant manuscripts, is not 
 merely in hand but almost completed. 
 
 ^ Museum Italicum ii p. 3 sqq. 
 
 ' Anasiasii Bibliothecarii de Vitis Rovi. Pont, iii p. xxxix. 
 
 ^ Monum. vet. Liturgiae alemaiinicae ii p. 144 sqq.
 
 154 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 century MS in Nenes Archiv iv pp. 409 sqq., and has been conveniently- 
 reprinted by Dr A. Schonfelder in Quellen und Abhandhmgen zur 
 Gcsch. d. Abtei u. d. Didzese Fulda No. 5 (Fulda, Actiendruckerei, 
 1910) pp. 102-104. 
 
 2. Gerbert's particularly interesting Ordo entitled * Capitulare 
 ecclesiastici ordinis', from a St-Blasien MS 'saec. ix circ' ^ This 
 recension is evidently, so far as the pontifical Mass is concerned, 
 the basis of two other documents which at first sight have quite 
 another look, and are an adaptation of the Roman Mass to monastic 
 use : one has been edited from a Lorsch MS, Cod. Vat. Pal. 574, by 
 Muratori,^ and again from a St-Blasien MS ' saec. ix ' by Gerbert ; ^ 
 the other was edited by Martene from a Murbach MS, which he says 
 is of about A. D. 800, but which must be of a later date.* This group 
 shews marked corruptions of the Roman Rite ; and its chief representa- 
 tive, the Capitulare of the St-Blasien MS, whilst noisy and even 
 violent in its advocacy of strict Romanism, is unblushing in its 
 endeavour to revive discarded Gallican rites. This adaptation of the 
 Ordo Romanus seems to have been prevalent in south-west Germany ; 
 and it enables us very well to understand how in the tenth century the 
 Lorsch deacon Theotrochus found the observances in his own home so 
 greatly wanting in Roman purity. 
 
 3. Mabillon's Ordo II ^ stands by itself; it is in fact a 'copy' of the 
 Ordo I in this sense, that it is the Roman text, but a text greatly 
 disfigured and corrupted by Gallican changes and interpolations. 
 Some useful items can also be extracted from the so-called Eglogae 
 of Amalar printed by Mabillon at the end of the Museum Italicum. 
 
 II. With this apparatus we can confront the Ordo of St-Amand, 
 beginning at the actual entry of the pontiflf into the church for the 
 Mass (' et egreditur pontifex de sacrario ') down to the end of the 
 section (' complet omnia sicut supra scriptum est ') : just eight and a 
 half pages of print. When the examination has been made according 
 to the usual methods, the following phenomena present themselves. 
 
 {d) Some thirty-seven items (according to my count) — little pieces 
 from half a line to two or three lines, in a very few places more — occur 
 nowhere else to my knowledge, and are for us first-hand authority, or 
 new material. But when they are brought together it appears that 
 they relate wholly to what may be called the underlings of the function, 
 subdeacons and acolytes : above all the writer follows with particular 
 attention the evolutions of the Schola caiitorum — supernumeraries 
 
 * Mon. vet. Lit. alemann. ii p. 168 sqq. 
 
 * Liturgia Romati. vet. ii col. 391 sqq. 
 ^ Moti. vet. Lit. alemann. p. 177 sqq. 
 
 * Thes. anecd. iv col. 103 sqq. * Mtis. Ital. ii p. 42 sqq.
 
 THE LITANY OF THE SAINTS I55 
 
 who. whatever the sweetness of their song, had by this time at all 
 events reduced the people to silence ;-our author marches them out 
 to lift up their voice in the assembly, and brings them back again to 
 decent obscurity 'subtus ambone'. All this then is new ; and from 
 the fact that this is so, it must be called, I suppose, an accession to 
 ' knowledge '. In all this part of his work I have no doubt that the 
 writer has used an authentic document or particular ceremonial of this 
 class of persons, a sort oi guide dcs cnfants dc chmir of the day. The 
 general character of his book, as the examination reveals it to us, 
 is a compilation rather than a record of things observed. 
 
 {b) The scattered bits mentioned under [a) are woven into the 
 very texture of the Ordo ; but now that we have sorted them out and 
 can address ourselves to the residue— that is, the stuff that really 
 matters— as a rubrical direction for the ceremonies or action of the 
 Mass, it appears that [cxceptis excipicndis, of which later) the Ordo 
 of St-Amand is Mabillon's Ordo I, with a difference— a difference 
 steadily maintained from the beginning to the end : it is elaborately 
 rewritten in such terms and in such a way as (until modern methods 
 are applied) to make the recognition of the original as hard for the 
 reader as possible. And we can realize the meaning to be attached to 
 the elaborate title which the man has given to his composition. He 
 writes ' non grammatico sermone ', he says,— and that is obvious indeed. 
 But we can tell wherein lies the ' summum studium ' and ' diligentia 
 maxima ' on which he prides himself: it is in his style. He is a stylist, 
 secundum quid; a sacristy official into whose hands good material has 
 fallen, and plenty of it, which he is above honestly copying, but works 
 up in such a way as to make his book a trap (it is no less) for the 
 modern savant. The only way to make this evident to an enquirer 
 would be to 'edit' him with relative texts in parallel columns and 
 a perpetual commentary. To do this properly would take up a sub- 
 stantial part of the present volume. In the circumstances perhaps my 
 word that the Ordo of St-Amand is really Ordo I, rewritten m a 
 'literary manner' and disfigured with ritual blunders, will at all events 
 be provisionally accepted. 
 
 {c) To come to the exccpta excipicnda mentioned above : these are 
 pieces, or rather items, in which our author differs in some definite 
 matter, some matter of fact, from his primary authority, Mabillon s 
 Ordo I That these differences are no more than ritual blunders and 
 errors on the part of the composer of the Ordo of St-Amand, two 
 specimens may suffice to shew. The first concerns the Pontiff's ritual 
 washing of hands at the time of the offertory ; the second concerns 
 the number of hosts forming the Pontiffs (celebrant's) special offering 
 at the general (people's) offertory— the ' oblatae quas offert pro se '.
 
 156 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 The first is a more simple case, the second a more complex and 
 difficult one. 
 
 The first case : the washing of the Pontiff's (celebrant's) hands at 
 the time of the offertory. All Ordos known to me, with the single 
 exception of the Ordo of St-Amand, agree in prescribing that the 
 Pope (celebrant) wash his hands after collecting the offerings of the 
 people, and his return to his chair. This is our present practice, 
 practically at the same place in the service, though the ' reason ' 
 for this ablution has disappeared. Such ablution is a prescription 
 the 'natural' reason for which, under the old system of collection 
 of the bread and wine from the people, is obvious. The Ordo of 
 St-Amand, however, prescribes this ahlutio manimm immediately 
 before the Pope goes down from his chair to make the collection. 
 After having examined the work of the author to see what sort of man 
 he is, and the nature of his methods, I think I may say that he is 
 certainly not a man to have invented this ablution before the offertory : 
 he found it in his materials, in his sources, somewhere. Now our 
 group 3 above (and it is a characteristic feature of this group) pre- 
 scribes an ablutio inamnnn for the celebrant before he goes down to 
 receive the people's offerings and also after he returns to the altar 
 from collecting them. I suggest (indeed I do not think it open to 
 doubt) that our author took his prescription of handwashing before the 
 offertory directly or indirectly from the original document on which 
 the three Ordos of group 1 above are ultimately based. In any case 
 his unique prescription of the ablntio viammm before instead of after 
 the collection of offerings is in accord with the very special want of 
 judgement and good sense that characterizes the writer of the Ordo 
 of St-Amand among his fellows (not particularly sensible persons at 
 best) the ritualists of the ninth century. 
 
 The second case : the number of the Pontiff's oblatae, or hosts. 
 When coming to the ritual confraction just before holy communion, 
 the first Roman Ordo says : * Tunc pontifex rumpit oblatam ex latere 
 dextro ; et particulam, quam rumpit, super altare relinquit : reliquas 
 vero oblationes snas ponit in patenam, quam tenet diaconus, et redit ad 
 sedem ' (Mabillon, p. 13). For which our author has this : The ' arch- 
 deacon ' ' tenet eam (i. e. the paten) ad dexteram pontificis et frangit 
 {sc. pontifex) unam ex oblatis quas offert pro se, et dimittit coronam ^ 
 ipsius super altare et ponit wiani integrant et aliam mediam in patenam, 
 . . . et pontifex vadit ad sedem suam '. Our business here is solely with 
 the careful precision of ' one and a half in the St-Amand Ordo as 
 compared with the vague ' reliquas oblationes ' of Ordo I. It is 
 
 ' ' Coronam ipsius ' is the writer's way of saying what Ordo I expresses by the 
 plain words ' particulam quam rumpit '. See Ducange under ' Corona oblationis '.
 
 THE LITANY OF THE SAINTS 157 
 
 necessary in reading our author and estimating his work to remember 
 that not merely has he at his disposal an ample body of materials, 
 but (to give him his due) he really possesses them well in mind. 
 To be a match for him — in a word, to find him out — it is necessary 
 for the modern critic himself to be well acquainted with this class of 
 document. 
 
 Neither Mabillon's Ordo I nor the Ordo of St-Amand mentions how 
 many hosts the Pope received from the archdeacon wherewith to make 
 his personal ' offering ' at the time of the offertory. But on certain 
 high days in Rome at the mass of the Pontiff there was what is called 
 concelebration ; that is to say, the assistant cardinal priests said the 
 Canon along with the Pope, consecrating at the same time with him 
 certain hosts which they had before them in their hands on a corporal. 
 All this is described in a fragment which though it has survived only 
 in a separate form, is really an integral part of the first Ordo. It 
 is printed by Mabillon, p, 29.^ The direction in this fragment is : 
 ' . . . unusquisque tenens corporalem in manu sua : et venit archi- 
 diaconus et porrigit unicuique eorum oblatas tres.^ Our author, in 
 his usual way of rewriting, and in his usual latinity, has : ' et tenet unus- 
 quisque corporale in manu sua, et dantur eis ab archidiacono oblatas 
 dtias ad unumquemque.' 
 
 Here then we have a substantial variant, and in the variant a key 
 also to the writer's 'one and a half. On the assumption that the 
 Pope received from the archdeacon, wherewith to make his personal 
 * offering ', the same number of hosts as his concelebrants, each Ordo 
 in writing as above ' reliquas vero oblationes stias' (Ordo I), and ' U7iam 
 integram et aliavi mediani ', is consistent with itself; but the two clash 
 as to the number of oblatae. How comes the Ordo of St-Amand by its 
 'two' instead of ' three ' ? Now the second Ordo of Mabillon, put 
 above into a class by itself and said to be greatly Gallicanized, in 
 describing the Pope's personal offering at the offertory, has : ' Deinde 
 archidiaconus suscipit oblatas dnas de oblationario et dat Pontifici ; 
 quas dum posuerit Pontifex in altare ', &c. (p. 47). This is textually 
 a copy of Ordo I (p. 11), but with the addition of the word 'duas' : 
 and this is the only Ordo known to me in which a precise number is 
 specified at this place. 
 
 I suggest that the real state of the case is this : that according to 
 Roman use the number of the Pontiff's oblatae at the offertory, ' quas 
 offert pro se ', was three, and when a piece of one had been broken off 
 
 ^ The fragment says this concelebration at Rome took place on four feasts, Easter, 
 Pentecost, St Peter, Christmas Day ; it is characteristic of the author of the St-Amand 
 Ordo to extend the observance to Epiphany, Holy Saturday, Easter Monday, and 
 Ascension Day — eight days in all.
 
 158 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 the vague direction of the first Ordo at the confraction — ' reliquas 
 oblatas '—is quite correct ; the ' one and a half of the St-Amand Ordo 
 is due to the fact that, Hke the Gallicanized Ordo II, he takes the 
 Pope's own oblatae to be only two in number instead of three as in 
 the authentic Roman practice. 
 
 III. Sections ii-iv relate to the services of Holy- Week and Easter 
 Week. I do not intend to make any general remarks on these 
 sections, but shall confine myself to a single item of detail, namely, 
 the putting out of the lights at Tenebrae, that is at the matins 
 (three ' nocturns ') and lauds (' in matutinis ') of the three last days 
 of Holy- Week. This single item will however shew in a perfectly 
 evident manner the quality of our informant and guide. 
 
 The following is the description of this ceremony given in the 
 account of the Holy-Week services which is printed as an Appendix 
 by Mabillon, p. 31:^ 
 
 Lumen autem ecclesiae ab initio cantus nocturnae inchoatur exstingui, hoc 
 tamen ordine, ut ab introitu ipsius ecclesiae incipiat paulatim tutari \id est 
 exstingui : Mabillon] : ut verbi gratia, peracto primo nocturno, videatur eorum 
 pars tertia esse exstincta ; medio nocturno iterum tertia : tertio vero expleto, 
 exceptis septem lampadibus, nihil lumen relinquunt. Quae in matutinis ex- 
 stinguuntur hoc ordine. Initio primi psalmi sit custos semper paratus in loco 
 dextrae partis ecclesiae prope lampadibus : ut ubi audierit antiphonam, tenens 
 cannam in manu sua, tutet lampadam unam : in fine vero psalmi ipsius tutet 
 aliam partis sinistrae. In secundo psalmo, cum antiphonas audierit, tutet 
 dextra parte aliam. Sic una ex parte una, alia ex alia tutantur usque ad 
 evangelium [id est usque ad canticum Benedidics : Mab.] : in evangelio vero 
 tutatur mediana lampada. Ea die vero Coena Domini, hora nona, faciunt 
 excuti ignem de lapide . . . . ita ut ex eo possit candela accendi . . et de ipso 
 igne continue in eadem ecclesia loco secreto accendatur lampada una, et 
 servetur usque in sabbato sancto ad inluminandum cereum, qui eodem die 
 benedicendus est ordine, quo in Sacramentorum continetur. 
 
 This at all events is intelligible. What the author of the St-Amand 
 Ordo has in its place is no better than gibberish : ' sed tantum 
 inchoat ad matutinum antiphona in primo psalmo, tuta lampada 
 de parte dextra, in secundo psalmo de parte sinistra; similiter per 
 omnes psalmos usque vi aut vii, aut in finem evangelii, reservetur 
 absconsa usque in sabbato sancto.' I leave it to the reader, if he 
 will, to make any comment that is necessary on comparison of the 
 texts. 
 
 But the extinction of lights at ' Tenebrae ' was not observed in Rome 
 
 * There is another account at p. 22 ; but, from the mention in the St-Amand Ordo 
 of the hiding of the light (' reservetur absconsa', &;c.), I think it clear that a text 
 like that of the Appendix p. 31 was before the author of our Ordo.
 
 THE LITANY OF THE SAINTS 159 
 
 at all ; it was a rite of Gallican invention. That curious, but I think also 
 typical, ritualist A malar went on a mission to Rome in 831 or 832. At 
 home he considered himself, and was looked up to by his neighbours as, 
 a first-rate authority on the real Roman usage ; but arrived in Rome 
 he had some surprising experiences, and among them this one, which 
 may be given in his own words {dc Ord. Antiphonarii c. 44): 'The 
 custom obtains in our [Prankish] Church, that on the three nights Coena 
 Domini, Good Friday, and Holy Saturday the lights are extinguished 
 [at matins and lauds]. In regard to the practice of our holy mother, 
 the Roman Church, I enquired of Theodore, archdeacon of the afore- 
 said Church, namely the Roman. He answered : " I am in the habit 
 of being with the Pope in the Lateran when the office of Coena 
 Domini is celebrated. Nothing is done there that night about extin- 
 guishing the lights. On Good Friday there are no lights in the Church 
 of Jerusalem [i. e. Santa Croce] ; . . . but on that day new fire is lighted 
 from which some is kept until the night office." ' 
 
 Modern ritualists have thought to save the situation by making out 
 that, although the ceremony of extinction of lights at Tenebrae was 
 not observed in Rome on Thursday, it was on Friday and Saturday : 
 in other words they represent that Theodore in replying to Amalar 
 had recourse to that sort of economy which is called by the moralists 
 ' restrictio vicntalis ', not to say to a suggestio falsi. This seems to 
 me mere trifling. It would be well at once to accept the plain truth 
 that the ritual extinction of lights at Tenebrae, with all the sym- 
 bolism attached to it, was of Gallican invention and was not in use 
 at Rome at all. This is even indicated by the use of the verb 
 ' tutare ', which is Gallic, occurring (says Ducange) in the Regula 
 Magistri Cd,^^. 19 and 20. 
 
 IV. We may now come to the litany, for the sake of which the 
 enquiry into the general character and quality of the Ordo of St-Amand 
 has been instituted. This litany is contained in section vi, the Order 
 for ' Letania maior' (St Mark's day, 25 April). The question is not 
 whether invocation of saints in a litanic form was in use in the Roman 
 Church in the early years of the ninth century or the later years of 
 the eighth — of this there is no reason to doubt ^ — but whether the 
 particular formula given in section vi was in use there. As no other 
 ninth-century Order exists for * Letania maior ' with which to compare 
 the St-Amand text, we must rely on internal evidence. 
 
 The litany is prescribed to be said by the schola ' infra presbyterium ' 
 of the church of the station in which mass is to be said ; and the writer 
 
 ^ The evidence for this is the so-called ' Laudes' of which we have MS attesta- 
 tion of as early a date as the last years of the eighth century in the Psalter B. N. 
 MS lat. 13159.
 
 i6o LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 makes it clear that the close of this litany is the Kyrie eleison of the 
 mass, as in the mass of Holy Saturday in the Ordos of the ninth century 
 and as is the use of to-day. But there is a difficulty in the present- 
 ment of our Ordo. On Holy Saturday the mass goes straight forward 
 from Kyrie eleison as usual ; but in our Ordo for ' Letania maior ' the 
 order of the mass runs : Kyrie eleison^ Introit, Collect, &c. ; in other 
 words the usual order — Introit, Kyrie — is inverted.^ I am unable to 
 parallel this inversion in any similar document ; and in view of the 
 general character of his work, the question arises, whether this piece of 
 originality be not due to the compiler's aptitude for blundering and 
 spoiling the material that is in his hands. 
 
 But there is a further suspicious note in the very text of the 
 litany itself as he gives it. With one exception all ancient texts 
 of this litany agree in this order of suffrages at the end : 13 Per 
 crucem tuam ; 14 Peccatores, te rogamus ; 15 ut pacem dones ; 
 16 Filius Dei; 17 Agnus Dei. But the text of the St-Amand Ordo 
 gives this order: 13, 14, 16, 15, 17 — an order which the very subject- 
 matter of the suffrages shews to be preposterous. But it is the same 
 order as that in the text of the litany given by Moelcaich (see p. 143 
 note 3 above), the later interpolator to whom the bulk of Galilean 
 matter in the Stowe Missal is due. 
 
 I conceive the just inference from the facts as hitherto developed to 
 be as follows : that the author of the St-Amand Ordo and the Irish 
 interpolator of the Stowe Missal both used a late and corrupt text of 
 this litany found in Gaul in their own day, in which the order of the 
 concluding suffrages had been inverted. Moreover, the presence of 
 this litany in the St-Amand Ordo is, in view of its general character, no 
 evidence that the litany was in use in Rome on * Letania maior ' or on 
 any other day. Consequently this Ordo affords no reliable ground for 
 assuming that the Latin form is the original text and that the Greek 
 is a version ; which was the question we started out to discuss. But 
 there is another result of our enquiry. It is this, that, so far from 
 being a ' rituel strictement remain, romain de Rome ', so far from 
 being of primary value and a first-rate witness for genuine Roman 
 practice, the Ordo of St-Amand is one of the most corrupt, as it is the 
 most deceptive and audacious, of the Galilean perversions that pass 
 under the name of ' Roman Ordos '. It may date from any time in 
 the ninth century after, probably, 830.] 
 
 ' * Deinde [at end of litany] Christe audi ?ios, Kyrie eleison, tantum ter ; et com- 
 pletum est. Et ipsa die . . . non dicit scola Cyrie eleison post antiphonam, neque 
 pontifex Gloria ifi excelsis Deo'
 
 THE LITANY OF THE SAINTS i6i 
 
 Note B 
 Influence of East Syrians on Western Piety and Devotion. 
 
 [It is mentioned above (p. 139) that in the Stowe diptychs the Hst of 
 names begins with John Baptist, the Blessed Virgin Mary, Peter, &c. 
 This is, so far as I know, the single example in the West (except in 
 documents that stand in close relation to these diptychs, like the 
 litany of 3 A xx) in which the name of the Blessed Virgin does not 
 come first. In a brief note in the Journal of Theological Studies for 
 April 1909 ('Liturgical Comments and Memoranda' No. I) I called 
 attention (pp. 447-449) to the existence of this ' historical order ' in the 
 Syriac (Jacobite) liturgy of Cyriacus of Nisibis (a. D. 793-^17), which 
 had been printed a year or two previously : Cyriacus's Intercession 
 shewing the more complete ' historical ' order, ' John Baptist, Stephen, 
 Mary'. This latter is also the order in the priest's Intercession of the 
 Syriac Liturgy of St James itself (Brightman, p. 93) ; i. e. it is the 
 order in the normal and general liturgy of the Syrian Jacobite Church. 
 
 In view of the de facto identity of the Irish order of Apostles, as 
 shewn in the Stotve diptychs, &c., with that in the Intercession in the 
 Greek Liturgy of St James (Brightman, p. 57), the order John Baptist, 
 Mary, in the Irish document, and in 2 A xx under Irish influence, is 
 not to be lightly dismissed as merely accidental : especially in view 
 of general considerations of another kind, namely, the indubitable 
 influence of Syrian (in the sense of Syriac) devotion and piety on 
 Ireland, remote from each other geographically and historically as the 
 Churches of these two regions are. 
 
 Interest in this matter was first aroused by Dr Scheff"er-Boichorst's 
 paper, mentioned in 'Spanish Symptoms' (see below p. 178 note 3) ; 
 and I think I am now, after the lapse of nearly thirty years, 
 in a position to make some observations on the subject by way of 
 forecasting the course which the enquiry will take, and the results 
 which will be obtained in regard to Syriac influence on religion in 
 Western Europe during what I have called the critical period, i.e. the 
 sixth, seventh, and eighth centuries. 
 
 Any one who will take up Gerard Vossius's Opera omnia of 
 St Ephrem and look over the prayers and meditations at the end 
 of torn, i and some of the sermons in tom. iii, and then turn over the 
 Mozarabic Missal with attentive eye, and read also St Hildefonsus'sZ)^ 
 virgitiitate, and finally consider the effusions of the oldest Irish piety 
 — of which there is now good store in print in the Book of Cerne and 
 2 A XX — cannot fail to be struck by a curious similarity, I might say 
 almost identity, of devotional spirit. To this spirit the prayers in even 
 
 1158 \{
 
 i62 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 the GalHcan Missals (from which for this purpose I exclude the Bobbio 
 Missal), but most markedly those in the Roman books, stand in clear 
 contrast. As to the Syrian (Syriac) prayers, &c., it does not matter 
 whether they be genuine productions of St Ephrem himself: it is 
 enough that they represent the sort of piety and devotion dominant in 
 East Syria in the fifth and sixth centuries. The authorship and date 
 of particular pieces are a matter as to which we must look for more 
 exact information to Syriac scholars by and by. 
 
 More than twenty years after Scheffer-Boichorst, M. Br^hier took 
 up the same theme, and dwelt {Byz. ZeitscJir. xii, 1903) in part on 
 the influence of the ' Syrians ' in the sixth and seventh centuries ; 
 among points that interest us here he calls attention (pp. 27-28) to 
 the shock given to southern Gallic Christian piety at Narbonne by the 
 introduction by such ' Syrians ' of the crucifix instead of a simple 
 cross; and at pp. 35-36 he briefly but justly characterizes (so far as 
 he goes) the sort of religious influence exercised by the ' Syrians ' in 
 the West. But here we must make a distinction : there are Syrians 
 and Syrians. The kind of Syrians he represents (pp. 4 sqq.) as exer- 
 cising influence in Italy and in Rome in the seventh century are really 
 a Greek set, religiously, liturgically, and in the spirit of their piety. 
 The Syrians we are concerned with here, and those recalled to us in 
 the Spanish and Irish documents, are the Syriac-speaking or Semitic 
 Syrians, whether they be from the neighbourhood of Antioch, Edessa, 
 or Nisibis — a Christian people with origins, traditions, religious and 
 devotional tendencies of their own, and very different from those 
 of the Greek-speaking populations with which in some regions (Syria, 
 Antioch, Jerusalem) they happened to be mixed. 
 
 It is specifically the kind of piety that prevailed among these 
 Semitic Syrians that is recalled so unmistakably to us in the docu- 
 ments of the Hispano-Visigothic and Irish Churches and peoples. It 
 was something in the very nature of the Spanish and Irish character 
 that was sympathetically moved by the new religious and devotional 
 developement, forms, or practices, brought with them by these Semitic 
 Syrians from East to West : a something which was as the good ground 
 in which the seed takes root and fructifies as if in the native soil which 
 first produced it. Rome was in this matter as the rock ; and if the 
 Western, Greek-speaking, Syrians for a time had everything in their 
 hands there, they and their ways made no real impression on either 
 Roman liturgy or piety ; whilst the Franco-Gallic regions, if directly 
 influenced from the East, were influenced rather by Greek than by 
 Syriac Christianity. 
 
 The question may be asked : Where precisely did this Syrian reli- 
 gious influence, with its thoughts, forms of expression, even formulae,
 
 THE LITANY OF THE SAINTS 163 
 
 begin to make itself felt on Western piety ? where did it make its first 
 home? I answer unhesitatingly : In Spain; and it was the Spanish 
 Church that ' inoculated the Irish. It is Spanish forms of private 
 prayer or devout meditation that stand directly behind certain Irish 
 forms, so far as my enquiries or investigations enable me to speak. In 
 the Book of Cerne (pp. 278-280) I have given a specimen of the sort of 
 documentary enquiry that will have to be initiated in regard to this 
 matter. Long ago G. H. Forbes pointed out how Spanish forms lay 
 behind the most interesting and characteristic features of the Bobbio 
 Missal ; though, like so much of the work of this admirable solitary, 
 his words seem now as if forgotten, and their moral remains disregarded. 
 Of course it is quite probable that such a feature as the order of 
 Apostles, or the order ' John, Mary ', in the Stoive diptychs was 
 derived by some Irishman — and the Irish were in those days a people 
 enamoured of the strange, the odd, the rare — directly from some 
 Syrian, and taken directly to Ireland. Traces of this Syriac piety in 
 forms of prayer, in prayer-books or devotional literature on the 
 Continent north of the Alps and Pyrenees in the ninth and tenth 
 centuries are to be ascribed to the influence of Irish or English 
 missionaries or wandering scholars in the eighth or ninth.] 
 
 Note C 
 
 (See p. 143 n. 3) 
 Lists of Apostles. 
 
 [To the original print of this paper a Supplementary Note was 
 appended (see J. T. S. vii pp. 135-136), giving details as to the various 
 orders of Apostles' names in insular and continental documents up to 
 the earlier part of the ninth century. Since then much further material 
 has accumulated on my hands ; and though the subject doubtless has 
 a practical value of its own, to deal adequately with it would demand 
 an altogether undue amount of space in this volume, to say nothing of 
 its extreme aridity. I have determined then to omit the original Note. 
 But whilst doing so I should like to utter a word of warning in regard 
 to Dr Schermann's treatment of the matter at pp. 216-230 of his Pro- 
 pheien- und Apostcllcgcnden nebst Jiingcrkatalogen, &c. {Texte und 
 Untcrsuchungen 3. Reihe, vol. i, Heft 3, 1907). 
 
 In my Supplementary Note, I had carefully distinguished the order 
 in the ' Irish ' group of documents, referring this to the list in 
 St Matthew x 2-4 ; that of the Spanish diptychs and the diptychs of 
 Aries which adopt the order of Acts i 13; and that in the Roman 
 Canon not derived from Scripture. Dr Schermann in his summing-up 
 
 M 2
 
 i64 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 (p. 229) throws the Latin lists into seven types. The second of these he 
 calls the ' liturgical ' type. The order so designated is simply that 
 of the Roman Canon, which spread, he says, with that 'Gelasian 
 Canon ' to Gaul, Ireland and England, and also Milan. Of his third 
 type he says : ' in the regions of Gaul with Spain and the British 
 Islands the Lukan lists seem to have been in use.' 
 
 I note : 
 
 (i) First of all that his third type (as witness the Stowe and the 
 Mozarabic Missals) is as truly ' liturgical ' as his second ; 
 
 (2) That it suffices to look at Luke vi 14-16 and Acts i 13 to see 
 that these ' Lukan' lists are two different orders, and that they cannot be 
 thrown together as if one type; indeed the order in Luke is much 
 more nearly like the order in St Matthew x 2-4 than that in Acts ; 
 
 (3) That the Spanish order, and that of the diptychs of Aries 
 simply are the order of Acts, and that is the end of the matter ; 
 
 (4) Finally that, when the numerous Apostles' lists which can with 
 safety and security be assigned to insular origin or influence are brought 
 together in parallel columns in one view, their common derivation from 
 Matthew is clear ; though (as may naturally be expected in documents 
 proceeding from Irish hands) a few shew variation in order : but even 
 these abnormal cases can hardly be called ' Lukan '. 
 
 It may or may not be worth while to spend time over such a matter 
 as Apostles' lists ; but I would plead that, if the subject be dealt with, 
 this should be done in a way different from that here followed by 
 Dr Schermann ; for it seems to me that he has successfully managed 
 to throw into confusion again a subject which I hoped to have in some 
 measure put into order. If such sort of enquiries be undertaken at 
 all, it must be not merely with the best attainable fullness of material 
 but also with strict and even tedious regard to the minutiae of 
 variation presented by the documents themselves.]
 
 VIII 
 'SPANISH SYMPTOMS '1 
 
 This title is borrowed; but its appropriation may find some excuse 
 in that the details to be given will perhaps fit into the work of the 
 writer from whom it is here adopted.^ In the Book of Cerne (Cam- 
 bridge, 1902) it was said there appear to be ' real indications that the 
 rising Church of the English was influenced in the very centre of its 
 life by the then flourishing Visigothic Church of Spain ' (p. 277) ; and 
 it was suggested (p. 280) that this influence was felt through the medium 
 of Ireland rather than of Gaul. 
 
 In the present paper I propose (i) to bring together the scattered 
 notices on the subject in the ' Liturgical Note' of that volume, and 
 add a few more details ; (2) to consider at what period it is most 
 likely Spanish documents can have made their way into England ; 
 (3) starting from the three prayers to the Blessed Virgin in the Book 
 of Cernc (nos. ^6, 57, 58), to illustrate the Marian cult evidenced in 
 some of our earliest Western liturgy-books. The subject of ' Spanish 
 Symptoms' is, if not new, at least somewhat unfamiliar and at present 
 obscure ; it must therefore in any case be dealt with tentatively. 
 What I should wish, however, now to do is to raise this question of 
 the influence of the Visigothic Church on our insular Churches, of 
 England and of Ireland, as a matter to be considered in and for itself; 
 but I shall act as if little more than a finger-post, pointing to the lines 
 of enquiry to be pursued and stopping short at the beginning of them. 
 
 It will be well, however, to make clear at once what is the ultimate 
 object, what in a word is the * use ', of such enquiries. At the ' Con- 
 gres de I'Histoire des Religions', held at Paris in 1900, one or two 
 voices were raised on behalf of the study of Christian liturgy ; not by 
 professed liturgists, but (if I remember rightly) only by laymen, 
 who dwelt on the need of pursuing this branch of study specifically 
 as a department of the history of religion. So far as I have been 
 able to observe, these voices have not evoked any adequate, or indeed 
 
 ' From \.\^t. Journal of Theological Studies, January 1907. 
 I';. ^ [' Spanisciie Symptome. Ein Beitrag zur tjberlieferungsgeschichte und Palao- 
 graphic ' was the title of a tract projected by the late Dr Traube for his series of 
 Qucllen und Untersuchtingcn zur lateinischen Philologie des Mittelaltcrs. See as 
 to his Collection of Materials Vorlesiingen ttnd Abhandhingen von Lttdwig Tratibe 
 i (1909) p. Ixv.]
 
 i66 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 any, response in the quarters most concerned. Yet these speakers pre- 
 cisely touched, I venture to think, on that which has constituted a 
 weakness, has been the cause of a certain steriHty, of Hturgical work 
 in the last century ; namely, that it has been in the main a study in 
 ritual rather than a study in religion ; as a consequence it has 
 seemed to be in touch rather with professionalism than with life, and 
 appears in its general character to be predominantly of clerical interest. 
 However it may be with earlier times, in dealing with the insular 
 Churches of the seventh century we stand, comparatively speaking, on 
 firm ground. I cannot but think, however, that with the ' Church 
 History ' which has so long held the field and is so familiar to us, there 
 is call for more attention to the religion of the English and Irish of 
 that age than the subject has hitherto received.^ It is with this idea 
 in mind that I am here concerned with ' Spanish Symptoms ', and 
 engage in the minute and miscellaneous details set out below. 
 
 I 
 
 The following are the Spanish items pointed to in the ' Liturgical 
 Note ' to Cerfte, with some corrections and one or two additions which 
 would not have been there in place. 
 
 {a) It has long since been observed that the diptychs of the Stowe 
 Missal (an excellent example of the Irish eclectic, or tinkering, method 
 in liturgy) draw, among other ' sources ', on the diptychs of the Moz- 
 arabic, or old Visigothic (Spanish) mass (F. E. Warren Liturgy and 
 Ritual of the Celtic ChtircJi p. 260 n. 61). In the Book of Cerne (p. 370) 
 it was also noticed that a prayer for the dead existing in the Toledan 
 Missal in the second half of the eighth century (though not now found 
 in its representative, the Mozarabic),and cited by Elipandus, bishop of 
 Toledo, in his controversy with Alcuin, is used textually as a preface 
 in the mass for the dead in the Stowe Missal.^ 
 
 ^ 1 am not insensible of the difficulties underlying the question. Some are 
 touched on, rather rudely perhaps, from the Protestant side in the address of the 
 Geheimer Kirchenrath Lemme to the Evangelical Conference at Karlsruhe in the 
 latter part oi\<:^\{Religionsgeschichtliche Efitwickelutig oder gottliche Offenbarnfigf, 
 Karlsruhe, 1904) ; on the Catholic side, by Professor Schrors in his rectorial address 
 before the University of Bonn in the following year. The latter is more urbane, or 
 academic, in his tone ; but there is a decisiveness of exclusion, not to say a certain 
 snap, in the title that leaves no opening for doubt as to his meaning {Kirchen- 
 geschichte tind nicht Religionsgeschichte, Freiburg, Herder, 1905). And it must be 
 allowed that one difficulty attaching to these studies in religion — but whether inherent 
 or only actual is not so clear — is obvious even to the unconcerned onlooker, namely 
 the ease, the seemingly fatal ease, with which those who pursue them so often 
 ingenii siii adinventiones facitint {scieiitiae) sacravienta. 
 
 - [Dom F^rotin points out {Liber Mozarabicus Sacravientoruvi, 1912, p. xxxi) 
 that, though not in the existing MSS of the Sacramentary as printed by him.
 
 •SPANISH SYMPTOMS' 167 
 
 {b) In Book of Cerne pp. 253-254 (28) it is pointed out that a prayer 
 (no. 19) of that collection textually embodies the central prayer of the 
 'mysterium crucis' said in the most solemn part of the Good Friday 
 Office of the Mozarabic Missal.^ An addition made by another hand 
 to the original script of Cerne gave occasion to observe that there must 
 have existed in England a text yet more closely following that in the 
 Mozarabic Missal than the one given by the composer of the Cerne 
 prayer. 
 
 {c) Attention was also called (ibid. pp. 252-253 (25)) to a prayer 
 common to the Mozarabic Missal, the Irish fragment in St-Gall MS 
 1395 (eighth or ninth century) and the very curious burial prayers, 
 quite un-Roman in character but marked by Irish and Spanish affinities, 
 that make up the section iii 91 in the Gelasian Sacramentary. But 
 here I must modify what was there said, that the text in Moz ' offers 
 the original text of which that in Gelas is an enrichment '. Since 
 these words were written Dom Ferotin has published his Mozarabic 
 Liber Ordinum (1904). It contains (coll. iio-iii) this same prayer 
 in a full text like that of the Gelasiamim, and shews (what is of more 
 importance here) that the Irish fragment does not derive from the 
 text in Gelas or the Liber Ordinum, but from one akin to that in the 
 Mozarabic Missal.^ 
 
 {d) It was stated {Book of Cerne p. 240 (i)) that the prayer Detis 
 vitae dator in the burial service ^ of the Carolingian Supplement 
 to the Gregorian Sacramentary * is a prayer of a mass for the dead in 
 the Mozarabic Missal (p. 459. 52-62). Not merely this one, but nearly 
 all the prayers of the burial service of the Supplement are found in 
 Spanish (Mozarabic) books ; it is, as a whole, a ' Spanish Symptom ', 
 and one of the most significant, since Alcuin is now commonly, and, 
 as I believe, justly and rightly, accepted as the compiler of that 
 Supplement.^ 
 
 It may be objected that Alcuin perhaps adopted a burial service 
 
 this text is found in the ' Missa generalis Defunctorum ' in the Liber Ordinum 
 edited by him (1904) col. 422.] 
 
 * [This prayer is not to be found either in the Liber Sacramefitorum or in the 
 Liber Ordinum edited by Dom Ferotin ; and it may be as well to observe that 
 the Mozarabic Missal of Ximenes (ed. Lesley or Lorenzana) is still absolutely 
 necessary to the enquirer who would wish to be sure of his work.] 
 
 "^ Where Gelas reads * sequi studeat', and Lib. Ord. ' sequi gaudeat', Moz and 
 the Irish fragment read 'custodiat'. 
 
 * ' Orationes post lavationem corporis ', no. civ of the Supplement (Muratori 
 Lit. Rom. Vet. ii 213-218). 
 
 * [See above, pp. 49 sqq. for this Supplement.] 
 
 ' [See all this drawn out in detail in the Table in Supplementary Note A to the 
 present paper. It is unnecessary to say how this has been rendered easy by Dom 
 F^rotin's Indexes to the Mozarabic formulae at the end of his Liber Ordinum and 
 his Liber Scuramentorum.]
 
 i68 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 current in France in his day. But in face of the documentary evidence 
 I do not see how it is possible that that view can be entertained 
 even for a moment. We possess in Gelas iii 91 a complete form of 
 * burial service ' (extending in four parts from the time of death to 
 the final * commendation ' after the actual internment) in actual use 
 in the early years of the eighth century, or in the last years of the 
 seventh. Our next stage is the service in the MSS of the ' Gelas saec. 
 viii ', a later compilation of about the middle of the eighth century. 
 Two of these services are in print : that of the (now destroyed) copy of 
 ' Gelas saec. viii' written by the priest Godelgaudus of Reims in 799, 
 and printed by Menard in his notes to his ' Gregorian Sacramentary ' 
 pp. 260-261 (Migne P. L. 78. 467-468) ; and that in the Rheinau 
 MS of ' Gelas saec. viii' printed in Gerbert's Mo7i. vet. lit. Alemann. 
 i pp. 313-315. With these I am now able to compare that in the 
 Gellone Sacramentary — on the whole the best MS of ' Gelas saec. viii '. 
 These three services are derived from the original form in Gelas iii 91, 
 with some additional matter at the beginning. Spanish material is 
 represented in the service they give by five prayers out of the whole 
 body of twenty ; and all the Spanish material is derived from Gelas 
 iii 91. On the other hand, in Alcuin's corresponding service, out of 
 the eight prayers for one just deceased four are taken from Mozarabic 
 sources, not one of which four is found in Gelas iii 91 ; three are the 
 three of the ' in agenda mortuorum ' of Greg (Muratori ii. 370) ;^ and 
 one only (the first) is from Gelas iii 91. Of the nine prayers of the 
 remainder of his burial service six are found in Mozarabic books, not 
 one of the six being found in Gelas iii 91. In a word, Alcuin made 
 a clean sweep of nearly the whole of the twenty or twenty-one prayers 
 found in these services in Gaul throughout the eighth century, and 
 substituted for them new Mozarabic material. In these circumstances 
 (since Spanish materials are otherwise found freely current in England 
 and Ireland) the reasonable supposition is that the Spanish prayers 
 in the new form of burial service found in his Supplement formed part 
 of the devotional material originally derived from Spain that had by the 
 end of the eighth century become in some measure naturalized in our 
 insular Churches in Alcuin's day, and so came to be utilized by him, 
 with some sparing use of Gallican material, in the compilation of that 
 service.^ 
 
 * [In face of Alcuin's use of the three prayers ' in agenda mortuorum ' of Greg, as 
 explained in the text, it would seem unreasonable to doubt that these three brief 
 prayers are (so far as prayers are concerned) the Roman ' burial service ' in the 
 seventh and eighth centuries.] 
 
 * [Supplementary Note A, now newly added, is a synoptic Table of the earliest 
 extant forms of burial service in the West, that is, in existence in the period from 
 c. A. D. 700 to c. A.D. 800. We have no forms for Spain until two or three hundred
 
 'SPANISH SYMPTOMS' 169 
 
 (e) In the ' Liturgical Note' to the Book of Cerne attention was called 
 (p. 278) to Harl. MS 3060 (' saec. ix seemingly', or x?) which appears 
 to be a copy of an earlier Visigothic MS dating (so far as its contents 
 indicate) from the end of the seventh century or beginning of the 
 eighth. This MS contains a prayer which (it was said, p. 279) ' stands 
 behind ' a series of prayers in Cerne that falls into two groups : nos. 21 , 
 24, 49, and nos. 20, 23, 29, 36. But it is now possible to bring one of 
 these groups into relation with a Spanish liturgical manuscript. The 
 Mozarabic Liber Ordumm recently printed contains a long series of 
 priest's masses ' for himself'.^ In one of these the introductory 
 prayer, and the 'alia' prayer following it (col. 266. 22 Detis itistitiae 
 to col. 267. 12 aliemim j^wi-^w) , are, with a line added at the beginning 
 and the end, the first part of the Cerne prayer no. 49 Oratio ppiitentis 
 (p. 145. 14 to p. 146. 17). This raises the further question whether 
 some at least of the Cerne prayers enumerated above as having affinity 
 with that in Harl. MS 3060 may not have come into England from 
 Spain almost as they stand in Cerne?- 
 
 if) Many years ago M. Manitius '^ called attention to the use which 
 Aldhelm, in his grammatical work entitled ' Epistola ad Acircium ' 
 (first printed by Mai Class, anctt. v 501-599), made of the ' Ars gram- 
 matica ' of Julian, bishop of Toledo (680-690). But here it seems 
 necessary to proceed with caution, for H. Hagen has shewn ^ that 
 Julian made use of an earlier anonymous treatise found in Cod. Bern. 
 207. It would remain then to enquire whether Aldhelm used this 
 
 years later ; I have therefore thought it best not to include the Spanish material 
 in this Table, which will, I think, be found useful in any conjectural reconstruction 
 of the Spanish burial service of the eighth century.] 
 
 ' This rich collection consists of no less than eleven masses (nos. 5 to 13, 17, 18, of 
 the list at c. xliv). I suspect that the collection, as well as the composition of the 
 individual masses, represents (like so much else in the L/d. Ord.) a late phase of 
 Mozarabic liturgy. The origination of the priest's ' mass for himself seems to be 
 due, on the one hand, to the anniversary mass of a bishop's or priest's ordination 
 {Leon, Ge/as), and on the other, to the spirit which created and developed the 
 special ' Praeparatio Sacerdotis ' found in liturgy-books as early as the seventh 
 century (see above, pp. 137-138). No mass ' pro seipso' is found in the Gallican 
 Missals designated Gothicum, Gallicanum, Frattcorion. The Bobbio Missal of a 
 slightly earlier date has one mass of this kind, ' Missa quomodo sacerdos pro se 
 orare debet ' (ed. Mab. p. 357). I have not been able to trace its prayers earlier 
 than this MS ; in the prayer 'ad pacem' occurs the characteristic Irish expression 
 ' inter sanctos et electos ', and it also shews familiarity with the Roman Canon. 
 
 ■■' On a comparison of the extracts from Cerne, nos. 21, 24, 49, given pp. 27S, 279 
 of that volume, with the Spanish text in Lib. Ord. (which runs as follows : ' Parce 
 anime mee, parce malis meis, parce peccatis meis, parce factis meis atque crimini- 
 bus') it will be seen that the text in Lib. Ord. covers all the vaiying forms of the 
 corresponding passage in those Cerne prayers, except one, viz. ' parce hereticis meis ' 
 ■(no. 24 p. 122. 20) ; the absence of which from the Spanish supports the suggestion 
 already made (ibid. p. 278 n. 4) that this curious expression is an Irish addition. 
 
 ' ' Zu Aldhelm und Baeda' in Sitzungsber. der phil.-hist. Classe of the Vienna 
 Academy, Bd. cxii, 1S86, pp. 597-599. 
 
 * Anecdota Helvetica (1870), see pp. xxi, xxiii, cciv, ccvi-ccviii, ccxi, ccxviii-ccxix.
 
 I70 
 
 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 treatise directly as found in the Berne MS, or only indirectly through 
 Julian's work.^ But Manitius also pointed out (p. 6ii) that Aldhelm 
 had in his metrical riddles made use of those of Eugenius of Toledo,^ 
 and states (p. ^^^) that L. MuUer had already called attention to the 
 fact that in his ' Epistola ad Acircium ' Aldhelm cites a verse of the 
 Visigothic king Sisebut (died 621).^ 
 
 Each of the cases above enumerated, taken by itself, may seem a 
 slight matter ; but their cumulative force is considerable. Although 
 the liturgical and devotional documents noticed under {a)-{e) afford no^ 
 evidence as to date, the facts set out under (/) would go to shew that 
 some sort of communications, or relations, or influence, or call the 
 phenomenon what we will, direct or indirect, existed as between 
 England and Spain already in the second half of the seventh century. 
 
 II 
 
 Extrinsic considerations tend also to shew that such communication 
 would be more likely in that period, or quite in the beginning of the 
 eighth century, than at the end of the eighth or early in the ninth. 
 By this latter date Hispanism and Irishry, in religion and devotion as 
 
 ^ I do not know whether this has already been done ; Manitius at any rate says 
 nothing on the subject. Julian's grammatical work is not reprinted by Migne. 
 It is curious to observe how, on the one hand, Lorenzana could find no MS 
 of Julian's Prognosticon Jttiurz saeculi libii Hi in Spain and could refer to 
 the existence of one only, that seen by Ambr. Morales, in the sixteenth century, 
 but in the interval burnt ; and how, on the other hand, this work (the subject 
 of which is the intermediate state of souls) occurs commonly in the earliest 
 library catalogues, but always and only in repositories with ' Celtic ' attachments ; 
 and, when by and by in the tenth century it occurs in other libraries also, 
 this is first at Cremona close to Bobbio, and at Lorsch not far from Fulda. See 
 G. Becker's ( atalogi Bibliofhecarinn antiqui (here cited by number of Library and 
 of item) : 8 (32) ; 10 (5) , 11 (142) ; 15 (242) ; 22 (235) ; 32 (543, 568) ; 36 (76) ; n 
 (368) ; Fulda MSS in F. Falk Beiirage ziir Rekonsirukiion der alien Bibhotheca 
 fuldensis (Leipzig, Harrassowitz, 1902) vi 4 15 p. loo and vii 4 15 p. 102 
 (at viii I 18 p. 103 is a copy of Juhan of Toledo's ' Ars grammatica '). 
 
 - Aldhelm Aen. tetrast. xi 1-3 [see Ehwald's edition of Aldhelm, Mon. Germ. 
 Aticlt. aniiquiss. xv p. 103, tetrast. 16], cf. Eugenius carm. Ixii ed. Vollmer, Aff «. 
 Germ. Auctt. antiquiss. xiv p. 261 and V.'s note ; xvi 3-4, Eugen. xlviii, ibid. p. 259 
 and note; Aen. pentast. viii 1-3 [Ehwald's edition p. 108], Eugen. ix, ibid. p. 261 
 and note. 1 do not understand Vollmer's note 8, p. xliii of his Preface, as in any 
 way affecting these three cases. 
 
 ' The case stands thus. The verse in question is cited by Aldhelm as Isidore's 
 (ed. Giles p. 232 11. 4-5, [see Ehwald's edition of Aldhelm, p. 80]), and is drawn 
 from the metrical piece ' de eclipsibus solis et lunae ' commonly in the ancient 
 MSS appended to Isidore's treatise 'de astronomia', although it certainly is not 
 Isidore's and comes from the pen of a man not of peace but of war, of a laynian 
 not a priest. The Leyden MS Voss 4" 33, embodying much early grammatical 
 material of ' English or Irish ' origin, contains a tract ' which (says L. Miiller) comes 
 from a compatriot of Aldhelm ' and attributes the ' de eclips.' to Sisebut by name : 
 ' et in hoc Sisebuti regis '. See Rhemisches Musetim xxii pp. 86-87.
 
 'SPANISH SYMPTOMS' 171 
 
 well as in other respects, had fallen into disrepute. Moreover, in the 
 seventh century, whilst the Church of Gaul was the most debased in 
 Western Europe, and promise or hope of better things lay not in native 
 but in foreign and imported elements, Irish, Roman, and by and by 
 English, the Visigothic Church of Spain, a convert Church, was in the 
 full course of its short-lived glory. Strong and self-centred, it was 
 animated by an intense, indeed an intolerant, spirit of nationalism. 
 The English Church was still weak, but it was receptive. There 
 remains the Irish, the most interesting, the most pervasive, of them 
 all. So things stood at the beginning of the eighth century. By its 
 close the situation had completely changed. The foreign elements at 
 work in Gaul had been reinforced and their action had issued in the 
 reformed Church of Charlemagne, with a strongly marked individuality 
 of its own, in which reaction against Celtic, Irish, influences is 
 unmistakeable, especially among the 'cultured'. And this Church, 
 whilst antipathetic in regard to other elements which had once 
 enjoyed consideration, was, in spite of the noisy trouble as to 
 Images, Roman through and through. It was not the mere repul- 
 sion of self-conscious orthodoxy to obstinate and decadent mis- 
 belief that in the Adoptionist controversy inspired the letter of 
 the bishops of France (794) in answer to Elipandus, bishop of 
 Toledo, speaking in the name of the Spanish Church. Elipandus 
 had written, with some touch of ancient pride, ' our confession is in 
 accord with the teaching of the holy venerable fathers Hilary, &c., &c., 
 Fulgentius, Isidore, Eugenius, Hildefonsus, Julian, and the rest of the 
 orthodox and catholic' The reply, in which Alcuin had the main 
 hand, breathes the scorn of a master of the newest learning for the 
 great representatives and glories of a fallen Church and a learning now 
 no longer the mode; in the words 'our Gregory' the actual writer 
 betrays himself. He thus writes as to the liturgical evidence which 
 Elipandus had brought forward from the Toledan Missal. ' It is better 
 to give credit (he says) to the testimony of God the Father as to His 
 own Son than to your Hildefonsus, who composed such prayers 
 for you in your mass as the holy and universal Church of God knows 
 not. Nor do we think God listens to you when you say them. 
 And if your Hildefonsus in the prayers he wrote called Christ 
 " adoptive", our Gregory, Pope of the Roman See and Doctor renowned 
 throughout all the world, in his prayers never hesitated always 
 to call Him the Sole-begotten One.' ^ Who could better know, or 
 
 » See Mon. Germ. Concil. ii pp. in, 145 ; Migne P. L. loi. I333-I334- Alcuin 
 goes over this liturgical ground a few years later in his 'Adversus Elipandum ' 
 (lib. ii capp. 7-9, Migne F. L. loi. 264-267) written for Leidradus and his com- 
 panions on the occasion of their journey to Spain to try and patch up matters.
 
 173 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 better express, the temper of the English Church of his age than 
 Alcuin ? ' 
 
 But there was at this time a like recoil from Irishry. On the Con- 
 tinent in ecclesiastical circles inconvenience from the presence of the 
 Irish was felt rather in the sphere of discipline and order. In the last 
 year of Charles's reign, after long intermission, councils were held 
 (813, 814) by superior command in various parts of his dominions. 
 The canons against wandering clerics had Irish priests doubtless in 
 view among the rest.^ But one only of these councils, that of Chalon- 
 sur-Saone, mentions the ' Scotti ' by name, and then only to declare that 
 orders received from Scottic bishops, as wanderers and unattached, are 
 to be treated as null and void. Under the rule of the great Offa and 
 the Mercian hegemony England was in thorough sympathy with the 
 policy and sentiment of Charlemagne, in whose administration, even of 
 educational affairs, the Irish no more than the Goths could find a place ; 
 and they, or the former at least, were left to obscurity in peace. But 
 the contemporary English synod deals with the Scottic question in a 
 different spirit and quite another temper from that of the councils held 
 on the Continent. The synod of Celchyth of July 27, 816, was com- 
 posed of bishops from all Southern England, and Kenulf, king of the 
 Mercians, was ' in person present, with his princes and dukes and 
 nobles '. This synod by its fifth canon simply excluded the Scottic 
 clergymen from all sacred ministrations whatever, and warned the 
 people against having anything to do with them. The canon runs 
 not as if coming from those whose preoccupation it is to correct 
 irregularities and set them right ; it is passion that speaks in this 
 decree, which is a sentence of ostracism and an expression of racial 
 antipathy." 
 
 Alcuin makes an effort to be civil and is even flattering as regards Isidore ; but his 
 aversion to the ' Toledan Fathers ' he cannot suppress ; one work, however, among 
 their productions he specially mentions as at least not unorthodox, the Prognostica 
 of Julian. 
 
 ^ [Cf. already Aldhelm, in the prose treatise De virginitate, cap. 55 : * Unde 
 Gregorius pervigil pastor et pedagogus noster — noster inquam, qui nostris parenti- 
 bus errorem tetrae gentilitatis abstulit, et regenerantis gratiae normam tradidit ' . . . 
 (ed. Ehwald p. 314).] 
 
 "^ See as to ' clerici vagi' Cone. Mogunt. a.d, 813, can. 22, Cone. Cabillon. 
 cc. 41, 43 (this is the canon as to the ' Scotti'), 44, 45, Cone. Turon. c. 13 {Mon. 
 Germ. Coficil. ii pp. 267, 282, 288). Cf. the * Annotatio capitulorum synodalium ', 
 nos. 42, 58, 104, 105 (ibid. pp. 304, 306). 
 
 •' This canon is so important in its bearings that I give it here, dividing and 
 italicizing it for easier apprehension. The text as it came from the synod was 
 probably in much the same state as now, since the difficulties are inherent in its 
 drafting and construction. ' Ut Scoti non admittendi sacra ministrare. Kap. 
 quinta interdictum est : Ut nullus permittatur de genere Scottorum {a) in alicuius 
 diocesi sacram sibi ministeria usurpare, (b) neque ei consenth-e liceat ex sacro ordine 
 aliquot attingere, (c) vel ab eis accipere in baptismo, aut in celebratione missarum, 
 (d) vel etiam Eucharistiam populo praebere : (e) quia incertum est nobis unde en 
 [= an\ ab aliqiio ordinentur. Scimus quomodo in canonis praecipitur ut nullus
 
 'SPANISH SYMPTOMS' i73 
 
 The Irishman and the Goth, their piety and their learning, are in 
 this period at a discount in England as well as on the Continent. A 
 day of revived influence for the Goth is at hand, and on the Con- 
 tinent at least, for the Irishman too. But if we find in England 
 at the end of the eighth century or in the early decades of the 
 ninth, religious or devotional pieces bearing marked evidence of a 
 piety Spanish or Irish in character, the actual composition of these 
 may, on general grounds, be attributed with greater probability to the 
 turn of the seventh and eighth centuries than to that of the eighth 
 and ninth. 
 
 But this Hispano-Hibernian character is notably evident in the MS 
 known as the Book of Cernc ; we must turn aside for a moment to 
 consider so curious a phenomenon ; for the actual MS is of the first 
 half of the ninth century, it has come down to us with entries appar- 
 ently in the Mercian dialect, it contains an acrostic with the name of 
 a bishop Ethelwold, and an Ethelwold occupies the great Mercian see 
 of Lichfield (818-830). It is tem.pting to settle, without more ado, on 
 Ethelwold, bishop of Lichfield, as the only begetter of this book and 
 so finish with the matter. But I cannot induce myself to think that in 
 doing so we are really getting to the bottom of it. In the catalogue 
 of the then sadly dilapidated Fulda library drawn up about the middle 
 of the sixteenth century, several books dating from St Boniface's days 
 can still be recognized. There is one MS, of what date we know not, 
 described as ' Ymnarius Edilwaldi 7 Dr Traube has remarked on this 
 entry : ' I do not think I can go far wrong if I take this manuscript of 
 Edilwald to be a copy of the Book of Cerne.' ^ Dr Traube is one 
 of the very last scholars from whose judgement I should care to dissent 
 in matters concerning these early times. But in face of the entry in 
 the Fulda catalogue I ask myself whether, whilst unduly emphasizing 
 line 10 of the acrostic : — 
 
 En omnipotenti deo libellmn hanc ad laudem scribere fecit 
 
 episcoporum, presbiterorum invadere temptaverit alius parrochiam nisi cum con- 
 sensu proprie episcopi. Tanto magis (/) respuendum est ab alienis nationibus sacra 
 ministeria percipere, cum quibus nuUo ordo metropolitanis, nee honor aliquis 
 habeatur' (Haddan and Stubbs ill p. 581). From the title and from {a) and [e] it 
 appears that a general exclusion of Scott! from performing acts of the sacred ministry 
 among the people is intended. From {b) it appears that licence by the bishop for 
 private acts is forbidden ; whilst the prohibitions (f), (</), and (/) are aimed at the 
 reception of baptism or holy communion at their hands, and are a warning against 
 even hearing their masses. I do not see how, when the terms of the canon are fully 
 considered and weighed, it is possible to avoid the conclusion that the whole ground 
 is meant to be covered, and that the canon of this English synod is indeed a sentence 
 of ecclesiastical ostracism. 
 
 1 See F. Falk Beiirdge p. 102. 
 
 * Anzeiger fiir deiiischcs Alterihum (Supplement to Zeitschrift) xxi.x, October, 
 1903, p. I.
 
 174 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 we^ may not have allowed lines 12, 13 to pass without due 
 
 attention : — 
 
 In domum gredi domini cum fiducia huic uolumini oracul texti 
 Solum deum castis carminibus indesinenter diligenter pulsate. 
 
 It is true the Book of Cerne contains more matter in verse than appears 
 from the print or the titles ; but the question arises whether the acrostic 
 was written to apply to the contents of the MS now in the Cambridge 
 University Library, or for a hymnar now lost ; some items of which, 
 however, may still be preserved in that MS.^ 
 
 Moreover, may not that MS itself, an evidence of reviving or active 
 Irishry, perhaps throw some light on the causes of canon 5 of the 
 Council of Celchyth of 816 ? 
 
 Ill 
 
 Among the prayers of the Book of Cerne those addressed to the 
 Blessed Virgin, nos. 56-58, have appeared to some persons among the 
 most notable. Nos. 57, 58 read to me as if somewhat commonplace 
 but genuine.^ No. ^6 was one of the small number of prayers printed 
 from this MS by the late Mr F. A. Paley in his article on ' Liturgical 
 Manuscripts at Cambridge' in the Home and Foreign Review in i86a. 
 As a prayer to the Blessed Virgin it certainly has some noteworthy 
 features : the accumulation on the one appellative ' Dei genetrix semper 
 uirgo ' of eleven adjectives, besides three adjectival clauses ; the triple 
 * exaudi '; the very confident expression 'we trust and know for certain 
 you can obtain from your Son everything that you wish '. These 
 three items make up, it may be said, the whole prayer, which may 
 read to some as betraying a mind overstrung, to others only as if 
 evidencing a desire to outdo a forerunner. It has been remarked 
 that the ' advanced ' character of this prayer is a sign of its late origin, 
 an origin as late, say, as the actual manuscript ; that is, the first decades 
 of the ninth century. But this seems subject to a good deal of doubt, 
 and may be due rather to imperfect acquaintance with the details of 
 
 ^ [I should like to say that in my manuscript and in the last proofs that passed 
 through my hands the word printed y. T. S. p. 287 1. 17 as ' he' was ' we '. I restore 
 above the original text.] 
 
 * [See Supplementary Note B for a treatment of the case of the Book of Cerne. '\ 
 ' The word ' saluatrix ' in no. 58, p. 155. 16 must not be looked at through modern 
 developments any more than Hildefonsus's 'administratrix Dei' (Migne P. L. 96. 
 65 C). It is characteristic of a certain class of devout minds in all ages to incline to 
 expressions that are extravagant or of ambiguous import or interpretation.
 
 SPANISH SYMPTOMS' 
 
 /O 
 
 the history of Marian devotion. I will make an attempt to view the 
 particular case in the light that may be thrown upon it by a con- 
 sideration of some of our early documents relating to Marian cultus 
 in the West. 
 
 In the Book of Cerne (p. 280 n, i) those of the seventh century 
 were briefly indicated.^ The most important western documents 
 are the mass of the Assumption in the great Gallican Missal 
 known as the Missale Gothiciim and the treatise De virginitate per- 
 pettia sanctae Mariae of Hildefonsus, bishop of Toledo (657-667). 
 This latter, short as it is, is one of the most characteristic 
 productions of the Visigothic Church of Spain in the days of its 
 splendour. On the death in 636 of that great inheritor and 
 representative of the older learning, Isidore of Seville, predominance 
 and influence, the literary no less than the ecclesiastical, passed to the 
 city of Toledo, long the seat of the civil power. Braulio of Saragossa 
 (who died in 646), the friend and literary correspondent of Isidore, 
 was still left to speak for the old school. But Braulio's successor at 
 Saragossa, Taius (who once calls himself ' cognomento Samuel ' -), 
 begins the new ; and this is continued in the series of great bishops of 
 Toledo, Eugenius, a native of that city and sister's son of Braulio, 
 Hildefonsus, nephew of Eugenius, and by and by Julian, also a Tole- 
 dan, and a devoted pupil of Eugenius and admirer of Hildefonsus. 
 It would almost seem as if Braulio anticipated but did not appreciate 
 the advent of the new school of learning. When Taius sent Braulio 
 his Libri quinque Senientiar7im, largely a compilation from Gregory, 
 whose works, wanting in Spain, Taius had gone to Rome to copy with 
 his own hand, Braulio frankly told him that 'except for what was 
 stolen, or rather corrupted, from Gregory, his book was only good to 
 be thrown aside and trodden under foot '.^ Taius's letter dedicating 
 this book to Eugenius is a specimen of the style carried to such per- 
 fection in Hildefonsus's treatise De virginitate perpetna, which certainly 
 confirms Julian's recollection of Hildefonsus as 'disserendi ingenio clarus. 
 
 ^ [To the pieces there mentioned should be added the very lengthy and remark- 
 able Triodiuin of Sophronius of Jerusalem first printed by Cardinal Mai (Migne 
 P. Gr. 87 ill coll. 3840-3981). See in particular coll. 3865-8, 3884-5, 3889, 3925 and 
 3928, 3964 ; but the whole document is saturated, so to speak, with Marian 
 devotion.] 
 
 ' Migne P. L. 80. 727. 
 
 ' He writes : ' Paradigma tuum illud in armatura compositum. quam mihi erat 
 pervium et pede, ut aiunt, conterere, excepto illud pace (.' papae) Gregorii quod pecu- 
 latum, immo corruptum, vidi' {P. L. 80. 657). The following illustrates another 
 kind of difference between the old school and the new. Taius writes to Braulio 
 about a relic of our Lord's blood, and thus comments : ' Piaquidem talis est religio, 
 sed mihi fateor dubia.' Braulio replies : Why trouble about things of doubtful 
 quality like this when we have our Lord's sanguuiem verum every day on the altar? 
 (ibid. coll. 686, 690).
 
 176 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 eloquendi facultate praecipuus, linguae flumine copiosus ', &c. Though 
 perhaps more cultured and certainly of a freer and less artificial vocabu- 
 lary, the De virginitate perpetua shews the same sort of florid elocution, 
 in which triads and quaternions are the soberest forms, that meets us so 
 often in early Irish Latinity.^ In chapters i and xii Hildefonsus pours 
 himself out in prayers to and appreciations of the Blessed Virgin. 
 Indeed it is difficult to see how a sermon addressed, for instance, in the 
 seventeenth century to the highly patronized confraternity of the Slavery 
 of Mary, then flourishing in various parts of the Spanish dominions, 
 could well be conceived in terms more precise or words more fervent 
 than those used in his twelfth chapter by this seventh-century bishop 
 of Toledo. But Hildefonsus spoke of the Blessed Virgin as yet by 
 way of piety and devotion, not of doctrine, which was to follow 
 later. 
 
 The treatise De virginitate perpetua does not stand alone. In the 
 year 1577 the Franciscan, F. Feuardent, printed at Paris along with 
 that treatise, and the tract De partu, now recognized as a work of 
 Paschase Radbert, eleven sermons. The manuscript from which he 
 drew all these pieces is described by him as ' an ancient codex that 
 had been brought out of Spain by Gotiscalc, a bishop of Aquitaine '.^ 
 Feuardent's ascription of the sermons to St Hildefonsus was accepted 
 until some theologians began to find traces of unsoundness in them, in 
 representing the bodily Assumption of the Blessed Virgin into heaven 
 as a pious opinion but not to be certainly affirmed, &c. The sermons 
 then fell into discredit, and so into neglect. Cardinal Lorenzana in 
 reprinting them as an appendix to the works of Hildefonsus, thinks he 
 sees in them traces of differing authorship, and he sorts them accord- 
 ingly. Of sermon ix, however, he says nothing but this in a footnote : 
 ' almost wholly from sermon viii ' ; but sermon vii is also closely con- 
 nected with these two ; and so vii, viii, and ix form a group. It is 
 
 ^ The book itself must be read to get any adequate idea of the author's facility in 
 words and economy in thought. The following which has relation to the present 
 subject may give some notion of this : ' O domina mea, dominatrix mea, dominans 
 mihi, mater Domini mei, ancilla Filii tui,genetrix Factoris mundi, te rogo,te oro, te 
 quaeso, habeam spiritum Domini tui, habeam spiritum Filii tui, habeam spiritum 
 Redemptoris mei, ut de te vera et digna sapiam, de te vera et digna loquar, de te 
 vera et digna quaecumque dicenda sunt dicam. Tu enim es electa a Deo, assumpta 
 a Deo ', &c., &c. (there follow twelve other clauses of the same kind) {De virg. 
 perpet. cap. l). 
 
 ^ Cardinal Lorenzana for his edition of Hildefonsus's De virg. perp. used three 
 MSS, all then at Toledo, one of the year 1067, one of the twelfth to thirteenth century, 
 and u third which was a copy of that of the Aquitanian bishop Gotiscalc, made in 
 the fourteenth century by order of a certain Cardinal Amelii and brought back by 
 him from France. Lorenzana found this last the most correct of the three ; which 
 raises the presumption that the MS of Hildefonsus and the sermons from which 
 Gotiscalc's MS was copied was a good and early Visigothic codex (Migne P. L. 96. 
 54 and 235-240).
 
 SPANISH SYMPTOMS' 
 
 ^n 
 
 precisely of sermon ix that there must be question here, for it contains 
 a passage which is to be found utilized in the Contestatio (or, as we 
 now say. Preface) of the very noteworthy Assumption mass, already 
 mentioned, of the Missale Gothicum (a MS written about A.D. 700). 
 This Contestatio also appears, though in a somewhat shorter form, 
 in one of the two masses of the Assumption in the Bobbio Missal, 
 a manuscript which is to be assigned to the seventh century. 
 
 The following is a print of the relative passages of the sermon and 
 the Contestatio, the variants of the Bobbio text being given in square 
 brackets : — 
 
 Skrmon ix 
 (Migne F. L. 96. 272) 
 
 O quam venerandum et 
 prae caeteris honorandum hunc diem, 
 
 in quo Dei ge?ietrix virgo Maria de 
 mundo migravit ad Christum, quae 
 
 dolori non sub- 
 iacuit post partum, fwn labori post 
 transitum. 
 
 O admirabilem 
 thalamum, de quo speciosus forma pro- 
 diit sponsus. 
 O lux gentium, spes fidelium, 
 
 tabernaculum gloriae, tempbim caeleste, 
 'cui apostoli sacrum reddunt obse- 
 quium . . . 
 
 Contestatio 
 (Mabillon Lit. Gall. p. 2 1 2 ; Migne 
 
 P. L. 72. 245) 
 Dignum et iustum . . . nos tibi magnas 
 merito gratias agere tempore celeber- 
 rimo die prae caeteris honorando, quo 
 fidelis Israel egressus est de Aegypto, 
 quo virgo Dei genitrix \AIaria Bo] de 
 mundo migravit ad Christum. Quae 
 nee de corruptione suscepit conta- 
 gium nee resolutionem pertulit in 
 sepulchro, poUutione libera, germine 
 gloriosa, assumptione secura, paradiso 
 dote praelata, * nesciens damna de 
 coitu, sumens vota de fructu, non sub- 
 dita dolori per partum, non labori per 
 transitum, nee vita voluntate nee 
 funus solvitur vi naturae. Speciosus 
 thalamus, de quo dignus [decorus Bo] 
 prodit [procedit Bo] sponsus, lux gen- 
 tium, spes fideliujti, praedo daemo- 
 num, confusio ludaeorum, vasculum 
 vitae, tabernaculum gloriae, templiim 
 catleste. [The Contestatio then goes 
 off to develop a contrast between Eve 
 and Mary.] 
 
 I imagine that no one with the texts before him will doubt that it 
 
 ' With the words immediately following compare serm. ix * haec est immaculata 
 coitu, fecunda partu, virgo' &c. (coll. 27 1 -272) ; and the same words in serm. vii 
 (col. 268 A) ; and also in the first address to the people of the same mass of the 
 Missale Gothicum : ' quae /oecunda virgo, beata de partu '. 
 
 * The address to the people mentioned in the preceding note has the following 
 words, perhaps suggested by the sermon : ' quo beatam matrem Mariam famulanti- 
 bus apostolis transtulit ad honorem.' 
 
 1558 N
 
 178 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 was the sermon that inspired the writer of the Contestatio, or will 
 suggest that the writer of the sermon made, in the passage quoted, 
 a choice of bits from the Contestatio. I would add from my experience 
 of the Gallic seventh- and eighth-century liturgical texts that in Gaul 
 there were past masters in the art of such embroidery as the Contestatio 
 when compared with the sermon exhibits.^ Yet if this be so our two 
 Missals throw sermon ix back to a date that cannot be much later 
 than the middle of the seventh century ; we must remember too that 
 the earliest manuscript we know of came from Spain, and is a copy of 
 an earlier Spanish codex. As the sermon is anonymous so it may 
 well remain. But it seems not too much to say that its origin in all 
 probability lies in the circle who were gathered around the author of 
 the De virginitate perpetua at Toledo. And if so, we must recognize 
 in the Assumption mass of the Missale Gothicum and the Bobbio 
 Missal another ' Spanish Symptom '.^ Whether the Cerne prayer 
 no. 56 be a ' Spanish Symptom ' also must remain, I think, matter 
 of mere subjective appreciation as to the character of the devotion 
 it displays, especially when compared with nos. 57, 58.^ 
 
 IV 
 
 In what goes before, the Bobbio Missal has not been specially dealt 
 with. But I am not able to understand the readiness at the present 
 day to view that book as * Galilean ', or Milanese ; or the difficulty in 
 regarding it as (what the place of its origin seems naturally to suggest) 
 an ' Irish ' production — that is, proceeding from circles, from a com- 
 
 ' See a modest specimen of this sort of work from the Missale Gothicum in the 
 * i.iturgical Note to the Book of Cerne' p. 260 No. 47. 
 
 '^ [See further as to sermon vii, one of this group of three, the closing part of 
 Supplementary Note C appended to this paper, below pp. 200-201.] 
 
 ' It is more than twenty years since the late Professor Scheffer-Boichorst printed 
 in the (Austrian) Mittheilimgen des ItistiHits vi (1885) pp. 521-550 his article on the 
 Syrians in Western Europe. It attracted (so far as I have observed) little attention, 
 certainly none from the liturgists. M. Brehier's recent article in the Byzantinische 
 Zeitschrift on the same subject has been more fortunate. I still think (cf. Book of 
 Cerne p. 278) that one of the first matters to be investigated, if we would understand 
 the outburst of the cultus of the Blessed Virgin in the \Vest in the seventh century, 
 at least in Spain, is the early translation of pieces by St Ephrem or other Syriac 
 writers into Latin. Canon 12 of the council of Seville in 618 gives an account of 
 the conversion to orthodoxy of a Syrian Jacobite bishop seemingly settled in Spain. 
 On the general question of East Syrian devotion and piety in the West see 
 pp. 161-163 above.
 
 'SPANISH SYMPTOMS' 179 
 
 munity, still Scottic in religious spirit, and in some measure also 
 doubtless in personnel} Its strongly marked ' Spanish ' character 
 points in the same direction. It is to be remembered too that the 
 Bobbio Missal is but one item to be considered in this connexion. 
 It is surely not by accident that the inestimable ' Orationale Hispano- 
 Gothicum ' (one of the two MSS at least) is found in the Verona 
 Library. But I readily leave such questions for another hand "^ alto- 
 gether better qualified to deal with these continental matters than 
 I who speak only as insular. But it must be added that our insular 
 material too is not exhausted ; a systematic examination of Cerne in 
 the light of the Liber Ordimim would doubtless yield interesting 
 results ; the investigation of its congener, MS Reg. 2 A xx, is almost 
 untouched ; and probably more English and Irish devotional material 
 of as early a date has yet to be printed. 
 
 The three centuries that elapsed between Caesarius of Aries and 
 Alcuin are the darkest of West European history. Evil though it 
 was beyond compare for the particular See and City of Rome, the case 
 of the ' leaden ' tenth century was in no way so desperate. Yet it is 
 precisely in those three centuries that took place the evolution definitely 
 fixing the religion of mediaeval and a large part of modern Europe. 
 The stage then passed through was that one, so particularly decisive, 
 when popular piety, which has listened to the word of the preachers, 
 makes the ideas they express, even if but rhetorically at times, its 
 own ; and piety in its slow and silent workings generates by and by 
 a common and accepted belief. Thereafter, by steps natural and easy 
 enough, come the reflection or reasoning of the more educated on what 
 is so believed, its formulation, consequent disputes, heresy, dogma. 
 It is this consideration which gives value, indeed importance, trivial 
 looking as they may seem or sometimes almost grotesque, to the 
 records coming from this darkest period of the history of the Church. 
 It is too late to begin our knowledge of the post-patristic age with the 
 ninth century, with the Carolingian renaissance, or with Bede who is 
 
 ' [I would be more precise, and say that, when all the relative phenomena are 
 reviewed, the probability is that the Bobbio Missal was written at Bobbio. I am 
 not forgetful of the Note which Traube has devoted to this MS considered from the 
 palaeographical point of view (in Dr Burn's Facsiiniles of the Creeds^ 1909* 
 pp. 44-47). It is a veritable model of balance and Vorskhfigkeit, worthy of this 
 consummate scholar. But the palaeographical is only one side of the problem to 
 be dealt with ; and I have good reason to believe that it was only a short time 
 before his death that Traube came actually to realize the complexity and the 
 ramifications of the questions involved in ' Spanish Symptoms '.] 
 
 ^ [Alas ! a hand now for ever still. I have been reduced therefore to bring 
 together such items of 'Spanish Symptoms' in North Italy in the seventh and 
 earlier eighth centuries as are within my ken. See Supplementary Note C, 
 pp. 197-202 below.] 
 
 N 2
 
 i8o LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 a figure apart. It is not only in the fixation of the biblical text and 
 the palaeographical declension of ' noster '/ but in all the great range 
 of items that lie between such extremes, that the ninth century presents 
 us already with a completed work. If we wish to know how the result 
 came about we must look to and penetrate into the years 500-800. 
 The liturgist is better off perhaps than most other kinds of enquirers 
 for this period ; but I venture to think that if he wishes his study to 
 be fruitful it must not be divorced from the history of popular religion 
 and current beliefs. 
 
 [One question still remains to be raised, namely, whether the 
 religious influence of the Visigothic Church on the Irish, and so on 
 the English, was direct, or whether it was exercised only mediately 
 through the Church of Gaul. Dom Gougaud {Dictionnaire de Liturgie 
 et iT Archiologie ii 2, 1910, under' Liturgies celtiques ' col. 2992) writes 
 as follows : 
 
 D'un autre cote M. Edmund Bishop a reconnu dans la liturgie irlandaise 
 et dans le Livre de Cerne qui en est issu, des accointances avec la 
 liturgie mozarabe. (a) II croit pouvoir expliquer historiquement ces traits 
 de parent^ par I'^tablissement des Celtes chr^tiens de Grande-Bretagne en 
 Galice au vie siecle ; mais rien ne prouve que cette colonie celtique ait 
 entretenu des relations avec I'lrlande ni meme avec la Bretagne. Je ne 
 discute pas la presence d'eldments mozarabes dans la liturgie irlandaise, 
 je conteste simplement le mode de transmission propose : il n'est fond6 
 sur aucune donn^e historique. 
 
 {U) Tout compte fait, a apprdcier ces questions d'origines liturgiques 
 du point de vue extrins^que, qui est presentement le notre, // semble Men 
 que ce soit la Gaule qui ait exerce' la principale influence sur la formation 
 des liturgies bretonnes et irlandaises, et que VEglise bretonne a dii agir, a son 
 tour, par surcroit, assez puissamment sur le de'veloppement des rites irlatidais? 
 
 Two points call for separate consideration here. I have rubricked 
 them {a) and {b). Each must be dealt with separately and on its own 
 account. But I must premise that Dom Gougaud's formulation of 
 what he has to say in {b) is to me so vague, obscure, and embarrassed 
 that (except on the one point which matters) I can draw no clear idea 
 of what he means. It is the more incumbent on me, therefore, to be 
 so clear in the formulation of what I have to say that no reader can 
 be under any misapprehension as to my meaning. 
 
 As to {a). In Book of Cerne p. 280, returning for a second time to 
 the presence of Spanish material in insular liturgical and devotional 
 documents, I said : 
 
 ^ See Traube Perrona Scottorum p. 527. 
 ' My italics.
 
 'SPANISH SYMPTOMS' i8i 
 
 So far as the case under consideration is concerned, the ' Celtic ' see of 
 Bretonaj in communion in its earliest period with the Catholic Suevi 
 under the metropolitan see of Braga, and later with the converted 
 Visigoths under the primacy of Toledo, suggests itself as a means of com- 
 munication with the Irish Church. However this may have been, «S:c., &c 
 
 I take this opportunity of absolutely withdrawing this suggestion 
 and requesting that it be treated as though it had never been written ; 
 and I am grateful to Dom Gougaud for thus giving me an opportunity 
 of doing so. My reason is simple : The whole field of liturgy, eastern 
 and western, has in the course of time, and never more actively than 
 within the last generation or so, been so greatly littered with baseless 
 theories and impertinent suggestions that I gladly retract this one and, 
 following at a humble distance the example of a great scholar lately 
 taken from us, say simply, ' I was wrong '. 
 
 As to (d) the case is different. 
 
 In Book of Cerne, in answer to the question (p. 277) ' By what means, 
 through what channel, did prayers and characteristic devotional ex- 
 pressions of the Spanish Church find their way into England ? Was 
 it through Ireland, or through France?' I said, pp. 277-278, that 
 when the three Gallican Missals, Goth., Gall., Franc, are examined 
 
 but little can be shewn to be common to these books and Moz. If 
 Merovingian Gaul be assumed to be the channel by which ' Mozarabic ' 
 material found its way into Irish or English compositions of the seventh 
 century or the eighth, the assumption of ' lost sources ' also is necessary, — 
 a body of prayers and masses which have disappeared, the existence of 
 which [i. e. in Gaul] has to be inferred from the prayers in Cerne, &C., 
 that have to be accounted for. 
 
 I added that the ' facts that can at present be ascertained . . . point 
 rather to a direct draft by the early Irish on the Spanish Church'. 
 
 If I rightly understand the passage italicized in {b) above, Dom 
 Gougaud is of opinion that there was not a direct draft by the Irish on 
 Spanish liturgical and devotional documents, but that the traces of 
 Hispanism found in the productions of Irish and English circles are to 
 be explained by the fact that they came to our insulars not directly 
 from Spanish circles and sources but only mediately through ' la 
 Gaule '. 
 
 It is on this point — that Gaul is the intermediary by which Hispanism, 
 liturgical and devotional, found its way into early Irish and English 
 documents — that I would in any case join issue, and that in the 
 clearest and most emphatic way. I believe this idea to be no more 
 than a fiction.
 
 i82 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 I shall be happy to see, and give my best consideration to, 
 any reasoned and detailed argument in favour of Dom Gougaud's 
 view. I think even that I could make up a plausible sort of general 
 historical case myself — by the aid of Spanish Matches, say, and the 
 like. But I would observe that presentments of this kind are not to 
 the point and that it is the evidence of the religious and ecclesiastical 
 documents themselves that alone will answer the purpose. As the 
 result of experience I have no hesitation in saying that the more the 
 relative data accumulate the clearer and more evident become the 
 indications that the presence in Irish (and English) documents of 
 Spanish liturgical or devotional elements is due to ' a direct draft by 
 the early Irish on the Spanish Church '.] 
 
 SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 
 
 (See p. 167 note 5) 
 
 Note A 
 Burial Services of the Eighth Century. 
 
 [The following Table shews the details of the Burial Services given 
 in five sacramentaries of the eighth century : the first column, that of 
 the Gelasianum ; the next columns, the services in three copies of the 
 Gelasianum of the eighth century, namely, that in the Sacramentary 
 of Gellone as yet inedited, that in the Rheinau MS 30 at Zurich, 
 printed by Gerbert, and that in the Reims MS of Godelgaudus, 
 printed by Menard ; finally, in the fifth column, the service drawn up 
 by Alcuin in the Gregoriamim of Charles the Great. A glance at 
 the Table is sufficient to shew how thorough and radical is Alcuin's 
 reform. 
 
 A burial service is found in four other manuscripts of * Gelas saec. 
 viii ', the details of which have been communicated to me by a friend ; 
 three are of late date, and shew merely fragments or rather remains 
 of the original scheme ; one, an early and genuine manuscript, gives it 
 in full. But as in its details this last closely approximates to the 
 Order in Gellone, and has no additional prayers, I think it unnecessary 
 to complicate the Table by giving a special column to this manuscript. 
 Only two remarks in regard to it need be made here i first, that it
 
 'SPANISH SYMPTOMS' 183 
 
 does not contain item 21, the Proficiscere, of which Gellone gives us 
 the earliest attestation ; secondly, that in the order of its prayers it 
 shews by another example (what, indeed, is obvious throughout the 
 manuscripts of the eighth-century Gelas) that each copyist of this 
 book — or, to speak perhaps more accurately, each church in which it 
 was adopted — varied the order, choice, and arrangement of prayers at 
 discretion. In a word the whole body of the extant manuscripts of 
 this sacramentary, which I have above (p. 152 n. i) called' the Roman 
 Sacramentary of King Pippin ', evidences in the most speaking way the 
 existence of that ' liturgical anarchy' mentioned p. 15 above, to which 
 Pippin's son Charles, by the introduction of the Gregoria7inin, meant to, 
 and in practice did, for a time, put an end. 
 
 There remain the burial services in the Bobbio Missal, in Pope 
 Hadrian's Gregorianum, and in the Spanish Liber Orditiuin. In the 
 observations following the Table something will be said as to the first 
 two ; the third, an immense and varied collection, coll. 107-149 of 
 Ferotin's Liber Ordimcm, is of too late a date to call for attention 
 here, although references in the Table will shew how it has affinities 
 with the eighth-century Orders. 
 
 For reasons on which there is no call to dwell, the prayers * in exitu 
 animae ', for the immediately departing soul, are treated as if a part of 
 the burial service. 
 
 In explanation of the Table following, it should be observed {a) that 
 each column shews the order of the whole of the service as found in the 
 manuscript mentioned at the head of the column ; thus the service in 
 Gelas consists of 20 items ; {b) the numbers up to 20 in columns 2-5 
 denote the prayers bearing the same numbers in column i ; [c) numbers 
 beyond 20 in columns 2-5 shew additional prayers not found in Gelas ; 
 id) the explicit of each prayer is given as well as the incipit.
 
 1 84 
 
 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Gelas iii 91 (Mur. i 747-752). 
 
 Orationes post obitum ho- 
 minis. 
 
 1 Pic recordationis affectu | sua 
 
 compenset. [Bo No. i , see 
 Mur, ii 952] 
 
 2 Diri vulneris | aggregari prae- 
 
 cipias. 
 
 3 Tu nobis Domine auxilium | 
 
 viventium evadat. [Bo 
 No. 2] 
 
 4 Suscipe Domine animam . . . 
 
 de Aegypti partibus | omnia 
 adoravit. [M02. Lib. Ord. 
 col. no] 
 
 5 Suscipe Domine animam . . . 
 
 vestem j aeternam possi- 
 deat. [Cf. Moz. Lib. Ord. 
 1 1 o- 1 1 1 ; Moz. Missal ed. 
 Lesley p. 462. 5-13 ; St 
 Call fragment MS. 1395 
 in Warren, p. 183] 
 
 6 Antiqui memores chirographi 
 
 I repraesentet. [Bo No. 4] 
 
 Gellone (Paris B. N. MS 
 Lat. 12048 ff. 246^-249''). 
 
 Orationes super de- 
 functum vel Commen- 
 datio animae. 
 
 21 Proficiscere anima ] in 
 bonis celestibus. 
 
 22 Deus ante cuius con- 
 spectum defertur | cum 
 electis tuis. 
 
 20 
 
 3 
 
 Deinde dicis capitulum 
 In memoria aeternaerit 
 iustus. 
 
 Item alia Ne tradas Do- 
 mine bestiis animam 
 confitentem tibi. 
 
 Item alia Exultent iusti in 
 conspectu Dei. 
 
 Item alia Pretiosa in con- 
 spectu Domini. 
 
 Itetn alia Exultabunt san- 
 cti in gloria. 
 
 5 {to ' sonum exaudiat ') 
 
 Oratio post obitum 
 super defunctum. 
 
 Orationes ad lavandum. 
 
 5 {from Suscipe . . . habi- 
 
 taculum to end) 
 2 
 5 {from Suscipe . . . habi- 
 
 taculum to coUocare 
 
 digneris revised) 
 
 4 
 23 Suscipe . . . et mitte ei 
 I recipiatur tabemacula. 
 
 6 
 [Then follows the mass; 
 cf. Rheinau after Ii 
 and<)\ 
 
 Godelgaudus of 
 Reims (in Me- 
 nard's Notes pp. 
 260-261 ; Migne 
 /'.Z.78.467-468). 
 
 Incipit officium 
 pro defunctis. 
 
 In primis cantatur 
 psalmus Inexitu 
 Israel cum anti- 
 pkona vel Alle- 
 luia. 
 
 Deinde has ora- 
 tiones cantat 
 presbyter. 
 
 I 
 
 collecta sequitur 2 
 
 collecta seqititur 3 
 
 Item alia 4 [Mi- 
 
 nard after the 
 
 first three lines 
 
 has &c.] 
 
 Praefatio defuncto- 
 
 rum 6 
 Collecta nunc se- 
 quitur 7 
 Dicuntur capitula 
 In memoria et 
 rel. Ne tradas 
 bestiis <?/r^/. Ex- 
 ultent sancti et 
 rel. Pretiosa est 
 et rel. Exulta- 
 bunt sancti et rel.
 
 Zurich Rheinau MS 
 Mon. i 312-315). 
 
 'SPANISH SYMPTOMS' 
 30 (in Gerbert 
 
 185 
 
 Carolingian Supplement to Greg (Mur. 
 ii 213-218). 
 
 Ordo ad commendationem animae. 
 
 21 
 
 20 
 3 
 
 Orationes in agenda mortuorum 
 quando anima egreditur de 
 corpora. 
 
 I 
 
 24 Deus cui omnia vivunt | indulgendo. 
 \Brev. Moz. p. cliv] 
 
 25 Suscipe . . . de ergastulo | resuscitari 
 mereatur. [Ibid.] 
 
 26 Non intres in iudicium | signaculo 
 Trinitatis. [Ibid.] 
 
 27 Fac quaesumus Domine hancjange- 
 licis choris. \Brev. Moz. p. clii] 
 
 28 Inclina Domine aurem tuam | esse 
 consortem. [Gr^.^m Mur. ii 270] 
 
 29 Absolve Domine animam ] resuscita- 
 tus respiret. [Ibid.] 
 
 30 Annue nobis Domine | peccatorum. 
 [Ibid.] 
 
 Ad lavandum corpus. 
 
 5 
 6 
 
 7 
 
 Et incipit psalm, canere et lavare cor- 
 pus, et ponitur inferetro, et anteqiiam 
 de domo egrediatur dicit antiphonam 
 Ad aeterna formasti me. Psal. Do- 
 minus regit me. 
 
 7 {a second time ; so in Gerberfs print j 
 but?) 
 
 Post haec continuatitn canantur psalmi, 
 
 et postea dicantur capiiula 
 In memoria aeterna erit iustus. 
 Ne tradas bestiis animas confitentium 
 
 tibi. 
 Pretiosa in conspectu Domini mors 
 
 sanctorum eius. 
 Non intres in iudicium cum servo tuo 
 
 Domine. 
 Requiem aetemam dona ei Domine.
 
 i86 
 
 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Gelas iii 91 
 
 7 Deus qui iustis supplicationi- 
 
 bus , muneris portionem. 
 {Bo No. 3] 
 
 8 Die cap\itul?i In memoria 
 
 aeterna. 
 Item orationes antequam ad 
 sepulchrum deferatur. 
 
 9 Deum iudicem universitatis I 
 resuscitet. \Miss. Goth. 
 Mass 33] 
 
 10 Te Domine Sancte, Pater | 
 
 consequatur aetemum. \Bo 
 No. 5 ; Moz. Lib. Ord. 
 coll. 124-125] 
 
 11 Omnipotentis Dei miseri- 
 
 cordiam dilectissimi fratres 
 I collocare dignetur. 
 
 12 Deus qui universorum | prae- 
 
 sentari. \Bo post nom. of . 
 Missa sace?-d. de/uncti, 
 Mur. ii 949] 
 Item orationes ad sepulchrum 
 priusquam sepeliatur 
 
 13 Oremus fratres carissimi pro 
 
 I orantibus Sanctis. 
 
 14 Opus misericordiae tuae est | 
 
 Abrahae. 
 
 15 Redemptor animarum Deus | 
 
 morte patiaris. 
 
 Gellone {?ax\s B.N. MS) 
 
 Godelgaudus of 
 Reims 
 
 em orationes ante 
 
 se- 
 
 Item oratio ante- 
 
 piilchrum priusquam 
 
 quam ad sepul- 
 
 sepeliatur. 
 
 
 chrum defera- 
 tur. 
 
 7 
 
 
 Praefatio 9 
 
 II 
 
 
 Collecta seqtiitur 
 
 9 
 
 
 10 
 
 12 
 
 
 Itefn mine praefatio 
 
 10 
 
 
 II 
 
 Collecta sequitur 
 
 12 
 
 13 
 
 Oratio ad sepul- 
 chrum prius- 
 quam sepelia- 
 tur. 
 
 13 {but ending ox^xi- 
 tibus nobis) 
 
 Collecta eiusdem se- 
 quitur 14 
 
 Item orationes post sepul- Or. post sepul[tu]r[am] 
 
 turam. 
 16 Debitum humani corporis | 16 
 
 perfrui concedas. 
 
 Praefatio post se- 
 pulturam. 
 16 
 
 ' I have not been able to find this prayer in its entirety as it is found in the 
 Supplement. The first part ' Obsecramus . . . misericorditer suscipias ' is M02. 
 Lesley p. 459. 64-70 ; for the second part ' Non ei dominentur . . . caligo ' see Moz. 
 Lib. Ord. col. 134 11. 5-6 ; the words ' in sinu . . . iubeas ' look like a rewrite of Gelas 
 iii 105 p. comm., ci.Lib. Ord. 134. 7-9. But, though Alcuin will carefully revise an 
 existing text, he does not indulge in this sort of patchwork stuff. I cannot but 
 think that the prayer lay before him in the form in which it is found in the Supple- 
 ment. Its second part contains the expression 'cum Sanctis et electis ' which (as 
 pointed out Book of Cerne pp. 243-245) is characteristically Irish. It occurs twice 
 in Lib. Ord., 'cum Sanctis omnibus et electis', col. 126. 3-4, col. 423. 34 (but 
 the texts of the Lib. Ord. seem to me, speaking generally, as if they had undergone 
 late revision and to be so far of a vevlue inferior to those of the Missal and Breviary 
 of Cardinals Ximenes and Lorenzana) ; it also occurs in the letter of Idalius, bishop
 
 'SPANISH SYMPTOMS' 187 
 
 Zurich Rheinau MS Carolingian Supplement to Greg 
 
 Postea portatur in ecclesiam canentibus 
 interim antiph. cum psalm. Ant. 
 Tu iussisti nasci me Domine Psal. 
 Ouemadmodum Ant. Audi vocem de 
 caelo Psal. Dilexi quoniam. 
 
 'if In memoria aeterna AL Redemit 
 Dominus Al. Ne tradas Domine Al. 
 Exaudi nos Deus Al. Exaudi oratio- 
 nem ad te Al. ant. Non derelinquas 
 me Deus Al. Delicta iuventutis meae. 
 Et can. Miserere mei Deus. 
 II 
 
 Incipiiint orationes post lavationem 
 corporis. 
 
 31 Deus vitae dator | confoveri iubeas- 
 \Moz. Lesley p. 459, 52-62] 
 
 32 Deus qui humanarum animarum | 
 consortiis. \Brev. Moz. p. clii] 
 
 Postea deputandi sunt qui ibidem sine 
 intermissione usque dum ipsum cor- 
 pus sepel. psallaftt psalmos vel re- 
 spons. permixta, et ipsufn corpus 
 semper in ecclesia debet [sic] tisque 
 pro anima missa celebratur; cum vero 
 ipsa expletafuerit, antequafn, etc. 
 
 Orationes ante sepulchrum prius- 
 quam sepeliatiir. 
 
 33 Obsecramus misericordiam tuamjre- 
 suscitari iubeas.^ 
 
 34 Deus apud quern mortuorum | gaudia 
 repromissa. [Brev. Moz. p. cxlix-cl ; 
 Fe'rotin's Liber Mozarabicus Sacra- 
 mentorum col. y^y frojn Toledo MS 
 35. 7 saec. ix or x] 
 
 Levatur ipsum corpus, procedentes atite 
 (illud) cum cereis vel turibulum cum 
 incensis, cantibus, antiphonis cum 
 psalm. An. In Paradisum deducant 
 
 Oratio post sepultum corpus. 
 13* 
 
 of Barcelona (Migne P. L. 96. 459) to Julian of Toledo acknowledging the latter's 
 Prognosticon lib. Hi {see p. 170 n. i above), but nowhere in Julian's own work. 
 
 * This prayer {Oremus fratres carissimi pro spirit u cari nostri, &c.) does not 
 appear to be in the Mozarabic books ; but the Gallican expression ' cari nostri ' as 
 applied to the dead, and the Irish 'inter sanctos et electos' would lead us to 
 expect that it is not from a Spanish source. As to the Spanish use of 'cams' 
 for the living, not as in Gaul for the dead, see Book of Ceme p. 263 note 4 ; 
 see also Julian of Toledo's Prognost. lib. ii capp. 26, 27, ' carorum viventium', 
 ' carorum superstitum ' (Migne P. L. 96. 487 D, 488 A, C) ; in lib. i cap. 19 
 it is used of the dead ' ubi sepultum sit charissimi corpus ' and then imme- 
 diately after 'a fidelibus carissimis' of the deceased person's living relatives (ibid. 
 474 B) ; ' cari ' for the living in the Bobbio Missal (ed. Mabillon, p. 325) ; for the
 
 1 88 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Gelas iii 91 Gellone (Paris B. N. MS) Godelgaudus of 
 
 Reims 
 
 17 Omnipotens aet. Ds. qui 17 
 
 humano | sociari. 
 
 18 Obsequiisautemrite|inregno \% {ending careat ignis 
 
 vivorum. aeterni) 
 
 Item alia (18: Adepturis 
 to end) 
 
 15 
 
 Commendatio animae. Commendatio animae. 
 
 19 Commendamus tibi | Salva- 19 19 
 
 tor mundi. 
 
 20 Deus apud quern omnia 
 
 morientia | ablue indulgen- 
 do. \Moz. Lib. Ord. col. 
 122] 
 
 This Table suggests many ' observations '. I must make a selection, 
 and deal with each item by way of indication, sufficient to set any 
 reader in the way, if he please, to follow up enquiries for himself. 
 
 (i) First, the Table will enable any one to recognize the original 
 elements of the Offices of prayer for deceased persons and of burial in 
 any mediaeval Rituale, Manuale, &c., from the tenth to the sixteenth 
 century, home or foreign, to observe how these are utilized, and to see 
 at once what are the later accretions ; with very little trouble, to 
 see too what is the nature, character, tone, spirit of these latter 
 compared with the early elements. 
 
 (2) The Rheinau Order is particularly interesting in this respect ; it 
 is not merely that the rubrics are more detailed, but it is as if an ' early 
 anticipation ' of those interesting and picturesque details of later rites, 
 the censings and aspersions and the rest. 
 
 (3) There is another point which calls for attention in this Rheinau 
 Order, namely, its last prayer, which is nothing else than the last 
 prayer of Alcuin's Order, and derived, like nearly all the rest of that 
 Order, from a Spanish source. I do not know how it may strike 
 others ; but to me, all circumstances considered, it appears very un- 
 likely that the compiler of the Rheinau book drew the prayer from 
 any other source than the Carolingian Supplement to Hadrian's 
 Gregorianiim, i. e. Alcuin. If this be allowed, it is, I would add, the 
 earliest trace of the existence of this Supplement known to me in con- 
 temporary documents ; and (if the palaeographers be right as to the 
 
 dead only once so far as I see in Lib. Ord. 399. 34 ; and once in Moz. Psalter, ' et 
 omnes patruni fratrum carorumque animas ', p. 347. But, as may suflficiently 
 appear from this last quoted book alone, ' cari ' is not a characteristic word for the 
 dead in the Spanish as it is in the Gallican documents.
 
 'SPANISH SYMPTOMS' 189 
 
 Zurich Rheinau MS Carolingian Supplement to Gre^ 
 
 te Psal. Ad te Domine levavi Ant, 7* 
 
 Ingrediar in locum tabernaculi Psal. 16' 
 
 Quemadmodum desiderat. Et ponunt 
 
 in sarcophago, et antequam cooperiant 
 
 orant otnnes pariter pro ipsa anima 
 
 et cantant Miserere mei Deus. Et 
 
 sacerdos dicit praefationem sepul- 
 
 turae. 
 
 16 
 Postea cooperitur, cant, interim antiph. 
 
 Aperite mihi portas Psal Confitemini 
 
 D. 35 Temeritatis quidem est I coronandus. 
 
 Commendatio animae. \Mos. Lib. Ord. col. 125 11. 25-42] 
 
 36 36 Tibi Domine commendamus | abs- 
 
 terge. [Bre7<. Moz. p. cli] 
 
 date of the Rheinau MS) would shew that the Supplement was already 
 in circulation in the latest years of the eighth century. 
 
 (4) It is to be observed that Alcuin's Order is the only one which 
 contains the all-familiar Requiem aeternam, &c., and it is the 
 earliest attestation known to me, though not, I think, the earliest 
 trace of its use. The very elaborate canon 27 of the Council of 
 Cloveshoe of 747 * De sanctae psalmodiae utilitate ' has these words : 
 ' . . . sive etiam pro ahis viventibus seu mortals cum expleta quanta- 
 libet psalmodia, genu flectentes in orationem, et lingua Latina vel 
 qui eam non didicerunt sua Saxonica dicunt (for the living, so and 
 so) . . . sive id pro mortuis, " Domine secundum magnam misericordiam 
 tuam da requiem animae illius, atque ei, pro tua immensa pietate, 
 gaudia htcis aeternae donare cum tuis Sanctis dignare " ' (Haddan and 
 Stubbs iii 373). I do not mean to imply that the Requiem aeternam 
 was in official use in the church service in England at the time of the 
 Council of Cloveshoe ; quite the contrary. But in view of its occur- 
 rence in Alcuin's Order it seems to me not improbable that the verse 
 was in use in England, even in its present form, in private devotions 
 during the eighth century. Whether by the end of that century it 
 was in use in the service in England non liquet. 
 
 (5) In none of these Orders is there trace of anything that can be 
 identified with the present Office of the Dead — vespers, matins, lauds. 
 Their evidence goes to shew that as yet (except for a small portion of 
 the psalm-singing in the Rheinau Order) the choice and number of 
 
 ' I cannot find this prayer in the Mozarabic books, but it contains the charac- 
 teristic Irish 'cum Sanctis et electis'. 
 
 * Not in the Mozarabic books ; it has the expression * Sanctis ac fidelibus ' .
 
 I90 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 psalms was left entirely free. The earliest indications that I can 
 find of an Office like our present one are in Benedict of Aniane (see 
 below, ' Origin of the Prymer ' p. 217) ; and earlier still in Angilbert, 
 cap. xvi of the Order printed below, p. 327. The part of Angilbert's 
 Order which was to give the details of this Office (' ut in sequentibus 
 declaratur ') has unfortunately not been preserved. It is to be noticed 
 that the Office of the Dead was to be said not in the main church 
 where the regular Office had been said, but in an oratory (St Maurice's). 
 In any case what is contemplated by Angilbert is the daily recital 
 of an Office for the Dead, with vespers, matins and lauds, and this is, 
 to my knowledge, the earliest witness to the practice. 
 
 Mgr Batiffol tells us that ' ce pathetique office de la vigile des morts ' 
 was ' cree a Rome au commencement du Vlil® si^cle au plus tard ', and 
 that it was ' veritablement I'office romain dans son ^tat le plus pur '. 
 But then I venture to think that this assertion has about the same 
 value as Mgr Duchesne's assurance of the true Roman purity of his 
 Ordo of St-Amand. There seems not the least reason for considering 
 that the origin of our modern Office of the Dead is in Rome, or for 
 doubting that it originated in the Prankish Church, and this is the 
 case too as regards the mass for the dead now in use, which bears on 
 its face the clearest marks of its Franco-Gallic origin. 
 
 (6) It will be noticed that whilst Alcuin keeps but four of the prayers 
 hitherto in use in Gaul, and newly adds ten which (so far as my know- 
 ledge goes) are found only in Spanish books (and one of the ten in 
 the Bobbio Missal also), he incorporates bodily the three prayers 
 (Nos. 28, 29,30 of the Table) prescribed in Hadrian's Gregorianuin ' in 
 agenda mortuorum ' (Muratori ii 270). I would suggest — and I do not 
 see what reasonable objection can be urged against this view — that 
 in these three prayers we have the Roman burial service corresponding 
 to the prayers of the burial services set forth in the Table. 
 
 It may be asked : but where is the mass ? In such case I would in 
 my turn ask : when the specific mentions of the bishop are removed 
 (that is to say, when the words ' et sacerdotis tui episcopi ' — ' sacer- 
 dotum' — 'episcopi ' are removed) from the prayers composing the mass 
 Mur. ii 269-270, what is there in this mass which renders it anything 
 but perfectly suitable for any or all Christians ? Rome is not Gaul ; the 
 religious sense and feeling of the two is widely different ; why should 
 Rome be required or expected to have a dozen or more different for- 
 mulae of mass for different classes of dead persons because they had 
 such a dozen or more in Gaul (see Book of Cerne, pp. 270-272) and m 
 Spain ? 
 
 (7) As to the burial srevice of the Bobbio Missal : it consists of five 
 prayers found in Gelas iii 91, namely Nos. 1,3, 7, 6 and 10 in the
 
 'SPANISH SYMPTOMS' 191 
 
 first column of the Table, and in this order. The Bobbio texts shew 
 variants and in the case of the last prayer, No. 10 (which is also found 
 in Spain in a text akin to that in Bo rather than that in Gclas), a cur- 
 tailment. Are we to infer that the Order of Gelas iii 91 existed and 
 was in use in Gaul in the seventh century, and that the compiler of 
 the Bobbio Missal made a selection from it ? I simply raise the 
 question ; to discuss it properly would entail the raising of other 
 questions as to Gclas in the form in which this book appears in the 
 unique MS Vat. 316. This would be out of place here, and the time 
 for such an enquiry is, I venture to think, not yet come. So far as 
 I can form an opinion I think that Bo is the derived text. 
 
 (8) As seen above, the Gellone Order and that of the Zurich MS 
 afford the first attestation of the prayer Proficiscere anima Christiana, 
 and this prayer, in these two MSS, embodies the prayer Suscipc with 
 its subsequent Libera invocations, now found in the Ritualc Romajnim 
 as a separate prayer divided from the Proficiscere by the lengthy prayer 
 Comniendo te. The late M. Edmond Le Blant, from the archaeological 
 and liturgical point of view, has written at length on \.\\est Libera invoca- 
 tions, making many interesting rapprocJiements, in order to illustrate the 
 connexion of early Gaulish piety with early Eastern (Greek) prayers 
 (see Sarcophages d Aries, i-SjH, pp. xxiii, xxvi, xxx-xxxvii). It was 
 perhaps unfortunate that he and other recent writers did not know 
 how recent is the first attestation (or, as I should say, origin) of the 
 Proficiscere, and of the Libera invocations which originally formed an 
 integral part of it, namely, the middle of the eighth century. 
 
 There is more to be said. Not merely is the origin of the prayer 
 late, but when it appeared it did not spread ; on the contrary, there is 
 a gap of more than two centuries, which I have been unable to bridge 
 over, before it again makes its appearance in church rituals. The 
 following are the only instances of its occurrence earlier than the 
 twelfth century known to me : (i) in a Jumieges ritual written before 
 1032 (Martene, de ant. eccl. rit. lib, iii cap. 15 Ordo vii) ; (2) in a ritual 
 of Remiremont in Lorraine of c. iioo (ibid. Ordo iv) ; (3) in the 
 so-called ' Breviarium ' of Monte Cassino written in the time of abbat 
 Oderisius, now MS Paris, Bibl. Mazarine No. 364 (ibid. §§ 5, 6) ; (4) in 
 a missal of the eleventh century written at Norcia (Ebner, p. 199) ; 
 (5) in another written in the region of Aquileia (ibid. p. 21) ; (6) in 
 a ritual of the eleventh century of the monks of S. Ambrogio at 
 Milan (Magistretti Maniiale Ambros. i p. 83). 
 
 Except No. (5) (as to which non liquet) all these are monastic ; 
 moreover, (i) and (a) have a connecting link in the reforming monk 
 St William of Dijon, who was a native of Northern Italy and 
 founded the monastery of Fructuaria there. These facts seem suffi-
 
 192 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 ciently to tell their own tale ; though it is proper to observe that 
 there is no mention of the Proficiscere in William's ' Consuetudines 
 Fructuarienses ' recently edited for the first time by Dom Bruno 
 Albers {Consuetudines monasticae iv, 191 1, pp. 182-189).] 
 
 Note B 
 
 (See p. 174 note 2.) 
 The Book of Cerne. 
 
 [As there seems but little chance at present that an attempt will be 
 made to investigate those very important documents for the early 
 history of religion in England, MS Reg. 2 A xx and the Book of 
 Cerne, I have thought it well to put on record some at least of the 
 circumstances, facts, and conditions under which discussion of the 
 question of the age and provenance of the second of these books will 
 have to be conducted. What follows is to be taken as of the nature 
 of indication and aide-memoire. But I shall not end without a state- 
 ment of my own ideas as to the origin of the Book of Cerne, and 
 as to what that book really is. 
 
 (i) Let the first place be for the reviewers : — 
 
 [a) In the Guardian (11 Feb. 1903) the writer of the review 
 considers that there can be no reasonable doubt who is the bishop 
 Aedeluald of the acrostic in the Book of Cerne \ namely, Aedeluald 
 bishop of Lichfield 818-830; and he thinks the editors suggestion 
 that it may be Aedeluald, bishop of Lindisfarne 721-740, not merely 
 ' seems unwarranted ' but ' is, surely, conjecture run wild '. The 
 grounds are these: 'you have a Mercian ninth-century MS referring 
 by name to a bishop Aedelwald, and a bishop of that name is known 
 to have existed in Mercia at that date.' It will be seen that hardly 
 anything can be more simple. 
 
 {b) In the Journal of Theological Studies, Oct. 1902, vol. iv 
 pp. 148-149 is a notice by the Rev. F. E. Brightman, who simply 
 says : ' The editor identifies " Aedeluald the bishop "... with Aethel- 
 wold of Lichfield 818-830'. This, however, is not the case. 
 
 {b) The reviewer in the Athenaeum, Nov. 8, 1902, is much more 
 guarded ; he says : ' If, then, the bishop Aethelwold of this MS was 
 living when it was written, it follows that he must be identified with 
 the Lichfield bishop . . . and the date of the book is confined to
 
 'SPANISH SYMPTOMS' 193 
 
 a period of about twelve years.' It would seem as if the writer 
 knew by experience that early MSS have sometimes revela- 
 tions to make that are apt to be disconcerting to critics in 
 a hurry. 
 
 So much for our reviewers at home. There is also a foreign 
 reviewer — a German this time — of whom mention must be made here, 
 for in fact he it was who first set me, as did Traube later, on the present 
 enquiry. The late Dr Paul Drews, in a review in the Literarisches 
 Centralblatt of Leipzig, 17 Jan. 1903, among other interesting things 
 observed : There is no ground for calling the MS Book of Cerne ; but 
 what ground is there for calling it the Prayer Book of Aedeluald the 
 Bishop} This is only an assumption ; this bishop is twice mentioned 
 in the book . . . but must therefore the book itself as it stands be his ? 
 This is possible ; but does the fact that a collection of poetry contains 
 poems by Goethe justify us in bringing the collection into intimate and 
 personal relation to Goethe ? These remarks struck me the more 
 inasmuch as, so far as my observation of his work goes, when Professor 
 P. Drews goes on wrong lines, it is lines that were suggested to him 
 by somebody else ; but when he strikes out a line for himself he 
 commonly shews more than common acumen, good sense, and judge- 
 ment. Having no answer ready for his questions I simply stored them 
 in memory, waiting for the time, if it might be. when there might 
 come ' more light '. 
 
 (3) When the late Ludwig Traube brought into notice the fact that 
 the library of Fulda once contained a MS called ' The Hymnar of 
 Edilwald ', it seemed to me that here was a first gleam. Turning at 
 once to the acrostic I saw, as stated above, what I had not observed 
 before — that the writer of the acrostic describes the nature of what 
 he calls ' this volume ', and that that description comprises two items : 
 {a) ' oracida [so I would read : * oraciilum ' Henry Bradshaw : and 
 ' oraculo' F. A. Paley] textV ; and {b) ^ carmina\ On then turning to 
 the contents of the book there could be no doubt that it does contain 
 two items that come precisely under {a), namely, the Breviate Psalter 
 compiled by ' oeSelwald the bishop' (pp. 174-195) and introductory 
 excerpts from the four gospels (pp. 5-79). 
 
 (3) But the ' carmina ' of course baffled me ; I naturally could 
 recognize only a very few ; we have no Wilhelm Meyer, Ludwig 
 Traube, Paul von Winterfeld in England ; and the Book of Cerne was 
 not Professor Atkinson's concern. F. Clemens Blume's Hymnodia 
 Hiber'no-Celtica sacculi v-xi {Pars altera of vol. li of the Analecta 
 Hymnica^ 1908) brought some light on the question. Of the 51 hymns* 
 
 ^ Blume's Nos. 245 and 248 comprise, each, two hymns. 
 isfi« O
 
 194 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 of which the collection consists, twenty-seven come from single MSS ; 
 thus : 
 
 four MSS contribute, each, one hymn (Nos. 232, 241, 255, 257) ; 
 
 two „ „ „ two hymns (Nos. 242, 246 and 250, 251) ; 
 
 one MS contributes three hymns (Nos. 238, 249, 254). 
 On the other hand, the single Bangor Antiphonar preserves no less 
 than nine, and the Book of Ccrne seven, not found elsewhere. This is 
 not all ; so far as the last-named MS is concerned, account has to be 
 taken of Nos. 224 and 227, which are preserved only in the Book 
 of Cerne and in the two English MSS (one hymn in each) 2 A xx 
 and the Nunnaminster Book (Harl. MS 2965), thus practically bringing 
 the Cerne number up to nine ; for, as both these MSS are by their 
 contents closely related to the Book of Cerne^ is it not possible, is it 
 not likely^ — now that we know of the existence of a ' Hymnar of Edil- 
 wald ' — that the seven hymns preserved in Cerne alone, and the two 
 common to Cerne and the MSS 2 A xx and the Nunnaminster Book, 
 may, all the nine pieces, be drawn from * Edilwald's Hymnar ' ? More- 
 over, it is to the point to note that there is a marked difference in 
 character between the hymns of the Bangor Antiphonar and those 
 of the Book of Cerne ; the hymns in the former are (except one or two) 
 evidently hymns for the Church Services; those in Cerne are all of 
 a personal cast. 
 
 I do not know how it may be with any reader who may have 
 followed me so far, but I must own for myself that, helped by lines 
 12-13 of the acrostic, in which ' Aedeluald episcopus' or some friend of 
 his gives an account of his work, I seem to begin to see daylight 
 piercing through the obscurities surrounding this question of the Book 
 of Cerne, and am led to think that, as Paul Drews had divined, 
 the Cambridge manuscript as little deserves the title of Prayer 
 Book of Aedehiald the Bishop as it does the title of Book of Cerne. 
 
 (4) Before stating my own view as to the character and origin of this 
 manuscript I think it desirable to point out two or three of the 
 questions which will have to be considered before the authorship of 
 the Cambridge manuscript can be assigned to Aedeluald bishop of 
 Lichfield 818-830. 
 
 On this supposition it would have to be contended either that 
 the Fulda ' Hymnar of Edilwald ' and the work described in 
 11. 12-13 of the acrostic are two different books; or that the work 
 of bishop Aedeluald of Lichfield came to Fulda in the course of the 
 ninth century or later. — The first is a thesis which would, I think, 
 be difficult to prove, or even make probable ; I wait to see this done ; 
 and proceed to observations on the second. 
 
 {a) It is easy to understand how books of English and insular origin
 
 'SPANISH SYMPTOMS' 195 
 
 like the Hymnar of Edilwald (if he be considered Edilwald of Lindis- 
 farne), and the Irish Missal that we call by the name of ' Stowe ', could 
 come to Fulda in its English period, that is to say within the first 
 twenty or thirty years of its foundation. If it be contended that the 
 Hymnar of the Fulda catalogue is the work of the bishop of Lichfield, 
 it would have to be shewn that Fulda in the ninth century was in such 
 communication with England that there was commerce of books 
 between the one and the other. Facts on this point are wanted ; 
 nothing else — not general considerations for instance — will do, 
 
 (d) Further, it is to be observed that the 'carmina' in the Book of Cerne 
 are of the Irish, the non-metric,^ type. The Latin verse which comes 
 from English pens, even from the earliest period, the verse of Aldhelm, 
 Boniface, Bede, Aedelwulf, Alcuin, is almost entirely metrical. The 
 Irish non-metric type of Latin versification early died out in England, 
 and in England it was never favoured. We can understand how such 
 compositions might still come from the pen of Aedeluald bishop 
 of Lindisfarne 721-740 and men of his generation, men trained and 
 formed whilst Irishry was still a living though declining force in 
 England. But if these pieces are by the Mercian Aedeluald of 
 Lichfield, it would have to be explained how it came about that he 
 should revert to the Irish form of verse, long dhnodS in England 
 and at no time popular with writers of English birth. Nor will the 
 case be mended if it be said that this Aedeluald only collected but 
 did not write the ' carmina ', which formed with Holy Scripture (so 
 says the acrostic) the substance of his book. 
 
 {c) There is another difficulty — the Breviate Psalter of bishop 
 OetSelwald included in the volume. I do not know where to refer for 
 a competent account of this class of document, and must therefore fall 
 back on my own resources. I know six of these Psalters, five in print 
 and one in manuscript ; that in the Irish Liber hyuinoriini from 
 Jerome's ' Gallican ' text ; two from his ' Roman text ' ; and one 
 (Bede's ^) from his ' Hebrew ' text. One is of a late date, that of 
 Prudentius of Troyes, written about the year 833 for the comfort and 
 consolation of the Empress Judith in those direful days ; it is rather 
 a personal composition than a psalter-text. Finally, the MS Breviate 
 may probably be by Eginhard, and is 'Gallican'. After a detailed 
 consideration and investigation of the extant specimens of ' Breviate 
 
 ^ Here, to avoid misconception, I must explain that by 'metric' I mean to 
 designate the metric of Latin classical poetry ; and by ' non-metric ' the specifically 
 Irish form of versification whether dependent on rhythm, or rhyme, or alliteration, 
 or assonance, &c. 
 
 ^ The Bede's Psalter edited by Martene and reprinted in Migne P. L. 94. 
 515-527 is the same document as that incorporated by Alcuin in his Officia per 
 ferias {P. L. loi. 569-579) under the title ' CoUectio Psalterii Bedae '. 
 
 O 2
 
 196 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Psalter ', it appears to me to be historically a devotion of Irish origin 
 and propagation, and to have been cultivated in England only while 
 the Irish influence was still, from old associations at any rate, a living 
 force. If the Breviate Psalter in the Book of Cenie be by Aedeluald 
 of Lichfield 818-830 some reasonable explanation would have to be 
 given, as in the case of the Irish non-metric versification, of the 
 revival in Merciaby this prelate of this form of devotion. A reference 
 to Alcuin's incorporation in his Officia per ferias of Bede's Breviate 
 will, for several reasons, not be enough. 
 
 (5) And now as to what the Book of Ccrnc really is. The following 
 is an outline of the case of the Cambridge manuscript as it presents 
 itself to me : 
 
 {a) Paul Drews was quite right in rejecting the title of ' The 
 Prayer Book of Aedeluald the Bishop ' as unauthorized, unsupported, 
 and without foundation. There never was such a Prayer Book. 
 
 {b) What did exist was a ' Hymnar of Edilwald the Bishop '. It 
 was the book in the Fulda library. 
 
 {c) This book was the work of Aedeluald, bishop of Lindisfarne 
 721-740; and consisted of Scripture excerpts (among which the 
 Breviate Psalter of his own making) and ' carmina ' : hymns, verse- 
 pieces. There is nothing to shew that the versifications contained in 
 it were anything else than pieces of his own composition ; or that it 
 contained any mere prose prayers at all ; and there is no positive 
 reason either why he may not have included ' carmina ' written by 
 others. 
 
 {d) This Hymnar of bishop Aedeluald was in the hands of the com- 
 piler of the Cambridge manuscript, who excerpted from it what 
 he thought proper for his own design, namely, certain ' hymns ', the 
 Breviate Psalter, and not improbably some, if not all, of the Gospel 
 extracts at the beginning of the manuscript.^ If so, this would easily 
 explain how the acrostic, which occurs between the extracts from 
 St Mark and those from St Luke, came into the Cambridge MS. 
 
 {e) Dr Drews was also quite right in insisting that the Cam- 
 bridge manuscript shews, so far as the prayers are concerned, ' eine 
 sicher beabsichtigte Ordnung '. In connexion with this should be 
 taken the remark of Dom Kuypers in his Introduction p. xviii, ' that 
 the Book of Cerne is not an original or homogeneous collection of 
 prayers, but was derived directly or indirectly from more than one 
 
 ' This remark is made of course subject to revision and control by the competent 
 expert. So far as I understand the case I gather from the Notes on the Biblical 
 Text of the Gospel Extracts in Book oj Cerne pp. 226-231 that there is nothing in this 
 Biblical Text which would not agree with the supposition that they were the 
 excerpts made by this bishop of Lindisfarne ; but that is a point as to which we 
 must desire a clear and express opinion from the expert.
 
 'SPANISH SYMPTOMS' 197 
 
 source ' ; and his pointing to the probabiHty that it ' was made up 
 from different booklets '.] . 
 
 Note C 
 
 (See p. 179 note 2.) 
 ' Spanish Symptoms ' in North Italy. 
 
 [Considering the question of ' Spanish Symptoms ' in North Italy 
 from a point of view other than the palaeographical, I would add 
 a few notes of my own. 
 
 The MS of the Spanish Orationale at Verona is by some stated to 
 be of the eighth century, or even the seventh (so Dom F^rotin, Liber 
 Mozarabicus Sacramentorum col. 947 ; I gather that this must also 
 be the opinion of Don A. Spagnolo, the present librarian). If so, it 
 would not be the only copy of a Spanish MS of so early a date even 
 in the Verona Library itself, for MS LXI (59) is a MS saec. vii-viii 
 of the Spanish Epitome (see Maassen, Gesch. d. Qnellen d. canonischcn 
 Rcchts p, 646) compiled some time between 598 and 6'>^'i^ (ibid. p. 661), 
 of which the existing MSS are to be found only outside Spain (ibid.). 
 The extreme corruption of the text of this MS noted by Maassen 
 (p. 647) also deserves notice. 
 
 In connexion with it the Novara MS LXXXIV (54) deserves atten- 
 tion, though this is of so late a date as the ninth century (Maassen, 
 p. 717). It too is a canonical collection, the origin of which there is 
 good ground for assigning to Spain ; it contains no document later 
 than the Council of Toledo of 638 and it is independent of the 
 Hispana ; moreover, as is the case with the Verona MS mentioned 
 above, no copy of the collection exists in Spain, but it survives only 
 in North Italian libraries (Novara, Brescia, Monza, Lucca ; see Maassen, 
 pp. 719-720, cf. p. 717). 
 
 Again, quite recently Dom Wilmart has printed (in the Bulletin 
 dancienne littirature et cTarch^ologie cJiriticn)ies of Fribourg, number 
 of 15 July 1914, pp. 176-187) a Bobbio MS fragment, barbarously 
 corrupt in text, of the seventh century. On examination the prayers 
 it contains prove themselves to be of Spanish origin. But there is 
 more : the Verona Lconiamivi is more famous than any of the MSS 
 just mentioned ; it is clearly not a tmicum, for the Gallican Missals 
 — the Gothicnm, Gallicaniivi, Francorum — all draw, and draw freely, 
 from this collection, which, it is evident, must have been, as a docu- 
 ment or collection, once widely spread on this side of the Alps ; 
 and it is probable that, whilst all manuscripts embodied the original
 
 198 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Roman nucleus, all and each may have received later additions which 
 have nothing to do with that nucleus. In the ' Liturgical Note on the 
 Book of Cerne' I called attention, for an item here or there, to 'Spanish 
 Symptoms ' in the Verona MS of the Leonianum} 
 
 It is now possible to go a step further. In his EinleiUing in die 
 lateinische Philologie des Mitte latter s (vol. ii of Vorlesungen und 
 Abhandlimgen, 1911) Traube (p. 28 and note 5) pointed out that the 
 Verona MS XL (38) is of ' scriptura Luxovicnsis ' ; already in vol. i 
 (1909) p. 162 he had pointed out Bobbio as the ' Bibliotheksheimat ' 
 of this (now) Verona MS, It would already appear then that we must 
 not assume that 'Spanish' MSS now at Verona were necessarily 
 written there any more than this one. 
 
 Dr Rudolf Beer's recent ' Bemerkungen liber den altesten Hand- 
 schriftenbestand des Klosters Bobbio ' {Sitzungsberichte of the Vienna 
 Acdidemy, philos. -hist. Classe, 191 1, No. 11) carries the matter yet 
 further forward. His object is to shew that Cassiodorus's library 
 at Vivarium, or a considerable portion of it, came to Bobbio. At 
 pp. 89-90 he says that in his view there is no evidence for the 
 existence of a native writing school at Verona in the seventh century, 
 whilst the Verona MSS of about that age can be shewn to have come 
 to Verona from elsewhere, and the Sulpicius Severus of 517, Verona 
 MS XXXVIII (36), certainly written at Verona, stands, he considers, 
 alone. Be that as it may, he also calls attention to the Bobbio origin 
 of other Verona MSS besides that mentioned by Traube as above : 
 the Didascalia fragments edited by Hauler, Verona MS LV (53) (p. 82, 
 cf.p. 90) ; the Verona MS XXXIX (37), Cassiodorus's ' Complexiones 
 in Epist. Apostolorum ' (p. 99). His paper indeed raises the question 
 whether the whole of the early ' Spanish ' MSS — i. e. copies of Spanish 
 originals — now at Verona did not come there from Bobbio ; just as 
 Traube {Vorlesungen ii p. 131 cf. p. 126) says it is 'certain' that we 
 can shew that some portions of the Bobbio MSS were ' written in Spain 
 and Africa '. ' Perhaps (he adds) there were monks who came to 
 Bobbio directly from Spain, and through Spain from Africa, That was 
 already in the seventh century,' 
 
 There remains yet one more item to be noticed. It will take some 
 time to develop the case ; but the time must be given. 
 
 In October 1910 Dom Germain Morin delivered at Oxford four 
 lectures on ' The Origin of the Athanasian Creed ' ; these were printed, 
 in the form of two articles, in the Journal of Theological Studies for 
 
 ^ In his review of that volume in the Revue d'histoire et de littcratio-e 7-eligieuses, 
 t, vii, 1902, pp. 556-564, abbe Paul Lejay, in this matter (p. 560) as in other points, 
 understood what I was driving at in these occasional indications scattered through 
 the 'annotation touffue' of that ' Note', namely traces of Hispanism (through Irish 
 handiwork) in the Verona MS of the Leoniamnn.
 
 'SPANISH SYMPTOMS' 199 
 
 January and April 191 1. His conclusion is that it is a Spanish pro- 
 duction dating from soon after the middle, or at all events from the 
 second half, of the sixth century. Those acquainted with the hot, and 
 I think I may say distinctly tendentious, disputes over this document 
 in England in the last two generations will not expect that such 
 a conclusion will be either accepted or acceptable in many quarters ; 
 but there seems to have supervened at any rate a certain accalmie in 
 the ranks of convinced disputants. The first of the two articles in the 
 J. T. S. was devoted to criticism of the methods hitherto commonly 
 employed to solve the difficult question, and to explaining the hope- 
 lessness of arriving at a result that will carry conviction to reasonable 
 minds so long as those methods are persisted in. His remarks on this 
 subject, in view of past attempts, seem to me, I may say in passing, 
 singularly pertinent. The second article, arguing for a Spanish origin, 
 seemed to recall to my mind how (if his preconceived notion of a late, 
 ninth century, origin of the Creed be eliminated) the idea of a Spanish 
 origin naturally suggests itself to the reader of the late Dr Swainson 
 in his volume on the Creeds published in 1875, which still remains 
 a record of pioneer work and of original research honourable to 
 English scholarship, in spite of all its weaknesses and defects, and in 
 spite too of what has been done since. True that it is to-day almost 
 painful to read pp. 313-322, where Dr Swainson deals with what is 
 now universally recognized as the oldest MS of the Athanasian 
 Creed, the Cod. Ambros. O 212, from Bobbio, of about the 
 year 700.^ 
 
 The Athanasian Creed, then, so far as documentary evidence goes, 
 is first discovered in the great Irish centre in North Italy. But how 
 did it come there ? 
 
 Dom Morin (p. 342) points, so far as concerns the Creed, to the 
 ' Spanish Symptoms ' of the Ambrosian MS : the Fides of Bachiarius,^ 
 
 ' Still, the difficulties on the side of palaeography, in which Dr Swainson was 
 not an 'expert', ought to be remembered. Muratori attributed the MS to 700, or 
 a little earlier; Montfaucon, after inspection, said 'Codex viii saeculi charactere 
 Langobardico ' ; Dr Ceriani in August 1871 in reply to Dr Swainson's enquiry as 
 to his opinion of its date, with the MS before him, 'assured me that he considered 
 it to be of the eighth century' (p. 317) ; thirty years later Dr Ceriani had reverted 
 to Muratori's opinion (/. T. S. vol. xii p. 161 note 3). These little but highly 
 embarrassing difficulties are inevitable so long as people will trust to general 
 expressions of opinion on the part of the ' expert ' without detailed and clear reasons 
 given; and the palaeographical expert continues the practice of settling technical 
 questions in this authoritative manner. 
 
 "^ Dom Morin (p. 242) speaks of the MSS of the Bachiarii Fides being 
 ' relativement rares'; should it not be 'excessively rare'.? Is any other MS 
 extant besides that now at Milan ? Montfaucon in his Bibliotheca Bibliothecaruin 
 MSS could record no other copy (so Florio, Bachiarii monachi Opuscula, p. Ixiv 
 as regards the mediaeval period, only one library among those in G. Becker's 
 Catalo_e:i possessed it— Fulda, in the twelfth century. It is not improbable that
 
 300 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 a Spanish writer of the fourth and fifth centuries, immediately- 
 preceding the Creed ; then, with the intervention of a sermon on the 
 Ascension, the Libelhts Fidei of Gregory of Elvira, also a Spanish 
 writer of the fourth century. But there is a ' Symptom ' much more 
 significant than these, and one that is of singular interest for the 
 purpose of the present Note. 
 
 Muratori [Anecdota vol. ii, 1698) points out (p. 226) that imme- 
 diately after the closing words of the Creed, ' salvus esse non poterit ', 
 in the same line, the script continues thus : 
 
 ' Lacta, mater, eum qui fecit te, quia talem fecit te, ut ipse fieret in 
 te. Lacta eum qui fructum foecunditatis tibi dedit conceptus, et decus 
 virginitatis non abstulit natus.' ^ 
 
 At p. 227 he remarks on this: ' I do not know to what writer these 
 words are to be ascribed. Would that I knew ! for perhaps then we 
 might hold a clue to guide us to the author of the Creed ' (' fortassis 
 enim nobis coniectura esset qua Symboli auctorem cognosceremus '). 
 
 The words in question are to be found textually (with the exception 
 of the word ' ergo ' for ' mater ' and ' qui ' for ' quia ') in the seventh of 
 the Hildefonsine collection of sermons on the Blessed Virgin which 
 has been spoken of at length in the preceding paper (pp. 176-178); 
 which sermon I have said forms with viii and ix a special sub-group. 
 That the sermon vii is the source from which the piece of text in the 
 Ambrosian MS has been drawn is clear when the texts of the various 
 ancient sermons containing the ' Lacta' motif 2Lre reviewed. It occurs, 
 to my knowledge, in the following sermons : 
 
 (1) A sermon attributed to St Augustine embodied by Arnobius 
 Junior {c. 450) in the Arnobii et Scrapionis co7ijiictus lib. ii cap. 31 
 (see Migne P.L. ^'>^. 317 a). This sermon is, with some modifica- 
 tions of its text, printed from other MSS by the Benedictine 
 editors of St Augustine among the * sermones dubii ' (serm. 369) ; 
 Augustine's authorship is dismissed by them with contempt (see P. L. 
 39. 1655). 
 
 (2) Sermon 128 ' In Natali Domini xii ' in the Benedictines' Appen- 
 dix to the sermons of St Augustine (see P. L. 39. T998). 
 
 (3) Same Appendix, sermon 119, 'In Natali Domini iii ' (see ibid. 
 col. 1984), 
 
 (4) Sermon viii of the Hildefonsine collection (see P. L. 96. 271). 
 
 (5) Sermon vii of the same collection (see ibid. col. 268 B). 
 
 this copy may still have existed at Fulda in the middle of the sixteenth century 
 (see F. Falk Beitrdge iv i 23 at p. 95 'Liber S. Baccharii ' ; iv 4 15 p. 97 is 
 a copy of Bachiarius's other tract De reparatione lapsi). 
 
 ' See plate xxiv lines 4-6 in Dr A. E. Burn's Facsimiles of the Creeds, Henry 
 Bradshaw Society vol. xxxvi, 1909.
 
 SPANISH SYMPTOMS' 
 
 20I 
 
 The following Table shews these five texts corresponding to the 
 scrap in the Ambrosian MS O 212 immediately after, and in the same 
 hand as, the Athanasian Creed. 
 
 Cod, Ambros. 
 212 
 
 (0 
 
 (2) 
 
 (3) 
 
 (4) 
 
 (5) 
 
 Lacta mater eum 
 qui fecit te, 
 
 L. e. 
 
 L.e. 
 
 L. Maria crea- 
 torem tuum, 
 
 L.e. 
 
 L. ergo e. 
 
 q. f. t., 
 
 quia talem fecit te 
 ut ipse fieret'^ in 
 te. 
 
 qui t. f. t. 
 u. i. {. i. 
 t-, 
 
 qui t. f. t. 
 u. et i. f. i. 
 t., 
 
 
 qui t. f t. 
 u, i. f. i. 
 t., 
 
 qui^ t. i. t. 
 u. i. f. i. 
 t. 
 
 Lacta eum qui fruc- 
 tum foecunditatis 
 tibi dedit concep- 
 tus, 
 
 q. tibi et 
 munus f 
 attulit c, 
 
 q. tibi et 
 munus f 
 attulit c. 
 
 1. panem 
 caeli, pre- 
 tium mundi, 
 (etc.) 
 
 q. tibi 
 munus f. 
 attulit c, 
 
 L. e. q. fr, 
 foec. 
 t. d. c, 
 
 et decus virginita- 
 tis non abstulit 
 natus. 
 
 e. d. V. 
 n. a. 
 
 n. 
 
 e. donum v. 
 n. a. 
 n. 
 
 
 e. d. V. 
 n. a. 
 
 n. 
 
 e. d. V. 
 n. a. 
 n. 
 
 In view of this Table it is not, I conceive, open to doubt that the 
 sermon vii of the Hildefonsinc collection is the source whence the 
 writer of the Athanasian Creed in Cod. Ambros. O 212 drew his 
 scrap, since in that sermon only does the text exist in the particular 
 form in which it is found in the Bobbio (now Ambrosian) MS 
 immediately at the end of the earliest known copy of the Athanasian 
 Creed. 
 
 I have no intention of putting my finger into the burning con- 
 troversy which has raged round that document,^ and, what is more, 
 
 ' * qui ' : so the print ; but ? if ' quia ' be not the true reading. 
 
 - In Dr Burn's FacsUniles, transcript of plate xxiv : ' ut ip[ ] '. Turning to 
 
 the facsimile itself I read quite clearly each letter of the script as Muratori had 
 read it two centuries and more ago. I am here not to be understood as criticizing ; 
 but I would take this opportunity of extending to passages grown dim by age or 
 wear in ancient MSS the remark made above at p. 135 n. i as to erased script. 
 
 ' Nevertheless I would venture to observe that, on the assumption of a Spanish 
 origin for the Athanasian Creed, the so-called ' damnatory clauses ', upon which so 
 much ingenuity has been expended to accommodate them to the cojtimunis senstis 
 of modem days, will appear self-explicable in their obvious meaning to any one 
 who has really studied the character of Spanish religion and orthodoxy in the 
 original documents, ecclesiastical and civil, of the sixth and seventh centuries. 
 Dom H. Leclercq, in pointing out how this intolerant spirit is characteristic of that 
 orthodoxy of Spain in all the Christian ages, certainly handled the subject with 
 a rudeness of touch which may explain or excuse the almost fierce resentment of 
 the veteran scholar the late M. Men^ndez y Pelayo in the Introduction pp. 27-29 to 
 the new edition of his Historia de los heierodoxos Espatioles ; but there can be no 
 doubt that Dom Leclercq is right, and I cannot but think that to the informed 
 mind the 'damnatory clauses' of the Athanasian Creed will appear as, in them- 
 selves, a genuine indication of that Spanish origin of the document on which Dom 
 Morin insists.
 
 202 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 I need not. It suffices for my purpose to remark that we have here 
 yet another ' Spanish Symptom ' in Northern Italy, again at Bobbio ; 
 and one surely that is not the least significant of the series.^] 
 
 ^ Those who would wish fully to inform themselves must examine the context 
 also of the Bobbio scrap in the sermons mentioned ; and they will be rewarded, 
 I think, for their pains, since all this is a not unimportant element in the 
 Vorgeschichie of Marian cult and devotion in the West as found in documents of 
 the seventh century. I may here do no more than give the hint to ' those who 
 will ' ; adding that, curiously enough, the roots of this devotion and the direction 
 originally given to its earliest growth are found in St Augustine, not in St Ambrose, 
 and (naturally enough) not in St Leo. The starting-point is the emphasis laid on 
 the accessories of the Birth and Infancy, the crib, the swaddling clothes, &c. 
 I trust, if circumstances be favourable, that all this may be duly brought out one 
 day by a young friend already started on the enquiry. Here I will only mention 
 that the context in sermon vii of the Hildefonsine collection draws largely for its 
 ideas on (3), which, however, by a singular exception, does not contain our Bobbio 
 MS scrap at all. The context in 'St Augustine's sermon' found in Arnobius 
 Junior, ' Merito . . . praeputium ', is embodied in the Preface of Gelas \ 9, one of 
 the two masses for New Year's day in that Sacramentary ; which I should view 
 as a Hibemo-Gallican interpolation.
 
 VIII A 
 
 MORE 'SPANISH SYMPTOMS'^ 
 
 By Mgr G. Mercati. 
 
 The Date of some Prayers in the Mozarabic Missal— The Revision 
 OF the Toledan Missal in the Seventh Century— A supposed 
 
 LfBER OfFICIORUM OF HILARY OF POITIERS. 
 
 Mr Edmund Bishop, in his most valuable Liturgical Note in illus- 
 tration of the Book of Cernc (1902) p. 270, has called attention to the 
 great importance of a prayer for the dead which is not found in the 
 ordinary Mozarabic missal, but was in the Toledo missal that has 
 come down to us through the extracts made from it by the adoptionist 
 Elipandus.2 This prayer must have been known to and made use of 
 by the composers of the postcomniunio (95), and the Flanc igitur (96) 
 of the third book of the Gelasian sacramentary, and of the preface pro 
 mortuis plurimis of the Stowe missal. Hence it is in the Spanish 
 Visigothic books that we must look for the origin, hitherto quite un- 
 suspected, of certain parts of those celebrated missals. How far the 
 liturgical and literary history of the West is affected will be clear to 
 those who read Mr Bishop's Note. 
 
 A passage of the same prayer is referred to in the letter of the 
 Spanish adoptionist bishops to their colleagues of Gaul, Aquitania, 
 and Neustria," and it is there attributed to St Julian, bishop of Toledo, 
 
 ' From thtfournal of Theological Studies, April, 1907.— [In the Revue Benedic- 
 tine Oct. 1 91 3 pp. 421-436 is an article by Dom Donatien de Bruyne entitled 
 ' De I'origine de quelques textes litiirgiques mozarabes ', in which he covers much 
 of the same ground as Mgr Mercati had done six years before. On my calling his 
 attention to this paper, Dom de Bruyne wrote me : ' Je ne connaissais pas I'article 
 excellent de Mgr Mercati. Si je I'avais connu je n'aurais pas ecrit le mien '. 
 Dom de Bruyne's paper was, however, called forth (and indeed called for) by the 
 articles of the eminent Professor of Gottingen, Dr Wilhelm Meyer, on rhythms of 
 the Mozarabic liturgical books, in which, he says, Dr Meyer proposes ' des con- 
 clusions qui risquent de fausser I'histoire de cette poesie liturgique '. This is true ; 
 but it is due also to the veteran scholar to observe that, so far as these conclusions 
 are false, he has been led into error by the palaeographer and the liturgist ; and it 
 is from them, and not from the philologist of Gottingen, that a reckoning has to be 
 demanded. — E. B.J 
 
 ' Ep. iv, ad Alcuinum, in Migne P. /.. 96. 874, Mon. Germ. Hist., Epist. iv 305. 
 
 * Migne P. L.\o\. 1 321 -1331, and the appendix to Helfferich Der wcstgothische 
 Arianismus, quoted in Hefele Conciliefi^eschichte iii* 650 n. 2. On the letter, which
 
 204 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 who died in 690. As the date of the prayer is thus fairly known, and 
 consequently the earliest date at which the formulas in question could 
 have been added to the Gelasian and Stowe Missals, and as this letter 
 gives us the names of the authors of two other missae of the Mozarabic 
 Missal, it is worth while giving the passages of the letter referred to.^ 
 
 Item praedecessores nostri Eugenius, Ildephonsus, lulianus, Toletanae 
 sedis antistites, in suis dogmatibus " ita dixerunt in missam de caena Domini : 
 ' Qui per adoptivi hominis passionem dum suo non indulsit corpori, nostro 
 demum, id est, iterum non pepercit.'^ Et alibi:* 'Qui pietati tuae per 
 adoptivi ^ hominis passionem quasi quasdam in praesentis populi acquisitione 
 manubias cum non exhibuerit ^ e caelo, exhibuerit e triumpho ; et cum non 
 habuerit divinitas immutabilis pugnam, habuerit fragilitas assumpta victo- 
 riam.' "^ Item in missa de ascensione Domini : ' Hodie Salvator noster post 
 adoptionem * carnis sedem repetit ^ deitatis.' Item in missam defunctorum : 
 * Quos fecisti adoptionis participes, iubeas haereditati tuae esse consortes.' 
 Ecce quos in adoptione participes esse non dubitat, consortes fieri in haeredi- 
 tate exoptat (P. L. loi. 1324 B). And further on Credimus igitur et con- 
 fitemur unigenitum Dei filium . . . conformem humano generi . . . secundum 
 naturam adoptionis . . . secundum Eugenium qui dicit : ' Qui per adoptivi 
 hominis passionem dum suo non indulxit \sic\ corpori, nostro demum, id est, 
 iterum non pepercit ' ; secundum Ildephonsum qui dicit : * Hodie post adop- 
 tionem carnis sedem repetit deitatis " ; secundum lulianum qui dicit : ' Quos 
 fecisti adoptioni participes, iubeas haereditati tuae esse .consortes ' * (ibid. 
 1328 B-1329 A). 
 
 is of the year 793 or the beginning of 794, cf. Hefele ibid. 676 sqq., and A. Hauck 
 Kirchengeschichte Deiitschlands ii* 296. [Though Hefele pointed out that the prayers 
 cited from the Toledan Missal by the Spanish adoptionist bishops were printed 
 from a Toledo MS by Helfferich in i860, this fact passed unobserved by liturgists 
 until Mgr Mercati called attention to it in the present paper. I do not see that 
 Hauck ii^ mentions it either. These prayers are now for a second time printed 
 from the Toledo MS by the late Dom Ferotin, Liber Mozarabicus Sacramentorum 
 pp. xxx-xxxii. It is a pity, however, that he failed to mention that Helfferich had 
 printed them fifty years before. Cf. /. T. S. x, 1909, pp. 602-603. — E. B.] 
 
 ' The fathers of the Council of Frankfort, A.D. 794, in their reply (Mansi, xiii 886, 
 P. L. loi. 1333 D sqq.) quote the words: ' Item praedecessores nostri . . . indulsit 
 corpori' and 'Item in missa de ascensione . . . deitatis', but refer them to 
 Hildefonsus only. 
 
 ^ ' In missarum oraculis' Blip. 
 
 ^ So in Elipandus, who has indttlget. This sentence does not occur in the 
 Missale Mixtuvi pp. 163-164 {P. L. 85. 415, 416), but it was found exactly as 
 above in the old Mozarabic Missal of Toledo by Helfferich, quoted by Hefele, 
 p. 651 n. I. 
 
 * ' In missa de quinta feria Paschae ' Elip. Cf. Missale Mixt. 209 Inlatio {P. L. 
 85. 507). 
 
 ^ ' Adsumpti ' Miss. 
 
 * ' Exegerit ' Miss. : ' exierit ' Eiip. 
 
 ' ' Et cum . . . victoriam ' om. in E/i/>. 
 
 " 'Per adopt.' Concil. Franc/.: 'post assumptionem ' Miss. Mixt. 251 Missa 
 {P. L. 85. 602) : ' repetivit ' Blip. 
 
 ' [In a later communication to me Mgr Mercati pointed out how this last cited 
 passage (which is preserved in a genuine form in Gelas iii. 95 and in the Stowe 
 Missal) has been utilized in the Reichenau Irish fragment printed by Dr H. M.
 
 MORE 'SPANISH SYMPTOMS' 205 
 
 Hence the Spanish episcopate or the writer of the letter attributes 
 to:— 
 
 (i) St Eugenius (H ? f 657) the ' missa ' of Holy Thursday, sup- 
 pressed or mutilated in the printed missal, but found in the old 
 manuscript of Toledo seen by Helfiferich ; 
 
 (2) St Hildefonsus (f 669) the ' missa de ascensione domini ' which 
 begins: ' Placeat dilectissimi fratres ' {Miss. Mixt. 251; P.L. 85. 602); 
 
 (3) St Julian (f 690) a ' missa defunctorum ', suppressed when the 
 Mozarabic liturgical books were expurgcd after the adoptionist 
 controversy (cf. Bishop, p. 270, Hauck ii ^ 288 n. 2).^ 
 
 The question arises : Did the compiler of the letter make a capri- 
 cious and not disinterested division ^ of certain viissae of the old 
 Toledan missal among the former bishops, ' praedecessores nostri ', or 
 did he follow some written tradition, something more precise than 
 a merely oral one ? Either literary-historical, so to speak ; or one 
 quasi-liturgical, such as e. g. is found above the canons of the Menaia 
 and the lessons and (formerly) the hymns of the breviary, and as 
 would have been handed on in the eighth-century Toledo missal itself, 
 if its rubrics occasionally indicated the true or supposed authors of 
 the various prayers. The idea of a mere fancy assignment of the 
 masses seems wholly inadmissible, not only on account of the nature 
 and seriousness of the episcopal document (quite apart from its doc- 
 trine) and the quiet but emphatic way in which the authorship is 
 attributed to Eugenius, Hildefonsus and Julian, but also because we 
 know, on the authority of their contemporary biographers,^ that these 
 bishops did compose some new masses. 
 
 Bannister in/. T.S. (Oct. 1903, p. 58 II. 18-19): ' et quos fecisti ad oblationem 
 participes iubeas hereditatis tuae esse consortes '. On the supposition that this is 
 a redaction of the later eighth century or of the ninth, I would observe how St Paul's 
 idea of ' the adoption of sons ' is turned into one which, in view of the then state 
 of things as regards Holy Communion, very well may mean no more than the 
 modern phrase ' assisting at mass '. — E. B.] 
 
 ^ One can well understand why the bishops and Elipandus quote the passages in 
 the general terms : ' Item praedecessores nostri . . . iterum testimonia sanctorum 
 patrum venerabilium Toleto deservientium in missarum oraculis sic edita.' 
 
 ^ It is of course easy to suggest a falsification, but we have to deal with another 
 similar expression of the Missale Mixtum cited by Bishop o. c. 270 n. 3 (cf. Hauck 
 288 n. 6). It is true that a large number of the quotations from the fathers by 
 Elipandus are spurious or falsified (cf. Hauck 288 n. i), but even if we suppose that 
 the simple old man was incapable of detecting the mistakes in such passages as his 
 friends brought to his notice, it does not seem that he could possibly make a mistake 
 when quoting from the Missal he had used all his life. If he deliberately acted in 
 bad faith, it would remain to explain why he should have fathered his inventions on 
 quite recent authors. 
 
 ' Cf. § II below. A similar indication can be seen in the letter of Elipandus to 
 Alcuin p. 305 (cf. Bishop 0. c. 270 n. 2) : ' Nam et ipsi canimus in vigilia Paschae 
 beato Isidore dicente : " Induit carnem sed non exuit maiestatem, nostram sub- 
 stantiam expetens, sed propriam non relinquens'" (P. Z. 96. 875 B) ; hence it is
 
 2o6 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Here we are bound to take into serious consideration the evidence 
 given by this letter, which was written at Toledo about a century after 
 St Julian, by one who had access to documents or traditions now lost, 
 and we must test it by carefully enquiring whether the style of the 
 missae at all corresponds with the extant writings of the Toledan 
 fathers who are asserted to have composed them. In this investigation, 
 which the present note is written to suggest, the possibility should be 
 borne in mind, nay more the fact, of later and important retouches ; 
 and also, though this is less probable, the possibility of the composi- 
 tion being more official than personal, as is frequently the case with 
 public documents. 
 
 Whatever result this investigation may have, it is now clear that : — 
 
 (i) The liturgical formulas used by the Spanish adoptionist bishops 
 were, if we may accept their statement, all of the seventh century, and 
 the work of writers who, in correctness of judgement and in taste, differ 
 considerably from St Isidore, ' that great inheritor and representative 
 of the older learning ' ; ^ 
 
 (2) These bishops attribute to the middle of the seventh century 
 and later the missae of such important days in the ecclesiastical year as 
 the ' caena domini ', a day in Easter week, and the Ascension. 
 
 If this be so, it will have to be carefully considered whether we may 
 venture to assign to an earlier date many other missae of less important 
 days. 
 
 II 
 
 To get a fair idea of the development of the Mozarabic liturgy in 
 Toledo, under the government of Eugenius, in the middle, and of his 
 successors until the end, of the seventh century, it will be useful to 
 gather information from contemporary writers whose truthfulness has 
 never been questioned. The present small contribution and most of 
 the notes attached are the result of a correspondence with Mr Bishop ; 
 it will suffice for our purpose to produce them in a rough form, and 
 not as he would have published them. ..." It is desirable that other 
 small notices should be collected by others, in order to get, if not 
 a clear light, at least some enlightenment on that dark but most 
 important period in the developement of the Western liturgies. 
 
 clear that it was known or believed that Isidore was the author of the ' benedictio 
 lucemae ' of Holy Saturday which is preserved in the Missale Mixtum pp. 176-177. 
 
 ' Cf. Edm. Bishop, ' Spanish Symptoms ', in the Journal of Theological Studies 
 viii p. 288 [s2(pra p. 175]— full of hints worthy of being carefully treasured, and 
 capable of fruitful application. 
 
 ^ [I omit a few words which Mgr Mercati was kind enough to add here, but which, 
 though I am grateful to him for them, I cannot comfortably include in a volume 
 of my own. — E. B.]
 
 MORE 'SPANISH SYMPTOMS' 207 
 
 (i) St Eugenius II (a) ' . . . cantus pessimis usibus vitiates melodiae 
 cognitione correxit, officiorum omissos ordines curamque discrevit * 
 Hildefonsus de viris ill. 14 {P. L. 96. 204) ; ' therefore a general work 
 of putting the Toledan liturgical books to rights' (Edm. Bishop).' 
 {b) Eugenius himself writes to bishop Protasius ' missam sancti Hip- 
 polyti vel orationes, si nobis oratu vestro vita comes adfuerit, ut 
 potuero pro vestra iussione patrabo ; missam vero votivam ideo non 
 scripsi quia in hac patria tam accurati sermonis habentur atque sen- 
 tentiae ut simile non possim excudere, et superfluum iudico inde me 
 aliquid dicere unde meliores recolo iam dixisse ' '^ {Mon. Germ. Hist., 
 Attctt. Antiquiss. xiv 287). 
 
 (a) St Hildefonsus, {a) according to the testimony of St Julian, 
 divided his numerous writings into four parts or classes, ' Partem sane 
 tertiam missarum esse voluit, hymnorum, atque sermonum ' {P.L. 96. 
 44 A). ' From the account of Julian it would seem that each part 
 was of some extent.' ' So far as the masses written by St Hildefonsus 
 are concerned, it would thus seem that there was a literary record.' 
 {b) Cixilanus, in his life of Hildefonsus, relates that when still a deacon 
 administering the suburban church of SS Cosmas and Damian, Hilde- 
 fonsus ' duas missas in laudem ipsorum dominorum suorum quas in 
 festivitate sua psallerent, miro modulationis modo perfecit ; quas 
 missas infra annotatas invenietis' {P. L. 96. 44 C, and cf. Moz. 385 
 sqq.) ; that (apparently when he was a bishop) he wrote a canticum 
 and a ' missa quae subter est adnotata ' in honour of St Leucadia 
 (45C-46A; cf. Moz. 415 sqq.); and that for the 'dies sanctae et 
 semper Virginis Mariae ' — the feast day of the Blessed Virgin — ' ante 
 tres dies letanias peregit et missam super (? subter) scriptam, quae in 
 eius laude decantaretur perfecit, quae est septima ' (96. 46 B).^ ' The 
 last three words are not clear, but they seem to imply that Hildefonsus 
 composed at least three other masses besides the four already men- 
 
 ' The amount of liberty a corrector of the Toledan school at that time allowed 
 himself can be seen by the words used by Eugenius 1 1 when describing his recension 
 of the poetry of Dracontius : ' . . . pro tenuitate mei sensuli subcorrexi, hoc vide- 
 licet moderamine custodito, quo superflua demerem, semiplena supplerem, fracta 
 constabilirem, et crebrius repetita mutarem.' Mon. Germ. HtsL, Aiictt. Antiquiss. 
 xiv 27. Cf. below at (3) similar words of Felix on the liturgical revision of St Julian. 
 
 ' ' The mass of Hippolytus is not proper in Moz. It appears there were more 
 votive masses than one in use. Of these earlier votive masses the "missa omni- 
 moda", pp.441 sqq., I certainly believe to be one; and it strikes me, havjng analysed 
 it carefully, as one of the older kind of masses of Moz. It is used in the Bobbio 
 missal.' 
 
 * ' And this must evidently be the occasion to which the first canon of the tenth 
 council of Toledo (a.d. 656) refers, and therefore the mass of the (Annunciation) 
 feast of 18 December is in question. But is the mass which was composed by 
 Hildefonsus the one now found in Moz. pp. 32 sqq. (cf. p. 34 11. 38, 39: " Non 
 adoptione sed genere, nee gratia sed natura"); or is this Hildefonsus's mass 
 revised ? '
 
 2o8 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 tioned — perhaps those for the " tres dies " of litanies — and that the 
 collection of masses at the end of Cixilanus's Life of him comprised at 
 all events seven numbers' (cf. N. Antonio in P.L. 96. 19-20). It is 
 curious that the reply of the council of Frankfort to the Spanish 
 bishops speaks only of ' Ildefonsi vestri qui tales vobis composuit 
 preces in missarum solemniis, quales universalis et sancta Dei non 
 habet . . . ecclesia. Nee vos in illis exaudiri putamus ', as if Hildefonsus 
 alone, and not Eugenius and Julian as well, had been quoted by the 
 advocates of adoptionism. 
 
 (3) St Julian too, {a) on the witness of his biographer and successor 
 Felix (t c 700), wrote ' librum missarum de toto circulo anni in quatuor 
 partes divisum in quibus aliquas vetustatis incuria vitiatas ac semi- 
 plenas emendavit atque complevit, aliquas vero ex toto composuit ; 
 item librum orationum de festivitatibus, quas Toletana ecclesia per 
 totum circulum anni est solita celebrare, partim stylo sui ingenii 
 depromptum, partim etiam inolita antiquitate vitiatum studiose cor- 
 rectum in unum congessit, atque Ecclesiae Dei usibus ob amorem 
 reliquit sanctae religionis ' {P.L. 95. 450 No. ii). Besides this, {b) 
 St Julian (so says a rubric in the newly edited Liber ordinum) in 
 a council confirmed the ' oratio ' which St Felix had once recited * per 
 ordinationem sancti luliani ', and this council ordered all Spanish 
 priests to recite it from memory at every mass after the names of the 
 * ofiferentes ' : ' Haec oratio recitata est per ordinationem sancti luliani 
 a domno Felice metropolitano Toletane sedis episcopo, et confirmata 
 est in concilio a suprafato pie memorie sancto luliano iam dicte civitatis 
 episcopo. Et praeceptum omni Hispanic conciliariter fuit, ut ab omnibus 
 sacerdotibus memoriter in omni missa post nomina offerentium recen- 
 seretur.' This is the rubric prefixed to the long ' oratio post nomina 
 offerentium dicenda in quacumque missa ' in Le Liber ordimwi en usage 
 dans riiglise Wisigothiqiie et Mozarabe, ed. Ferotin, 331-334; a rubric, 
 in substance it may be, though perhaps not in form, taken from the 
 lost Acta of this Toledan council under St Julian. This ' oratio ', divided 
 into separate prayers with the addition of a line or two of introduction 
 adapted to the various parts of the missa (' alia ' prayer * ad pacem ', 
 &c.), is repeated in its entirety in the ' missa votiva quam sacerdos pro 
 se et amicis vel domesticis dicere debeat ', ibid. 299-302. That the 
 author of the ' missa votiva ' derived his material from the prayer, and 
 not vice versa, seems to me the more probable supposition, if we are to 
 trust the account given in the rubric of the recitation and subsequent 
 confirmation of the prayer. 
 
 From these sources (and they must certainly be not the only ones) 
 and from the letter of the Spanish bishops, it appears : — 
 
 (i) That the Mozarabic missal was considerably enlarged at Toledo
 
 MORE 'SPANISH SYMPTOMS' 209 
 
 between 640 and 690, and it then underwent more than one revision ; 
 as occurred also in the ninth and eleventh centuries ; 
 
 (2) That this was chiefly the work of those ' Toledan fathers ' who, 
 in other respects, appear to have been renovators. 
 
 Hence it would well repay any one who will collate the historical 
 notices and the surviving works of Toledan writers as well as Spanish 
 manuscript missals, and endeavour to separate, as far as is possible, the 
 Toledan and even the later additions from the older parts, noting their 
 characteristic differences of conception and form, and ascertaining 
 what parts were known, and how far they were imitated in the Gallican 
 and the Irish Churches in the seventh and eighth centuries, say up to 
 750 (cf. Bishop Spanish Symptoms pp. 170 sqq. above). 
 
 It is only by this means that we shall gain a less confused idea of 
 the character, the developement, and the influence of the Mozarabic 
 rite, and in some way of the Spanish Visigothic church and its litera- 
 ture ; only thus shall we be qualified to apply with discretion and less 
 risk the Mozarabic formulas to the very difficult and delicate questions 
 of the connexion between this rite and some of the most ancient and 
 important documents of the liturgy of the West. 
 
 HP 
 
 Berno of Reichenau (f 1048), to prove that * tres tantum hebdomadae 
 observentur in adventu domini ', cites a work of St Hilary of Poitiers ; 
 neither the fragment nor its title is given even among the spuria in 
 any edition of the works or life of the saint which I have seen, although 
 the editor of Berno, B. Pez {Patr. Lai. 142. 1053 B), has called special 
 attention to it. I reproduce the short passage here because, whether 
 genuine or not, it is of liturgical interest. 
 
 Est autem et alia eiusdem negotii ratio haudquaquam vilipendenda, qua 
 gloriosus ecclesiae auctor et doctor eximius Hilarius in iibro utitur Offidorum, 
 'Sicut ', inquiens, ' pater familias in evangelio trine adventu infructuosam ficul- 
 neam visitavit, sic sancta mater Ecclesia salvatoris adventu m annuo recursu 
 per trium septimanarum secretum spatium sibi incitavit \sic\ Venit enim 
 Filius hominis quaerere et salvum facere quod perierat : venit ante legem, 
 quia per naturalem intellectum quid unicuique agendum quidve sequendum 
 sit innotuit ; venit sub lege, quia patriarcharum exemplis et prophetarum 
 praeconiis Abrahae legalia confirmavit decreta ; venit tertio post legem per 
 gratiam ad [5/V ; ac ?] vocationem gentium, ut a solis ortu usque ad occasum 
 
 ' [Although this has nothing to do with ' Spanish Symptoms ' yet, as the origins 
 of Advent are often misapprehended, I think readers will be glad to have this 
 Note of Mgr Mercati made accessible here as well as in the long and miscellaneous 
 series of the/. T. S. — E. B.] 
 
 1658 p
 
 210 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 laudare discerent pueri nomen Domini, quo usque ad finem mundi ad suae 
 maiestatis cultum exhortari non desinit.' Haec sunt quae apud Gallos positus 
 ex libro Officiorum sancti Hilarii non inutiliter mihi corrasi. '■ 
 
 Doubtless the worthy Berno saw in Gaul a iibe7' officiorum S. Hilarii, 
 and took it for a work of the holy doctor of Poitiers : still it must be 
 evident to any one who knows the history of the advent season that it 
 is impossible to carry back to that saint and the fourth century the 
 origin of its three weeks' duration.^ The book cited by Berno must 
 be either a spurious work due to another and much later Hilary ; or it 
 may even be a liber officiorum of some church of St Hilary, a title 
 misunderstood by Berno and perhaps by others before him.^ 
 
 ^ Ratio generalis de iniiio adventus domini secundmn auctoi-itatem Hilarii ep. 
 {P. L. 142. 1086-1087 ; also found in Lib. de qidbiisdam rebus ad missae officium 
 pertinent i bus, ibid. 1066 A, omitting the final note Haec sunt). 
 
 * Cf. Caspari in Realenc.f. prot. Theol. u. Kirche i' 188 sqq. 
 
 5 If Hilary in Matth. xxi 6-8 had not explained otherwise the parable of the fig- 
 tree {P. L. 9. 1037 sq.) one might suspect a mistake caused by a marginal citation 
 bearing the name of Hilar)'. [As to recent discussion in regard to this presumed 
 extract from Hilary of Poitiers and the historical origins of the present liturgical 
 season of Advent, see Dom P. Blanchard's article * Notes sur les oeuvres attributes 
 k Bernon de Reichenau ' in Rev. Bened. xxix (1912) pp. 102-107. The sum is, that 
 the famous passage of Hilary was neither cited by nor known to Berno. — E. B.]
 
 IX 
 
 ON THE 
 ORIGIN OF THE PRYMERi 
 
 The questions I propose to examine in the following pages are : — 
 (i) What was the relation of this favourite layfolks' prayer book, 
 called the Pryincr, to the authorized and official service books used in 
 the public worship of the Church ? Or, as Dr Furnivall writes : ' The 
 point I want to know is — if a man took the Prymer to church, would 
 he hear the same service or set of services in Latin ? Is the Prymer 
 a translation of a public service book, or one of private devotion, or 
 partly of both ? ' 
 
 (2) Since the Prymer presents certain practically unvarying elements 
 — viz. the Office of the Blessed Virgin, the Office of the Dead, the 
 Penitential and Gradual Psalms, the Litany, and Commendations — 
 which may be considered as substantially the Prymer, how came 
 precisely these elements to be brought together ? Is there any 
 historical reason which accounts for this particular selection ? I think 
 that there is ; and that the case will be found plain enough if we pro- 
 ceed by the simple method of a historical inquiry into the origin and 
 use of each item of which the Prymer is made up. This point of 
 origins in detail once elucidated, the relation of the Prymer as a 
 whole to the public services of the Church can be seen without 
 difficulty. It may seem a far cry from the English Pryincr to 
 St Benedict of Aniane, from a book the product of the fourteenth 
 century to the practice of the close of the eighth or beginning of the 
 ninth ; but to begin at the beginning will save trouble in the end ; 
 
 * From the Early English Text Society s publications : Original Series No. 109 
 (1897). — [In the Revue Uu clergi frangais of 15 Sept. 1904 is an article by abbe 
 Paul Lejay entitled ' Les accroissements de I'office quotidien '. Taking the present 
 paper for a start M. Lejay (as will be naturally expected by those acquainted with 
 his wonderful bibliographical papers, ' Ancienne philologie chr^tienne', in the 
 successive volumes of the Revue a'histoire et dc litterature religieuses) gives new 
 apergus and makes contributions of his own to the subject. I would call the 
 attention of those interested in the history of the Divine Office to M. Lejay's paper, 
 as, unless this be done, it may easily pass unnoticed in the very voluminous 
 periodical in which it appeared.] 
 
 P 2
 
 212 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 and it is only thus that a clear understanding of the whole question 
 can be arrived at. 
 
 St Benedict of Aniane ^ was of Gothic race, but the son of a firm 
 and distinguished adherent of the royal house of the Franks, which 
 had absorbed into its dominions the old Gothic kingdom of Aquitaine. 
 He was born in the middle of the eighth century in that quarter of 
 France which borders on the Mediterranean and the Spanish frontier. 
 In early manhood he became a monk far from his home at the 
 monastery of Saint-Seine near Dijon, and soon made himself remarked 
 for his austerities : though professing the Rule of St Benedict, it was 
 a common and almost contemptuous saying with him that such a Rule 
 was fit for the tyro and the weakling only, and he turned with specietl 
 satisfaction to the more rigid or fervent monastic teaching of the East, 
 the words of St Basil, the discipline of St Pachomius.^ After some 
 years he returned to the country of his birth, and gathering around 
 him some kindred spirits, adopted a mode of life resembling in many 
 respects the first Cistercian austerity of later times. He would have 
 no chalice but of wood, later of glass, then tin ; nor tolerate mass 
 vestments of silk.^ As time went on, he mitigated his severity, and, 
 in building and fitting the church of the abbey of Aniane which he 
 had founded, he admitted all the splendour and costliness then usually 
 shewn in edifices of this kind.* But his singularity appears in a point 
 of detail : anticipating a devotion which spread in the later middle 
 ages, but was alien to the mind and feeling of those earlier times, he 
 dedicated his church, not under the title of a saint, but under that of 
 the Holy Trinity.^ It is unnecessary to follow the spread of his 
 reputation, his foundation of new monasteries, and reform of older 
 houses. In this work he came before long under the personal notice 
 of Lewis, son of Charles the Great, constituted by his father King of 
 Aquitaine, and Benedict soon acquired over him an ascendancy which 
 only grew stronger as years went on. Lewis committed to him the 
 visitation of all the monasteries of Aquitaine. On succeeding to the 
 empire in 814, Lewis summoned Benedict to his palace, and from that 
 time forward Benedict was, till his death in 821, the most influential 
 person at the court of the new Emperor. But he was no mere minister 
 or courtier ; he remained, first and before all, a monk. One of Lewis's 
 first measures was to build a monastery for thirty monks close to his 
 own palace at Aachen, with a double object : first, that he might have 
 
 ' The following is from his life by his friend Ardo, in Mon. Germ. Hist., Scriptt. 
 
 XV. 
 
 ^ ' Regulam quoque beat! Benedicti tironibus seu infirmis positam fore contestans, 
 ad beati Basilii dicta necnon et beati Pacomii regulam scandere nitens, quamvis 
 exiguis possibilia gereret, iugiter impossibiliora rimabat' (p. 202). 
 
 ' p. 204. ■• p. 207. ' p. 206.
 
 THE PRYMER 213 
 
 Benedict as counsellor always at hand ; secondly, this monastery of 
 Inde or Cornelimunstcr was to serve as a model according to which 
 others were to be reformed. And to compass the desired end, Lewis 
 now gave him those general powers over the monasteries of his 
 Prankish dominions which as king he had granted him for the reform 
 of those of his realm of Aquitaine. The general scheme was this : all 
 houses were to be reduced to an absolute uniformity of discipline, 
 observance, even of habit, according to the pattern of Inde ; ^ visitors 
 were to be appointed to see that the constitutions were strictly observed. 
 The new scheme was to be launched at a meeting of all abbats to be 
 held at Aachen in 817. But to plan is one thing, to carry into effect 
 another. It is clear that, in the general assembly of abbats, Benedict, 
 backed as he was by the Emperor, had to give up for the sake of 
 peace, and in order to carry through substantial reforms, many details 
 of observance by which he set great store. His biographer and friend 
 Ardo, too, who knew everything by personal observation and at first 
 hand, in a roundabout way and darkly gives this to be understood.^ 
 But the decrees of this meeting of Aachen, of which Benedict was as 
 well the author as the life and soul, were a turning-point in the history 
 of the Benedictines, forming the basis of later legislation and practice. 
 After the great founder himself, Benedict of Nursia, no man has more 
 widely affected Western monachism than did the second Benedict, he 
 of Aniane. 
 
 We may now turn to the points which are of direct interest for the 
 history of the Prymcr. And first it is well to advert to a broad fact 
 of general experience which may be said to constitute a law in the 
 developement of devotional forms and practices : the source of new 
 forms of private devotion, which become by and by popularized, is in 
 the religious orders. This holds good in regard to the monks of earlier 
 days, the mendicants of the high tide of the Middle Ages, or the 
 various institutes of clerks regular of modern times. It has been very 
 rightly said that the Prymcr is the outcome not of the Divine Ofiice, 
 in its strict sense, but of these ' supplementary devotions '. It will be 
 readily conceived that such devotional additions and accretions will 
 not easily have found their origin with the secular clergy engaged in 
 the active duties of the ministry, and generally dispersed, or at most 
 but loosely organized ; whilst, on the other hand, such additions to 
 the prescribed divine service almost inevitably must ensue upon the 
 decrease of manual labour in the monasteries, such as had already 
 taken place by the ninth century ; and any revival or reform of monastic 
 discipline would in such circumstances be naturally accompanied, as 
 
 ' pp. 215, 216, 217. "^ p. 216.
 
 214 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 a dictate of piety, by the adoption of novel and extraordinary devo- 
 tional practices in addition to the traditional Office. And this was, in 
 fact, the case with St Benedict of Aniane in settling the practice of 
 his pattern monastery of Inde. His biographer Ardo gives a detailed 
 account of these additions. On going to the church for matins, he 
 prescribed that the brethren should first visit all the altars, saying the 
 Lord's Prayer and Creed at each altar ; and then, going to their places 
 in the choir, each should privately recite fifteen psalms, divided into 
 three sets of five, each set to be followed by a short prayer or collect 
 relative to the intention for which the five preceding psalms had been 
 said : the first five for all the faithful living ; the second five for all the 
 faithful dead ; the third five for all recently deceased. And then only, 
 on the arrival of the officiant or hebdomadar, were matins to begin. 
 He prescribed a second visit to the altars before prime, and a third 
 after complin. At these two latter visits the brethren were free to 
 say either the Lord's Prayer or to make acts of contrition.^ 
 
 The devotional recital of the fifteen psalms before the Church office 
 of matins, thus introduced, obtained a permanent footing in monasteries, 
 and in the following century, the tenth, it was of universal observance 
 among monks. The biographer of Benedict does not say in express 
 words that these fifteen psalms were the fifteen gradual psalms (cxix to 
 cxxxiii ; or cxx to cxxxiv according to the Authorized Version), but in 
 view of the invariable later practice, from the very first occurrence of 
 definite statements on the subject, there can be no doubt that these 
 were the fifteen actually prescribed, and said at Inde from the first 
 institution of the devotion. 
 
 It is to be understood that what now follows has reference exclu- 
 sively to practice in monasteries, and among monks. By the second 
 half of the tenth century, as has been observed, the testimony of 
 monastic custom-books is uniform, that the recitation of the fifteen 
 gradual psalms before matins obtained everywhere. By what steps 
 this uniformity was brought about there is, however, no evidence to 
 shew. But it seems certain that as late as the middle of the ninth 
 century, two distinct and sharply antagonistic schools existed, the 
 one favouring, the other opposed to, Benedict's innovation in this 
 point. These schools are represented by two commentators on ' the 
 Rule ' of ' the Great Benedict ' of Nursia, Smaragdus and Hildemar. 
 The divergence between the two writers, and their different tendencies, 
 come out clearly in their observations on the apparently simple direc- 
 tion of the eighth chapter of the Rule, that the monks ' in winter 
 should rise at the eighth hour '. The case is not so simple as it at 
 
 ' p. 216 ; and p. 217, 'His tribus per diem vicibus', &c.
 
 THE PRYMER 215 
 
 first sight might appear to us who are accustomed all the year round 
 to ' hours ' of equal length, and fixed as to time, both night and day ; 
 whilst the length of the ' hour ' in the Rule varied continually through- 
 out the year, according to the Roman reckoning, as the nights or days 
 were longer or shorter. But this difficulty was not the point which 
 divided Smaragdus and Hildemar ; the discussion was only the oppor- 
 tunity for the former to make room for the new practice, and by 
 a little prudent manipulation of terms to enable him to shew that 
 ' eight ' may conveniently mean ' half-past seven '? Hildemar, whose 
 book is a series of notes of lectures on the text of the Rule rather than 
 a formal commentary, comes down on this artificial method with the 
 sledge-hammer of common sense : ' Rise at eight d clock of the night. 
 What is it, rise at eight d clock ? It is as if he said, " neither before 
 eight, nor after eight, but at eight precisely." ' ^ But, for all that, the 
 party represented by Smaragdus carried the day ; a devotional current 
 had set in which was to flow in increasing volume in the immediately 
 succeeding centuries. 
 
 There is ground for supposing that the visits to the altars and the 
 fifteen psalms were not the only additions which Benedict of Aniane 
 had adopted and had desired to impose generally, although in face of 
 opposition he was unable to carry out his design. It seems not im- 
 probable that among the additions thus dropped was the regular 
 recital of the office for the dead, which forms so important a part of 
 the Pryincr. The origins of this office are obscure ; a recent writer 
 has declared it to be purely Roman, and a creation of the beginning 
 of the eighth century.^ Extant testimonies by no means warrant so 
 
 ^ Migne P. L. 102. 829, 830. 
 
 2 Vita et Regula SS. P. Benedicti, ed. Mittermiiller (Ratisbonae, 1880), pp. 277, 
 278. The differences between the two schools were by no means confined to this 
 point. A much more important matter, the partial substitution of the office of the 
 clergy for the office prescribed by the Rule, seems to have been evidently favoured 
 in practice by Benedict of Aniane. See Herrgott Veins discipiina monastica 
 (Parisiis 1726) pp. xxxvi sqq. Hildemar, as might be expected, took the conserva- 
 tive view, and enforced it with no little vigour (pp. 310 sqq.). The commentary 
 which has been printed under the name of Paul Warnefrid, an earlier writer, but 
 which is probably of a somewhat later date {Bihliotheca Casinensis t. iv, Flcri- 
 legium p. 94), runs on the same lines. These two writers represent the Italian 
 conservative ideas, as opposed to Ultramontane innovations, taking up just the 
 position of Monte Cassino towards Cluny a century or two later. The Menioriale 
 qualitcr in Monasierio conversari debevitts represents the same conservative party, 
 and it is not easy to see how it can have St Benedict of Aniane for its author (as is 
 assumed in the Winchester Obedientiaries' Rolls p. 196). 
 
 ^ BatifTol Hist, dti Br^viaire remain pp. 1 88- 190. The author's best argument 
 appears to lie in his personal and subjective appreciation of what the Roman office 
 must have been 'dans son dtat le plus pur' when 'degage de toute influence 
 monastique'. The reference ' Amalar. De ord. antiph. 65 et 79' settles nothing. 
 So far as mere testimonies are concerned, it would not be difficult to make out a 
 stronger case in favour of non-Roman than in favour of Roman origin. This is not 
 the place to discuss the question ; it is necessary, however only too frequently to
 
 2i6 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 confident a tone. A document seemingly of the second half of the 
 eighth century, detailing the obseivances of Monte Cassino, states that 
 on the burial of a monk, the brethren after vespers (of the day, that is) 
 recited for him the seven penitential psalms with litanies.^ A docu- 
 ment of the year 8ii or 812, drawn up by the monks of Fulda and 
 presented to Charles the Great, gives the following account of the 
 offices for the dead as said in that monastery: (i) for deceased 
 brethren, a commemoration twice a day, after lauds and vespers, 
 consisting of the antiphon Requiem eternam, the ' first part ' of the 
 psalm Te decet hyinnus Dejis (Ixiv), a verse and collect ; (2) on the 
 first day of every month for the first abbat, Sturm, and the founders 
 of the house, ' a vigil and fifty psalms ' ; (3) on the anniversary of 
 abbat Sturm, ' a vigil and the whole psalter.' ^ As the object of this 
 petition of the Fulda monks to the Emperor was the maintenance of 
 the discipline introduced by the first abbat, and he had drawn the 
 observance prescribed by him from the monasteries of Rome and the 
 neighbourhood, including the recently re-established Monte Cassino,^ 
 it is probable that these offices of the dead, at least in a general way, 
 represent practices prevailing in Italian monasteries also; although it 
 is open to question. what is here precisely meant by the word 'vigil'.* 
 But it is certain that Benedict of Aniane had determined to intro- 
 duce uniformity (a matter on which he laid the strongest stress) ^ in 
 
 warn the reader against the positive tone of this writer on matters as to which either 
 nothing is known or the evidence is of a doubtful and uncertain character. [The 
 earliest certain mention of an office for the dead, in our present sense as vespers, 
 matins, and lauds, is contained in Angilbert's Ritual Order for St-Riquier c. xvi, 
 printed in no. XV p. 328 below,] 
 
 * ' Cum frater ad exitum propinquaverit, omnis congregatio ante eum psalmos 
 decantet : illoque sepulto, post vesperum septem psalmos cum litaniis omni corpora 
 in terram prostrati decantent ' (Herrgott Vet. disciplina mon. p. 3). 
 
 ^ J. G. Eckhart De rebus Franciae Orientalis ii 72. 
 
 ' See the tenth article of the petition (p. 73), compared with Eigil's Life of Sturm 
 {M, G. SS. ii 371). 
 
 * [Canon 10 of the English Council of Celchyth of 816 describes the office to be 
 said on the death of a bishop ; there is nothing as to an ' office of the dead ' but 
 only of so many ' psalters ' and so many ' paternosters' (Haddan and Stubbs iii 
 583-584). — A convention, with the same object, of the bishops and abbats of Bavaria, 
 of a date earlier than 774 and probably of 770, besides masses, prescribes in the 
 same way only so many 'psalters' to be said (Af. G. Concil. ii p. 97). — A later 
 Bavarian convention, of May 805, prescribes only a hundred psalms, a 'psalter' 
 and masses (ibid. p. 233). — So far as France with the bordering German region is 
 concerned, a like (and very widespread) convention at the Council of Attigny, 
 760-762, prescribes, besides masses, a hundred psalms; and, by monks, 'psalters' 
 (Labbe-Coleti Coticil. viii 461). It would, then, seem practically certain that no 
 ' office of the dead ' in our modern sense was known in these regions.] 
 
 " Ardo repeatedly returns to this point : ' Ut autem sicut una omnium erat 
 professio fieret quoque omnium monasteriorum salubris una consuetudo ' {M. G. SS. 
 XV 215). ' Perfectum itaque prosperatumque est opus [the Council of Aachen] 
 . . . et una cunctis generaliter posita observatur regula, cunctaque monasteria ita 
 ad formam unitatis redacta sunt, ac si ab uno magistro et in uno imbuerentur loco. 
 Uniformis mensura in potu, in cibo, in vigiliis, in modulationibus cunctis observanda
 
 THE PRYMER aiy 
 
 this detail also of the office of the dead, or the mode of its recital. On 
 the accession of Lewis the Pious to the empire, it was very soon under- 
 stood on all hands that Benedict would now have a free field and full 
 powers for carrying out generally his own long-cherished plans. One 
 abbat at least, though distant from the seat of government, the abbat 
 of Reichenau, an island on the Lake of Constance, had the wisdom to 
 take time by the forelock, and set his house in order before the 
 measures which he saw would be taken were promulgated and the 
 great scheme launched ; lest the monastic visitors coming from Bene- 
 dict with imperial command to settle the houses on the new model 
 should find him unprepared. He accordingly sent two of his monks 
 to Inde, to stay there, ascertain by practical experience the custom of 
 that monastery, and report to him the chief points of observance that 
 were to be insisted on, and changed in the old foundations. Their 
 report ^ was drawn up certainly before 817, perhaps a year or so earlier. 
 Of the twelve points of practice given in this report, there is one 
 describing ' how the vigil of the dead is celebrated ' by St Benedict of 
 Aniane and his monks in the pattern monastery. ' As soon as vespers 
 of the day are over ' (runs the document) ' they immediately say 
 vespers of the dead, with antiphons, and after complin, matins of the 
 dead with antiphons and responsories, sung with full and sonorous 
 voice and with great sweetness [plcnissiine atqiic suavissimc) ; next 
 morning, after matins of the day, lauds of the dead.' - Martene, with- 
 out any ado, takes it for granted that this means a daily recital of the 
 office of the dead, after the regular Divine office.'' When the document 
 
 est tradita' (ibid.). ' In abitu quoque dissimiles fecerat multorum consuetudo. . . . 
 Quam ob rem vir Dei uniformem cunctis tenendum monachis instituit modum ', &c. 
 (p. 217). The ' Goths ' had been ' the outs ' in the time of Charles the Great ; they 
 had their day gloriously under his son, and for the time were masters all along the 
 line. 
 
 * Printed in Herrgott pp. 19-21. 
 
 ' ' Undecimo, ut defunctorum vigilia hoc modo ab eis celebratur. Vespera . . . 
 finita, statim vesperam cum antiphonis celebrant pro defunctis, ct post completorium 
 vigiliam cum antiphonis vel responsoriis plenissime atque suavissime canunt ; et 
 post nocturnos intervallo matutinos pro mortuis faciunt. Facto autem primo mane 
 . . . missam celebrant pro defunctis publicam. . . • Qua percelebrata statim cantant 
 primam, si fuerit tempus, aut certe tertiam ' (p. 21). On 'intervallo' Herrgott 
 remarks : ' that is, in the interval between matins and lauds of the day.' As to this 
 'interval', see the Disciplina Farfensis (Herrgott pp. 49-50), and the English 
 Concordia re^ulatis (in Reyner Apostolatus Append, p. 81 1. 8). But this interpre- 
 tation seems by no means sure ; it might be the interval between lauds of the day 
 and prime (see Capitula monachorum Sangallensium cap. xxxi, in Herrgott p. 36) ; 
 or, if we may judge from a later practice, both, according to the season of the year, 
 as will be explained below. 
 
 * De ant. Mon, rit. lib. i c. 2 § 19 and c.|io § 28. [The whole question of 
 the history of the office of the dead has since been dealt with in an exhaustive 
 manner by the late Mgr Ceriani in a Consultation for the Roman Congregation of 
 Rites dated 25 May 1897, entitled ' Mediolanen. Circa obligationeni recitationis 
 officii defunctonim '.]
 
 2i8 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 is read as a whole, the general terms in which it is couched make this 
 interpretation a possible one. And it is to be remembered that these 
 monks of Reichenau are reporting to their abbat points of importance 
 in which observance usual amongst them is to be altered. Still, the 
 words as they stand by no means require such general interpretation 
 to be put upon them ; it is possible, for instance, that the novelty 
 consisted in the mode of recitation. But if the devotional addition of 
 the office of the dead daily was any part of Benedict's programme, it 
 is certainly one of the items insistence on which he saw fit to give up 
 when he met his brother abbats in general assembly at the great 
 meeting held by order of the Emperor at Aachen in 817. This 
 assembly passed some eighty resolutions, which were confirmed by 
 imperial authority, prescribing points of discipline to be inviolably 
 observed in all monasteries. It is worthy of note that more than one 
 seems to be aimed at novelties favoured by Benedict. The fiftieth 
 resolution relates to prayer for the dead, and is couched in these 
 curiously impatient terms : 'that, doing away with piecings up of the 
 Psalter, the psahni speciales be said for benefactors and the dead.' ^ 
 The * psalmi speciales ' here mentioned are nothing else than the seven 
 penitential psalms, which, it will be remembered, are specified in the 
 Monte Cassino observance a few decades earlier. Another resolution 
 of the meeting evidently contemplates the recital of some ' office of 
 the dead ' after complin ; it may be matins, as specified in the report 
 of the two monks of Reichenau ; but this recital is here certainly 
 contemplated as only an occasional occurrence.^ 
 
 A few years later, Amalar, a writer deeply concerned in the then 
 fashionable liturgical movement, and admitted into the Emperor's 
 confidence in this matter, tells us that an office of the dead was 
 recited on the third, seventh, and thirtieth days after decease, but 
 explains that different practices were followed in different places : 
 (i) in some places, a commemoration was made for the dead at lauds 
 and vespers, except in Eastertide and on feast days ; he evidently 
 here has in view the practice explained in the Fulda memorial ; 
 (2) elsewhere there was a daily mass for the dead ; (3) in some places, 
 at the beginning of the month, ' nine psalms and nine lessons fend as 
 
 ^ ' De specialibus psalmis pro eleemosynariis et defunctis cantandis. Ut praeter- 
 missis partitionibus psalterii, psalmi speciales pro eleemosynariis et defunctis 
 cantentur' (Herrgott p. 29). Speciales psalmi are the seven penitential psalms; 
 besides Ducange, see Concordia regtilaris (Reyner Append, p. 84 1. 24), and 
 the Verdun St-Vannes Customs in Martene De ant. Mon. rit. (folio editions) 297^ 
 I. 20. 
 
 ^ ' Ut si necessitas poposcerit ob operis laborem, post refectionem vespertinam, 
 etiam et in quadragesima pari modo, et quando officium mortuorum celebratur, 
 priusquam lectio completorii legatur, bibant' (Herrgott p. 25).
 
 THE PRYMER 219 
 
 many responsories are said for them.' ^ Here nothing is said of either 
 lauds or vespers of the dead, although he mentions them elsewhere ; ^ 
 nor does he apparently know, or at least think fit to mention, any 
 addition daily of the devotional office of the dead to the traditional 
 Divine Office of the day. Of course it will be understood that this 
 office of the dead, which afterwards came to form part of the Prynier, 
 is not a Burial Service ; as indeed may sufficiently appear from what 
 has been already said, and will be said in the sequel, as to its use. It 
 is what its name calls it, an office of the dead and nothing more. 
 
 Still, in spite of the silence on this point of documents, it is, after 
 all, not improbable that Martene is right that Benedict of Aniane may 
 actually have introduced and himself practised at Inde the devotion of 
 a daily recital of the office of the dead ; ^ and for this reason. Some 
 hundred and twenty or thirty years later, all extant testimony goes to 
 shew that the daily recital of the office of the dead as a supplement 
 to the Divine Office was universally admitted among Benedictine 
 monks ; and there seems to be no other reasonable way of accounting 
 for such a general observance, except on the assumption that it was 
 in fact recommended by the example of a person of most widely 
 reaching influence and authority (and no such person but the greatly 
 revered Benedict of Aniane occurs in that age) ; and that it was 
 introduced in several and widely distant quarters simultaneously, so 
 that it could spread gradually from many centres, as might well have 
 happened after the Aachen meeting in 817. 
 
 But certain it is that the idea of these devotional accretions to the 
 daily Divine Office started by Benedict of Aniane took deep root, and 
 became imitatively expressed in ways of which he could have had no 
 anticipation. It is not uncommon in a vague and general fashion to 
 attribute the origin and spread of such accretions to the example of 
 Cluny, the great prestige attaching to that name being doubtless 
 a sort of convenient and handy means of solving any difficulty of the 
 kind.* But in the present case this is to attribute to Cluny an 
 
 * Amalar De ecclesicisticis officiis lib. iv c. 42 (in Hittorp De divin. eccl. offic. 
 ed. 1610 col. 499, 500). Any obscurity of expression in this passage is cleared 
 up by lib. iii c. 44 (ibid. col. 439). Amalar is of opinion that the office of the dead 
 is framed on the pattern of the office of the last days of Holy Week (i. e. of the 
 office of our Lord's passion and death). 
 
 2 De eccl. offic. lib. iv c. 4 (Hittorp col. 452 D). 
 
 ' [M. Lejay (p. 121) thinks not: he points out that the resolutions of Aix-la- 
 Chapelle present the recitation of the office of the dead as only occasional, ' quando 
 officium mortuorum celebratur'; and, moreover, how this recitation 'est mise sur 
 le meme pied que les furies de carcme '. He concludes (and I expect rightly) that 
 ' d^s cette epoque I'office des morts avait sa place normale (among monks, that 
 is) ci certaines feries d^terminees'.] 
 
 * Much as ' Fleury ' is a name to conjure with among our modern writers who^ 
 would account for the English monastic customs of the tenth century ; though they
 
 220 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 influence which it obtained only at a later date ; the practices are too 
 widely observed to admit of such an explanation ; and that monastery, 
 in this matter, only went along with the prevalent current. Not 
 merely do we everywhere find daily said in the monasteries, in the 
 second half of the tenth century, the so-called trina oratio, or fifteen 
 (gradual) psalms introduced by Benedict before matins, as well as the 
 matins, lauds, and vespers of the dead, but also a new devotional 
 office, evidently imitated from this latter, viz. the vespers and lauds of 
 All Saints, said in connexion with vespers and lauds of the day ; and 
 the seven penitential psalms and litany introduced after prime. In 
 fact by this date, say 950-1000, with the exception of the office of the 
 Blessed Virgin and the * commendations ', the whole groundwork of 
 the Prymer (and something more, the office of All Saints) forms in the 
 monasteries a series of supplemental daily prayers in addition to the 
 old authorized, and still the only official service, the Divine Office of 
 the day. The monks were not even content with this, but added after 
 each of the hours certain psalms, two, three, or even more, for the lay 
 benefactors and friends, familiares^ of the monastic family, the abbey 
 (which from their object came to bear the name psalnii familiares), 
 besides a series of commemorations or suffi-ages of particular saints, 
 the Holy Cross, or for peace, &c. But with these further accretions, 
 especially as the last-named have come in time to form a part of the 
 Divine Office itself, we are not here concerned. 
 
 Still more : as if the recital of the fifteen gradual psalms before 
 matins were not enough, in many monasteries thirty were now said 
 during the winter half of the year with its long nights, viz. in addition 
 to the fifteen gradual psalms those immediately following. Psalm cxxxiv 
 to the end of the Psalter.^ The Concordia rcg?ilaris, representing the 
 practice of English monasteries of about the middle of the tenth 
 century, adopted another devotional expedient, viz. prefixing to the 
 older trina oratio — the fifteen gradual psalms which were daily said — 
 another, a preliminary, trina oratio. This was accomplished by 
 dividing the seven penitential psalms, in imitation of the division of 
 the gradual, into three sections, each section being followed by the 
 Lord's Prayer and a Collect ; the first three psalms being said pro se 
 ipso ; the next two, for the king and queen, and ' familiars ', ^.nd^ pro se 
 ipso ; and the last two, for the faithful departed. 
 
 would find some difficulty in giving a description from originals of the discipline of 
 Fleury in that age apart from the English documents, the peculiarities of which the 
 name of ' Fleury ' is invoked to explain. 
 
 ' Psalms cxlviii-cl were counted as one psalm ; and indeed they are still so said 
 at lauds. [This, of course, was written before the reform of the Breviary Psalter 
 by the late Pope Pius X. The old arrangement is still retained in the Benedictine 
 Psalter.]
 
 THE PRYMER 221 
 
 Of all extant monastic consuetudinaries of the tenth and eleventh 
 centuries, the Concordia regidaris gives the clearest view of the way in 
 which these devotional accretions were woven into the traditional 
 Divine Office proper. The order varied according to the time of the 
 year, and the varying length of day and night ; consequently there is 
 a winter and a summer practice. The winter half begins universally 
 with 1st November. The time of change from winter to summer 
 practice varied in different localities ; in the Concordia^ that is in 
 England in the tenth century, the change was fixed at the beginning 
 of Lent. In the following table the devotional accretions are printed 
 in italics, so that it is possible to distinguish at once the Church's 
 office from these voluntary, supererogatory additions. The day hours, 
 terce, sext, none, and the evening complin, and the psalmi familiares 
 are omitted, as they do not affect the question immediately under 
 discussion, and would only serve to complicate matters already obscure 
 enough, and so far hard to be understood that it is ' scientific ' 
 method to disburden the subject of unnecessary technicalities, and 
 reduce it, for non-specialists, to its simplest possible expression. 
 
 TABLE OF THE MORNING AND EVENING OFFICES 
 
 ACCORDING TO THE CONCORDIA REGULARISE 
 
 SUMMER. WINTER, 
 
 (from caput Quadragesimae to i No- ( i November to caput Quadragesi- 
 vember.) mae.) 
 
 MORNING. MORNING. 
 
 I. Preliminaries {viz. the new '■ trina 1. Preliminaries (as in Summer), 
 oratio ', /'. e. the seven penitential 
 psalms divided into three sections^ 
 as explained above ; and the older 
 * tri7ia oratio ', the fifteen gradual 
 psalms also divided into three 
 sections). 
 
 E Summer ; tnorning offices : ' Sic ad oratorium festinando . . cum summa 
 reverentia et cautela intrans ut alios orantes non impediat, ac tunc [i] flexis genibus 
 in loco congruo et consueto, . . cffi'ndat preces magis corde quam ore. ... In 
 prima itaque oratione decantet tres primos poenitentiae psalmos (in the second 
 prayer, the next two ; in the third prayer, the last two ; then) residentibus cunctis 
 in sedibus suis ordinatim, atque canentibus quindecim psalmos graduum singillatim, 
 trina partitione . . . atque finitis eisdem psalmis [2] incipiant nocturnum (followed by 
 psalmi fa)niliares). Post hos psalmos [3] parvissimum, uti regula praecipit et tota 
 aestate convenit, fiat intervallum. [4] Post hoc, sequantur diei laudes {dSi^ psalmi 
 familiares after, with commemorations or suffrages). Post quas [5, 6] eundum est 
 ad matutinales laudes de omnibus Sanctis, decantando antiphonam ad venera- 
 tionem sancti cui porticus, ad quam itur, dedicata est. Post quas [7] laudes pro
 
 222 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 SUMMER. WINTER. 
 
 MORNING. MORNING. 
 
 2. Matins of the day. 2. Matins of the day. 
 
 [3. Short interval.] 3. Matins of the dead. 
 
 4. Lauds of the day. 4. Lauds of the dead. 
 
 5. Lauds of All Saif2ts. 5. Laxids of All Saints. 
 
 [6. They go to another oratory.] [6. Interval.] 
 
 7. Lauds of the dead. 7. Private prayer {detail not specified). 
 
 [8. Interval, if not yet daylight.] 8. Lauds of the day. 
 9. Prime. 9. Prime. 
 
 10. Seven penitential psalms. 10. Seven penitential psalms. 
 
 11. Litany. 11. Litany. 
 
 EVENING. EVENING. 
 
 12. Preliminary private prayer {detail 12. Preliminary private prayer {detail 
 
 not specified). not specified). 
 
 13. Vespers of the day. 13. Vespers of the day. 
 
 14. Vespers of All Saints. 14. Vespers of All Saints. 
 
 15. Vespers of the dead. 15. Vespers of the dead. 
 
 16. Matins of the dead. 
 
 The points of difference between summer and winter in the fore- 
 going table, and their rationale, seem to be : 
 
 (i) In the long nights, matins of the dead were thrown into the 
 
 night ; in the long days, into the day. 
 (2) In summer, lauds of the dead and of All Saints, instead of 
 being said before the lauds of the day, were thrown after 
 them, and a procession was made to another oratory — 
 a change of place reasonably enough avoided in the cold 
 winter nights.^ 
 
 defunctis. Quod si luce diei, ut oportet, finitum fuerit officium, incipiant primam, 
 absque tintinnabuli signo ; [8] sin autem, expectant lucem et pulsato signo congre- 
 gentur ad [9] primam. {'^\ot& psahnt familtares aiier prime ; and then) more solito 
 [10] poenitentiae psalmos percurrant. . . . His vero finitis [11] subsequatur laetania, 
 quam universi more solito prostrati humiliter, nullo excepto, signo pulsato, com- 
 pleant (with the usual appendices). Ouibus finitis vacent fratres lectioni ', &c. &c. 
 (Reyner Append, pp. 80, 81, compared with the print in Anglia xiii 378-382). 
 
 Evening offices : ' Temperius agatur vespera, cuius signa dum sonant fratres post 
 [12] orationem in choro . . . sedeant. [13] Vesperam vero cantantes, (thereafter 
 two psalmi faviiliares are said). (Vespers said with their suffrages, there follow) 
 [14] vesperae de omnibus Sanctis; [15] et mortuorum ; [16] et vigilia usque ad 
 Calendas Novembris ' (ibid. p. 83, and Anglia p. 392). 
 
 Winter; morning offices: [i] as above in summer; [2] 'nocturnali peracto 
 ofificio, et psalmis supradictis, [3] ac vigiliS. pro defunctis [4] cum laudibus suis, 
 [5] atque matutinis de omnibus Sanctis expletis, [6] fratribus psalmodiae deditis vel 
 lectioni . . . intervallum usquequo lucescat cum magna vigilantia custodiatur. In 
 lucis crepusculo, dum edituus signum pulsaverit, ad ecclesiam universi conveniant, 
 [7] factaque oratione [8] laudes psallant matutinales (and the suffrages or com- 
 memorations) ; quas sequatur [9] prima, [10] et speciales psalmi, [11] et letania. 
 Post haec egrediantur ecclesiam ' (ibid. p. 84, and Anglia p. 398). 
 
 Evening offices: As Nos. [12] to [15] in summer, above. 
 
 ' The practice of saying the close of lauds and vespers in another oratory is of
 
 THE PRYMER 223 
 
 (3) The order of these supplementary lauds was dififerent in 
 summer and winter ; the reason for this is probably one 
 of the mysteries of ' the Pye ', or rather the secret of its 
 compiler. 
 
 Of the other printed monastic custom-books of the tenth and 
 eleventh centuries that of Udalric of Cluny, which dates more than 
 a century later than the Concordia, is the only one which gives a fairly 
 clear and connected account of the order of these services. It would 
 not be easy to construct from the others, taken as they stand, a 
 scheme with any certainty of being correct ; the notices are merely 
 incidental, and generally assume in the persons for whom they were 
 written a practical knowledge of existing custom. But by the help 
 of the Table drawn from the Concordia, the interpretation of these 
 consuetudinaries, in the matter in question, is easy enough ; and their 
 examination gives as a result that they all show a practically uniform 
 observance in regard to the details under consideration. 
 
 Two points should, however, be observed : 
 
 (i) The devotional accretions whereby the Divine Office was so 
 greatly lengthened were not said in full in Eastertide or on feast 
 days of a high grade ; or speaking technically, they were only said in 
 full on ferial days. It is to be remembered, however, that in the 
 tenth and eleventh centuries the feast days of a high grade were com- 
 paratively of rare occurrence. 
 
 (2) These accretions were not assigned to special seasons, or 
 portions of the year, or treated as preparations for the great feasts, 
 but were said on non-festal, i. e. ferial days throughout the year. 
 
 great antiquity. It is prescribed in section 69 of the rule of St Caesarius for nuns 
 as printed by the Bollandists in connexion with the life of St Caesaria, 12 Jan. ; a 
 document which in any circumstances must represent a practice of the sixth and 
 seventh century. The foundation of Pope Gregory III at St Peter's (Duchesne 
 Lib. pont. i 422, 423, cf. 417) is another version of the same custom, though 
 restricted to the evening office. In the Concordia it is reserved for the morning, 
 and for only half the year. Cluny maintained it at both lauds and vespers, and all 
 the year round, as may be gathered from a comparison of the various eleventh- 
 century customs of that house. The * porticus ' at Cluny was the chapel of the 
 Blessed Virgin (see Udalric, lib. i c. 3 and 41, in Migne I\ L. 149. 646, 686). 
 Bernard of Cluny once incidentally mentions the custom (in Herrgott p. 410, ' Sed 
 sciendum ', &c.). A century before these writers it was adopted from Cluny by 
 Farfa (see the Disciplina Farfensis in Herrgott pp. 50, 51, 60, 79, 80). As on the 
 way the antiphon sung was 'de sancta Maria' (p. 50), the ' alius Chorus ' at Farfa 
 was doubtless the ' Oratorium sanctae Mariae ', described p. 87. — The Constitutions 
 of William of Hirschau, drawn up after he had adopted the Cluny discipline, give 
 the most detailed description (Herrgott pp. 545, 547, 548), and shew how extremely 
 uncomfortable this following of the practices of venerable fathers of antiquity must 
 have been for the sick monks : their chapel was the * other oratory ', and on the 
 approach of the community in long procession, the injirini were simply cleared out 
 of it, to find refuge elsewhere as best they could (see also statute 6i of Peter the 
 Venerable, Migne P. L. 189. 1042).
 
 224 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 It is well to recall at this point the items which up to this time 
 have come before us : 
 
 (a) The fifteen gradual psalms before matins (in some places 
 
 increased to thirty during the winter, i. e. the long nights). 
 
 (b) The penitential psalms and litany after prime. 
 
 (c) The office of the dead, vespers, matins and lauds. 
 
 (d) The office of All Saints, vespers and lauds. 
 
 (e) The psa/mi /aviiliares, said after all the hours. 
 
 All these before the close, perhaps by the middle, of the tenth century^ 
 obtained throughout the Benedictine monasteries of England, France, 
 Germany, and doubtless Italy.^ Themselves an imitation of the 
 original Divine Office, or ctu'sus, as it was from long tradition called, 
 such offices as those of the dead and of All Saints, once fairly 
 established, were in the then temper of men's minds sure to call 
 forth imitations. And in fact ingenious piety invented many a new 
 airsus ; those of the Blessed Virgin and of the Holy Cross - are the 
 first to appear ; to which by and by were added those of the Incarna- 
 tion, of the Holy Trinity, of the Holy Ghost. Each represented a 
 special devotional attraction of some individual, and each was said in 
 the same way that the customary recitation of the office of the dead 
 and of All Saints had made familiar, viz. as a private daily devotional 
 addition to the Divine Office itself, in strict imitation of it, and, like 
 the Office, as a daily exercise throughout the year." 
 
 Of these numerous later products of an exuberant piety only one — 
 the office of the Blessed Virgin — was destined to take its place, as an 
 additional airsus to the Divine Office, alongside of the office of the 
 dead, and like it secure public recitation in the church, eventually 
 
 ^ Even where only a portion of these accretions is mentioned in any particular 
 document in the tenth century, it is not safe to conclude from silence that the items 
 not mentioned were not also said. Thus the life of St John of Gorze {M. G. SS. iv 
 360) mentions only the ' ternae orationes ' of fifteen (in winter thirty) psalms ; and 
 the seven penitential psalms and the litany after prime. The Verdun St-Vannes 
 Customs say nothing of these, but give details as to the daily offices of the dead and 
 All Saints (Martene De ant. Mo7i. rit. p. 300 b). Yet there can be no doubt they 
 both represent, in these details, the same stage and practice of the same monastic 
 movement in two of the episcopal cities of Lorraine. The compiler of the Verdun 
 Customs, an interesting man, a physician, and an authority on diet, not to say on 
 cookery, evidently looks back with pleasure, if not with regret, on the good old days 
 before the ' movement ' began. 
 
 '^ See note i, p. 225 below. 
 
 ^ So Franco, abbat of Lobbes, about the middle of the twelfth century, ' nee enim 
 communi horarum regularium vel cursuum debito contentus, Trinitatis insuper 
 Incarnationisque . . . cotidianum devote cursum frequentabat ' {Gesta abb. Lob. 
 in M. G. SS. xxi 331). And at an earlier date St Stephen of Grandmont, ' exceptis 
 etenim ecclesiastic! officii regularibus debitis ... a prima die qua venit in eremum 
 (in 1076) usque ad ultimum diem vitae suae, ordinem de sancta Trinitate cum 
 novem lectionibus et horis canonicis singulis diebus ac noctibus devotissime 
 celebravit ' {Vi/a § 20, Migne P. L. 204. 1017-1018).
 
 THE PRYMER 225 
 
 ousting even in the monasteries the long-established older cursus of 
 All Saints. It will be proper therefore to bring together here the 
 scanty early notices of the office of the Blessed Virgin. 
 
 (i) The contemporary biographer of St Udalric, bishop of Augs- 
 burg, who was provost of the cathedral, and knew the saint well in 
 his later days, writes that, finding himself able by the Emperor's 
 permission to throw off on his nephew the burden of the secular 
 duties attaching to his high station, Udalric threw himself almost 
 unreservedly into prayer and acts of devotion ; unless interrupted by 
 necessary duties, it was his custom to say the Divine Office daily 
 along with the chapter in the choir of his cathedral ; he also added 
 thereto, as an act of personal and private devotion, ' one cursiis in 
 honour of St Mary, Mother of God ; another in honour of the Holy 
 Cross ; and a third in honour of All Saints, besides the whole psalter 
 daily '} This notice occurs almost at the beginning of the ' Life ' ; 
 but the work is written without regard to chronology, and from later 
 notices as to the appointment of the nephew,- it is clear that the 
 passage just quoted must relate to quite the last years of Udalric's 
 life, say about 970 or 971. 
 
 (2) In the chronicle of Hugh of Flavigny a story is told how it 
 was the habit of Berengerius, bishop of Verdun (940-962), to go to 
 the church to make long prayers before matins began, and how on 
 one occasion in the darkness of the building, when entering the 
 choir, he stumbled over Bernerius, the provost of the cathedral, who 
 was lying prostrate on the ground reciting the matin office {niatuti- 
 naritim cur sum) of the Blessed Virgin.^ The same story is told 
 much more briefly by the somewhat earlier author of the Gcsta 
 episcoporum Virdunensiwn, who uses the expression that Bernerius 
 was saying the ' memory ' of the Blessed Virgin {Beatae Mariae 
 viemoriam celebrantcvi).^ But apart from the question that there can 
 be hardly a doubt the same thing is meant, Hugh of Flavigny has 
 more detailed and authentic sources of information (evidently the 
 necrology of the monastery of St Peter, called later St Vannes, at 
 Verdun, in which Bernerius became a monk). 
 
 (3) The Einsiedeln Customs, drawn up not long after the year 
 
 ' Mile vero quantum secularibus curis se absolutioreni esse persensit, tantum se 
 ipsum in Dei voluntate facere nitebatiir obligatiorem. Cursus scilicet cottidianus 
 cum matriculariis in choro eiusdem matriculae ab eo caute observabatur, quando- 
 cumque ei domi manendum aliae occupationes consenserunt. Insuper autein unum 
 cursum in honore sanctaeNIariae genitricis Dei, et alterum de sancta Cruce, tertium 
 de omnibus Sanctis, et alios psalmos plurimos, totumque psalterium omni die ex- 
 piere solitus erat, nisi si eum impediret aliqua inevitabilis necessitas' {Gerhardi 
 Vita S. Oudalrici Efi. in M. G. SS. iv 389). 
 
 * See the narrative, ibid. pp. 407 sqq. 
 
 ' M. G. SS. viii 365. * M. G. SS. iv 46. 
 
 1B58 Q
 
 226 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 970, as it would seem, and certainly before 990 or 995, not only 
 confirm the existence and the spread of such a ciirsus of the Blessed 
 Virgin in Germany at this time, but they also shew that the transi- 
 tion from the stage of a mere private devotion to an actual place in 
 the public office in the church was already accomplished. They 
 assign, for the period from the octave of Easter to Advent (provided 
 the days were not occupied by a feast), a votive office (with three 
 lessons) of the Holy Cross to Fridays, and one of the Blessed Virgin 
 (also with three lessons) to Saturdays, apparently along with, and 
 not in substitution of, the ordinary ferial office of those days.^ Of 
 course this is different from the daily recital, after the Divine Office, 
 which obtained somewhat later ; but a step forward at the least is 
 taken. 
 
 Soon after the middle of the eleventh century, St Peter Damian 
 gives ample evidence that a devotional and private daily recitation 
 of the office of the B. V. must have been commonly practised amongst 
 even the secular clergy in Italy. He moreover specially mentions 
 a case where, in a monastery, the custom was, about the year 1053, 
 introduced of saying the hours of this office in choir along with the 
 regular office of the day.^ From the terms which he uses {novae 
 adinventionis pondus) it is clear that in northern Italy, at least, this 
 must have been at the time a hitherto unheard-of novelty. But it 
 does not seem open to doubt that about this time at the latest the 
 practice must have been in vogue at Monte Cassino ; for Peter the 
 Deacon, the chronicler of that house, writing in the early years of the 
 twelfth century a commentary on the Rule of St Benedict, narrates 
 that Pope Zacharias (who died 752) imposed on the community of 
 Monte Cassino a strict obligation always, as well in summer as in 
 winter, to say before the night and day office, as soon as the brethren 
 assembled in choir, the office of St Benedict ; and after the regular 
 office, the office of the Blessed Virgin Mary. And, as if to preclude 
 all doubt as to the nature of these offices of St Benedict, and the B.V., 
 he describes them as being ' offices of the seven hours ' {septein horarum 
 
 ^ ' Per totam quinquagesimam paschalem (i.e. to the octave of Pentecost inclu- 
 sive) infra ebdomadam fiant tres lectiones similiter ; sexta quoque feria et septima, 
 si sanctorum natalitia non affuerint, de sancta Cruce et sancta Maria tres eodem 
 
 modo compleantur Hoc quoque de sancta Cruce et sancta Maria non dimitta- 
 
 tur usque in Adventum Domini' (O. Ringholz Des Benediktinerstiftes Einsiedeht 
 TJidtigkeit fiir die Reform deiilscher Kioster p. 41). — The Concordia regularis 
 (p. 82}, and Aelfric's Eynsham Customs (in Kitchin's Witichester Obedientiaries' 
 Rolls p. 177), say nothing of an office, but prescribe for these days that the principal 
 mass shall be of the Holy Cross, and the Blessed Virgin, deriving the practice 
 doubtless from Alcuin, whose own prescription, it can hardly be doubted, was based 
 on the devotion of the Anglo-Saxon Church before his days. 
 
 ^ See Batiffol Hist, du Brev. romaifi pp. 185-186.
 
 THE PRYMER 327 
 
 officio)} Whatever be thought of the account Peter gives of the origin 
 of the ' custom ', it is certain that that custom must, when he wrote, 
 have been already of long standing at Monte Cassino : during a couple 
 of generations at least. And if the stringent terms which he uses in 
 regard to the obligation raise some suspicion that there were grumblers 
 who did not eye the custom favourably, yet it must have existed long 
 enough for all knowledge of the precise circumstances attending its 
 introduction to die out ; otherwise his fellow monks would have at 
 once detected the error. 
 
 The schemes printed in No. 109 of the Early English Text Society's 
 Publications (Original Series) pp. Ixxv sqq,^ are sufficient evidence 
 that the office of the Blessed Virgin must have been used in England 
 at even an earlier date, whether in the form of a daily addition to 
 the Divine Office, or as a votive office on Saturday does not appear. 
 Apart from the probable evidence of date afforded by the volumes in 
 which they are found (always uncertain and unsatisfactory, however, 
 as such evidence must be, where mere undated handwriting has to be 
 depended on), the statutes of Lanfranc are clear proof that such an 
 office was not introduced into English monasteries by Norman monks ; •' 
 nay more, they are proof too that, if it had been in use in England 
 previously, it w^as abolished by the new-comers, the men of model 
 observance, as mere Englishry. There can be little doubt that the 
 offices of which the schemes are here printed are to be brought into 
 connexion with that spread of devotion to the Blessed Virgin which 
 was so marked a feature of the English Church from the close of the 
 tenth century to the Conquest ; of which to this day the Feast of the 
 Conception is speaking evidence, originating as it did (so far as the 
 
 ^ See Martene De ant. Mon. rit. lib. I c. 2 § 17. There can be no doubt as to 
 the origin and source of Martene's passage. Ang. de Nuce (Chron. Casinens. 1668 
 app. p. 19) draws it from Cod. Casinens. 257, as to which see Bibliotheca Casinensis 
 iv, Florileg. p. 5, ' Sub districto praecepto (writes Peter) Casinensi congregation! 
 Zacharias papa observare praecepit, constituens ut omni tempore tam aestatis quam 
 hiemis ante noctumale vel diurnale officium mox ut fratres in choro convenerint 
 incipiant officium de sancto Benedicto ; et eo expleto inchoent ofificium quod regula 
 praecipit ; adiuncto etiam sanctae Dei genitricis et virginis Mariae officio,' Above 
 he describes them as ' canonica septem horarum officia in commemoratione B. P. 
 Benedicti salvo eo quod in honore S. Dei Genitricis persolvi consuetudo est.' — The 
 author of the life of St Stephen of Grandmont, recounting how the Saint said daily 
 the office of the Blessed Virgin from the year 1076 onwards, counts it with the office 
 of the dead as already in that neighbourhood an integral part of the Divine Office : 
 'ecclesiastici officii regtdaribiis debitis, agenda videlicet diei et beatae Mariae et 
 fidelium defunctorum ' (Migne P. L. 204. 1017). 
 
 "^ [These schemes are now published in facsimile in vol. xxi of the Publications of 
 the Henry Bradshaw Society, 1902.] 
 
 ' The office of the Blessed Virgin is nowhere mentioned in Lanfranc's Statutes 
 for Canterbury Cathedral for Benedictines, which in more than one particular 
 prescribe the contrary of older English customs in a way so express as to shew 
 that his directions are aimed at them in a prohibitory sense. 
 
 Q3
 
 228 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Western Church is concerned) in England, and spreading from thence 
 over the rest of Europe : a devotion which was thrown into the back- 
 ground by the Norman Conquerors, but which, with the gradual reco- 
 very of Englishry, asserted itself again in the later Anglo-Norman days, 
 and finally found its natural theological expression in the controversy 
 between Nicholas, the monk of St Albans, and the great St Bernard.^ 
 
 Cluny was somewhat late in admitting this office of the Blessed 
 Virgin ; and even when adopted, it did not enter into the round of 
 daily devotion of the community. The fact is that Cluny had already 
 overburdened itself with these accretions ; worthy Udalric asseverates 
 and vows that the monks bore it all with freshness, alacrity, and 
 joy. That may be ; but the reader who will have the patience to 
 read him (and especially the eighteenth chaper of his first book) will 
 be apt to think that he is himself very good evidence that the monks 
 of Cluny monastery must have been pretty well breathless before they 
 got to the end of the day.^ The office of the B. V. was first intro- 
 duced by abbat Hugh (1049-1109), but he prudently restricted its 
 recitation to the monks who were in the infirmary, and to the chapel 
 of sick monks only. Cluny in its then mind could hardly subtract 
 itself from the practice of a devotion which, to use a plain term, had 
 become fashionable ; and the infirmary chapel, dedicated to the 
 Blessed Virgin, naturally recommended itself as a ground where, on 
 the one hand, the need felt to be on a level with the times, and on 
 the other the sheer impossibility of undertaking new devotional duties, 
 could both be conveniently reckoned with. In the days of abbat 
 Peter, some time before 1146 or 1 147, the complin of the Blessed 
 Virgin, which had not been hitherto said at Cluny, was added to the 
 infirmary cursus? 
 
 With the twelfth century, and the institution of the White Monks of 
 the order of Citeaux, and the White Canons of the order of Premontre, 
 and the Black Canons of St Augustine, a new period opens in the 
 history of these accretions to the Divine Office. The White Monks 
 and White Canons, who were the expression of the most ardent piety 
 of the time, resolutely struck out a new line for themselves. They 
 began by simply sweeping aside all these novelties, in each case with 
 one exception. They cleared them out of the way, and reduced the 
 
 ' See as to the origins of the feast of the Conception the next paper, No. X. 
 
 ' Migne P. L. 149. 668, and cap. 41, 686-688 ; cf. Stat. 31 of Peter the Venerable 
 in Migne, 189. 1034. 
 
 ' 'Quidquid dicit conventus dicunt (infirmi); et, ex praecepto domni abbatis 
 Hugonis, insuper omnes horas de sancta Maria' (Bern. Clun., lib. i cap. 23, in 
 Herrgolt p. 189); see also the 60th Statute of Peter the Venerable, Migne 189. 
 1041.
 
 THE PRYMER 229 
 
 Office to the early simplicity and straightforwardness^ which from the 
 time of St Benedict of Anianc it had gradually lost through the 
 heaping upon it of productions of devotion, privately commendable 
 doubtless, but not always publicly prudent. - 
 
 In their somewhat ruthless reform Citeaux preserved the daily 
 recital of the oflfice of the dead ; •' Premontre, of the office of the 
 Blessed Virgin.* But as it has happened before and since, new and 
 powerful religious orders, which seem at first glance to carry all 
 before them with a rush, are found in fact, when the whole length 
 and breadth of the situation is patiently considered, to have exercised 
 a less absorbing influence than the trumpet of common fame gives 
 out. Citeaux and Premontre were powerful no doubt, but the current 
 was still set in the channel we have been following, and with a force 
 they could not stem ; with all their popularity and power, the direction 
 of the future in this matter was not with them. 
 
 The Black Canons, as in their organization, so in their practice, 
 adopted a directly contrary policy. The Cistercians and Premon- 
 stratensians, imitating Cluny, though with modifications, were a 
 highly centralized organization, having a personal head, the abbat of 
 Citeaux or Premontre, and a common centre, those abbeys themselves, 
 wherewith the whole order was brought into continual and direct 
 communication by means of frequent general chapters held in these 
 mother-houses. The Black Canons adopted the older Benedictine 
 system, with no necessary dependence on a central point, and no 
 
 ' This is clear enough on a comparison of chapters 68 and 74 of the original 
 Customs of Citeaux (Ph. Guignard Mo7iiiments primitifs de la R^gle Ctstercie?ine 
 pp. 161, 176) with the Primaria instititta Canonicorum Praemonstratensium dist. 
 i c. I, 2 in Martene De ant. Eccl. rit. (folio editions) iii p. 325. 
 
 - [Although it was but within late years — the space of a generation — that 
 the Benedictine monasteries of northern France had allowed themselves to be 
 carried away by fashion and had adopted Cluniac superfluities, already in the third 
 decade of the twelfth century there developed what may be called a ' strike ' against 
 Cluniacensian observances and the sense of a need for return to the dictates of good 
 sense in regard to church services. In his Documents inMits pour sennr h rhistoire 
 eccUsiastique de la Belgique (1894) Dom U. Berliere has printed letters on this 
 subject that passed between the abbats of the first Benedictine provincial chapter 
 ever held— that of Reims in 1131 — and Matthew, cardinal bishop of Albano. 
 Matthew was a thorough-going Cluniacensian of the most convinced and self- 
 satisfied type. There is extremely plain speaking on both sides and no mincing of 
 matters. It is a pity that these documents should be accessible only in this little- 
 known collection, where too they lie buried away under a mass of very uninteresting 
 matter. They are of the first importance for the understanding of the history of 
 Benedictinism as contrasted with the pompous maximism of the Cluniacs on the one 
 hand and the minimism of puritanic Cistercianism on the other. I must be content 
 here to have called attention to their existence, and their value to those who love 
 ' to know '. See them at pp. 94-1 lo of Berliere.] 
 
 ^ Consuetiidines c. 50 in Guignard p. 137. 
 
 * 'Post missam dicitur prima de Sancta Maria' {Primaria instituta dist. i 
 cap. 2 in Martene loc. cit.) .
 
 230 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 common head. Their houses assumed, therefore, more the character 
 of diocesan institutions. And whilst Citeaux and Premontr^ each drew 
 up a complete set of office books to be copied down to every jot and 
 tittle, and followed with minute exactitude in every house of their 
 respective orders,^ the devotion and piety of the Black Canons in their 
 early fervour imitated as far as possible the practices to be found in 
 the monasteries and churches of best-established repute in their own 
 neighbourhood. Thus in the constitutions for these canons regular 
 drawn up by Peter de Honestis, of the monastery of St Mary de Portu 
 near Ravenna, confirmed by Pope Paschal II in 1 117, which were very 
 soon widely observed in Italy and Germany, it is prescribed, in 
 regard to diversity of hours and offices, on ferial days, Sundays, and 
 feasts, &c., that as diversity of practice exists in different places, the 
 local order and use of the more observant churches of the district 
 should be followed.'^ He lays down the same practical rule, especially 
 in regard to the various accretions to the Divine Office. As regards 
 the three prayers,^ before matins, in the morning before prime, and at 
 night after complin ; the gradual psalms ; the lauds and vespers of 
 All Saints ; the hours of the Blessed Virgin, if the devotion of the 
 brethren observes them (si fraterna devotio habeat) ; matins, lauds, 
 mass, and vespers for the dead; the penitential psalms in the morning; 
 and ihe psalmi familiares 2ihex the hours, and whatever other things 
 are necessary, let the use, order, and custom of those who have gone 
 before us inculcate what is to be done.* 
 
 Other constitutions were drawn up for the Black Canons about the 
 same time by Manegold of Lautenbach, a man influential and revered, 
 who had been deeply concerned in the ecclesiastical politics of the day, 
 and so formed a contrast to * Peter the sinner, clerk, with his brethren ', 
 who were the authors of the Ravennese code. Manegold's compilation 
 was primarily designed for the monastery of Marbach in Alsace, which 
 he had founded, but it soon obtained wide acceptance elsewhere. He 
 
 ^ For the condition of Cistercian office books in early days see Viia S. Stephani 
 Obazin. in Baluze Miscellanea iv 120 (original edition). Citeaux was more success- 
 ful than Prdmontre in securing uniformity ; see the description of the ' manuscrit- 
 type ' in Guignard, prdf. pp. iii sqq. For Prdmontrd efforts, M. G. SS. xxiii 526, 585 ; 
 xxiv 655, 672. 
 
 ^ ' Horarum autem et ofificiorum diversitas fit pro die, festo, hora et tempore. 
 Aliter enim fiunt diebus ferialibus, aliter diebus dominicis ', &c. ' Verum in 
 aliquibus horum plurima quorumdam officiorum pro temporibus diversis et locis 
 invenitur varietas, quam in singulis partibus maiorum ecclesiarum et rectiorum ordo 
 et usus edoceat' {Regula Portuensis lib. iii c. 8 ; in Amort Vettis disciplina 
 Canonicoruin Venet., 1747, p. 369). 
 
 ^ That is, three preliminary short prayers often said before the fifteen psalms, 
 corresponding to the seven penitential psalms with collects before matins in the 
 Concordia. See such prayers in Herrgott pp. 593-4, from a Monte Cassino Breviary 
 of the eleventh century. 
 
 * Beg. Portuens. lib. iii c. 17 in Amort p. 373.
 
 THE PRYMER 231 
 
 mentions as of daily observance the trina oratio, to be followed by the 
 fifteen gradual psalms, before matins ; the office of the dead ; the office 
 of the Blessed Virgin, the hours of which were to be said after the 
 relative hours of the ordinary office ; the seven penitential psalms and 
 litany after prime.^ In these German constitutions, the vespers and 
 lauds of All Saints, mentioned in those of St Mary de Portu, have 
 fallen out, and the office of the Blessed Virgin is assumed to be gene- 
 rally said ; whereas the Italian Peter de Honestis has, with regard to 
 this latter, a limitation {sifraierna, &c.) shewing that in many monas- 
 teries, to say the least, it was not said in his neighbourhood. 
 
 So far the discussion has been concerned with the religious orders. 
 It remains to consider briefly the adoption of these devotional accre- 
 tions in their public service in the Church by the secular clergy, viz, 
 those who may specifically and absolutely be called ' the clergy' proper, 
 i. e. all clerics who do not belong to a religious order. 
 
 It has been already pointed out, that the spread of ' devotional ' 
 practices is, as a general, if not universal, rule, from the religious 
 orders to the clergy. Just as in earlier centuries, six and seven 
 hundred years or more before, the clergy adopted matins from monks 
 first as a matter of devotional imitation, and found them at length 
 imposed as a duty and obligation, it was inevitable that the accre- 
 tions to the Divine Office, which began from the time of Benedict 
 of Aniane, should be taken up by the secular clergy and become at 
 length a part of the daily petisiim. In view of the unvarying tenor 
 of the story, whether in ancient days or modern times, the wonder 
 is that the clergy did not adopt these at an earlier date than that 
 when they were actually received in non-monastic churches. The 
 office of the dead seems to have been the first item of these offices 
 of supererogation to make its way into the office as publicly said 
 by the clergy.'^ It is, of course, to be understood that this item, 
 
 ' In Amort pp. 386-387; see also §§ 12, 18, 24, 35, 37, 50, 52; less correctly 
 from another manuscript in Martene De ant. Eccl. rit. iii 306 sqq.— St Stephen 
 of Obazine and his companions used all these accretions (including both the hours 
 of the Blessed Virgin and of All Saints) whilst they were still seculars, and before 
 they had made up their minds to join themselves to a religious order ( Vita in 
 Baluze Miscelt. iv 80-81 ; the passage does not occur in the abridged Life in the 
 BoUandists). The compiler of the Ordo divini officii in Amort pp.932 sqq. is a 
 strong orthodox Romanizer, as appears from his frequent quotations from the 
 Micrologus (i.e. Bernold of Constance), and he consequently has but small liking 
 for these novel accretions ; he mentions, however (lib. viii c. 5 p. 1046), the 
 fifteen gradual psalms, and (lib. vii c. 22 pp. 1042-1043) the daily office of the 
 dead. 
 
 ^ Batiffol Hist, du Br^v. rom. p. 190, quoting John of Avranches, who wrote 
 between 1061 and 1067, and gives the custom at least in Normandy. In Ciermany 
 the practice must have found its way into some cathedral churches a century earlier, 
 e.g. Augsburg : ' aliis orationibus firmiter insistebat (sc. Udalr. episc. Augustens.) 
 usque dum signum ad vigilias defunctorum sonaret ; quo audito statim surrexit et 
 cum fratribus vigiliam celebravit et primam. Prima vero expleta, fratribus solito
 
 232 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 as well as the rest later, was not imposed by some general order, 
 but was adopted or not in particular churches according to the 
 discretion or the zeal of individual bishop and individual chapter. 
 When once, however, the current set in that direction, it was only 
 a question of time that the whole of these additions would be 
 publicly said, and become of obligation by and by from mere custom 
 in the churches of the secular clergy no less than in those of monks 
 and regular canons. The Black Canons, without design, but in 
 practice, were just the means whereby these monastic observances 
 might be expected to be the more quickly communicated to the 
 cathedral and collegiate churches, and the secular clergy at large. 
 For whilst now forming a religious order in the strict sense of the 
 word, and adopting the devotional practices usual among the monks, 
 they still remained themselves clerics, and professedly a part of the 
 clerical, not the monastic body, and were designed by their very 
 institute to take a share in the pastoral and other ministerial duties 
 incumbent on the secular clergy. And, as an accident, the simple 
 and unassuming character of their piety contributed to recommend 
 their practices to the favourable notice of their clerical brethren.^ 
 
 How, and by what steps, and when, in different localities they 
 were in fact received, it would be possible to state only after an 
 examination, impracticable at present for any individual, of the 
 extant early cathedral statutes and ordinalia. But it was certainly in 
 the course of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, for the most part 
 perhaps even in the twelfth, that the change took place.^ And it was 
 
 more crucem portantibus, ipse remanens in aecclesia ', &c. ( Vit. S. Oudalrici 
 Augustens. in M, G. SS. iv 391). The whole context shews that \hQ fratres in 
 question were the cathedral chapter, and the ecclesia the cathedral church. 
 
 ^ The writer of the history of the foundation of Llanthony might be considered a 
 partial witness. But the highly critical ' Bumellus ', who saw through the weaknesses 
 of every order, and especially of the ' canons secular ', cannot be gainsaid (see 
 Nigelli Speculum Stultormn in Wright's Satirical Poets of the Tiuelfth Century 
 i 93 ; the author, Nigel ' Wireker ', the Canterbury monk, was own brother to no less 
 a personage than the powerful Chancellor, William Longchamp, bishop of Ely). 
 
 '^ A Reims Ordinale at the British Museum (MS Reg. li B. xiii), of the early 
 thirteenth century, shews the devotional offices of the dead, of All Saints, and of the 
 Blessed Virgin, as already established in that church. [The bulk of this Ordinale 
 is now printed by Canon Ulysse Chevalier in vol. vii of his Bibliotheque Liturgique 
 (pp. 261-305, cf. xxvi-xxxi).] A Treves Ordinale of about the latter half of the same 
 century (Harl. MS 2958) mentions none of these ; only the fifteen gradual psalms 
 after prime (apparently in Lent only). Also in Lent, besides many psalms and 
 preces of no account here, the seven penitential psalms at prime ; and during the 
 whole year (including Lent) on ferias, one of the seven penitential psalms after each 
 of the hours. Possibly also, in Lent, before prime, the matins of the dead: 'ante 
 primam cantande sunt vigilie cum novem lectionibus per totam quadragesimam ' 
 (f. 22 b). These two ordinalia shew very well the different ways in which different 
 secular churches approached the adoption of these devotional accretions as a whole. 
 
 It is to be observed that the vespers and lauds of All Saints never gained any 
 general acceptance in secular churches, and indeed from this time forward gradually
 
 THE PRYMER 233 
 
 thus coincident with the general settlement of cathedral chapters on 
 the new model, and with the erection of new and more magnificent 
 cathedral churches, an occasion which would be taken advantage of, 
 there is every likelihood for expecting, to revise the Church books 
 and ceremonies. By the end of the thirteenth century, at the very 
 latest, the process must have been complete. 
 
 Unfortunately no formal directory or ordinal of so early a date 
 exists for any English cathedral. But there are in various documents 
 scattered indications, each one slight enough in itself, but in fact suffi- 
 cient to make it reasonably sure that the accretions, even as a whole, 
 may have formed part of the public office as said in our English 
 cathedral churches as early as the first half of the thirteenth century. 
 Thus an incidental notice in the Sarum tractate de officiis, dating at 
 the latest about 1230, shews that the offices of the dead and of the 
 Blessed Virgin were then daily said in the church of Salisbury.^ 
 The custumals of Lincoln cathedral, dating from the third quarter 
 of the thirteenth century, shew that the daily recital of the office of 
 the Blessed Virgin was the settled practice of that church."^ Of devo- 
 tional accretions to the office, the statutes of St Paul's, drawn up 
 before the year 1305, mention the office of the dead, the fifteen psalms, 
 and the commendations.^ It is to be observed that these are mere 
 chance notices ; and seeing that the whole body of accretions are found 
 at a later date in the Sarum books, there is little reason to doubt 
 that all the items had here, as elsewhere, found admission by the 
 beginning of the fourteenth century, although only some of them are 
 specifically mentioned in the fragmentary records of that age which 
 have survived to the present day.^ 
 
 fell into disuse in the monasteries themselves. So that at the time of the formation 
 of the Pfyiner, this office was not a commonly current devotion. 
 
 ' Section 52 (in Rock's Church of our Fathers, 1853, iv 2 p. 36; Registnwi 
 S. Osmuiidi ed. Jones, i p. 90). 
 
 ' H. Bradshaw and Chr. Wordsworth Statutes of Lincoln Cathedral \ 289, 290, 
 385. Office of B. V. at Wells in 1207 (C. M. Church Early History p. 173). 
 
 ^ Sparrow Simpson Registrum Statutorum eccl. cathedr. S. Fault Londinens. 
 
 PP- 47, 54-56. 
 
 * A reference to the so-called 'Antiphonar' of Hereford in the Cathedral 
 library would be here desirable, as it seems to be of the thirteenth century. 
 [This MS is made use of in foot-notes to the edition by Dr W. H. P'rere of the 
 Hereford Breviary in three volumes for the Henry Bradshaw Society.] It is un- 
 necessary to cite later books, e.g. at Exeter, Hereford: the detail can be easily 
 filled up. For York the sources seem curiously defective, on account especially of 
 the paucity of interesting rubric in the York Breviary ; but see vol. i col. 213. It will 
 be enough for the present purpose to follow up Sarum. [Mgr Ceriani (see 
 above, p. 217 note 3) remarks at this point : ' Bishop, quem nescio quomodo latuerint 
 omnia Anglica documenta allata nn. 61-63', "^c. (num. 64). The explanation, I am 
 afraid, is only too easy to give. I pass on quickly to a simple enumeration of the 
 'Anglica documenta' cited by Ceriani as to the recital of the office of the dead. These 
 are the following English episcopal or synodal statutes of the thirteenth century : (i) 
 Richard de Marsh, bishop of Durham, of about 1220 (Wilkins i 579) ; (2) Richard
 
 234 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 It does not, of course, follow that each item was assigned exactly 
 to the same place as that in which it is found in the table from the 
 tenth century Concordia, given above. With a general liturgical 
 uniformity in the West during the middle ages, there existed an 
 infinite variety in point of minute and indifferent detail. Thus a 
 competent and well-informed liturgist of the second half of the four- 
 teenth century was able to say that the daily recital of the offices of 
 the Blessed Virgin and of the dead was now obligatory on all, and that 
 by virtue of the general custom of all nations. By the laudable 
 practice of many, other particular offices are also observed, as the 
 penitential and gradual psalms, and so forth. The vespers and matins 
 of the dead are (he says) generally said in the evening, and lauds next 
 morning, after lauds of the day. The office of the Blessed Virgin was 
 usually said before each hour of the regular office, except complin ; 
 but the Franciscans say matins, lauds and vespers before matins and 
 vespers of the day, and the other hours after the relative hour of the 
 day. Some religious and seculars said the fifteen psalms, according to 
 the original institution, before matins ; others divided them into five 
 groups of three, and said them after the five lesser hours of the office 
 of the Blessed Virgin ; some said the penitential psalms after prime ; 
 others omitted them ; others said them after prime, but only in Lent, 
 a restriction first introduced into the Papal Chapel by Innocent III, 
 and adopted by the Franciscans, although this practice is designated 
 as exceptional.^ 
 
 The following table will shew the Salisbury custom and accom- 
 modation of these devotional additions to the regular and traditional 
 Divine Office proper.- The gradual and penitential psalms were 
 
 Poore, bishop of Salisbury (1217-1225, and Marsh's successor at Durham) of 1225 
 (ibid. p. 599) ; (3) Alexander de Stavenby, bishop of Coventry and Lichfield, of 
 c. 1237 (ibid. p. 642) ; (4) Walter de Cantilupe, bishop of Worcester, of 1240 (ibid. 
 p. 668) ; and (5) Peter Quivil, bishop of Exeter, of 1287 (ibid, ii p. 144). In sum, 
 these bishops prescribe generally that Placebo (= vespers of the dead) and Dirige 
 (= matins and lauds of the dead), with ' commendatio animae ', be said every day 
 except on feasts of nine lessons.] 
 
 ' See Radulphus de Rivo Z?^ Canonuin observantia liber va Hittorp (ed. 16 10), 
 coll. 1145-1146 (office of dead); 1146-1147 (office of B. V.); 1148, 1133 (the 15 
 and 7 pss., litany, &c.); 1137 (lenten additions). 
 
 ^ It is drawn up on the prints of Procter and Wordsworth (P.), and Seager (S.) ; 
 the rubrics of the latter's ' MS. L.' are useful for clearing up some obscurities of the 
 printed breviaries. 
 
 For the office of the dead, see P. fasc. i pp. xliv, xlv, xlvii, xlix, dxcii, dxciii, dxciv ; 
 S. fasc. i p. Iv. 
 
 For the office of the Blessed Virgin, see S., fasc. ii § 115 (p. 174), 125 (p. 178); 
 pp. xlv, xlvi, xlvii, xcvii, and p. xii of the third pagination. I do not understand the 
 explanation given in the Index of fasc. i of P. : ' Mattins and Vespers of S. Mary 
 were said in choir before those of the day ; the other hours of the Virgin after the 
 day hours ' (p. mdxxi). According to Radulphus de Rivo, this was the use of the 
 Franciscans, but it does not appear to be the practice described in the Sarum 
 rubrics.
 
 THE PRYMER 235 
 
 said on ferias in Lent only ; the fifteen gradual psalms, followed by 
 the Litany, after terce ; the penitential psalms were divided over the 
 hours of the day, and one each was said after lauds, prime, terce, sext, 
 none, vespers, complin. 
 
 FERIAS OUT OF LENT. 
 
 EVENING. MORNING. 
 
 1. Vespers of the day. 4. Matins and lauds of the day. 
 
 2. Vespers of B. V. 5. Matins and lauds of B. V. 
 
 3. Vespers and matins of dead. 6. Lauds of the dead. 
 
 FERIAS IN LENT. 
 
 I. 
 
 Matins and lauds of the day. 
 
 
 and None said before mass of the 
 
 2. 
 
 Matins and lauds of B. V. 
 
 
 day. After mass of the day — 
 
 3- 
 
 Lauds of the dead. 
 
 10. 
 
 Vespers of the dead. 
 
 4- 
 
 Prime. 
 
 11. 
 
 Vespers of the day. 
 
 5- 
 
 First penitential psalm. 
 
 12. 
 
 Vespers of the B. V. 
 
 6. 
 
 Terce. 
 
 
 
 7- 
 
 Fifteen gradual psabns. 
 
 
 IN THE EVENING. 
 
 8. 
 
 Litany. 
 
 
 
 9- 
 
 Second penitential psalm. The rest 
 
 13- 
 
 Matins of dead. 
 
 
 of the penitential psalms dis- 
 
 14. 
 
 Collation. 
 
 
 tributed as explained above. Sext 
 
 15- 
 
 Complin of day. 
 
 The other hours of the Blessed Virgin were recited out of choir ; 
 prime, terce, sext, and none in the chapel of B. V. before the Lady 
 Mass ; complin was said by each one privately after complin of the 
 day. 
 
 Having followed up the story of the particular items of which 
 the Prymcr in its groundwork is made up, we are now in a position 
 to answer the question, What was the relation of this favourite lay- 
 folks' prayer book to the authorized and official service books of the 
 Church? The answer is that the Prymer consisted of those devo- 
 tional accretions to the Divine Office itself, invented first by the 
 piety of individuals for the use of monks in their monasteries, which 
 accretions were gradually and voluntarily adopted in the course of 
 two or three centuries by the secular clergy so generally, that by the 
 fourteenth century they had, by virtue of custom, come to be regarded 
 as obligatory, and practically a part of the public daily (or only 
 lenten) office itself. These accretions, besides the Litany, fall into two 
 classes: (i) mere special psalms, gradual, penitential, the commenda- 
 
 For the gradual psalms and litany : P. fasc. i pp. dlxxxix, dxc, dxci ; fasc. iii p. 249. 
 For the penitential psalms : P. fasc. i pp. dlvii, dlxxxviii. 
 For the commendations : P. fasc. i pp. xlviii, xlix, dlxxxix.
 
 236 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 tions ; (a) offices (of dead, of B. V.) framed on, and following, the model 
 of the hours of the Divine Office. 
 
 ' If a man took the Prymer to church, would he hear the same 
 service, or set of services, in Latin ? ' The foregoing table from the 
 Sarum books gives a sufficient reply. So far as the items printed in 
 italics are concerned, he would find them in the Prymer ; but it is 
 to be added, that he would hear them said with much less solemnity 
 than those portions not in italics, which constitute the old office 
 proper. 
 
 It may be further asked. How came precisely the accretions to 
 be taken for the basis of the Prymer^ and these only ? Quite apart 
 from a fact which experience shews to be true, viz. that the popular 
 instinct always seizes on the devotional, and if possible the latest 
 devotional, accessory, it seems easy to explain the original constitu- 
 tion of the Prymer on other grounds. There is a constant desire in 
 a certain set of lay folk to imitate the clergy as far as they can ; and 
 this tendency is not restricted to any particular class or period. An 
 observant foreigner travelling in England nearly four centuries ago, 
 noted it among our own people. The instance he records aptly 
 illustrates the very subject under discussion. ' Although they [i. e. the 
 English] see and hear mass every day, and say many Paternosters 
 in public (the women carrying long rosaries in their hands ; and, 
 if any can read, taking with them the office of our Lady, they recite 
 it in the church verse by verse, in a low voice, after the manner 
 of religious), they always hear mass on Sundays in their parish 
 church,' &c.^ 
 
 The perplexing intricacies of the Breviary, with its continually 
 varying texts, apart from its size, put an adaptation of the old daily 
 office for common use out of the question. But the accretions, 
 now by this time popularly looked on as an integral part of the 
 office, afforded just the material that was wanted. They were, with 
 the exception of the office of the Blessed Virgin, invariable. This 
 latter, in the Sarum (and other) books, does indeed vary with the 
 season of the year ; so that on referring to a Breviary, the enquirer 
 must not expect to find this office exactly the same as that found in 
 a Prymer. But the variants of the seasons are not so considerable 
 as to have made it otherwise than easy for the compiler of the 
 Prymer to frame, what was convenient for his purpose, an invariable 
 office. Looking at the book as a whole, we cannot but be struck with 
 its appropriateness for the end in view. What could appeal more 
 directly to the devout and pious mind than these psalms of degrees, 
 
 ' Italian Relation of England {(ZzxaAtn Society) p. 23.
 
 THE PRYMER 237 
 
 these psalms of penitence, or that wonderful ii8th psalm, which 
 constituted not merely the Sarum ' commendations ', but also the day 
 hours, prime and terce, and sext and none, said in every secular church, 
 said by every secular priest, day by day and all the year round 
 throughout England ? Or again, what more readily appealed to men 
 in those days than the offices which were the expression of devout 
 reverence to the Spotless Mother of our Divine Lord, of piety and 
 duty towards those who have gone before, to rest, we would fain trust, 
 in the sleep of peace ? 
 
 There can be no need to add words of explanation why the Prymer 
 in English makes its appearance in the fourteenth century— possibly 
 in the second half rather than in the first.
 
 X 
 
 ON THE ORIGINS OF THE FEAST OF THE 
 
 CONCEPTION OF THE BLESSED 
 
 VIRGIN MARY^ 
 
 As is well known, the Provincial Council of Canterbury of the year 
 1328 attributes the institution of the Feast of the Conception of the 
 Blessed Virgin to Saint Anselm, who thought fit, so runs the text, ' to 
 add to the more ancient feasts of the Blessed Virgin the solemnity of 
 the Conception '. Another document, professing to give a history 
 of its establishment, states that it began at Ramsey, pursuant to 
 a vision vouchsafed to Helsin, Elsi, or Aethelsige, abbat of that 
 monastery, on hjs journey back from Denmark, whither he had been 
 sent by William I soon after the Conquest. This narrative seems to 
 have been known as early as 1140, or thereabouts, to Saint Bernard, 
 who in his famous letter to the church of Lyons mentions a ' scriptum 
 supernae revelationis ', put forth by some persons in support of the 
 new feast ; it is also pointed out that in Domesday Book mention is 
 made of the abbat's journey, the fact of which is indubitable. Some 
 time in the twelfth or thirteenth century an attempt was made to 
 reconcile the two accounts by adding a few words at the beginning 
 and end of the narrative, whereby it is made to take the form of 
 a letter addressed by Saint Anselm to the bishops of his province. 
 
 The spuriousness of the letter is commonly allowed, though some 
 writers of authority are disposed to credit the narrative. It may be 
 as well to say at once that I do not believe the reported institution 
 of the feast by Saint Anselm, though it may be possible to explain 
 how that idea got abroad, and that I attach no credence to the 
 Helsin narrative so far as it relates to the matter in hand, for this 
 reason, among others, that the feast was already established in England 
 before the Conquest, and was in all probability known to Helsin at 
 Canterbury during his abbacy at Saint Augustine's. (For his 
 
 ' From the Downside Review^ April 1886; reprinted by Messrs. Bums and 
 Gates, 1904. [As to this Paper and its appended Note see Preface.]
 
 FEAST OF THE CONCEPTION 239 
 
 perplexed history see Freeman Norman Conquest iv 135-138, and 
 Appendix P.) 
 
 The following evidence of the observance of the Feast of the Con- 
 ception of the Blessed Virgin in England in pre-Norman times has 
 come under notice : — 
 
 1. In a calendar contained in Cotton MS Titus D xxvii is the 
 entry, in the original hand, at 8th December : ' Conceptio sancte Dei 
 genitricis Mariae.' The MS was written in the monastery of New- 
 minster, at Winchester, during the abbacy of Aelfwin, whose obit 
 occurs in another hand at 25th October. Its date, therefore, falls 
 between 1034-1057.^ 
 
 2. Another calendar of the Old Minster, or Cathedral Priory, at 
 Winchester, in Cotton MS Vitellius E xviii, has the same entry. The 
 MS is attributed by Wanley to about the year 1030. The handwriting 
 and the character of the calendar itself fix its date, with all reasonable 
 certainty, before the Conquest.^ 
 
 3. Additional MS 28188 is a pontifical and benedictional of the 
 eleventh century, of which the printed catalogue says : ' The name of 
 Aegelfleda (as the only English saint occurring in the second litany) 
 connects the volume with the abbey of Romsey ' ; in other words, 
 this is a Winchester pontifical. The benediction for Saint Swithin's 
 Day (' interventu tanti patroni ') is not the only further point which 
 might be brought forward in support of its Winchester origin. But 
 I think that this book actually comes from Exeter. Stress, perhaps, 
 must not be laid on the invocations of SS. Neot, Petrock, and Germanus 
 in the first litany (fol. 3 a) ; but that of Saint Sativola, or Sidwell 
 (fol. 4 a), seems decisive. At least, in the course of an examination of 
 a large number of English service books, I have found traces of her 
 cultus outside the diocese of Exeter only in a Norwich martyrology of 
 the fifteenth century and in an addition, in a later hand, to that of 
 Christ Church, Dublin ; it is possible such cult may have existed at 
 Sherborne at a late date (but not in the eleventh century). The 
 Winchester cast of the book is easily explained. It is well known 
 
 i- 
 
 [I leave the text as it originally stood; but this paper was written on the basis 
 of notes taken some years earlier than 1 886 and without any intention of their being 
 utilized as here. Since then I have carefully re-examined the Titus calendar ; and I 
 now think that though the entries of 21 Nov. and 8 Dec. seem to be in the same hand 
 or the same kind of hand, they were made at a later date than the first script They 
 do not occupy the space of ordinary entries, but begin further to the left among the 
 numerals. It also appeared that the calendar was written not in the abbacy of 
 Aelfwin as stated above, but in that of his predecessor, Alnoth (1021-1035) and 
 whilst Aelfwin was still a private monk (say c. 1020-1030 : Bos^uorth Psalter igo8 
 p. 50 note 2 ; see the careful note in \V. de G. Birch's Fasti Monastici Saxonici 
 1872, pp. 28-29). The entries in the Vitellius calendar are part of the first script 1 ' 
 
 Both these calendars are printed by Hampson Medii aevi Kalendari'um 
 ' 423) 435-
 
 240 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 that copyists of church books often neglected to adapt the old text 
 to changed circumstances. Bishop Leofric, in providing his new 
 cathedral of Exeter with office books, is known to have used Win- 
 chester models, and in the additions to the so-called ' Leofric Missal ' 
 his scribe has actually left unaltered a text appropriate to Winchester 
 (see York Pontifical^ ed. Henderson, pp. xxiii-xxiv). What happened 
 in the case of the missal may well have happened with the pontifical 
 also. I am, therefore, disposed to recognize in Add. MS 28188 one 
 of the books written for Bishop Leofric, and accordingly to assign it 
 a date 1046-1072. At any rate its liturgical character is distinctly 
 pre-Norman, and its original at least is of Winchester. At fol. 161 is 
 the following : — 
 
 BENEDICTIO IN CONCEPTIONE SANCTE MARIE. 
 
 Sempiterna(m) a Deo benedictionem vobis beate Marie virginis pia 
 deposcat supplicatio, quam concipiendam Omnipotens, ex qua eius conci- 
 peretur Unigenitus, angelico declaravit preconio, quam et vobis iugiter suffra- 
 gari benigno, ut est benignissima, sentiatis auxilio. Amen. 
 
 Quique illam ante conceptum presignavit nomine ' Spiritus Sancti obum- 
 bratione, vos divinam gratiam mente annuat concipere in sancte Trinitatis 
 confessione, atque ab omni malo protectos deifica confirmet sanctificatione. 
 Amen. 
 
 Sancta vero Dei genitrix Maria vobis a Deo pacis et gaudii optineat incre- 
 mentum, ut quibus felix eiusdem beate virginis partus extitit salutis exordium, 
 sit etiam ipse lesus Christus premium in celis vite permanentis sempiternum. 
 
 Quod Ipse prestare dignetur [qui cum Patre et Spiritu Sancto vivit et 
 gloriatur Deus per omnia secula seculorum. Amen. 
 
 Benedictio Dei Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti, et pax Domini sit semper 
 vobiscum].'^ 
 
 4. Harl. MS 2892 is also a pontifical and benedictional, written for 
 the cathedral church of Canterbury (the contents afford conclusive 
 evidence of this) after the translation of Saint Elphege (1023), but, to 
 judge from the handwriting, in the first half of the eleventh century, 
 and certainly before the Conquest. At ff. 189-190 is : 
 
 BENEDICTIO IN DIE CONCEPTIONIS SANCTE DEI GENITRICIS MARIE. 
 
 Caelestium carismatum inspirator lerrenarumque mentium reparator, qui 
 beatam Dei genitricem angelico concipiendam preconavit oraculo, vos bene- 
 dictionum suarum ubertate dignetur locupletare et virtutum floribus dignanter 
 decorare. Amen. 
 
 ' The angelic annunciation of the Virgin's birth and name is drawn from the 
 Evangelism de nativitate S, Marine capp. 3-4. 
 
 ^ The words in brackets are not in the MS, but are added to shew the usual 
 ending of these benedictions. Another formula is: ' O. I. pr. d. cuius regnum et 
 imperium sine fine permanet in secula seculorum. Amen. Benedictio ', &c.
 
 FEAST OF THE CONCEPTION 241 
 
 Et qui illam prius sanctificavit nominis dignitate quam edita gigneretur 
 humana fragilitate vos virtutum copiis adiuvet pollere, et in nominis sui vene- 
 randa confessione (conffensione MS) infatigabiliter perdurare. Amen. 
 
 Obtineat vobis gloriosis intercessionibus prospera tempora, iocunda et 
 pacifica, et post presentia secula gaudia sine fine manentia, cuius venerande 
 conceptionis freciuentamini magnifica sacramenta. Amen. 
 
 Quod Ipse prestare dignetur. 
 
 Probably a search among manuscripts at Oxford and elsewhere 
 would bring to light further evidence.^ If the calendar entries stood 
 alone it would be well to hesitate before drawing conclusions ; the 
 Episcopal benedictions shew that the feast not only commended itself 
 to the devotion of individuals but that it was recognized by authority, 
 and was observed with considerable solemnity. They, moreover, 
 justify us in assuming that, at the time these books were written, its 
 observance was no novelty, but that it had had time to spread and to 
 grow in public esteem. It is to be noted that these benedictions come 
 in the manuscripts immediately after the Feast of Saint Birinus 
 (3 December) ; the day was, therefore, doubtless that given in the 
 calendars — viz. 8th December. 
 
 A few words on the question of the precise place where the feast 
 had its rise — always a difficult matter where rites or ceremonies or 
 liturgical institutions are concerned, for they mostly come in without 
 observation, and their existence is commonly not recorded until they 
 have obtained an established footing, and have begun to spread. All 
 that can usually be done is to follow the way to which facts seem to 
 point, and in the end a probability, more or less strong, is the utmost 
 that can be arrived at. So, too, in the present case. The Winchester 
 monasteries have occurred in connexion with the first three documents 
 quoted above ; the Canterbury benedictional is hardly less a witness 
 for Winchester than these, for it is to be remembered that, from the 
 time of Saint Dunstan to the martyrdom of Saint Elphege, Canter- 
 bury was intimately connected with Winchester. In the last years of 
 the tenth century both the Winchester houses, which took their cue 
 from Saint Ethelwold, were a busy hive ; the picture has yet to 
 be drawn — and the means for doing so are becoming easier, thanks to 
 modern research — of the activity, mental and manual, of which they 
 were the scene : painting, architecture, goldsmiths' work, music, history 
 and grammar, verse-making and homiletics, even science, the vulgar 
 and the learned tongues, were alike cultivated. The so-called Co7i- 
 cordia regularis is not only ample witness to the care and thought 
 
 ' [The calendar of Worcester in the so-called Breviary of St Oswald (C.C.C.C. 
 MS 391, of circa 1060-1070?) also has the entry at 8 Dec. * Conceptio sancte dei 
 genitricis Mariae '.]
 
 242 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 bestowed on the observance of sacred liturgy and of regular discipline, 
 but also evidence of a certain freedom in breaking new ground and 
 innovating in these matters. Witness, for instance, the quasi-dramatic 
 representation of the resurrection in cap. 5, which in later centuries 
 became an integral part of the Easter morning office throughout the 
 churches of northern Europe. This instance of the ' sepulchre office ' 
 alone betokens a habit of mind which dwelt on and realized and 
 sought, as far as might be, by action to shew forth the mysteries 
 surrounding the story of our redemption. On the other hand, the 
 Newminster manuscript quoted above is still speaking evidence of 
 the profound devotion of the monks of that house towards the holy 
 Mother of God.^ 
 
 The probabilities, therefore, on existing evidence seem to point to 
 this, that the establishment of the feast is due to the monks of 
 Winchester, disciples of St Ethelwold.^ 
 
 So much for origins : to proceed to the later history. 
 
 Stowe's Chronicle, under 11 29, states that at the council of London 
 in that year, ' by authoritie of the Pope, the Feast of the Conception 
 of our Ladie was confirmed '. Stowe's authority is doubtless, either 
 directly or indirectly, the following passage of the Tewkesbury 
 annals, compiled in the thirteenth century": — ' 11 29. Festivitas con- 
 ceptionis sanctae Mariae in concilio apud Londoniam apostolica 
 auctoritate confirmata est ' (ed. Luard, p. 45). Nothing is said of this 
 matter in the contemporary chronicles (e.g. Huntingdon's History and 
 the Saxon Chronicle, which both speak of the council at some length) ; 
 but the letters of Osbert de Clare, a contemporary, give strong reason 
 for thinking that the statement is correct, though probably the words 
 'apostolica auctoritate' will not bear the precise interpretation put 
 upon them by Stowe. 
 
 Osbert de Clare was a native of Suffolk, monk, and by and by 
 prior, of Westminster. His history is obscure* — it need not have 
 been so if he had been content to speak plainly instead of wrapping 
 up his meaning in a cloud of words — but his letters shew that he was 
 a man of consequence, and in relation with the most notable personages 
 
 ^ The Titus MS D xxvi is very much like its neighbour, and is not improbably 
 a Newminster MS also. 
 
 ' See Supplementary Note, pp. 250 sqq. 
 
 ^ MS fonds latin 9376 at the Bibl. Nationale, Paris, is said to contain Tewkes- 
 bury annals 1066-1149; the MS seems to be saec. xii {Neues Archiv vi 478). If 
 this be so there is a chance of getting contemporary authority. [The Paris MS 
 does not contain the entry ; but, in view of the general character of the thirteenth- 
 century monastic annals, this would not necessarily affect the credit due to it.] 
 
 * [The career of Osbert has now been brought into clear light by Dr Armitage 
 Robinson, Dean of Wells : see his article in the Church Quarterly Review 
 vol. Ixviii no. 136 (July 1909) pp. 336-356.]
 
 FEAST OF THE CONCEPTION 243 
 
 of his time. With Anselm, abbat of Edmundsbury, nephew of the 
 archbishop, and during the second half of the reign of Henry I, one of 
 the most influential ecclesiastics in England, he was on terms of 
 intimate friendship ; on one occasion he overpoweringly addresses the 
 abbat as his ' lord, father, guide, protector, refuge, and the angel of his 
 counsel'. But our business is with another letter, also to abbat 
 Anselm, which after the usual salutations runs thus : ' Your sedulous 
 zeal has fired many in various countries with devotion towards the 
 blessed and glorious Mother of God, and by your assiduous care the 
 Feast of her Conception is now in many places observed, which was 
 not wont to be celebrated by the ancient fathers. Wherefore, some 
 followers of Satan, whilst we were keeping this feast, decried its 
 observance as hitherto unheard-of and absurd, and with malicious 
 intent they went to two bishops, Roger (of Salisbury) and Bernard 
 (of St David's), who happened then to be in the neighbourhood, and, 
 representing its novelty, they excited them to displeasure. The 
 bishops declared that the festival was forbidden by a council, and that 
 the observance of it must be stopped. Nevertheless, we proceeded 
 with the office of the day, which had already begun, and carried it 
 through with joyous solemnity. Then some who bore me a grudge, 
 and who, whilst striving to get countenance for their own silly fancies, 
 are busy to bring discredit on both words and deeds of religious men, 
 vomited against me the venom of their iniquity, and shot out upon me 
 the darts of their pestilent tongues, saying that the feast was not to be 
 kept, for its establishment had not the authorisation of the Church of 
 Rome. I refuted them by reason, and answered them according 
 to their malice, and many persons bore witness that, as well in this 
 kingdom as across the sea, a festal commemoration of the day has 
 been instituted by some bishops and abbats in their churches.' After 
 entering on the reasons for such a feast (a passage of considerable 
 interest, though not necessary for the present purpose) Osbert proceeds 
 to explain that his object in writing is to beg Anselm to confer with 
 religious, lettered, and well-minded persons on the subject, and excite 
 them to a defence of ' the cause of the Blessed Virgin '. * And since 
 our lord and father Gilbert, by the grace of God bishop of London, 
 a most catholic-minded man, is sufficiently instructed in these matters, 
 and Hugh, abbat of Reading, who at the prayer of King Henry 
 solemnly keeps this festival, is well versed in both sacred and profane 
 learning, I exhort you to discuss the matter with them, and to enlist 
 their co-operation lest you should hear it said of you by your enemies 
 with the word of scorn : " This man began to build, and could not 
 finish," This I say because you have begun the building up of this 
 solemnity and so do you carry it through, and faithfully accomplish 
 
 R i
 
 244 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 an undertaking which it is incumbent on you to bring to completion. 
 Since you have a thorough practical knowledge of the customs of the 
 Roman Church we beg you to let us know if anything in support of 
 the venerable Conception of the Mother of God is to be drawn from 
 them.' Osbert concludes with expressions of his readiness to die, if 
 need be, in her cause.^ 
 
 This letter suggests several observations. First, its date must be 
 fixed. Gilbert, surnamed the Universal, was consecrated bishop of 
 London at Canterbury on 22nd January, 1128. Hugh, abbat of 
 Reading, was elected Archbishop of Rouen in the last days of 11 29 
 or the first of 1130. The letter falls, therefore, in either 1 128 or 11 29. 
 
 ' Portions of Osbert's letters were edited by Anstruther (Brussels 1846, 8vo), 
 with those of Herbert de Losinga, &c. The one in question is partially printed, 
 pp. 124-126. The following extracts are material for our purpose; the words in 
 brackets, not given by Anstruther, are taken from Cott. MS Vitell. A xvii ff. 24- 
 26 : — ' Ouoniam diligentia sollicitudinis vestre per diversa mundi spacia multos ad 
 amorern"beate et gloriose Dei genitricis Marie ferventer accendit, que castis visceri- 
 bus perpetue virginitatis auctorem celi et terre Christum Dominum concepit et 
 peperit ; etiam in multis locis celebratur eius vestra sedulitate festa conceptio, quam 
 antiquitus apud patres veteres celebrare non consuevit Christiana religio. Unde in 
 ecclesia Dei cum a nobis Celebris ageretur illius diei festivitas, quidam post Sathan 
 abeuntes dixerunt esse ridiculum quod usque ad hec tempora omnibus fuisset seculis 
 inauditum. Et in livore ac felle sue malicie perdurantes duos episcopos qui tunc in 
 vicinio forte aderant Rogerum videlicet et Bernardum adeuntes convenerunt, ac de 
 novitate solennitatis exortae facta relatione animos eorum ad indignationem provo- 
 caverunt. Qui banc festivitatem prohibitam dicentes in concilio affirmaverunt quod 
 cassanda esset nee tenenda ista tradicio. Nos tamen cepto diei insistentes officio 
 cum gaudio gloriosam festivitatem exegimus et solenni tripudio. Postremo vero 
 emuli mei et qui canino dente bona invidentes rodunt aliorum, qui vanas suas in- 
 eptias semper nituntur approbare, et dicta et facta religiosorum moliuntur improbare, 
 nescientes secundum apostolum neque que loquuntur neque de quibus affirmant, 
 evomuere venenum iniquitatis sue et in me sagittas lingue pestifere iaculantes 
 asseverarunt tenendam non esse festivitatem [cuius primordia Romane ecclesie non 
 habent auctoritatem. Ouos me rationabiliter refellente et eis secundum maliciam 
 eorum respondente, multi testimonium perhibuerunt quoniam in hoc regno et in 
 transmarinis partibus a nonnullis episcopis et abbatibus in ecclesiis Dei Celebris 
 instituta est illius diei recordatio, de cuius summa redemptionis nostre salutari 
 processit exordio. . . . Et quia controversie scismata facientium, scandala mo- 
 ventium, heretice garrientium, obstruende sunt in domo Dei catholica veritate et 
 ecclesiastica defensione fidelium, ad hoc tendit stilus meus ut cum talibus religiosis 
 personis et litteratis de hac invidorum calumnia et genitricis Dei conceptione 
 gloriosa vel scripto vel verbo loquamini, qui et subtilia sancte scripture argumenta 
 non ignorent et vobiscum defendere contra inimicos veritatis causam beate virginis 
 Marie non formident]. Et quia dominus et pater noster Gillebertus Dei gratia 
 Lundoniensis episcopus vir admodum catholicus de his est sufficienter instructus, et 
 vir vite venerabilis domnus Hugo abbas Radingensis, qui banc festivitatem prece 
 etiam regis Henrici solenniter celebrat, in divinis et humanis est liberaliter edoctus, 
 hortor ut cum eis de hac eadem re sermonem instituatis, et ut eos coadiutores et 
 cooperatores habeatis [ne de vobis dictum ironice a vestris inimicis audiatis : Quia 
 hie homo cepit edificare et non potuit consummare. Hec iccirco dixerim quia vos 
 edificium tante solennitatis incepistis. Et vos perficite ; quodque per vos consum- 
 mandum est fideliter explete. Cumque usu atque experimento consuetudines 
 Komane noveritis ecclesie, si quid aliquando in ea dignum auctoritate de hac geni- 
 tricis Dei veneranda conceptione vel potuit vel poterit inveniri, per vos nobis 
 petiraus revelari].
 
 FEAST OF THE CONCEPTION 245 
 
 The ' we ' who kept the Feast of the Conception are, of course, 
 Osbert and the monks of Westminster. Gilbert's predecessor at 
 London died i6th January 1127; the vacancy of the see, it may be 
 presumed, was the reason why Osbert's ' emuh' ' (not improbably they 
 were to be found among the chapter of Saint Paul's, the dean whereof 
 caused no little rub in abbat Anselm's fortunes later on) addressed 
 themselves to the bishops of Salisbury (the King's most trusted coun- 
 cillor and minister) and Saint David's (Bernard had been Queen 
 Matilda's chaplain). The celebration it was desired to put a stop to 
 would accordingly be that of 8th December 1 127 ; the letter probably 
 would be written no long time after. 
 
 Next, it is not to be supposed that, had Saint Anselm, the arch- 
 bishop, actually prescribed the observance of the feast, even in the 
 single church of Canterbury, Osbert would have been silent on the 
 point. Had such been the case, what would have been more natural 
 in writing to the nephew than to bid him complete the work of his 
 uncle, to whom the younger Anselm had been bound by every tie of 
 gratitude and affection, and appeal to the holy archbishop's memory 
 in urging his requests ? But Osbert's words are : ' Vou have spread 
 the feast ; do you complete what j^// began.' 
 
 Again, it is evident that at that time the question of the feast was 
 no hole-and-corner affair. There were two parties, each with influen- 
 tial adherents. Though the answer of the bishops when appealed to 
 did not amount to an actual prohibition, the action of the monks 
 at Westminster must have seemed something like a challenge, if not 
 defiance. The matter was public, and both parties would probably 
 desire a settlement one way or the other. The preferences of the 
 King (who had a great share in managing the course of things in 
 the council of 11 29) were sufficiently declared ; the new bishop of 
 London, who then stood without a rival in Christendom as a ripe and 
 learned theologian, could be relied on to take the same side ; at the 
 time of his elevation to the episcopate he was canon of Lyons,^ and, 
 from what Osbert says of him, it would seem not impossible that he 
 may have already had a hand in establishing the feast in that church. 
 What more likely than, as the outcome of the conferences initiated by 
 abbat Anselm, it should have been determined to seize the oppor- 
 tunity of the council of 1 129 to bring the matter to an issue ? Osbert 
 and his friends were hardly likely to find again so favourable an 
 opportunity for the establishment of their views ; the King would 
 
 ' ' Ouidam ecclesiae Lugdunensis canonicus, vir probus et grandaevus,' says the 
 continuator of Florence of Worcester, ed. Thorpe, ii 89. For Gilbert generally see 
 Wright Biographia Brit. Lit. ii 103-104.
 
 346 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 frown down one sort of opposition, and bishop Gilbert with his 
 learning and repute could bear down heavily upon another.^ 
 
 It is certain that from this time the feast spread rapidly in England, 
 and in this country at least we hear of no further objections raised to 
 it. In view of all the circumstances I am disposed to think that, 
 although recorded in the Tewkesbury annals alone, the confirmation of 
 the Feast of the Conception of the Blessed Virgin by the council 
 of London of 1 129 is a fact. 
 
 Osbert's letter suggests these further considerations : 
 
 1. No reference is made in it to the observance of the feast in 
 England previous to the Conquest. But this silence can be explained. 
 The Normans in coming into England were disposed to treat in 
 a contemptuous fashion enough both English liturgical observances 
 and English saints and relics ; to them the Feast of the Conception of 
 the Blessed Virgin must have appeared specifically English, a product 
 of insular simplicity and ignorance. Doubtless its public celebration 
 was abolished at Winchester and Canterbury, but it did not die out of 
 the hearts of individuals ; the memory was kept up, and on the first 
 favourable opportunity the feast was re-established in the monasteries 
 again, as in them it had had its rise. 
 
 1. It is well to note the cautious expression of Osbert, who was apt 
 to make the most of things that told in his own favour : ' in hoc regno 
 et in transmarinis partibus a nonmdlis episcopis et abbatibus in ecclesiis 
 Dei Celebris instituta est illius diei recordatio '. 
 
 3. It is not improbable that this very letter may have given rise 
 later to the idea that the institution of the feast was to be attributed 
 to Anselm the saint instead of his nephew. There is every likelihood, 
 however, that the archbishop, as has been suggested, may have been 
 at least the ultimate cause of its establishment at Lyons, the first 
 church to adopt it, so far as appears, on the Continent. At Canter- 
 bury he must have known those who remembered to have kept the 
 solemnity in former days ; and he did not share in the prejudice of 
 most of his friends and compeers against English saints and ways. 
 The younger Anselm inherited this spirit of his uncle, so that, accord- 
 ing to Eadmer, the native English came to look on him as one of 
 
 ' [For all this story cf. The Bosworth Psalter pp. 43-53 ; see also Eadmeri 
 Monachi Cantuariensis Trnctatus de Conceptione Satictae Marine edited by the 
 Jesuit Fathers Herbert Thurston and Thomas Slater, Freiburg, Herder, 1904. I 
 may add in regard to the note on the last page — ' Hanc notulam ex parte edidit 
 saepe laudatus Edmundus Bishop . . . quam tamen prius indicaverat Dom Boni- 
 facius Wolff', &c. — that any knowledge abbat Wolff had in 1885 of the ' Notula de 
 Anselmo abbate S. Edmundi ' was communicated by me to my friend for use in his 
 article in the Benedictine Studieti und Mittheiltmgen : I had copied that Notula 
 so long ago as 1870 or 1871.]
 
 FEAST OF THE CONCEPTION 247 
 
 themselves ; and Osbert, urging his return to England from a journey, 
 writes : ' Redi ad patriam, tc omnes suspiramus,' &c. 
 
 It remains to add such notices as have occurred of the establishment 
 of the Feast of the Conception in English churches in the first half of 
 the twelfth century. 
 
 1. For Westminster and 
 
 2. Reading see above : in or before 1127. 
 
 3. From a note in one of the St Edimmdsbiiry cartularies we learn 
 that abbat Anselm established it in his own monastery, therefore 
 between 11 21 and 1148.^ 
 
 4. Abbat Geoffrey (11 19-1 146) at Saint A /dans ordered the feast 
 to be celebrated in cappis. This at St Albans was a feast of the 
 highest grade.^ 
 
 5. Abbat William Godeman seems to have introduced it at Gloucester 
 (iii3-ii3i).3 
 
 6. It was first celebrated in the abbey of Winchcovibe in the year 
 
 7. At Worcester Cathedral at some time after 1125.^ Among 
 
 ^ This note is in a fourteenth-century hand, but it is drawn from good memoirs. 
 The following is the material part :— ' Anselmus abbas ortus fuit in Langobardia et 
 monachus monasterii sancti Michaelis quod Clusa vocatur effectus, et post ad 
 Angliam ductus, etc. . . . Erat autem familiarissimus summis pontificibus maxime 
 Pascali, Calixto, Innocencio, Lucio et Eugenio, ut privilegia ab eis data testantur, et 
 omnem dignitatem et honorem pontificis preter hec que sine unccione olei non 
 possunt fieri ilium decreverunt habere, scilicet anulum, mitram et sandalia. Hie 
 Anselmus duas apud nos solemnitates instituit, scilicet concepcionem sancte Marie 
 que iam iti multis ecclesiis per ipsum celebriter observatur^ et commemoracionem 
 eius in adventu quam Hildefonsus episcopus instituit ; et cotidie unam missam de 
 ea, et post canonicas horas alias in honore eius celebrandas decrevit.' (Harl. MS 
 1005, ff. 217-218.) 
 
 ^ Gesta abb. ed. Riley, i 93. The feast is in the calendar of the Saint Albans 
 breviary, MS Reg, 2 A x, which, from the mention of Saint Giles's feast as only in 
 albis, seems to have been written before abbat Geoffrey's death. 
 
 ^ ' Istius vero tempore coepit primum celebrari apud nos in Anglia solemnitas 
 conceptionis beatae genetricis Mariae ' {Hist. Mon. S. Petri Gloucestriae, ed. Hart, 
 i 15). This is not absolutely cogent Tpxooifor Gloucester. 
 
 * The older Winchcombe annals, Cotton MS Tib. E iv, at 1 126: 'Ipso anno 
 primum cepit celebrari apud nos solennitas concepcionis sancte Marie' (cf. MS 
 Faustina B i, fol. 14b). The feast occurs in the Winchcombe calendar, of about 
 the middle of the twelfth century, in the same Tiberius MS. 
 
 ■' [In the Worcester annals at 1 125 is the entry : ' Conceptio beatae Mariae primo 
 celebratiir in Anglia' (ed. Luard, iv 377), but this hardly entitles us to assume 
 that this is the date of its introduction at Worcester.— A friend tells me that the 
 chronicle of John of Worcester (who used to be known as ' the Continiiator of 
 Florence'), p. 29 n., ed. J. R. H. Weaver in Anecdota Oxoniensia, 1908, under the 
 year 1129, has the following clause in G ('the Gloucester' MS) only: ' Inde in 
 concilio apud Lundoniam congregato in presentia eiusdem regis Henrici ex auctori- 
 tate apostolica confirmataest festivitas Conceptionis Sancte Dei genitricis Mariae.' 
 I presume the fact that John of Crema, the papal legate, presided at this council 
 is the warrant for the statement 'ex auctoritate apostolica'; but it should not be 
 forgotten that another and urgently interested 'authority' was also present, the 
 King, Henry Heauclerc]
 
 248 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Osbert's letters is one addressed to Warinus, dean of Worcester,^ 
 accompanying a sermon drawn up by him at Warin's request on the 
 Feast of the Conception of the Blessed Virgin, 'to excite in the minds 
 of the hearers a greater alacrity in the celebration of so great and 
 joyous a festival '.^ From this it may be concluded that the feast was 
 already at the date of the letter established at Worcester.^ He says 
 that he was encouraged by the favourable reception accorded to the 
 lessons for the feast of Saint Anne, which (as appears from another 
 letter, to bishop Simon of Worcester) he had been asked to write by 
 dean Warin and bishop Simon when they were all three attending 
 the funeral of an abbat of Pershore. Unfortunately, the series of 
 abbats at Pershore is very imperfect (jumping from iioato 1138), and 
 does not help us to the date.* But there is another matter, bringing 
 us back to the Helsin legend, which must not be passed over here. 
 Immediately after the letter to Warin there is in the MS a piece 
 entitled ' De Conceptione sancte Marie qualiter primo celebrandi 
 habuit initium ' ; and thereon follows — the Helsin legend. Here, then, 
 it may be supposed we have the author. But a little attention throws 
 much doubt on that point, for it will be found that, though the 
 imitation is fairly good, the title has been altered by a later hand 
 (the last five words being added), which has erased the last lines of 
 this page (folio 99 b) and inserted two new folios (100 and loi), 
 writing over the space thus gained the Helsin legend, which finishes 
 so as to leave just room enough on the second inserted folio (101) to 
 copy what had been erased on 99 b, and with folio 102 the original 
 hand of the MS resumes. The interpolator is probably of the twelfth 
 century ; but what Osbert really sent to Worcester is the piece 
 
 * Warinus seems to have been monastic dean ; the later deans mentioned in the 
 Worcester annals are secular priests. He is probably identical with the Warinus 
 among the Worcester community in the Durham Liber Vitae p. 14 col. 3. 
 
 "^ The following portions of the letter are of interest ; the words in brackets have 
 been omitted by Anstruther, p. 156 : ' Rogasti me pater Warine venerabilis decane 
 Wigorniensis ecclesie ut aliquid scribendo tibi de conceptione beatissime ac per- 
 petue virginis Marie deberem innuere quod [ad celebranda tante festivitatis gaudia 
 animos posset audientium alacrius incitare ' — his incompetence ; his belief on the 
 subject. ' Desinant ergo infideles et heretic! de hac sancta solennitate in sua 
 vanitate multiplicia loqui (cf. the " vanas ineptias " of his London adversaries above, 
 p. 244 n. i) et discant quia filii matris gratie non de actu peccati celebritatem faciunt 
 sed de primitiis redemptionis nostre] . . . sermonevi tibi transmitto qualicunque 
 vulgar! lima minus decenter artificiali decore politum. . . . [Vale pater in Christo et 
 sancte novitatis incudem aggredi solenniter tali ne pigriteris exordio].' (MS Vitellius 
 A xvii, ff. 98-99.) 
 
 ' Cotton MS Vitellius A xvii, f. 45 &c. This piece is a highly curious 
 document for the cultus of Saint Anne, whose feast seems to have been kept at 
 Worcester with an octave ; the bishop supplied a pittance on the day, the dean on 
 the octave. 
 
 * [This meeting at Pershore was perhaps in 1137, for the funeral of Wido, 
 ex-abbat of Pershore (see the article of the Dean of Wells cited above, p. 242 n. 4).]
 
 FEAST OF THI-: CONCEPTION 249 
 
 fol. loib-iOQb, made up of pious generalities in his tumid style, 
 without any mention of Helsin whatever, and entitled * Item sermo de 
 Conceptione sancte Marie '. It would be interesting to know how the 
 case stands with the Gale MS at Trinity College, Cambridge. But it 
 may be permitted to remark here and now (i) on the absence ot any 
 mention in documents certainly penned by Osbert of this 'superna 
 revelatio ', which would have been most convenient for his purpose ; 
 
 (2) that the source of the note in the Exchequer Ramsey cartulary as 
 to abbat Helsin's institution of the feast is this narrative itself; 
 
 (3) that the old Ramsey history (the Stowe MS is the only one we 
 have been able to consult) has a great gap from the point where Gale's 
 print leaves off to the accession of abbat Walter, and, therefore, 
 further information on the subject is not to be expected from it. 
 
 To sum up, rather coniectando than affirviaiido, though we think the 
 facts adduced would warrant a more positive tone : 
 
 1. The feast of the Conception of the Blessed Virgin seems to 
 have originated in England,^ and specifically among the monks of 
 Winchester. 
 
 2. It was prevalent and firmly established before the Conquest, 
 when it suffered some eclipse. 
 
 3. Saint Anselm probably became familiarized with it here, and 
 although he may have contributed indirectly to its institution at Lyons, 
 he did not prescribe its observance in England. 
 
 Its revival is mainly due to the influence of the younger Anselm, 
 and was formally sanctioned by a council of English bishops in the 
 year 11 29. 
 
 5. The current story in regard to abbat Helsin of Ramsey, though 
 it eventually found its way into several breviaries,- is in the highest 
 degree doubtful.^ 
 
 1 The celebration at Naples, or rather its occurrence in the Marble Calendar, is 
 a mere isolated appearance ; it was not a living germ. [See now as to this the 
 Supplementary Note, p. 250 below.] Until more trustworthy evidence is forthcoming 
 for Spain we may acquiesce in the words of Lesley : * Festivitas ista ignota erat 
 Gotho-hispanis : earn a Gallis suscepisse videntur Mozarabes, quorum more die 
 viii Decembris in Missali . . . et in Breviario . . . colitur' {Missale mixtum dtctum 
 Mozarabes ab Alex. Lesleo, IT SS^?- ^9)- . _, , . 
 
 ^ That of which Langebek prints the lessons is monastic ; the Helsin story seems 
 also to be given in the Schleswig breviary. Jos. Sim. Assemannus mentions (A'^r/. 
 £cc/. Univ. v 440 sq.) a breviary of about .\.D. 1300 in the archives of Saint 
 Peter's, and another in the Vatican Librar>', once belonging to Matthias Coryinus, 
 with the same lessons. They also occur in a MS breviary of the Congregation of 
 Saint Justina of Padua, saec. xv, penes me. 
 
 3 [In The Bosivorth r Salter (1908) pp. 43-53 ^ dealt with the case from another 
 point of view. What now follows is a detailed treatment of some points there but 
 briefly indicated.]
 
 250 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 SUPPLEMENTARY NOTE 
 
 (See p. 242 note 2.) 
 
 The ' Irish Origins ' of the Feast of the Conception. 
 
 [On re-reading the foregoing paper for the present reprint, two 
 passages of the original print of 1886 struck me as particularly 
 demanding modification : {a) ' The evidence seems to point to this, 
 that the establishment of the feast is due to the monks of Winchester, 
 disciples of St Ethehvold ' (cf now p. 242 above) ; {b) ' The celebration 
 at Naples, or rather its occurrence in the marble calendar, is a mere 
 isolated appearance ; it was not a living germ' (p. 249 note i). 
 
 In the thirty years that have elapsed since the paper first 
 appeared much has been written concerning the earlier history of 
 the feast of the Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary in various 
 parts of Europe ; especially on the occasion of the great celebration or 
 congress held in Rome in 1904 to mark the jubilee (or half-jubilee) of 
 the definition of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception by Pope 
 Pius IX in 1854. For this celebration many preparations were made, 
 and articles were written to throw light on the origins and on various 
 aspects of the feast itself. I need here mention only two : 
 
 (i) In France a great search was made in ancient calendars, &c., to 
 discover the earliest traces of the observance of the feast. The result 
 of all this labour is given in an article by P. Aug. Noyon S. J., in the 
 Paris Etndes of 20 September 1904, in these words : ' . . . c'est d'outre- 
 Manche que vint, pour notre pays, le culte de la Conception.' Indeed, 
 so far as concerns countries north of the Alps generally, the origins 
 of the feast are wholly insular ; and we can confine our attention to 
 these islands. 
 
 (2) In the Month for May 1904 Father Herbert Thurston S. J. printed 
 a paper entitled ' The Irish origins of our Lady's Conception Feast ', 
 which was supplemented in the December number by a second article 
 entitled * England and the Immaculate Conception '. The kind of 
 impression left on interested readers of these two papers may be con- 
 veniently given in the words of a paper, * Les origines de la fete et du 
 dogme de I'lmmaculee Conception ', in the third series of his Etudes 
 de critique et d'histoire religiense (Paris, Lecoffre, 191 2, pp. 226-227) 
 by the abbe Vacandard, who had interested himself in this question 
 so long ago as 1893. After stating that in the West, as in the East, 
 the institution of the feast of the Conception of St John the Baptist 
 (which became common in the ninth and tenth centuries) seemingly 
 occasioned the institution of a similar feast for the Blessed Virgin
 
 FEAST OF THE CONCEPTION 251 
 
 Mary, M. Vacandard continues : ' The Fdirc of Oengus [besides a 
 feast of the Conception of St John Baptist] contains also the feast 
 of the Conception of Mary. And the same is the case with three other 
 calendars of Irish origin which are of the same date [i. e. ninth century] 
 or the century following.' He then adds these comments on his own 
 account : ' It is necessary to observe, however, that in these documents 
 the date of the solemnity is not fixed at 8 or 9 December, but varies 
 from I to 3 May. We will not enquire here as to the cause of this 
 singular fact. Fr Thurston believes that it comes from an Egyptian 
 tradition, more precisely a Coptic one. However that may be, one 
 positive fact remains acquired to knowledge, that in Ireland the feast 
 of the Conception of Mary is inserted in the calendars, if it was not 
 celebrated in the churches, as early as the ninth century.' It will be 
 observed that M. Vacandard is not content merely with summarizing, 
 but here for his own share in the matter makes his reserves : ' if it 
 was not celebrated in the churches ', &c. 
 
 In the present note I propose to deal with the case of the origins 
 once more ; and I would do so (if I can) positively, but above all distmcte^ 
 and avoid proceeding confusedly or in a literary manner. But first of 
 all it will be well to be clear as to what precisely I want to know. We 
 are now certain that the feast at present celebrated was derived and 
 borrowed specifically from England sometime in the first half of the 
 twelfth century ; and it was thus that it gradually spread through the 
 countries of western Europe. What I want, if possible, to know is, 
 how it first got to be established in England, and from whence did the 
 English get it. The question may be raised : Is it worth while to take 
 particular pains in the matter at all ? In these days much is to be heard 
 of ' developement ' and ' evolution '. Here is a case in which the pheno- 
 menon, in regard to religious ideas and beliefs, may be observed and 
 examined under peculiarly, I may indeed say uniquely, favourable 
 circumstances : first in the observance of piety in the eleventh century, 
 and in the twelfth with a growing consciousness of the theological 
 implications of the case ; then at the end of the thirteenth century 
 speculative theology in a scholastic form deduces a definite doctrine, no 
 part of the cominunis sensus of the Schools (and in some measure, it 
 may perhaps be said, counter to that soisus). but eventually penetrating 
 and dominating, so that in our own day the dogma is solemnly pro- 
 claimed as of revealed truth. I think then that, dull as the enquiry 
 may be, it is worth all the trouble that may be involved to ' fix ' as 
 exactly as possible the point of departure, its situation and the 
 surrounding circumstances. 
 
 I. First, in company with abbe Vacandard, we will start with the 
 documents that have been called ' Irish Calendars '. These, to my
 
 252 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 knowledge, are three in number : (a) that of Oengus, the date of which 
 Dr Whitley Stokes in his second edition (Henry BradshawSoc.vol.xxix, 
 1905), correcting his first ideas of 1880, now on philological grounds 
 considers ' may be safely ascribed to the year 800 or thereabouts ' (p. vii ; 
 cf. p. xxxviii) ; (d) the Martyrology of Tallaght, assigned to the end of 
 the ninth or the early tenth century ; (c) the metrical calendar edited 
 from three MSS, the oldest copy of which ' is believed to date from 
 the first half of the tenth century (Hampson Medii aevi Kalendariuni 
 i pp. 397-420). 
 
 II. It will be convenient to take the first two documents together. 
 In the beginning of the ninth century Oengus at 3 May has the simple 
 entry : ' The great feast of the Virgin Mary ', without statement of cha- 
 racter or object. The Martyrology of Tallaght, at the end of the ninth 
 century, at the same day (3 May) is perfectly specific : ' Mariae virginis 
 conceptio.' This being so, there is call to ask ourselves whether it is 
 likely or unlikely that in the mind of Oengus his' great feast of Mary ' 
 was the feast of her Conception. I think it will not do to deal with the 
 case, as has hitherto been done, by the consideration of a single snippet. 
 We must look further afield, and enquire what were the feasts of Mary 
 thought by Oengus worthy of registration in his Martyrology. They 
 are seven in number: {a) 18 January 'the great death of Jesu's 
 Mother ' \ {b) i April ' one of Mary's feasts ' ; (^) 3 May, as above ; 
 (d) I July 'on the marvellous calends of July Mary whom Matthew 
 magnifies' {plus Aaron, and Simon and Thaddaeus) ; {e) 15 August 
 ' the great feast of her commemoration ' ; (/) 16 August ' the Nativity 
 of Mary ' ; (^) 8 September ' thou shalt commemorate Mary '. 
 
 The Martyrology of Oengus cannot be understood without continual 
 reference to the Epternach MS {Ept) of the Hieronymian Martyro- 
 logy, a MS in insular script of A. D. 730 circiter. In this MS the 
 death, ' depositio of St Mary', is recorded at 18 Jan., i.e. the Galilean 
 feast of the Assumption ; the Nativity of the B. V. at 16 Aug. There 
 are no entries of a Marian feast at 15 Aug. or 8 Sept. Thus Oengus 
 at the end of the eighth century adopts the two feasts of Ept, but gives 
 in addition the two feasts of 15 Aug. and 8 Sept. which had in the 
 course of the seventh century been introduced into the West under 
 the influence of Constantinople : designating these two, however, 
 simply as ' commemorations '. Thus {a) (e) (/) and (^) are now 
 accounted for. As regards (b), I suggest that this is taken from the 
 following entry of a martyr at kal. apr. in Epi : ' It. ces Mariae.' ^ As 
 to (d) I have no suggestion to make. 
 
 ' In the so-called 'Athelstan Psalter' Cotton MS Galba A xviii, for which see 
 p. 141 note I above. 
 
 * Until the publication of the M artyrologiwn Cambrense (i. e. Ricemarch's
 
 FEAST OF THE CONCEPTION 253 
 
 With this material before mc I am to ask myself the question 
 whether— with his ' death ' (Assumption) of Mary 18 Jan. and Nativity 
 on 16 Aug. (as in Ept) and his adoption at 8 Sept. of a feast of Mary 
 which is our feast of her Nativity but was only called by him a 
 'commemoration' of her— Oengus in entering at 3 May 'the great 
 feast of Mary ' conceived himself as entering the feast of her Con- 
 ception. Left to myself, I cannot think so, but must look to others 
 for the necessary ' motives of credibility ' in this matter : and I would 
 observe in passing that this particular question has not been, I will 
 not say dealt with, but even raised by any writer whose work has 
 come in my way. 
 
 By the end of the ninth century, with the Martyrology of Tallaght, 
 the question is clearly decided, and the neutral entry of 3 May in 
 Oengus becomes ' Mariae virginis conceptio '. Here then at length 
 we have something solid to go upon. I must leave it to others to 
 enquire into the cycle of Marian feasts in this document : recalling, 
 however, at this point the prudent reserve of the Abbe Vacandard in 
 speaking of the entry of the Conception in Irish calendars from the 
 ninth century: ' si elle [i. e. the feast] n'est celebree dans les eglises' ; 
 and recalling, too, how the recent heortologist Dr Kellner considers 
 that ' the mention of the feast in the Irish calendars does not prove 
 the celebration of the feast, but only the erudition of the writers of 
 that country' (Vacandard u. s. p. 227, and note 3). 
 
 III. We now come to the metrical calendar designated {c) at p. 252 
 above. Those who are interested in seeing how this document comes 
 to be designated as an ' Irish calendar ' may consult Fr Thurston's 
 first article (pp. 5-9 of the separate print). But I would remark that 
 
 Martyrology, reproduced in facsimile by the Henry Bradshaw Society in the 
 following year) by P^re H. Delehaye [Anal. Bolland. tome xxxii, 1913, pp. 
 369-407) this commemoration was to be found in no other MS, except as an after- 
 thought in cod. S (see de Rossi and Duchesne, p. xiv). In Mart. Cambr. at i Apr. 
 is this entry : ' et in Caesarea Mariae ' (p. 390).— At p. 373 P^re Delehaye remarks : 
 ' Maioris moment! est paucis ostendere libellum nostrum e stirpe esse quam dicunt 
 Britannicam, et cum i:pternacensi et Augiensi arte cognatum videri. Quae cum 
 optima et antiquissima sit hieronymianorum progenies, cuius et rationibus melius 
 perspiciendis haud leve afferat adiumentum, quanta sit martyrologii Cambrensis 
 praestantia et utilitas facile erit ostendere.' He then proceeds pp. 373-375 to shew 
 by examples its close affinity with Ept\ and continues p. 375 as follows: 'His 
 satis superque demonstratum esse existimo ex optima progenie . . . codicem 
 Dublinensem [Ricemarch's MS is now at Trinity College, Dublin] originem ducere. 
 Nee minus certum videtur epitomatori exemplum Epternacensi plenius prae 
 manibus fuisse ' ; he adds pp. m-in a series of entries which shew that there 
 must have existed in England up to a comparatively late date a copy or copies of 
 the Hieronymian Martyrology in its final redaction superior to the Epternach copy 
 which alone has survived. I may add that the examination of the early English 
 calendars for the purpose of The Bosworth Psalter had brought home to me (see 
 what is said pp. 149, 150, 152-153) through indications supplied by our early 
 calendars that some such insular tradition of the Hieronymian Martyroloca- in a text 
 akin to Ept must have been accessible to their compilers. "
 
 254 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 the late Dr Whitley Stokes, who has done the hagiologist and liturgist 
 such inestimable service by his second edition of Oengus, would have 
 been the first to disclaim any special competence in either hagiology 
 or liturgy. In 1880 (first ed.) he saw a few entries that are indubit- 
 ably Irish, and jumped to the conclusion that this metrical calendar 
 itself is an Irish document. I have said a word above about the 
 danger of dealing with documents of this class by means of snippets. 
 If we are to reach anything like safety in our conclusions about them 
 they must be considered and examined as wholes. This I have tried 
 to do to the best of my ability in the case of the metrical calendar 
 printed by Hampson from the Galba and two other MSS. I propose 
 here to register the results of this examination, and my conclusions, in 
 the briefest form possible. 
 
 IV. Anyone really acquainted with calendarial matters, on perusing 
 this calendar will very soon begin to recognize that the backbone of it 
 is the Sanctorale of the Gregoriammi — not pure, but with the addition 
 of some old ' Gelasian ' feasts discarded in Greg but (by means of 
 ' Gelas saec. viii ') brought back into use in the later years of the ninth 
 century. 
 
 On this hint I proceed to compare with the metrical calendar, which 
 has a line for every day of the year, the calendar contained in MS 
 Bodl. Junius 27, now assigned by palaeographers to the first half of 
 the tenth century. This is not a full calendar, but only a set of extracts 
 from one. That the two documents are closely related to each other 
 is at once clear from the fact that out of some ninety-five entries in 
 all the Junius calendar in twenty-three cases has a verse identical with 
 that in the metrical calendar, instead of a calendar entry in the usual 
 style. Moreover it appears on examination that in nine or ten cases 
 the name of a usual * sacramentary ' saint is given instead of the name 
 found in the corresponding line of the metrical calendar. Hence, apart 
 from the entries of vigils and octaves, it appears that the writer of the 
 Junius calendar does not wholly depend on the metrical calendar, 
 but had before him, in his work of compiling, a ' practical ' Church 
 calendar like that also before the writer of the metrical calendar. Thus 
 then we have two co-temporary testimonies to the character and 
 contents of that * practical ' Church calendar. 
 
 But we must not stop here. On comparing these two independent 
 witnesses of the early years of the tenth century with the two pre- 
 conquest Winchester calendars still extant — that of Newminster in 
 MS Titus D xxvii, and that of the Cathedral in MS Vitellius E xviii 
 (printed by Hampson i pp. 435-446, 422-433) — it appears (so it seems 
 to me) as an inevitable conclusion from the evidence, that the 'practical' 
 calendar used by the writers of the metrical calendar and that of Junius
 
 FEAST OF THE CONCEPTION 255 
 
 27 is the calendar from which the two Winchester calendars of the 
 eleventh century derive. 
 
 V. But there is something further still. Besides ' sacramentary ' 
 saints, ' martyrological ' saints, and insular saints, our four calendars 
 (the metrical and Junius calendars and the two Winchester ones) 
 compared together witness to the presence in the common basic 
 ' practical ' calendar of a certain small number of foreign local saints. 
 These are: Vedastus and Amandus (6 Feb.), Austroberta (11 Feb.), 
 Wulmar (20 July), Bertin (5 Sept.), Audomarus (9 Sept.). It will be 
 observed that all these are saints whose cult prevailed in that tract of 
 country just opposite our shores which goes to-day by the name of the 
 Pas-de-Calais. 
 
 VI. These are the facts in the light of which we have to consider 
 the Irish entries, that is the entries shewing Irish influence, in the 
 metrical calendar. So far as I can make out they are twenty-four 
 in number out of a total of 365 entries.^ But there are other 
 indications of Irishry. When I read, for instance, at 31 Jan.: ' Ab 
 
 ^ They may be divided into two classes : (a) the feasts of native Irish saints ; 
 (d) feasts of Irish origin ; by ' Irish origin ' I here mean feasts which the compiler 
 of the metrical calendar drew from Irish sources ; these latter again fall into two 
 classes : feasts which are of Irish local ' invention' (e. g. the ' feast of the Saints of 
 Europe ' 20 Apr.) and those derived from foreign sources (as e. g. the Finding of the 
 Head of St Paul 25 Feb., and the Finding of the Head of St John Baptist 27 Feb.), 
 
 The three MSS preserving the metrical calendar are : the Cotton MSS Galba 
 A xviii (G), Tiberius B v (T) and Julius A vi (J). — The Julius IMS in some cases 
 substitutes for the original ' Irish ' feast some commonplace martyrological saint. 
 In the following list it is to be assumed that, unless otherwise stated, the feast is 
 recorded in all three MSS. Under (d) I have noted if a commemoration is found 
 in any of the three ancient MSS {Ep^ Bern Wissenb) of the Hieronymian 
 Martyrology. 
 
 {a) Feasts of Native Irish Saints. 
 
 I. Jan. 14 Fursey (J substitutes Felix). — 2. Jan. 31 Aed (J subst. a line for the 
 last day of January). — 3. Feb. I Brigid (G illegible; name supplied by Hampson 
 from T ; as he gives no variant, it is assumed J reads as T). — 4. Feb. 1 7 Fintan 
 (J subst. Crissanius). — 5. Feb. 26 Comgan (J subst. Nestortus).— b. March 17 
 Patrick. — 7. June 3 Coemgen.— 8. June 9 Columba (J subst. Feitcianus). — 
 9. June II Mactail. — 10. July 7 Maelruen. 
 
 {b) Feasts of ' Irish origin '. 
 
 II. Jan. II : note in the verse of the metrical calendar the word ' Memphiticis', 
 and cf. Oengus ad diem: 'out of Egypt Mary's great Son'. — 12. Feb. 25 : 'caput 
 . . . reperlum', i.e. Finding of the Head of St Paul; cf. Oengus ad diem. — 13. 
 Feb. 27 : ' caput . . . ostenditur', i.e. Finding of the Head of St. John the Baptist ; 
 cf. Oengus ad diem.— Mi,. March 9 '40,000 soldiers'; cf. Oengus ad diem '40 
 soldiers' (so too Ept and Bern; 40,000 Wissenb).— x^. Mar. 15 Luke and 
 James: cf. Oengus aa' r/zVw (and in Bertt). — 16. March 26 Montanus ; cf. Oengus 
 at 25th (in Ept at 26th).— 17. Mar. 28 Mary (Magd., cf. Oeng. ad d.). — 18. Apr. 20 
 Feast of the Saints of Europe; cf. Oengus ad dtem.— i(). Apr. 24 The Three 
 Children ; cf. Oengus ad diem (and in Ept Bern Wissenb) ; J subst. T/ieo, — 
 20. May 2 Conception of B. V. (G illegible); J. subst. Commine; cf. Oengus at 
 May 3 : ' the great feast of Mary'.— 21. May 8 Michael Archangel; cf. Oengus at 
 May 9.-22. May 21 Matthew (G has no name); supplied from T; J subst. 
 Timothy \ 'Matthew' not in Oengus (but in Ept and />Vr;/).— 23. Aug. 26 
 ' Abundus ' ; see Oengus ad diem : ' The triumph of Abundius the martyr to heaven 
 with a very pious host '.—24. Oct. 7 Matthew ; cf. Oengus ad diem (in Ept).
 
 256 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 lani fines figat Aed famina ferria/ or at 5 June : ' Hie prepides tem- 
 ptant avida concludera rostra,' I seem to catch unmistakable echoes of 
 the manner and style of true old Irish scholarship ; and personally, 
 I have no doubt whatever that the author of this calendar, of these 
 ^6^ lines of verse, was an Irishman. But I would add (a) that his two 
 lines recording the death of Alfred at 26 Oct. and his queen Ealhswith 
 at 8 Dec. — ' Aelfred rex obiit septenis et quoque amandus ' ; and 
 ' Quinta tenet veram dominam anglorum Ealhswithe ' — are both 
 lines witnessed to by the excerptor in the calendar of the Junius 
 MS 37, and formed, there can be no possible reason for doubting, 
 part of the metrical calendar as originally composed ; [d) that internal 
 evidence shews that the author of the metrical calendar used a Missal, 
 or the calendar of a Missal, just such as might be expected to be found 
 in — to have been brought to — England and the court at Winchester in 
 Alfred's day ; (c) that in these circumstances the Irish entries cannot 
 be viewed as having any practical or cultual value at all, and do not 
 represent feasts actually celebrated, but are of the nature of literary 
 and patriotic ornament ; (d) that this last remark holds good in par- 
 ticular for the entry of the Conception at 2 May (in Oengus at 3 May) : 
 until, at all events, it is shewn that there be found any trace of the 
 observance of such a feast in England in the tenth or early in the 
 eleventh century — I take it, an utterly hopeless quest. 
 
 VII. It would appear then that we have in our metrical calendar the 
 production of one of those nameless Scotti mentioned by Asser,^ who- 
 found their way to Alfred's court ; and, though it cannot in our sense 
 be considered an Irish document, but rather English, it is in the highest 
 degree interesting as the only liturgical document that comes down 
 to us from Alfred's times or the early days of Edward the Elder; 
 and from the point of view both of liturgy and of Alfred it deserves 
 much more attention than it has hitherto received. 
 
 I now pass for the moment into the region of pure conjecture : if it 
 were suggested that the ' practical ' calendar, utilized by the wandering 
 Irish scholar at Winchester, was brought there by Grimbald, the monk 
 of St-Bertin, I could but answer that such a suggestion quite falls in' 
 with the data of the case so far as these are known to me. 
 
 VIII. And now we may come at last to the origins of that historical 
 feast of the Conception observed throughout the West to-day. And 
 here, so far as concerns our English documents of the eleventh century, 
 this feast must not be dealt with by itself. There is another that 
 stands in intimate connexion with it : both appearing together and both 
 
 ' Mon. Hist. Brit. p. 486 A, B ; ed. W. H. Stevenson, p. 60. Some sort of detailed 
 tradition of these persons seems to have existed still in Ethelwerd's days (see his- 
 narrative ibid. p. 517 D to 518 A).
 
 FEAST OF THE CONCEPTION 257 
 
 together disappearing in the Norman ecclesiastical settlement after 
 the Conquest. In the two Winchester calendars there is, besides the 
 Conception on 8 Dec, this entry at 21 Nov. : ' Oblatio sanctae Mariae 
 in templo cum asset trium annorum.' This entry might at first sight 
 appear as if one of that class of ' historical ' memoranda so well known 
 in our ancient calendars, like ' Adam creatus est ', ' Egressus Noe de 
 area ', &c. ; or events in the life of our Lord so well represented in 
 Oengus. But such an impression would be incorrect : it is a real 
 ' liturgical ' feast, and was actually observed in practice. Assurance of 
 the fact is supplied by the Canterbury Cathedral Benedictional, from 
 which has been given above (p. 240) the episcopal benediction for the 
 feast of the Conception. In its proper place in this Benedictional 
 (i.e. between the feasts of St Martin, 11 Nov., and St Cecily, 22 Nov., 
 f. i86») is a ' Benedictio de praesentatione sancte Marie'. This is that 
 feast of the Presentation which, after appearing in our English books 
 of Winchester and Canterbury, only to disappear again, was started in 
 Latin Christendom in the later decades of the fourteenth century : our 
 English essay of three hundred and fifty years earlier being forgotten 
 by all the world iisque in hodiermim diem. 
 
 How are we to account for the presence of these two feasts thus here 
 in England ? When this paper was written thirty years ago the Marble 
 Calendar of Naples, assigned to the close of the tenth century, was the 
 only western document outside England known to give a liturgical feast 
 of the Conception. It does not give the feast of 21 Nov. ; ^ and it seemed 
 
 1 It has instead at 21 Nov. ' Gamoniae et Gutiae ' : ' fidenter corrig.', says Mazochi, 
 ' Samonae et Guriae. Ex Graecor. libris Gurias et Samonas mm. Edesseni . . . 
 cum quibus in Menol. Basil. Abibus iungitur, quamvis alibi et sub Licmio passus. 
 Horum Neapoli erat olim ecclesia in regione Nidi ', &c. [De sandorum Nea- 
 politanae ecclesiae episcoporum cultu dissertatio p. 318). It would be mterestmg 
 to know by what steps, by what medium, these Syriac saints came to have a church, 
 at Naples in the ninth (?) century; their cult, or rather the mention of them 
 in calendars, spread curiously later, and they are found in English calendars 
 of the eleventh century. Dom Connolly supplies me with the following further 
 particulars concerning them : The original Syriac Acts of the martyrs iShamona 
 and Guria were first published by Mgr Rahmani Acta Sanctorum Lon/essorum 
 Guriae et Shavionae (Rome, 1899); the Greek and other versions by E. yon 
 DobschiJtz Die Akten der edessenischen Bekenner Gurjas, Sa?nonas und Abiboi 
 (in Texte u. Untersuch., Leipzig, 191 1) ; the Syr. text of Rahmani has been reprinted 
 with English translation and an introductory study by Professor F. C. Burkitt in 
 Euphemia and the Goth (Text and Translation Society, London, 191 3). The Acts 
 of Habib were published by Cureton in his Ancient Syriac Documents (1864) ; 
 and again by Burkitt op. cit. ; the versions by v. Dobschiitz op. ctt. There was a 
 definite cult of them at Edessa in St Ephrem's day (t 373) ; he writes in his hymns 
 on St Julian Saba (of unquestioned authenticity) : ' Lo, in thee L = our landj resound 
 the festivals of Guria, Habib and Shamona' (ed. Lamy iii col. 855). And in his 
 Nisibene Hyinns (no. xxxiii): 'Per ossa Joannis (sc. Baptistae), quorum est 
 (particula) in regione nostra, prophetae venerunt ad terrain nostram. Per Gunani 
 et Samonam et socium eorum Chabib martyres venerunt et visitaverunt nos 
 (Bickell S. Ephraemi Syri Carmina Nisibena, Leipzig, 1 866, pp. 138-139)- The 
 early Syriac Calendar (written 411-412) places the martyrdom of Habib on 2 Sept., 
 that of Guria and Shamona on 15 Nov. 
 leet S
 
 258 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 loose method to knit up the commemorations of our eleventh-century 
 English books with it. A glance at the documents set forth at pp. 83, 84 
 of T. Toscani's Ad Typica Graecorum Animadversiojtes (Rome, Typ. 
 de Prop. Fid., 1864) will shew the need of proceeding cautiously in such 
 a case. Dmitrievsky's volume of Typica (annual Directories of church 
 services: in English, 'Pyes'), bearing the date 1895, with its print of 
 Constantinopolitan documents of as early a date as the ninth and 
 tenth centuries, gives us firm standing ground ; for in these earliest 
 extant Constantinopolitan typica^ are to be found both feasts, on 
 21 Nov. that of the Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary in the 
 Temple, and on 9 Dec. that of her Conception. We may now therefore 
 conclude with practical certainty that in Greek monasteries newly 
 founded or renewed in Lower and Middle Italy in the tenth and 
 eleventh centuries both these feasts were already received and estab- 
 lished as traditional. 
 
 As to the persons by whom, or the circumstances in which, the two 
 feasts were brought from Italy to England, I do not propose to labour 
 the subject here. The question can be discussed at length by those 
 who may feel a call to do so. But I allow myself a brief general 
 remark and two particular suggestions. 
 
 There has yet to be worked out — it would require a volume, and 
 it is a task worth undertaking — in complete detail, down to matters so 
 trivial as feasts, cults, relics, commerce of books, &c., the question of 
 the relations of England with the Continent from, say, 900 to the 
 accession of Edward the Confessor in 1042. We must endeavour to 
 realize, for instance, the trains that followed archbishop after arch- 
 bishop on pilgrimage in quest of the pallium, and what these must 
 have meant for the importation of foreign and outlandish ways into so 
 aspiring and modern an England as that of the tenth century. 
 
 As to particular occasions that suggest themselves as not unlikely to 
 have brought about the importation of our two feasts into England : 
 there is the long stay of King Canute in Rome in 1027, with all the 
 great ceremonies he assisted at — the Roman Lent and Holy Week, 
 leading up to the great occasion of the coronation of the Emperor 
 Conrad II in St Peter's on Easter day. Canute has left on record in 
 a letter from himself^ the deep religious impressions made upon him 
 during this sojourn in Rome ; and there is no reason to suppose that 
 he alone was thus impressed : doubtless it was to more cases than one 
 that the old adage applied — ' like master like man'. 
 
 * A. Dmitrievsky Opisanie liturghiceskikh rukopisei, &c., i (Kiev, 1895) pp. 25, 
 29 ; and 203, 205. 
 
 ^ Preserved in Florence of Worcester A. D. 1031 {Mon. Hist. Bnt. pp. 596-597)> 
 and William of Malmesbury ' Gesta regum anglorum ', ed. Hardy, pp. 308-313.
 
 FEAST OF THE CONCEPTION 259 
 
 Or there is another possible occasion in 1022, when 'archbishop 
 Ethelnoth went to Rome and was there received by Benedict the 
 honourable Pope with much worship ', and by him * hallowed archbishop 
 with his own hands ', &c. And there was a train here too, among the 
 rest, abbat Leofwine of Ely, who was so honourably acquitted 'of 
 everything that was said against him '. — And as regards the Greeks 
 and Greek observances in Rome, the most recent research increasingly 
 shews the importance and influence in the ecclesiastical world of the 
 Greek monastery of St Sabas. So there was plenty of opportunity 
 for learning Greek ways and fashions in liturgy or devotion. 
 
 I have no intention of arguing the questions involved one way or the 
 other, but am content to state in a simple fashion the facts relating to 
 the two feasts as found in England in the eleventh century — facts that 
 certainly seem to call for an explanation — and to point to the way (so 
 far as I can see, the only way) along which that explanation is reasonably 
 to be found. 
 
 Before closing I should like to repeat what I said in the Bosworth 
 Psalter (p. 45 note 9, and see p. 175) as to the existence of a copy 
 (in MS Bodl. Auct. D 4. 18, olim NE C 4. 11) of the once famous 
 treatise of Nicholas of St Albans against St Bernard on the subject of 
 the feast of the Conception, which has been believed to be lost.] 
 
 S2
 
 XI 
 
 ORIGINS OF THE COPE AS A CHURCH 
 VESTMENT 1 
 
 In this paper I propose to examine the liturgical origins of the cope, 
 and hope to make it clear and easy to understand how and why it was 
 that, in the times when cope and chasuble were both in use in the 
 services of the later mediaeval church, the most ignorant person knew 
 well enough that the chasuble was the vestment in which a priest 
 would offer the sacrifice of the Mass, and the cope was not. 
 
 And first it would be well to have a clear notion of the precise 
 relation, as a mere matter of shape and form, existing between the 
 two vestments, cope and chasuble, at the time when they began to be 
 in general use together. It has been often said that a cope in the 
 origin was a chasuble — of course the old form of chasuble — cut open 
 in front. The actual state of the case (so far as the mere shape and 
 form of the piece of stuff is concerned) is to be more correctly appre- 
 hended to-day by the converse statement that the old form of chasuble 
 was our present cope sewn up in front but cut away at the upper end, 
 whether in the shape of a circle or a lozenge does not matter, to allow 
 a passage for the head. In other words the chasuble of the date of 
 which we are speaking, the eleventh century say, was not a round piece 
 of stuff with a hole cut in the centre, but a piece of stuff in the shape 
 of a half circle sewn up nearly to the top in front. This can be verified 
 by extant examples.^ 
 
 Before coming to the church cope it is necessary to say a few words 
 as to the monastic cappa of the Carolingian epoch. In the closing 
 years of the eighth century, Charles the Great, solicitous for the good 
 estate of the monasteries of his realm, wrote to Monte Cassino to 
 enquire as to the customs there, and, among other points, he enquired 
 
 ^ From the Dublin Review, January 1897. 
 
 ' Franz Bock, who had seen and handled probably all extant early chasubles, 
 had called attention to this {Liturgische GewdnderW 290) already in 1866. The 
 so-called chasuble of St Regnobert at Bayeux, and the St-Blasien vestments now at 
 St Paul's in Carinthia, are cases in point. Any one who will cast a glance at pi. xxii 
 of the late Mr G. G. Scott's Essay on the History of English Church Architecture 
 will see the state of the case at once.
 
 THE COPE 261 
 
 as to the habit worn. From the highly curious reply of abbat 
 Theodemar,' it appears that the habit prescribed by St Benedict and 
 that in actual use at Monte Cassino somewhat differed. Thus, of the 
 garments mentioned by St Benedict, the monks of that monastery had 
 no cuatlla or scapiilare. In place of the former they used a garment 
 which they called a matUis ; for the scapulare they had something of 
 the fashion of a mclotc (a sort of cloak or upper garment, originally of 
 rough skin or fur, later of stuff), but, if I rightly understand, with longer 
 sleeves ; the melote proper, such as was worn by St Benedict though 
 not mentioned in the Rule, falling out altogether. Moreover Theodemar 
 uses also the word casula, chasuble, to designate the cuculla ; and he 
 tells us that what the monks in France called a cuculla they at Monte 
 Cassino called a cappa, and, as used by the French monks, it was fuller 
 and longer than the cappa of Italy. The cappa as here mentioned would 
 seem to be a cape or hood.^ Of course all these garments are to be 
 understood as not for church use, but for secular, everyday wear. 
 
 The Capitula of the Council of Aix-la-Chapelle of 817, relating to 
 monastic discipline, among garments for monks prescribe two cucullae 
 and two cappae sewn up in front, besides a third, villosa, thick and 
 warm for winter, open in front. The cappae here specified are large 
 cloaks, and it is to be gathered that these garments were of the same 
 shape and character as the black copes for use in choir, and the close 
 copes for use in ordinary life, of the twelfth and later centuries.^ The 
 foregoing may suffice to give a warning how wary it is necessary to be 
 in dealing with testimonies, apparently plain, of these early times, 
 since at one and the same date the same word may easily designate 
 two really different garments, and different words a single and the 
 same one. 
 
 In treating of the original of the rich cope, or silk cope, for use in 
 the ceremonies of the Church, I propose to review in order, 
 
 I. The testimony of that series of writers who specially treat of 
 ecclesiastical persons, places, and things, and the rationale of the divine 
 service ; ranging from Amalar in the early years of the ninth century 
 to Sicardus in the beginning of the thirteenth. 
 
 II. The witness of custumals and ceremonials. 
 
 III. The evidence afforded by inventories. 
 
 * Jaffe Mon. Carol, p. 358 assigns it to the years 7^7-797- ^ ^ . , 
 
 ' See W. B. Marriott Vestiarium Christianum note 459 ; and from the words 
 
 * Graeci vero praeter operimentum capitis modicum quiddam ante pectus et a dorso 
 
 dependens', he would seem certainly to be right. 
 
 ' This may be inferred from a later prescription, num. 61 : ' Ut monachi cappas 
 
 dissutas praeter villosas non habeant ' (Herrgott Vetus Disciplina Monastica 
 
 p. 30 ; Mon. Germ. LL. i 203).
 
 262 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 I. The Testimony of Ecclesiastical Writers. 
 
 The cope for Church use is not so much as mentioned by any one 
 of them until early in the twelfth century, not by Amalar, Rhaban Maur 
 (died 856), Walahfrid Strabo (died 849), pseudo-Alcuin (saec. x or xi), 
 Bernold of Constance (died iioo), or Ivo of Chartres (died 11 15). 
 Amalar, high priest of symbolism and a favourite crony, characteristi- 
 cally enough, of the not too clear-sighted emperor Lewis the Pious, is 
 a source of information at once provoking and precious. No one is 
 more full of information as to the common or special practices in the 
 Western Church in the Carolingian age, but by his excessive love of 
 antiquarianism, his exaggerated craze for symbolism, and the indifferent 
 character of the written documents on which he sometimes relies, he is 
 as likely to mislead in regard to current practice as to inform. ' The 
 chasuble ', he says, ' is a vestment common to all clerics ' ; ^ and there is 
 ground for thinking that even in his day this may still have been the 
 case ; but it must not be hence concluded that it was the characteristic 
 vestment, at least in Gaul, of clerics, subdeacons and under. On the 
 contrary, it may be gathered from another passage of the same writer 
 that the specific vestment, for instance, of the lector or cantor was still 
 the camisia, or alb, as it had been in southern Gaul and elsewhere three 
 centuries before.^ And from Rhaban Maur, archbishop of Mentz, 
 who, as might be expected, is a much more practical person and so far 
 a safe guide to actual observance, it would appear that the chasuble 
 was in his region regarded as the specific vestment for the priest in 
 the celebration of Mass.^ Of course this was a piece of modern 
 Gallicanism. 
 
 ^ De Eccl. Offic. lib. ii c. 19. As a rule it will be more simple to cite these writers 
 below by book and chapter, than to refer to any particular edition, Hittorp, 
 Migne, &c. 
 
 ^ ' Ministri casula se exuunt quando lectoris sive cantoris officium assumunt ' (lib. 
 iii c. 15). The use of the alb by the cantor in execution of his ofifice may (after a 
 somewhat close wrestle with Amalar's symbols and figures) be deduced, I think, 
 securely by those that will, from lib. iii c. 4. Only so could the implied equation of 
 cantors in byssus under the old law, and in linum under the new, be exact ; for 
 byssus was the result of all the castigatio, whilst the casula was only the process of 
 it, and the camisia of linutn was the munditia ipsa. It is doubtless a pity that 
 Amalar could not state a simple fact plainly ; but every writer has his own ' style * 
 of communicating information. For the older practice see the ' Statuta Ecclesiae 
 Antiqua', num. 41 (in Mansi vol. iii col. 954); Martin of Braga's Collection, 
 can. 66 (Migne 84. 583); the Council of Narbonne of 589, can. 12 (ibid. 612); 
 a deacon acting as reader at the fourth Council of Toledo, 633 (ibid. 367). 
 
 ^ He says nothing of the casula being used by other orders than that of priest, 
 like Amalar ; and of the priestly order, 'septimum sacerdotale indumentum est quod 
 casulam vocant . . . supremum omnium indumentorum est . . . banc ergo vestem 
 possumus intelligere charitatem . . . Sine hac (that is, charity) nee sacerdos ipse ad 
 altare appropinquare debet, nee munus ofiferre, nee preces fundere ', &c. {De Inst. 
 Clerkorum lib. i c. 21). Here from the figurative (charity) we may conclude back
 
 THE COPE 263 
 
 The cope is first counted as entering into the category of fixed and 
 recognized vestments for Church use in the works of the monk Rupert, 
 abbat of Deutz, and the secular priest, Honorius of Autun. Rupert 
 (who died about 1130) ^ is evidently inspired (as is felt at once by any 
 one conversant with the monastic custumals of his day) by the scenes 
 he witnessed in the church of his own abbey in the course of the 
 ecclesiastical year. In describing the adornment of the altar and the 
 temple he mentions the hangings with which the walls were decked on 
 solemn feasts, the Gospel books enriched with gold and silver ; and 
 then : 
 
 The cantors are wont, like all the choir that sing, to take from the sacristy 
 precious vesture [he is here alluding to the cope, as will be seen below], and 
 with loud voice and elaborated chant to celebrate the joyous feast of the holy 
 sacrifice. The subject demands that we should not omit to mention some- 
 thing that is special to our order, that is, the order of monks {quiddam 
 nostri ordinis, id est monachorum, non praeterire proprium). For we are wont 
 on such feasts to stand in choir or go in procession, all in albs, &c. 
 
 The next chapter is dc cappis^ ' of copes ' : 
 
 We put on copes also on greater feasts, that we may praise God more 
 
 gloriously, looking to the resurrection to come, &c Which copes are 
 
 open in front and, except the necessary fastening or clasp iyfibula)^ are 'with- 
 out any sewing, because, &c They are also adorned with fringe below, 
 
 because, &c.' 
 
 Honorius of Autun, a secular priest,* looks at the case from another 
 
 to the actual (the chasuble). There is nothing to the point in the Liber de Sacris 
 Ordinibtis, Vestitnen/is, &c., or in the De Ecclesiastica Disciplina. It is worthy of 
 note that in copying St Isidore for his description of the chasuble, Rhaban omits 
 ' est vestis cucullata ', and the following words as to the cucuila. The chasuble had 
 changed in form and use since Isidore's time. 
 
 ^ This seems more probable than 1 135. See E. Ettlinger Der sogenannte 
 Anonymus Mellicensis de Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis (Karlsruhe, G. Braun, 1896) 
 
 PP- 8-9- 
 
 ^ The lingua of other writers: Honorius, Gemma Anitnae lib. i c. 232, and 
 capp. 233-234 in regard to the alb ; in regard to the fringe of the dalmatic in Hugh 
 of St Victor's (or R. Pullen's) De Sacramentis i 53 (Hittorp 1385); the lingula 
 of the alb in Sicardus, Mitrale lib. ii c. 5 (Migne 213. 74) ; the lingulae of the 
 episcopal sandals, ibid. 72, 73. To turn to another class of writers, the reformer 
 Tyndall calls the lingua a 'breastflap' {Doctrinal Treatises p. 419). 
 
 * Rupert of Deutz, De Divinis Officiis lib. ii capp. 23-24. For Hittorp's 
 interiori read anteriori, at least in sense. 
 
 * [After Dr von Kelle had made many a vain attempt to penetrate the 
 mystery surrounding this very enigmatical personage, Dr J. A. Endres {Honorius 
 Augustodunensis, Beitrag zur Gcschichte des geistigen Lebens im 12. J ah rh under t, 
 Kempten, J. Kosel, 1906) has succeeded. In the latter part of his life he was a 
 reclusus, in close connexion with the newly founded ' Scots ' monastery of St James 
 at Ratisbon ; he is more interesting to us in England in that he at one time resided 
 at Canterbury with the monks of the cathedral and seems to have been a sort of 
 Lector in Theology there. In mediaeval times great monasteries often employed 
 such extern persons, not Benedictines. More than one of Honorius's books saw
 
 a64 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 point of view and treats the subject quite otherwise. The story of his 
 life is very obscure, but it seems certain that he had retired from France 
 or Burgundy into the territories of the Emperor by the year 1120, and 
 that he had written the works of interest here, his Sacramentarium 
 and his much better known and more popular Gemma Animae, 
 before 1125.^ The Gemma of Honorius is the first work of this 
 class of literature in which the cantors are specially mentioned and 
 treated of at length, as a sort of particular ' order '. Little by little 
 these nondescripts, mere clerics, had grown into practical importance 
 and into consideration. The cantors who rule the choir are to Honorius, 
 in the figurative language he and his kin love so well, apostles teaching 
 the churches the praises of God : they are the leaders who set in array 
 the hosts for the battle ; with hand and with voice they urge on the 
 rest to the fight. The cantor is a herald, a standard-bearer, a trumpeter 
 who gives the signal for combat. In the same spirit he describes the 
 processions of pontiff, clergy, and people, as like to the going out of 
 the emperor and his army to the war ; ^ hence they (the clergy) put on 
 albs underneath, copes over, or other solemn vestments, as soldiers are 
 protected for the fight by breastplate beneath and shield in front.^ 
 
 For so important and prominent a person as the cantor had now 
 become, it is natural to suppose that nothing less would do than the 
 assignment of a special vestment, and no mean-looking one. That 
 vestment is the cope, the rich or silk cope, our present dignified and 
 splendid vestment. Of course, practice had in fact decided the question 
 long before the ritual writers descant thereon by way of doctrine, 
 and find congruities and symbolical interpretations to shew how fitting 
 and proper the assignment of this vestment to these persons must be. 
 Their words mark the time when practice had become so general and 
 confirmed that it was safe to dogmatize. ' The cope is the proper 
 vestment of cantors', says Honorius,whose multitudinous and mysterious 
 congruities I omit ; ' it has a hood at the top, it reaches down to the 
 heels, it is open in front and fringed at the bottom '.■* He was well 
 read enough to be aware of the ancient traditional use of the alb (here 
 called by him tunica talaris) as the vesture of cantors, and he even 
 ventures on a suggestion of origin in the natural order for the cope ; 
 
 written at the request of these ' Cantuarienses fratres', on whom he seems to have 
 made a great impression.] 
 
 * See in Migne 172. 9-14, the section of the Histoire Litteraire, and Wilmans's 
 preface to the scraps in the Monumenta Germaniae SS. x 125-128. 
 
 " Note how Honorius of Autun here speaks naturally of 'the emperor', not of the 
 king (of France). There is that in the tone of many passages of the Ge}nma which 
 gives evidence of its composition amidst the clang of arms at home of the last years 
 of Henry V. 
 
 ' Gemma Animae lib. i cc. 16, 76, 77, 82. 
 
 * Ibid. lib. i c. 227.
 
 THE COPE ^^S 
 
 ' The cope ', he says, ' seems to have originated in the chasuble ' ; ^ and, 
 so far as the shape of the piece of stuff out of which both were made 
 goes, he is right. 
 
 In his Sacramentarium;^ which I take to be an earlier work than 
 the Ge7nma, Honorius does not mention the cope ; no more do later 
 writers in this century : Hugh of St Victor in his Speculum, Robert 
 Pullen (or the same Hugh?) in the De Sacramcntis, Stephen of 
 Bauge, Beleth, Giraldus Cambrensis ; nor do the earlier Bruno of Asti, 
 Bonizo of Sutri, Cardinal Drogo, Gilbert of Limerick. ' We now pass 
 on direct to Italy and to the early years of the thirteenth century, the 
 age which saw so much systematizing and formalizing, the dawn of 
 which must mark the term of our present obscure enquiries. Two 
 writers are here in question— Sicardus of Cremona, a man of the old 
 school, and Pope Innocent III, whose tractate is so highly valuable as 
 representing, without a tinge of antiquarianism, the current practice of 
 the Roman Church itself: ' the Custom of the Apostolic See now, not 
 as it was ', is its subject. Sicardus very properly calls his work a ' Sum 
 of the Offices of the Church '. Whilst he is a full source of information 
 on current practice, he not merely gathers up what previous writers 
 had said, but takes from them (of course without acknowledgement) 
 passages wholesale, weaving the words of one into the words of another. 
 This ' Sum ' has indeed been printed ; but before it is possible to use 
 the work with safety it is necessary (as in the case of all these writers) 
 for the reader to do the wearisome work of editing for himself, that 
 is of tracing out the borrowings and their sources. The whole of the 
 second book is devoted to ecclesiastical vestments and clerical dress. 
 And here again, to make any headway, we must labour heavily through 
 the beggarly elements of tiresome words and names. 
 
 Clerics about to receive the tonsure [he says] or just tonsured {Inter ckricos 
 tonsurandi aut illico tonsurati) use cappae and stolae in divine services, and 
 
 ^ Ibid. c. 234 : ' Cappa videtur a casula tracta.' . 
 
 2 The Sacrament arium is a work unduly neglected ; it is an interesting book, 
 especially for comparison with the Gemma, of which in some respects it seems like 
 a first rough sketch. But it must be added that it is a book with excellent pitfalls 
 for the unwary, who may not readily perceive Honorius's textual borrowings, and 
 may thus be led to adduce as evidence of practice what is mere antiquarian baggage. 
 I would add that there seems to have been some misplacing of the leaves in the 
 manuscript from which H. Pez printed ; cap. 82 (Migne 172. l^l) seems evidently 
 the continuation of cap. 39 (col. 767). 
 
 » The writer printed by Zazzera with the title Anonymi SS. Ecclestae rituitm 
 divinorumque officiorum explicatio sec. xii elucubrata (Rome, 1784) affords nothing 
 for the purpose of the present paper. The early twelfth-century statutes of the 
 various kinds of canons regular do not mention the cope (vestment), only the cappa 
 nigra. An Alsatian writer of the thirteenth century notes how in the monastery 
 of Marbach (one of the most famous Augustinian houses, founded 1090), ' casule 
 et cappe chorales habebant septem pedes in longitudine et circumferentiam 
 circularem ' (De rebus Alsaticis, in M. G. SS. xvii 236).
 
 366 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 camisiae, and sometimes woollen [€apj>ae\, close and open And note 
 
 that in profestis we wear cappae nigrae ... as on festivals we use iogae 
 albae. . . . The /anea tunica . . . must be circular and close, not open.' 
 
 The interpretation to be given to these words seems to be the 
 following : 
 
 {a) In regard to the stola, Sicardus, a line or two below, says that it 
 is the same as the ' cotta, or surplice, white, in the form of a cross ' ; 
 that is, of a tau cross. In the same way Honorius of Autun, with whose 
 Gemma Animae Sicardus seems to have saturated his mind, had 
 before stated that the monk's tunica and the dalmatic shewed in their 
 shape the sign of the cross.^ 
 
 ip) The camisia is clearly an alb, the old common dress of clerics in 
 function ; elsewhere Sicardus calls it timica talaris. 
 
 {c) The cappa nigra is the open choir cope of black stuff, worn still 
 for some centuries later by the clergy of cathedral and collegiate 
 churches at divine office, and just in the same form by the Dominicans 
 at the present day during the winter months. 
 
 {d) The cappa clausa, close cope, is simply a cloak or cape, sewn up 
 in the front, for common outdoor use ; the wearing of which instead of 
 the cappa scissa, the same cloak not sewn up, is again and again enjoined 
 on the clergy by synods and statutes during the later Middle Ages. 
 
 (e) The /anea tunica is the same garment.^ 
 
 (/) There remains the toga alba, the interpretation of which is 
 doubtful ; but I incline to think it may mean a festal or silk cope 
 rather than an alb.^ 
 
 Sicardus proceeds, in the fifth chapter,^ to a great gathering up of 
 what had preceded as to sacred vestments : sandals, amice, alb, girdle, 
 
 ' Mitrale lib. ii c. I (Migne 213. 59-60). 
 
 ^ Gemma Animae lib. i c. 237. 
 
 ^ The laneae tunicae clericormn are mentioned by Honorius of Autun, Gemma 
 lib. i c. 233. But from his text it is by no means clear what is meant. Sicardus, 
 whilst adopting much that is said in the Gemma as to the distinction between 
 clerical and lay dress and the reason therefor (viz. that laymen wear close-fitting 
 garments quatenus expediti reddantur pugnae), adds the observation in regard to 
 his own day at least that the lanea tunica is clausa non scissa, words not in 
 Honorius ; and ' laicorum autem vestes debent esse strictae et scissae ut ', &c. 
 {Mitrate col. 60). A passage of Honorius in the Sacramentariu7n has also a bearing 
 on this : ' in divinis induantur (clerici) lineis, in quotidianis negotiis utantur laneis ' 
 (cap. 25, Migne 172. 760). The use of the word tunica for the close cope of daily 
 life in writers like these seems to come from their idea that the cantor's cope ' pro 
 tunica hyacinthina Legis mutuata videtur ' {Genwia lib. i c. 227). 
 
 * For obvious reasons i spare the reader the dissertation which an exposition of 
 so nice a point must involve. If any person should be disposed to be impatient that 
 time and print be spent over the subject-matter of writers of this character, it may 
 not be out of place to observe that from them and their workshop, precisely, is 
 derived a whole range of current ideas, any even seeming depreciation of which is, 
 in some quarters and in some ecclesiastical circles, regarded as an impertinence, or 
 rather as ;in offence yet more grave. 
 
 ^ Migne, 213. 72-82.
 
 THE COPE 267 
 
 subcingulum, stole, tunicle, dalmatic, chasuble, rational, maniple (or 
 fanon, mapula, sudary), mitre, gloves, ring, staff, pallium ; and (as an 
 anticlimax, not the principal vestment) finally the cope — that is the 
 silk cope, as now, for church use. His account of this cope is almost 
 entirely confined to an ingenious mosaic of expressions and phrases 
 selected from Honorius of Autun and Rupert of Deutz ; but he varies 
 Rupert's words thus, ' we put on copes only on greater feasts '. The 
 eighth chapter is devoted to an explanation of the use of all these 
 vestments. He vests the ministers one by one and at last the bishop ; 
 this description reads like the work of an expert in current sacristy 
 practice. And finally Sicardus says (adopting, but adding to, the 
 words of Honorius) : ' Then let the cantor put on his vestment, that is 
 the cope, which adapts itself also to every order (of the clergy) ; so it 
 is of HO account to what order he belong'. These last words in italics 
 are Sicardus's own. 
 
 Of himself the cantor was a man of no order and rank; he was, indeed, 
 a mere unclassed ; he had come to exist, and now held a splendid 
 position, no one quite knew why. These ritualist writers, leaning as 
 they habitually do on their forerunners, but continually ' improving ' 
 on them under the pressure of more recent practice, are continually 
 embarrassed how to fit in novelties ; circumstances seem to be always 
 doing violence to the conservatism of their nature. Cantors had with 
 time come more and more into public view, but Sicardus could find no 
 better expedient for dealing with them than to throw them into a sort 
 of appendix. But this was by no means the cantor's condition in real 
 life. Pope Innocent HI at this same date, whilst not mentioning a 
 word about the cope in his tractate De sacr. Altaris Myst., or so much 
 as condescending to notice the vesture of the ' inferior clergy ' from 
 deacons downwards, makes out six ' orders of clergy ' to accompany 
 the Supreme Pontiff: bishops, priests, deacons, sub-deacons, acolytes, 
 and cantors^ thus giving them a recognized position in his theory, 
 though really they were no ' order ' at all. 
 
 To sum up, then, what may be gathered from these writers on the 
 subject of the antiquities of the cope : 
 
 (i) Early in the ninth century it was still no more than a garment 
 for use in common life ; 
 
 ^ De s. Altaris Myst. lib. i c. I. As to the vesture of cantors at this time in the 
 Roman Church, whether in cope or alb, non liquet. So far as I can make out, the 
 cope did not obtain its promotion to the rank of an ecclesiastical vestment in any 
 degree from Rome. It is clear that Domenico (liorgi {De Liturgia Rom. Pont, ii 
 p. 124) could not tell what was the Roman practice in the thirteenth and fourteenth 
 centuries. Rupert and Honorius (whom he cites) are certainly no authority for 
 Rome in the twelfth. D. Giorgi and his friend G. B. Gattico for many years 
 together swept the Roman libraries for ritual manuscripts of those ages and knew 
 all the detail of such matters that will probably ever be known.
 
 268 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 (2) By the twelfth century, this cope, made of rich material, was in 
 use in the ceremonies of the Church ; 
 
 (3) It had come to be regarded as the special vestment of cantors ; 
 but 
 
 (4) It was considered a vestment that might be used by any member 
 of the clergy from the highest to the lowest ; nay, below the lowest — 
 even by one who was only about to be tonsured ; 
 
 (5) Among monks it was the practice to vest the whole community 
 (except of course the celebrant and his ministers) in copes at High 
 Mass on the greatest festivals ; and 
 
 (6) It may be added that it was a speciality of monks, on solemn 
 feasts of a somewhat lower grade, for the community to vest thus in 
 albs instead of in copes. 
 
 We may pass now from these theoretical testimonies to documents 
 that afford direct evidence of use and practice, ceremonials and inven- 
 tories, documents which may be taken as the proof, or test, of the 
 theories propounded by the writers reviewed above. Let us take, 
 then, 
 
 II. The Witness of Custumals and Ceremonials. 
 
 The documents to be considered here fall into three groups : (i) The 
 English documents (these are the earliest evidences in point of date) ; 
 (2) the Cluny group ; (3) a group which shews a position intermediate 
 between these two. 
 
 (i) In the Concordia Regularis of the English monks, drawn up 
 by the year 970 at the latest, the cope is prescribed only {a) for the 
 abbat at the blessing of the candles on the feast of the Purification ; ^ 
 {b) for the quasi-dramatic office of the Resurrection on Easter morning, 
 and then only for the three or four persons engaged in that curious 
 ceremony.^ On great feasts the whole community was vested in albs 
 (not copes) for the procession.^ It is not distinctly stated that they 
 remained so vested during the High Mass ; but this seems certainly 
 implied, and is consonant with general practice on the Continent at the 
 time. The abridgement and revision of the Concordia for the use 
 of the Abbey of Eynsham, drawn up about 1005, shews a like observ- 
 ance ; but nothing is said of the office of the Resurrection.* 
 
 (2) The Cluny practice, even as early as the later part of the tenth 
 
 * Reyner Apostolatus Append, p. 85. 
 » Ibid. p. 89; 
 
 ^ This appears on a comparison of p. 84 (last line), and other places where the 
 vesting of the community is mentioned, with p. 85 (' omnes albis induti si fieri 
 potest ') and p. 86 (' omnes, si fieri potest et aura permiserit, albis induti '). 
 
 * In the Winchester Obedientiaries' Rolls, ed. Kitchin, pp. 179, 182, 183, 187.
 
 THE COPE 269 
 
 century, shews the opposite extreme, as appears from the ' discipline ' 
 of the monastery of Farfa near Rome, where Cluny customs were 
 introduced in the year 998. On the greatest feasts (and they were 
 numerous), e. g. on the Assumption, or SS. Peter and Paul, or All 
 Saints, the community were all in copes at the High Mass, and twelve 
 in copes sang the introit in the middle of the choir. On the octave of 
 Easter at the procession before the High Mass all were in copes, and 
 doubtless during the Mass ; for this was the practice on the Monday, 
 Tuesday, and Wednesday of Easter week. On Holy Saturday eight 
 in copes sang the Alleluia of the Mass ; on Easter Day the invitatory 
 was sung by four in copes. On lesser feasts copes were used in pro- 
 portion to the grade of the solemnity, e.g. on feasts of ordinary 
 apostles, like St Bartholomew or St Andrew, the invitatory was sung 
 by two in copes, and so forth. ^ 
 
 It is useless to multiply examples ; nor, since Cluny practice in the 
 matter of ritual glory was so far developed at so early a date, is it 
 necessary to recount the splendours and refinements in ceremonial at 
 that monastery in the last years of the eleventh century, as shewn in 
 the works of Udalric and Bernard. It may not be out of place, how- 
 ever, as a mere specimen of the reduction there of ritual to a science, 
 or at least an art, to mention how ' the principal' feasts themselves are 
 divided into four grades or classes, at even the lowest of which the 
 whole community was in copes at the High Mass. As to the feasts of 
 really very highest grade, good Bernard seems at a loss how to describe 
 them. Here are his own words, to which no rendering can do justice : 
 ' Restant illae nominatissimae atque excellentissimae solemnitates 
 totius universalis ecclesiae speciali gaudio suscipiendae, praedicandae 
 pariter atque et celebrandae ; . . . caeteras quasi quodam super- 
 lativo gradu transcendunt' - Such an exalted model of faddy and 
 fussy ritualism could not but finally exhaust itself in the distribution 
 of superlatives that would not bear the weight of ordinary reflection. 
 
 The statutes of Lanfranc, which more correctly speaking are in 
 original intent merely directions for practice in his own cathedral 
 church of Canterbury, and must in substance be identical with the 
 ' Bee Customs ' occurring in ancient English library catalogues, &c.,^ 
 
 ' ' Disciplina Farfensis' (in Herrgott Vetus disciplina monastica^^. yj-iyi^ox 
 in Migne 150. 1193 ^op^^ passiin. The book itself was drawn up some time before 
 the year 1039, since it was worked over by abbat Hugh, who died in that year; the 
 preface was added by another hand in the lifetime of either abbat Hugh or of his 
 immediate successor, and at any rate before 1049. Even conversi (lay brethren) 
 who could sing wore copes (Herrgott p. 82; Migne 150. 1245). [A new edition 
 of the Farfa Customs has been given by Dom Bruno Albers in vol. i (1900) of his 
 Constietudines Monasticae. ] 
 
 - Herrgott p. 244. 
 
 ' [The whole question of Lanfranc's Constitutions and the Bee Customs has
 
 ayo LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 shew that much of this ritual and elaboration was introduced into our 
 English monasteries soon after the Conquest, thus relieving the exces- 
 sive simplicity or even bareness evinced in this matter by the Co7i- 
 cordia. But with the new system there came from Bee another 
 spirit too ; at Bee, any tendency to the redundancies of mere ritualism 
 found a counterpoise in nobler and more healthy ambitions, as would 
 be sufficiently shewn in the career and character, so diverse, of two 
 such representatives of the Bee school as Lanfranc himself and his 
 successor St Anselm, even if we had not those letters of Anselm 
 enabling us almost to breathe the air in which these men had lived in 
 their younger days. The Stattita of Lanfranc, it must be allowed, do 
 betray a delight in ritual novelties that borders on the trivial ; but 
 this, when the sense of novelty had passed, is soon lost, though the 
 practices prescribed, with various modifications in different houses, 
 entered into the observance of the English Benedictines generally, and 
 were on the whole maintained to the time of the suppression. To pass 
 from reading the productions of Bernard and Udalric of Cluny and 
 the similar compilation of William of Hirschau to later English works 
 of a like nature is to pass into another atmosphere, as I believe I may 
 say from knowledge. But it is time to pass on to 
 
 (3) Those custumals which shew a middle term between the two 
 classes just reviewed. They are {a) the customs of St-Vannes of 
 Verdun of the tenth century ; {b) the Einsiedeln customs of the close 
 of that century ; and {c) the Luxeuil customs of the eleventh. 
 
 At St-Vannes the brethren assisted at Mass in copes but once in the 
 year — on Palm Sunday ; even on the greatest feasts they wore albs 
 only ; on Easter Day the invitatory was sung by two (only) in copes, 
 which gives the measure and proportion of all else. The writer says 
 he is recording that which older men whom he had known declared to 
 have been the ' ancient ' custom of the house.^ 
 
 Einsiedeln indulged in greater exterior pomp. At the procession 
 and Mass of the Purification and Palm Sunday, at the Mass of Easter 
 and the three following days, and at the third Mass on Christmas Day, 
 the brethren were in copes ; ^ whether on other great feasts does not 
 
 now been cleared up by the Dean of Wells ; see his article in the Journal of 
 Theological Studies, April 1909, pp. 375-388.] 
 
 ^ These customs are printed in vol. iv of the folio editions of Martene De ritibus. 
 The passages referred to are (folio edd.) p. 297, col. 2 (bottom of page) ; p. 298, col. 2 
 (' nondum albis exuti ') ; p. 299, col. i (' cantor . , . vestitus pallio . . . duo fratres 
 (for invitatory) albis cappis induti'); p. 299, col. 2 (Monday, Tuesday, and 
 Wednesday after Pentecost). [The St Vannes Customs are now reprinted from 
 Martene by Dom Bruno Albers in vol. v of his Consuetudines Monasticae 
 
 PP- 113-133-] ^. „ 
 
 '^ D. Odilo Ringholz Des Benediktiner stifles Einsiedeln Thatigkeit fiir die Re- 
 form deutscher Kloster (a separate print from vol. vii of the Benedictine Studien und
 
 THE COPE 271 
 
 appear. But these customs do not know the body of cantors, four, 
 eight, twelve, in the midst of the choir, in which the Cluniacs delighted ; 
 their whole system betokens a much greater simplicity. 
 
 The Luxeuil customs stand nearly on the same footing as those of 
 Einsiedeln ; if anything, as later in date, so they are more * advanced ' 
 in ritual.^ 
 
 All the foregoing represent the practices of monks. I know but one 
 detailed ceremonial of a cathedral of so early a date as the eleventh 
 century — the tractate of John of Avranches, written between 106 1 and 
 1067, and representing the practice of Rouen at least, and perhaps of 
 other Norman churches. From this work it appears that the practice 
 of the whole body of the clergy assisting at the High Mass in copes 
 must have been frequent there in the course of the year ; in albs, 
 never ; but the number of cappati acting as cantors or rulers of the 
 choir during the offices is very limited. 
 
 From the additional information supplied by these ceremonials it 
 may be gathered, as a supplement to the conclusions drawn above 
 from the ritual writers : 
 
 (7) That by the middle of the tenth century monks were commonly 
 in the practice, at least in France and on the borderland of Germany, of 
 vesting the whole community in cope for processions and for assisting 
 cappati at the High Mass on some great feasts. 
 
 (8) That this practice had not yet been admitted into England by 
 men like St Dunstan and St Ethelwold ; and that even in Lorraine in 
 some quarters it was only beginning to make its way. 
 
 (9) That this novelty was the extension of an older practice among 
 monks of vesting in albs on these occasions, a practice (or survival) 
 which by the middle of the tenth century was universal among them, 
 at any rate north of the Alps. 
 
 (10) That the same novelty was adopted, when it had become 
 prevalent among monks, certainly by the clergy of the cathedral 
 church of Rouen and perhaps elsewhere, though there is no evidence 
 that the clergy adopted albs for similar use on lesser feasts ; indeed, 
 Rupert of Deutz, who witnesses for the eleventh and twelfth centuries, 
 says that the vesting of the community in albs on feast days was 
 a speciality of monks. 
 
 Mittheilimgen of Raygern) pp. 43, 35, 40; a general prescription at p. 31. The 
 abbat distributed the copes (ibid.), or the prior (p. 35); according to Lanfranc 
 (= Bee) the cantor (Reyner iii 228, 235). [The Einsiedeln customs are re-edited 
 from the MS by Dom Albers v pp. 73-110.] 
 * Herrgott pp. 576-578.
 
 272 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 III. Inventories^ 
 will be the means of indicating with sufficient certainty when and where 
 this use of copes began, both among monks and among the clergy. 
 
 As usual, it is necessary to be more precise and exact in the matter 
 of beginnings ; the rest can be summarily dispatched. 
 
 The earliest instance of copes in inventories, so far as I know, is of 
 the year 800 or 801. The inventory of St-Riquier, drawn up by 
 Angilbert, mentions cappas cc? In the inventory of the same house of 
 the year 831 " the number had risen to 377. But these are evidently 
 not church copes, but the cloaks for common wear mentioned in the 
 Aix-la-Chapelle capitula, provision for which is described in the 
 chronicle of the Norman monastery of Fontenelle.* The inventory 
 of 831 also mentions cappa castanea auro parata ; this might be thought 
 to be a cope for use in church. I doubt it ; it may be only an extra 
 fine cloak for one of the splendid abbats of St-Riquier.° 
 
 The Fontenelle chronicle mentions among the very numerous gifts 
 to the monastery by abbat Ansegisus (823-833), ' two Roman copes, 
 namely, one of red silk {cendal) with green fringe round about ; another 
 of bever, also with fringe of its own colour '." And these, again, I do not 
 think are ' copes ' for strictly church use ; as regards the ' bever ' one, 
 this may be taken as clear ; as regards the silk cope, the very epithet 
 ' Roman ' is sufficient to raise the doubt, for the cope as a church 
 vestment is of no Roman origin. 
 
 But the case becomes quite otherwise when we find in the inventory 
 of the abbey of St-Trond of the year 870 ' thirty-three precious copes 
 of silk ' against only twelve chasubles ; '^ or again, in an inventory of 
 Marchiennes of the ninth century, eighteen copes against eight chasu- 
 bles ; '^ or again, at St-Bavo at Ghent, where, about the year 860, 
 
 ' To shorten references I permit myself to quote where possible the number by 
 which these documents are noted in F. de Mely and E. Bishop Bibliographie 
 genirale des Inventaires i7)ipri7nes (Paris, Leroux, 1892- 1895). 
 
 * Bibliographie No. 6254. ^ Ibid. No. i. 
 
 * Moti. Germ. SS. p. 299. The cappae were to be made of a very thick grey 
 stuff {griseus sicciscus). 
 
 " This affectation of a cappa by abbats (though hardly of so illustrious a race as 
 the princely abbats of St-Riquier) occurs later ; as well as the castigation of such 
 ostentatious assumption of dress unbecoming monastic simplicity. Udalric, once 
 canon of Ratisbon and afterwards monk of Cluny, wrote (we are told) a letter to the 
 venerable abbat William (of Hirschau), taking him to task for his wearing a cope 
 contrary to rule— out of mere simplicity indeed, and in imitation of the usurpations 
 of German abbats ; instructing him that it was his duty not to distinguish himself 
 by his dress from his subjects (non debere transgredi habitum sibi subdiiorum) as 
 he well knew it was written ' They have made thee their head {ducem) ; be among 
 thern as one of them '. The saintly man did not even wait to finish the letter before 
 pulling off his cope never to put it on again. {Anonymus Mellicensis de Scriptori- 
 bus Ecdesiasticis, ed. Ettlinger, p. 94.) 
 
 ^ Mon.Gertn. SS. ii p. 295. "' Bibliographie No. 8. 
 
 Dehaisnes Documents concernant Vhistoire de Part p. 14.
 
 THE COPE 373 
 
 there were twenty-four copes of silk among the ' precious ornaments ' 
 of the sacristy.^ In the same century St-Denis must also have pos- 
 sessed a certain number of precious copes ; ^ how many, however, does 
 not appear. I know of no other churches but the three first mentioned 
 possessing anything like such an array of copes at so early a date ; 
 and, it will be observed, they are all three monastic and all three in 
 the same region. 
 
 By the close of the tenth century stores of copes are found in cathe- 
 drals. At Clermont-Ferrand, twenty-seven ; •' to Auxerre bishop 
 Goffridus gave thirteen copes ;'^ to Cremona bishop Odelricus gave, 
 according to the inventory drawn up by himself in 9H4 it would seem, 
 about a score ; ■'' bishop Abraham (957-994) gave twenty-two to 
 Frisingen, as against six chasubles.® It looks as though these bene- 
 factors made a beginning so far as an outfit in copes on any scale is 
 concerned ; and their gifts mark the commencement of a common use 
 of the cope in these cathedrals. It was a long time yet before the 
 cope found its way generally into parish churches ; the earliest case 
 I know of, and it is quite an exception, is the church of Worthsee in 
 Carinthia, which, about the year 990, possessed two copes ; but these 
 were the gift of bishop Abraham of Frisingen, a propagator of the 
 vestment it would seem ; before this gift of Abraham's, Worthsee 
 possessed no cope.' 
 
 It would be wearisome to pursue the spread of the vestment further, 
 though the details suggest many curious observations, and these not 
 altogether insignificant. But I cannot refrain from adding a few words 
 as to the earliest history of the cope in England ; and this brings up at 
 once one of those ' observations ' just mentioned. So far as documentary 
 evidence goes it is evident that the use of copes in any number in the 
 
 ^ Neues Archiv viii p. 374. 
 
 ^ L. Delisle Littdrature latine et Histoire dii Moyen Age (Paris, Leroux, 1890) 
 p. 9. 
 
 " Bibliographte No. II. 
 
 * Labbe Nova Bibliotheca MSB i 452. 
 
 " Bibliographte No. 5505. 
 
 ' Mon. Germ. SS. xxiv p. 320. 
 
 ' Bibliographte No. 4238. [Two recently published early inventories of 
 churches help to shew the rapid rise of the cope in favour and fashion. The 
 collegiate church of Aschaffenburg, founded by Otto, Duke of Swabia and Bavaria, 
 in 974, possessed, according to its sacristy inventory of the tenth century, one cope 
 as compared with fourteen chasubles ; a note of additions made soon after this list 
 was written mentions two copes, one dalmatic, (Sic. An inventory of the first half 
 of the eleventh century shews eight copes as against no more than seven chasubles ; 
 the other kinds of vestments remain almost as before {Xeues Archil' xxxvi, 1911, 
 pp. 672-673). The other case is that of the monastery of St-:fevre-l^s-Toul of the 
 eleventh century ; the sacristy possessed twenty-four copes as compared with six 
 chasubles (R. Fawtier, ' La Biblioth^que et le Tresor de I'Abbaye de St-ilvre-les- 
 Toul ', in Mim. de la Sac. d" Archiologie Lorraine t. Ixi, 191 1, p. 33 of the separate 
 print).]
 
 274 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 services of the Church is first found among monks, and the concurrent 
 testimony points all to one region, or rather neighbourhood, as the 
 place where the movement began, viz. Flanders, and in the ninth 
 century. We have seen that the Concordia of the English monks is 
 for its date singular in its limitations of the use of this vestment ; yet 
 it was precisely the usages of the monasteries of Flanders that were 
 known to, and held in high esteem by, the great leaders of the monastic 
 movement in England which issued in the Concordia : ' praecipuum 
 coenobium quod celebri Ghent nuncupatur vocabulo ' is the expression 
 used in that document ; and in a Ghent monastery Dunstan had lived. 
 I press the matter no further, but may only express the regret that 
 writers of even the first name and fame who have dealt with the story 
 of that great English movement have so often not seen their way to 
 penetrate into the real mind of the actors. It is a story yet to be 
 told. 
 
 To Peterborough St Ethelwold gave four copes (and six mass- 
 garbs).^ Elfstan, bishop of Elmham (995-1001), when received into 
 fraternity, gave to Ely * cappam cantoris ' ; archbishop Stigand, who 
 held Ely in commendam, also gave a ' cappam cantoris '.^ In 1079 
 Ely possessed thirty-three copes, in 1093 forty-six, as compared with 
 forty and forty-four chasubles respectively.^ The bulk of the copes 
 seem to have been there before the Conquest and not to have followed 
 on the introduction of Bee, or any other, ' customs '. On the other 
 hand, it may be presumed from his large gift to Abingdon of twenty- 
 nine copes as against three chasubles,* that abbat Faricius (i 100-11 17) 
 found that his house had maintained its old-fashioned bareness and 
 things were pretty much on the lines of the Concordia. It is true 
 that Queen Matilda, wife of the Conqueror, had despoiled the church, 
 but she had taken only one cope — the one good cope of the house 
 apparently, ' cappa chorealis valde optima ', as the regretful chronicler 
 says, which was only produced reluctantly and at the last moment, 
 when she had scouted with contempt the vestments previously pro- 
 duced, and had scorned even to look at such poor stuff.^ Nor were' 
 the cathedral churches in the hands of the clergy at the Conquest too 
 well provided with copes, if we may judge by the case of Exeter 
 which possessed only ' three cantors' copes \^ 
 
 The following is a summing up of our enquiry : — 
 
 ' Bibliographie No. 1333. 
 ^ Liber Eliensis ed, D. J. Stewart, pp. 185, 220. 
 ^ Bibliographie Nos. 1336, 1337. 
 * Chron. Monast. de Abingdon, ed. Stevenson, ii 151. 
 ' Ibid. vol. i p. 485. 
 
 " Which, by the way, the Rev. F. E. Warren presents to us as * three choristers' 
 caps'. Bibliographie No. I $2^.
 
 THE cope; 275 
 
 (i) In the eleventh century the piece of stuff out of which a cope for 
 church use or a chasuble was made, was of the same form, viz. that of 
 a half circle, the shape of a cope now. 
 
 (2) A distinction at that time between the cope and the chasuble, 
 patent to the eyes and sense of all, was this, that the chasuble was 
 sewn up in front, the cope was used just as a cope is now. 
 
 (3) The so-called close cope was not a church vestment, but a 
 garment for use in ordinary life. 
 
 (4) The church vestment called ' cope ' was never sewn up. 
 
 (5) In the twelfth century the chasuble was folded up at the sides 
 for the convenience of the celebrant of the Mass. 
 
 (6) In course of time, instead of being folded the chasuble was cut 
 away, so that by the close of the fifteenth century even the shapes of 
 the pieces of stuff from which the two vestments were made bore no 
 resemblance to each other : one was still a half circle, the other made 
 up an oval. 
 
 (7) Though the cope, indeed, has retained its original shape and the 
 chasuble has since the fifteenth century been still further curtailed, it 
 was as impossible then to mistake one vestment for the other as it is 
 now. 
 
 (8) The most ignorant person was, in the year 1500, as competent 
 as the most learned to distinguish between the two : to do so required 
 just about the same sort of education as is now required to distinguish 
 between, say, a coat and a waistcoat, and no more. 
 
 (9) The cope has retained not merely its old shape but its old use. 
 In its origin it was a vestment the use of which was restricted to no 
 particular order of the clergy, but, as now, could be worn by any order, 
 from the highest to the lowest cleric ; in fact, it was sometimes worn 
 (as it still is, though, of course, now abusivk) by persons who are not 
 clerics at all. 
 
 (10) To go back no further than the date at which the cope is first 
 brought by ritual theorists into the category of church vestments, in 
 the twelfth and in the following centuries the chasuble was the vestment 
 specifically assigned to the priest for the saying of Mass. 
 
 (11) The practice was then universal, as is testified by such a crowd 
 of authoritative witnesses of every kind that there is no need of recondite 
 learning in the matter ; and there is no place for balancing in doubt as 
 to the use in the later middle ages of the chasuble, and of the chasuble 
 only, as the priest's specific Mass vestment.^ 
 
 ' It will be time to deal with the ' cappe missal ' of certain inventories when (if 
 ever) it is brought forward as evidence for the use of the cope by the celebrant of 
 the Mass. 
 
 T 2
 
 XII 
 
 HOLY WEEK RITES 
 
 OF SARUM, HEREFORD AND ROUEN COMPARED ^ 
 
 The ceremonies and offices of Holy Week offer so wide a field for 
 investigation and comment that in a paper like the present it is neces- 
 sary strictly to limit the question to be dealt with. Moreover, the 
 variations between the observances of neighbouring churches are so 
 numerous and minute, the resemblances between the observances of 
 churches at a distance from each other are often so singular, that 
 there is considerable risk, unless definite points are selected for inves- 
 tigation, of lapsing into the mere curiosity of collecting, with the only 
 result of overwhelming the reader with a mass of disjointed detail. 
 
 Still, few subjects in liturgy are more interesting than the enquiry 
 into the historical connexion — the genealogy, so to speak — of late 
 mediaeval local rites or uses, quite independently of the fact that such 
 enquiries, properly conducted, are a good apprenticeship for persons 
 who would wish to turn their attention to the difficult and delicate 
 work of criticism of liturgical origins. Moreover, history has some- 
 thing to gain from such enquiries. If the transmission and spread of 
 legal and social customs be a worthy object of investigation, the 
 passage of ritual observance from church to church, and the outward 
 forms assumed by religious rites at a time when they so largely entered 
 into popular life, deserve more attention than the subject has hitherto 
 received. But it is an enquiry most tedious, to follow up which it is 
 necessary to enter into details in appearance trivial with a minuteness 
 which may seem intolerable : though indeed it is only by an accu- 
 mulation of evidence in detail that a fair and reasonable presumption 
 can be raised in these cases at all. Mere occasional agreement is 
 insufficient proof of immediate affinity. The historical explanation 
 has to be sought, if we are to verify the probabilities raised by the 
 internal evidence of the liturgies themselves. 
 
 This paper is devoted in the main to a comparison of the details of 
 one single item in the ceremonies of the first day of Holy Week — viz. 
 that singular Anglo-Norman observance, the procession with the 
 
 ^ From the Transactions of the Society of St Osmund vol. i part iv pp. ^^ ff.
 
 HEREFORD AND ROUEN 277 
 
 Blessed Sacrament on Palm Sunday, known, as it survived at Rouen 
 till the end of the eighteenth century, as the Corps-Saint procession. 
 An examination of the ritual arrangements in regard to this procession 
 will be found at once to raise the question as to the foreign affinities 
 of two English uses, those of Sarum and Hereford. 
 
 It is natural that the Rouen rite should at once suggest itself as 
 a source of the uses which were developed in English churches after 
 the Conquest. There is indeed definite and sufficiently trustworthy 
 evidence that bishop Remigius introduced Rouen customs to some 
 extent at least at Lincoln. Although there is documentary proof that 
 Lincoln was in the fourteenth century considered to have a * use ' of 
 its own (whether in Mass, or Office, or for the sacraments only, does 
 not appear), yet there is reason to believe that by the sixteenth century 
 a special Lincoln use (if by the term ' use ' is to be understood a dis- 
 tinctive rite, like that of Hereford or York, Lisieux or Coutances) was 
 little more than a half- forgotten tradition, so much so that its mention 
 in the Preface of the Book of Common Prayer was only an after- 
 thought.^ 
 
 In regard to the relation of Rouen and York, the late canon 
 Simmons touched on the question in various passages of his Lay Folks 
 Mass Book. It has often been stated, and in some quarters seems to 
 be taken as a fact, that special connexion exists between Rouen and 
 Sarum, but no detailed proof has been offered. At the end of his 
 translation of the Sarum Missal Mr Pearson gives extracts * from (as 
 he says) a Rouen manuscript missal ' in order to shew ' that the Use 
 of Rouen and that of Sarum were almost identical in the eleventh 
 century'.^ But on this two or three observations occur : — 
 
 (i) The writer did not observe that these extracts are merely Le 
 Brun Desmarettes's translation of parts of the tractate De Officiis 
 Ecclesiasticis of John of Avranches. 
 
 (2) The ' use of Sarum ' in the eleventh century is, and, unless 
 hitherto unknown material can be found, must be, mere matter of 
 vague conjecture. The Sarum Missal, as we have it, shews in its 
 groundwork a good thirteenth-century book. 
 
 (3) The tract of John of Avranches is a recension or adaptation 
 for Rouen of the Ordo Romanus which, as a book, passed away as 
 Germanism and Romanesque gave place in the twelfth century to 
 Frenchified fashions and Gothic architecture. The particular resem- 
 blances pointed to by Mr Pearson are no more than items, which, 
 practically speaking, formed part of the substructure of all the late 
 mediaeval uses. 
 
 ' See Gasquet and Bishop Edward VI and the Book of Common Prayer p. 37. 
 ' Second edition p. xxiii.
 
 278 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 What is required for proof of affinity between any of these uses is 
 evidence of a similarity of rite in particulars distinctive of the pre- 
 sumed parent rite, and not found in its neighbours. The following 
 examination of the details of the Corps-Saint procession will be found 
 to raise a prima facie case for a special connexion between Rouen and 
 Hereford, and will so far go to shew that the source of the special 
 features of Sarum ceremonial must be sought for elsewhere than at 
 Rouen. The presumption raised by the examination of this single 
 item, the Palm Sunday procession, will be found to be confirmed by 
 a continued similarity of Rouen and Hereford, and a continued dissi- 
 dence of Sarum in other details of observance in Holy Week. Finally, 
 a suggestion will be hazarded as to the particular point of time when 
 Hereford was influenced by Rouen. 
 
 In considering the Corps-Saint procession Rouen and Hereford will 
 be taken together, and Sarum will be taken separately afterwards. 
 This plan may seem to point to a foregone conclusion. It is, however, 
 adopted not merely for convenience of comparison, but for the very 
 practical reason that it is possible to go along the route of the pro- 
 cession of Rouen and Hereford step by step together, and it is impos- 
 sible, without confusion, to fit in Sarum arrangements with those of 
 the other two rites. Each statement is supported by its due array 
 of rubric. The following are the materials mainly used : for Rouen^ 
 an Ordinarium of about the year 1450 in the appendix to Le Prevost's 
 edition of John of Avranches (in Migne P. L. vol. 147 coll. 117- 
 119); and the Rouen Processional of 1645 (published by archbishop 
 Francois II de Harlay ; Le Prevost had a considerable hand in this 
 processional, which was the last to represent the traditional rite) : for 
 Hereford, Dr Henderson's reprint of the Missal, and the fourteenth 
 century Ordinale, Harl. MS 2983 : for Sarnm, the Burntisland reprint 
 of the Missal, and Dr Henderson's reprint of the Processional, which, 
 however, have been used always with an eye on manuscript Sarum 
 ordinalia and processionals at the Museum. 
 
 [The edition of the Sarinn Missal {Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1916) 
 by Dr. Wickham Legg from the three earliest MSS (seemingly of about 
 the end of the thirteenth century) does not entail, for the particular 
 purposes of this paper, changes in the original text. Of course all the 
 minute topographical details in the printed missals and processionals 
 are wanting in these early missal texts ; but the service itself, what 
 was said or sung, is the same. One of the three MSS, that in the 
 Bibliotheque de 1' Arsenal, No. 135, thought to be of the end of 
 the thirteenth century, has, with slight textual variants, the rubric 
 ' Dum distribuuntur . . . vexillis praecedentibus ' (see under (6), p. 290 
 below). But there can be no doubt (so at least it seems to me) that
 
 HEREFORD AND ROUEN 279 
 
 this is a mere intrusion from without, and that the Corps-Saint 
 procession is no part of the genuine Sarum rite, any more than of the 
 rite of York (see p. 293 below). This rubric in MS A shews only 
 that some people at any rate who used the Sarum Missal chose to 
 adopt also this striking rite of the Corps-Saint from some other 
 church.] 
 
 THE PALM SUNDAY PROCESSION 
 Rouen and Hereford. 
 
 Rouen. Hereford. 
 
 (i) In the morning the Blessed In the morning the Blessed 
 
 Sacrament is taken from the Sacrament and relics are carried 
 
 cathedral to the appointed place from the cathedral to the ap- 
 
 (the church of St-Godard) out- pointed place. The place is not 
 
 side the city walls. specified, but it was clearly out- 
 side the city walls (see (8) below). 
 
 c. 1450. In ramis palmarum. ... ad locum constitutum in quo 
 
 Finitis matutinis deferatur Corpus reliquiae et Corpus Domini, quod illuc 
 Domini ad locum destinatum in mane sit deportatum, consistant . . . 
 feretro a duobus sacerdotibus de se- (Missal, Henderson's reprint, 1874, 
 cunda sede in albis, et sint duodecim p. 80). 
 famuli circa feretrum portantes duo- 
 decim torchias quas debet dominus 
 archiepiscopus ; et duo de praefata 
 \al. prima] sede, ferant duas torchias 
 chori et associent Corpus Domini 
 usque ad atrium Sancti Gildardi (MS 
 Ordinarium of Rouen Cathedral in 
 Migne P. L. 147 col. 117). 
 
 1645. In Ecclesia Cathedrali, noctu antequam incipiatur matutinum, 
 sacerdos comitantibus aliquot clericis cum luminaribus accedit ad maius 
 altare, pixidem aperit in qua sacra Eucharistia asservatur, accipit unam ex 
 hostiis consecratis, eamque ponit in alia pixide, quam reverenter defert ad 
 portam alae dexterae chori, et deponit in tabernaculo portatili super mensam 
 decenter apparatam : ubi Sanctissimum Christi Corpus a fidelibus devote con- 
 fluentibus adoratur usque ad finem laudum : ac subinde ex eodem loco per 
 medium chori cum multo populi concursu defertur in Ecclesiam S. Gildardi 
 (quae olim erat extra civitatem) a clero et populo adorandum. Circa horam 
 vero octavam diei, post aspersionem aquae, facta benedictione et distributione 
 ramorum in navi Ecclesiae Cathedralis, clerus eiusdem Ecclesiae processio- 
 naliter pergit in atrium S. Gildardi ordine infrascripto {Processionale Ecclesiae 
 Rothomagensis, 1645, p. 100).
 
 28o 
 
 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Rouen. 
 (2) At the cathedral, after Terce 
 and the sprinkh'ng of holy water, 
 procession is made to the altar of 
 the Holy Cross, where the palms 
 are to be blessed. 
 
 During the procession are sung 
 the Antiphons — 
 
 Ante sex dies soleimiitatis. 
 Ante sex dies passionis. 
 
 c. 1450. Tertia cantata clerus at 
 populus totius civitatis ad matrem 
 ecclesiam conveniant ; et processione 
 ordinata cum cruce discooperta et 
 candelabris ad altare crucis, in quo 
 benedictio palmarum fiet, pergat. 
 Et cantor incipiat ant. Ante sex dies 
 solemnitatis, Sequitur alia antiphona 
 Ante sex dies paschae (Migne ibid. col. 
 117; for ' paschae ' read ' passionis ' 
 according to the Rouen Missal of 
 1499). 
 
 1645. Facta post tertiam aspersione aquae in Ecclesia Cathedrali, ubi 
 rami benedicuntur ad altare sanctae crucis, processio cum sacerdote et mini- 
 stris paratis ut in aliis benedictionibus, praeeuntibus cruce discooperta et can- 
 delabris, descendit in navem Ecclesiae ante Crucifixum cantando sequentem 
 antiphonam Ante sex dies solemnitatis [Froc. Eccl. Rothom., 1645, pp. loo-ioi). 
 The antiphon Ante sex dies passionis had, in 1645, fallen into disuse; but the 
 last portion of it was added to the antiphon Ante sex dies solemnitatis. 
 
 Hereford. 
 
 At the cathedral, after Terce 
 and the sprinkling of holy water, 
 procession is made to the altar 
 where the palms are to be blessed. 
 This altar is not named, but it 
 must be other than the high altar 
 or procession would not be in 
 place. 
 
 During the procession are sung 
 the Antiphons — 
 
 Ante sex dies solemnitatis. 
 
 Ante sex dies passionis. 
 
 Post aspersionem aquae benedfctae, 
 dicta tertia eat processio ad altare 
 coram quo sunt palmae benedicendae. 
 Interim cantentur sequentes anti- 
 phonae — 
 
 Ante sex dies sollemnitatis. 
 
 Ante sex dies passionis. 
 
 {Missal, reprint 1874, p. 79.) 
 
 Rouen. 
 procession arrived at 
 
 the officiant said a 
 
 (3) The 
 this altar 
 prayer. 
 
 This is followed by a Lesson 
 [Dicite jiliae Sion, J 450 ; but 
 Veneritnt jilii Israel, 1645). 
 Then ]^ Circumdedertint. 
 
 Quoniain. 
 and the Gospel Qim appropin- 
 qtiasset. 
 
 Hereford. 
 
 The procession arrived at this 
 altar, 
 
 the Lesson Venerunt filii Israel 
 is read ; then 
 
 Ant. Fratres, hoc enini sentite. 
 
 Ant. In nomine enim lesu. 
 and the Gospel Cum appropin- 
 quasset.
 
 HEREFORD AND ROUEN 
 
 281 
 
 Deinde legatur sequens lectio sine 
 titulo Exodi Venentnt fiUi Israel. 
 Postea cantentur hae antiphonae, 
 Fratres, hoc enim setitite. Alia ant. In 
 nomine enim lesu. Deinde legatur 
 evangelium. . . . Cum appropinquasset 
 {Missal, reprint 1874, p. 79). 
 
 c. 1450. Finita antiphona dicat 
 archiepiscopus vel sacerdos super 
 ramos oxdXxon&axActiones nostras quae- 
 sumus Domine. Finita oratione sub- 
 diaconus revestitus, verso vultu ad 
 populum, in pulpito legat quasi lectio- 
 nem, cum titulo, Diciie filiae Sion. 
 Qua finita cantor incipiat J^ Circum- 
 dedemnt. t Quoniam. Quo finito 
 Evangelium a diacono dalmaticato 
 legatur in pulpito, Cutn appropinquas- 
 set lesus (Migne ibid, col. 117). 
 
 1645. Deinde Sacerdos stans in cornu epistolae, non vertens se ad populum, 
 dicit m tono orationis missae Dominus vobiscum et orationem Deus quern dili- 
 gere ut m Missali. Postea subdiaconus vestitus tunica in pulpito seu in alio 
 loco cantat lectionem Venerunt filii Israel in tono epistolae. Qua finita 
 exuitur tunica, et cantatur a choro pro graduali sequens responsorium, cantore 
 mcipiente. ^ Circumdederunt. if Quoniam. Interim dum cantatur Resp 
 diaconus dalmaticatus accipit librum de altari, petit benedictionem a sacer- 
 dote : postea cum subdiacono et acolythis candelabra accensa ferentibus 
 vadit m pulpitum seu in locum consuetum, ubi cantat evangelium Cum appro- 
 pinquasset more consueto ; quo finito subdiaconus defert librum osculandum 
 sacerdotiet diaconus exuitur dalmatica(/'^^^.ii^r/. Rothom., 1645, pp. 102-103) 
 
 Rouen. 
 
 (4) The actual blessing of the 
 palms was accompanied by a 
 prayer, the preface sung, their 
 sprinkling with holy water, 
 
 and a second prayer. 
 
 c. 1450. Quo lecto sequitur bene- 
 dictio ramorum, et dicantur orationes 
 Deus qui dispersa congregas . . . Aeterne 
 Deus (more praefationis) cuius filius 
 pro salute. Postea dominus archi- 
 episcopus vel sacerdos super ramos 
 aquam benedictam aspergat ; et haec 
 oratio sequitur Deus qui per olivae 
 ramos (Migne ibid. col. 118).' 
 
 Hereford. 
 At Hereford the rite was more 
 simple still : a single prayer dif- 
 fering from that used as a preface 
 at Rouen by a few slight variants 
 only ; with the sprinkling and 
 censing of the palms. 
 
 Quo finito sequatur benedictio 
 palmarum hoc modo. Dominus 
 vobiscum. Oretnus. Oratio. Deus 
 cuius filius pro salute. Deinde asper- 
 gantur palmae aqua benedicta et in- 
 censentur {Missal, reprint 1874, pp. 
 79-80). 
 
 1645. Sacerdos vero stans in eodem cornu epistolae dicit in tono orationis 
 Dominus vobiscum et orationem Deus qui dispersa congregas cum praefatione 
 in cantu et orationibus Deus qui per olivae et Benedic quaesumus etiam in 
 tono orationis : quibus finitis ter aspergit ramos aqua benedicta dicendo anti-
 
 282 
 
 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 phonam Asperges secreto et sine versu. Postea vero dicit in tono orationis 
 Dominus vobiscion et orationem Deus qui filium tuum {Proc. Eccl. Rothom.y 
 1645, PP- 103-104).' 
 
 (5) During the distribution of the palms, the antiphons sung at 
 Rouen, Hereford, and Salisbury are the same, and the same as those 
 now in use in the Pian, or Common, rite.^ 
 
 Rouen. 
 (6) The procession then set out 
 for the church of St-Godard, where 
 the Blessed Sacrament had been 
 carried in the early morning, and 
 where was to be the first station. 
 On the road were sung three anti- 
 phons. 
 
 c. 1450. Hoc finite pergat pro- 
 cessio ad locum destinatum, cantore 
 incipiente 
 
 ^ Cum audisset tiirba. 
 
 'if Et cum appropinquasset . 
 
 Sequitur ant. Fratres hoc enim 
 sentite. Sequantur aliae antiphonae 
 ad placitum cantoris quantum ne- 
 cesse fuerit. Ant. Cum audisset popu- 
 lus. Alia ant. Prima autem. Alia 
 ant. Cum appropinquaret Dominus 
 (Migne ibid. col. 118). 
 
 Hereford. 
 The procession then set out for 
 the appointed place, where the 
 Blessed Sacrament had been 
 carried in the early morning, and 
 where was to be the first station. 
 On the road were sung two anti- 
 phons (the same as the first two 
 used at Rouen). 
 
 Et his dictis eat processio ad locum 
 constitutum in quo reliquiae et Corpus 
 Domini, quod illuc mane sit depor- 
 tatum, consistunt ; cantando has anti- 
 phonas Cum audisset et caetera [. . . 
 antiphonas sequentes : Ant. Cum au- 
 disset. Ant. Ciim appropinquasset. 
 Ordinale, Harl. MS 2983, fol. 28 a.] 
 Si autem progressio ulterior fuerit, 
 cantentur responsoria sequentia de 
 historia. ^ Insurrexerunt. 'if Et 
 dederunt. 
 
 ^ The Add. MS 10048 at the British Museum, a Rouen Missal of the twelfth 
 century, shews that the Ordinarium of c. 1450 represents the ancient practice. It 
 gives the prayers Actiones nostras (above § 3), Deus qui dispersa congregas, the 
 Aeterne Deus ctmis filius as a preface (shewing the Rouen, not the Hereford, 
 readings), and Deus qui per olivae (ff. 35-36). The Rouen Missal of 1499 does not 
 mention the censing of the palms : ' Sacerdos ramos aspergat et postea dicat Deus 
 qui per olivae ^^ &c, Benedic quaesmnus, Asperges, and Deus qui filium tuum, as 
 in the Processional of 1645, "^"^^ additions to the Rouen order from the Pian Missal. 
 
 ' At Rouen Ptieri Hebraeorum toUentes was the first antiphon, and Pueri 
 Hebraeortim vestimenta the second (see Ordinarium of 1450, Missal of 1499, and 
 Processional of 1645). At Hereford this order was reversed according to the 
 Missal. The Hereford Ordinale of the fourteenth century, Harl. MS 2983, f. 28 a, 
 omits Pueri Hebraeorum vestimeftta, and has : ' Clero canente has antiphonas 
 sequentes. Ant. Pueri Hebraeorum tollentes. Cum angelis.^ The full text of 
 this latter seems to be ' Cum angelis et pueris fideles inveniamur triumphatori 
 mortis clamantes Osanna in excelsis^ This antiphon Cutn angelis occurs also in 
 Lanfranc's order for the Palm Sunday procession, immediately before the Ave rex 
 noster. 
 
 The Rouen Processional of 1645 (P- 105) adds after the distribution the prayer 
 Omnipotens sempiterne Deus qui Dotninum, adapted from the Pian Missal.
 
 HEREFORD AND ROUEN 
 
 283 
 
 1645. Postea omnibus ramos in 
 manibus tenentibus fit processio ex 
 ecclesia quidem cathedrali ad San- 
 ctum Gildardum . , . cantando quae 
 sequuntur. Rasp. Cum audisset turba. 
 "5^ Et cum appropitiijuaiset. Ant. 
 Fratres hoc enim sentite. Sequentes 
 antiphonae omitti possunt ubi via 
 processionis est brevior. Ant. Cum 
 audisset populus ; alia ant. Prima 
 autem azymorum [Proc. Eccl. Rot horn., 
 1645, pp. 105-109). 
 
 Rotten. 
 (7) On reaching St-Godard, a 
 sermon was preached, and the 
 Blessed Sacrament was brought 
 from the choir to the south door 
 of the church (so 1645), which 
 was the place of the station. It 
 was then censed and adored with 
 genuflexions during the singing 
 of versicles, which are the same in 
 the three rites, Rouen, Hereford, 
 and Salisbury, and with practically 
 the same ceremonies. 
 
 c. 1450. Cum autem ventum fue- 
 rit ad locum ubi static debet fieri, fiat 
 sermo ad populum. 
 
 Quo finite quinque de secunda sede 
 cantent in albis hos versus ante fere- 
 trum ubi Corpus Domini fuerit por- 
 tatum privatim ante lucem illius diei. 
 ■5^ En rex venit. Quo finite dominus 
 archiepiscopus vel sacerdos, cantor, 
 diaconus et subdiaconus cum choro 
 de statione sua, flectendo genua, re- 
 spondeant Salve quern lesutn incen- 
 sando. 
 
 Quinque clerici ^ Hie est qui de 
 Edom venit. Dominus archiepiscopus, 
 cantor, diaconus et subdiaconus et 
 
 1^ Noli esse, "if Confundantur. 
 
 Yf. Dominus mecum est. if Vidisti. 
 
 ly Conclusit. if Factus sum. 
 
 Quae disponente cantore sic pro- 
 trahantur quod durent usque ad 
 locum stationis {Missal, repr. 1874, 
 p. 80). 
 
 Hereford. 
 
 On reaching the place of the 
 station, the Blessed Sacrament 
 was censed and adored.^ 
 
 The Gospel, Turba mult a, was 
 then read ; after which a sermon 
 was preached. 
 
 Cum autem perventum fuerit ad 
 stationem, tres canonicivel clerici ante 
 reliquias stantes versis vultibus ad 
 chorum cantent ant. Cum rex venit. 
 Tres alii ex maioribus personis ex op- 
 posite respendeant Salve qttem lesum ; 
 et sic secunde et tertio antiphonae 
 sequentes subiungantur. 
 
 Que facte accedant predictae per- 
 sonae maieres ad reliquias et ante 
 illas stantes cantent ant. Dignus es 
 Domine. Chorus idem repetat cum 
 genuflexione. Interim incensent reli- 
 quias, et sic secunde et tertio idem 
 faciant. 
 
 Deinde legatur evangelium secun- 
 
 ^ [The text mentions * relics ' only ; but from what precedes it appears that relics 
 and the Blessed Sacrament go together ; and, as the pieces sung evidently relate to 
 the latter, I presume the statement in my text will be allowed.]
 
 a84 
 
 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 chorus Salve lux mundi, incensando dum lohannem xii. In illo tempore 
 et flectendo genua. turba multa quae convenerat. 
 
 Quinque praedicti clerici '^ Hie est Quo lecto fiat sermo ad populum 
 ilk qui let agnus. Interim sicut prius {Missal, repr. 1874, p. 80). 
 dominus archiepiscopus, cantor, et 
 alii Salve nostra salus. 
 
 Quo finito dominus archiepiscopus, 
 cantor, diaconus et subdiaconus ver- 
 tant se ad feretrum et incensent 
 Corpus Domini honorifice, cantore 
 incipiente cum domino archiepiscopo 
 et revestitis, incensando, et ter repe- 
 tatur, et chorus ducat ad finem Dignus 
 es Domine ; alia ant. Hosanna filio 
 David {M-igne ibid. coll. 118-119). 
 
 1645. Cum pervenerit processio ecclesiae cathedralis ad atrium Sancti 
 Gildardi, ordinata cleri populique multitudine, habetur sermo in tribuna 
 lignea decenter et commode praeparata, vel, si per temporis inclementiam 
 non liceat, in proxima ecclesia S. Laurentii. Quo finito SS™"™ sacramentum 
 effertur e loco ubi mane positum fuit in choro ecclesiae S. Gildardi ad portam 
 meridionalem eiusdem ecclesiae; ibique clero et populo devote occurren- 
 tibus, quinque de secunda sede albis induti ante tabernaculum cantant versus 
 sequentes. Vers. En rex venit, &c. [Then substantially as in the Ordinarium 
 of c. 1450, except that the three Resp. Salve, &c., are begun by the arch- 
 bishop, &c., and continued by the choir.] Postea D. archiepiscopus vel 
 sacerdos genuflexus incensat Corpus Domini, incipiens cum cantore et mini- 
 stris banc antiphonam Dignus es Domine Deus noster. Chorus flectendo genua 
 respondet Dignus es Domine Deus noster. D. archiepiscopus vel sacerdos 
 cum cantore et ministris iterum dicunt Dignus es, idemque chorus respondet. 
 Item D. archiepiscopus vel sacerdos cum cantore et ministris tertio repetunt 
 Dignus es. Chorus vero genuflexus prosequitur antiphonam dicens Accipere 
 gloriam et honorem. D. archiepiscopus vel sacerdos cum cantore et ministris 
 incipiunt et chorus finit Hosanna filio David, &c. {Proc. Eccl. Rothom., 1645, 
 pp. 110-114). 
 
 Rouen. 
 (8) The adoration finished, the 
 procession returned to the cathe- 
 dral singing an antiphon and re- 
 sponsories. On reaching the city 
 gate, the place of the second 
 station, six boys from the summit 
 of the tower of the gate sang the 
 Gloria latis ; after u'hich the anti- 
 phon In nomine lesic was sung 
 with genuflexions. 
 
 Hereford. 
 The sermon finished, the pro- 
 cession returned to the cathedral, 
 singing three responsories (two of 
 them as at Rouen ; Sarum here 
 has one of four like Rouen). On 
 reaching the city gate, the place 
 of the second station, five or seven 
 boys from the top of the gate sang 
 the Gloria laus.
 
 HEREFORD AND ROUEN 
 
 285 
 
 c. 1450. Hoc finito processio 
 redeat, cantore incipiente antiphonam 
 Coepenitit omnes turbae. Sequantur 
 Resp. Dominus lesus. '^ Convene- 
 runt', ^ Cum audisset turba. if Et 
 dum appropinquaret. 
 
 Cum autem processio ad portam 
 civitatis ordinatam (a/, ornatam) 
 venerit, sex pueri turrim ascendant 
 et hos versus festive cantent Gloria 
 laus et honor. Dominus archiepi- 
 scopus vel sacerdos, cantor cum re- 
 vestitis, incensando incipiat Gloria 
 laus flectendo genua, et chorus ducat 
 ad finem. Item sex pueri if Israel 
 es tu rex. Chorus flexis genibus, 
 dominus archiepiscopus, cantor et 
 alii Gloria laus. [And so with the 
 two next verses Coetus in excelsis and 
 Plebs Hebraea.'\ Hoc finito dominus 
 archiepiscopus vel sacerdos cum re- 
 vestitis incipiat antiphonam, et omnes 
 flectant genua, et chorus finiat In 
 nomine lesu (Migne ibid. col. 119). 
 
 Finito sermone redeat processio 
 cantore incipiente ]^ Dominus lesus. 
 ^ Cogitaverunt. ^ Cum audisset 
 turba. 
 
 Quae cum venerit ad portas civi- 
 tatis, claudantur portae ; in quarum 
 summitate appareant septem vel 
 quinque pueri cantantes Gloria laus. 
 Chorus idem repetat. Pueri versum 
 Israel. Chorus Gloria laus ; et sic 
 deinceps {Missal, repr. 1874, p. 80). 
 
 1645. His finitis cantor incipit sequentem antiphonam, et praeeunte clero 
 Sanctissimum Sacramentum honorifice refertur ad Ecclesiam Cuthedralem. 
 Ant. Coeperunt omnes turbae, &c. Resp. Dominus lesus, &c. Si necesse sit 
 additur Resp. Cum audisset turba. Cum processio pervenerit ad locum ubi 
 antiquitus erat porta civitatis, tabernaculum Sanctissimi Sacramenti deponitur 
 super mensam decenter ornatam, ibique fit statio, tribus de secunda sede 
 versum Gloria laus et alios sequentes sursum e loco consueto decantantibus, 
 et D. archiepiscopo vel sacerdote cum cantore et ministris ante Sanctissimum 
 Sacramentum genuflexo ad singulos versus eumdem if Gloria laus repetente, 
 quem chorus musicorum prosequitur. . . . His finitis . . . D. archiepiscopus 
 vel sacerdos cum cantore et ministris . . . flectendo genua incipit sequentem 
 antiphonam quam chorus flexis genibus prosequitur In nomine enim lesu, &c. 
 {Proc. Eccl. Rothom., 1645, pp. 114- 118). 
 
 The Office de VEglise a r usage du diocese de Rouen pour la co?nmodite' des 
 Idiques (171 1), partie d'hyver, p. 533, is more particular in its details: — 
 ' La procession ^tant en la rue du Grand-Pont, au lieu ou etoit autrefois la 
 porte de la Ville, qui fut demolie en I'ann^e 1539 ... on fait une station, en 
 laquelle le vers Gloria laus et les autres suivants (que Ton chantoit dessus 
 ladite porte, avant qu'elle fflt abbatue) sont chantez maintenant dans une 
 maison prochaine par trois de la seconde forme du chceur,' &c. The windows 
 from which the Gloria laus was sung here before the Revolution could still 
 be shewn a few years ago ; the house is probably yet standing.
 
 286 
 
 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Rouen. 
 
 (9) The second station finished, 
 the procession entered the city- 
 singing the responsory Ingrediente 
 Domino. This was followed by 
 another responsory. 
 
 Then at the entrance of the 
 Aitre- Notre -Dame, in front of 
 the cathedral, 
 
 the cantor began the antiphon 
 Colleger unt p07itifices. At the door 
 of the cathedral four priests in cope 
 sang the verse Unus autem. After 
 which the procession entered the 
 church in silence, passing under- 
 neath the Blessed Sacrament,which 
 was held aloft transversely in the 
 doorway (so in 1450 ; by 1645 this 
 ceremony had been transferred to 
 the entrance of the choir, and the 
 rite was in some respects altered, 
 see remarks on (9) and (10)). 
 
 Hereford. 
 The second station finished, 
 the procession entered the city 
 singing the responsory Ingre- 
 diente Domino. This was followed 
 by an antiphon, which was 
 timed to last until the choir 
 came to the door of the cloisters, 
 and at that spot was begun the 
 antiphon Collegerunt pontificcs. 
 At the door of the cathedral 
 two canons, or clerks, in copes 
 sang the antiphon Unus autem. 
 After which the procession en- 
 tered the church, passing under- 
 neath the Blessed Sacrament ; but, 
 instead of in silence as at Rouen, 
 at Hereford the antiphon Occur- 
 runt turbae was sung. 
 
 c. 1450. Qua finita cantor incipiat 
 ^ Ingrediente Domino. "5^ Cum 
 audisset. Et intret processio urbem. 
 Sequitur 'B^ Cogitaverunt autevi. 
 if Testimonium. Ad introitum atrii 
 cantor incipiat Collegerunt pontifices. 
 Quatuor presbyteri de maiori sede 
 cum rubeis et viridibus cappis induti 
 ante ianuas ecclesiae cantent hunc 
 versum Unus autem ex ipsis ; chorus 
 Ne forte. Hoc finite intret processio 
 ecclesiam, et feretrum in quo Corpus 
 Domini fuerit, ante portas ecclesiae 
 a duobus presbyteris in transversum 
 ablatum teneatur, et clerus et popu- 
 lus subintrent (Migne ibid. col. 
 119). 
 
 Postea apertis portis intret pro- 
 cessio in civitate cantore incipiente 
 ^ Ingrediente Domi?to. Deinde se- 
 quatur ant. Prima autem, quae sic 
 protrahatur quousque chorus venerit 
 ad ostium claustri ; et ibi incipiatur 
 ant. Collegerunt. Cum vero per- 
 ventum fuerit ad ostium ecclesiae 
 duo canonici vel clerici capis induti 
 versis vultibus ad populum [in ipso 
 introitu, Harl. MS 2983, f. 28 a] can- 
 tent ant. Utus autem ; chorus repetat 
 J\^ forte. Postea in ipso introitu 
 feretrum reliquiarum ^ in transversum 
 teneatur a duobus presbiteris, et sub- 
 intret clerus et populus, cantore in- 
 cipiente ant. Occurrunt turbae. Alia 
 ant. Turba multa {Missal, repr, 1874, 
 pp. 80-81). 
 
 * See above, p. 283 n. I.
 
 HEREFORD AND ROUEN 287 
 
 1645. Finita antiphona . . . tabernaculum Sanctissimi Sacramenti effertur 
 e mensa, statimque omnibus surgentibus cantor intonat sequens Resp. quod 
 chorus in itinere prosequitur . . . Resp. Ingredienie Domino, &c. Aliud resp. 
 Cogitaverunt atitem. Ad introitum atrii cantor incipit sequens resp., quod 
 finitur ad portam ecclesiae clausam, tabernaculo Sanctissimi Sacramenti 
 interim stante in medio cleri. Resp. Collegerioit pontifices. Quatuor de 
 maion sede nigris cappis induti intra ecclesiam versa facie ad ianuas clausas 
 cantant if Unus aiitem. Chorus respondet Ne forte, &c. Finito responsorio 
 aperiuntur valvae ecclesiae in quam infertur tabernaculum Sanctissimi Sacra- 
 menti, clero subsequente sine cantu {Froc. Ecd. Rothom., 1645, pp. 119-124). 
 
 (10) The fourth and last station was before the great Crucifix at the 
 entrance of the choir, which was saluted with the Ave rex noster. The 
 three rites of Rouen, Hereford, and Salisbury are here substantially at 
 one. 
 
 Rouen. Hereford, 
 
 c. 1450. Hoc finito statim dis- Deinde facta statione ante cruci- 
 
 cooperiatur crucifixus et dominus fixum discooperiatur crucifixus. Quo 
 
 archiepiscopus vel sacerdos, cantor, facto episcopus vel decanus et duo 
 
 diaconus et subdiaconus incipiant, [vel duo, Ordinale, f. 28a] de seniori- 
 
 flectendo genua, Ave rex ?toster, et bus canonicis presbiteris cantent Ave 
 
 chorus similiter Ave rex noster. Do- rex tioster. Chorus idem repetat cum 
 
 minus archiepiscopus et alii dicant Ave genuflexione. Interim incensent cruci- 
 
 rex nosier. Et chorus Aver ex fioster, fixum : et sic secundo et tertio illud 
 
 et totam deinceps finiat antiphonam idem faciant. Deinde Chorus prose- 
 
 Ri/i David {Migne ibid. col. 119). quatur Ri/i David et cetera {Missal, 
 
 repr. 1874, p. 81). 
 
 1645. By this date the procession under the Blessed Sacrament at the 
 west door of the cathedral had fallen into disuse ; for it was substituted a 
 ceremony somewhat akin. An elevated estrade with a passage way under it 
 (' un reposoir haut eleve ', says the Office of 1 7 11) was erected in the nave ; on 
 it the Blessed Sacrament was placed, and in front of this estrade the station 
 was held. As a natural and an almost inevitable consequence the salutation 
 Ave rex noster was transferred from the Crucifix to the Blessed Sacrament. At 
 the close of the procession, before entering the choir for the Mass, the clergy 
 passed underneath the estrade. This was popularly called ' passer sous le 
 joug'. Le Brun Desmarettes {Voyages Liturgiques, p. 340) gives the old 
 practice, not that of his own day. The passage ' sous le joug ' was continued 
 until recent years ; it was abolished by the late Cardinal de Bonnechose. 
 The following is the rubric of the Processional : ' Et in medio navis col 
 locatur (sc. SS""""" Sacramentum) super mensam altius elevatam. Interim 
 vero discooperitur Crucifixus. Tunc disposito clero in modum stationis, D 
 archiepiscopus vel sacerdos cum cantore et diacono accedit ante taber- 
 naculum, et genuflexus incensat Sanctissimum Sacramentum, incipiens anti- 
 phonam Ave rex noster. Chorus flexis genibus respondet Ave rex noster. 
 D. archiepiscopus vel sacerdos cum cantore et diacono flexis genibus iterum
 
 288 
 
 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 dicit Ave rex nosier. Quod chorus flexis genibus denuo repetit. D. 
 archiepiscopus vel sacerdos, cum praedictis, flectendo genua idem tertio 
 dicit. Chorus vero flexis genibus prosequitur antiphonam dicens Fili David, 
 &c. {Proc. Ecd. Rothotn., 1645, pp. 124-125). 
 
 Rouen. 
 (11) After the salutation of the 
 Crucifix four deacons in black 
 copes, standing behind the Cruci- 
 fix in the rood loft, facing each 
 other two and two, sang the re- 
 sponsory Circumdederimt me viri 
 mendaces, with its verse and repe- 
 tition. After which the cantor 
 began the antiphon Principes sa- 
 cerdotum, and at the singing of 
 this with, if necessary, Multa 
 ttirba, the procession passed into 
 the choir. The archbishop gave 
 his blessing, and the Mass began. 
 (For the change in 1645 see 
 remarks on (10) above.) 
 
 c. 1450. Qua finita quatuor dia- 
 coni de secunda sede nigris cappis 
 induti in pulpito retro crucifixum 
 versis vultibus ad se ipsos cantent 
 hoc resp. Circumdederunt cum versu 
 et regressu. Quo finito ad introitum 
 chori cantor incipiat ant. Principes 
 sacerdotum, et cantando intret pro- 
 cessio chorum. Sequitur alia ant. si 
 necesse fuerit, Multa turba ludaeo- 
 rum. Qua finita dominus archiepi- 
 scopus, si praesens fuerit, benedicat 
 populum ; et incipiatur missa (Migne 
 ibid. col. 119). 
 
 1645. Finita Antiphona . . . qua- 
 tuor diaconi nigris cappis induti in 
 pulpito cantant resp. Circumdederunt 
 cum versu et regressu. . . . Postremo 
 ad introitum chori dicitur sequens 
 
 ' In view of the Rouen rubrics it would seem that the words * subtus crucifixum ' 
 at Hereford are to be strictly interpreted and bear the meaning placed on them 
 above. If 'underneath the rood loft' were meant, the natural expression would be 
 ' in introitu chori '. 
 
 Hereford, 
 After the salutation of the 
 Crucifix two priests in black 
 copes, standing underneath the 
 Crucifix in the rood loft^ with 
 their hoods up, with looks bent 
 on the ground, sang the resp. 
 Circumdederunt, with its verse 
 and repetition. After which> 
 during the singing of the anti- 
 phons Principes sacerdotum and 
 Multa turba, the procession 
 passed into the choir, and the 
 Mass began. 
 
 Postea duo sacerdotes in capis 
 nigris velatis capitibus et demissis 
 vultibus in terram, subtus crucifixum 
 humili voce cantent ]^ Circumdede- 
 runt cum versu et repetitione, nullo 
 eis respondente. Ad introitum chori 
 Ant. Princeps {sic) sacerdotum. Ant. 
 Multa turba. 'f Dederunt in escam. 
 Oratio Omnipotens sempiterne Deus. 
 [So the printed Missal (p. 81). The 
 fourteenth-century Ordinale omits this 
 prayer altogether, and after the "5^ 
 Dederunt passes on at once to the 
 Mass. The prayer was probably 
 borrowed in the fifteenth century 
 from Sarum.]
 
 HEREFORD AND ROUEN 289 
 
 antiphona ; et interim . . . omnis clerus 
 ordine processionis flectendo genua 
 reverenter transit sub tabernaculo. 
 Ant. Prindpes sacerdotum, &c. {Froc. 
 Eccl. Rothom., 1645, p. 126). 
 
 In spite of occasional divergences, it has been possible to follow 
 the order of Rouen and Hereford in the procession of Palm Sunday- 
 together. At Salisbury the difference of observance begins with the 
 first step.^ 
 
 Salisbury. 
 
 (i) There was no station outside the city walls, nor was the Blessed 
 Sacrament carried anywhere within the city in the early 
 morning. It was not indeed taken from the cathedral until 
 after the procession had left the church. 
 
 (2) The palms were blessed at the high altar, not as is expressly 
 
 provided for at Rouen and Hereford at some other altar. 
 There was consequently no room for a procession before the 
 blessing of palms, and accordingly there is no singing here 
 of the antiphons Aftte sex dies? 
 
 (3) The Office began straightway with the Lesson, immediately 
 
 after which (there being no intercalated responsory for quasi- 
 gradual as at Hereford and Rouen) followed the Gospel 
 Turba nmlta (not Ctivi appropinqiiasset as at Rouen and 
 Hereford). 
 
 Post aspersionem aquae benedictae legatur haec lectio, ad gradum altaris 
 ex parte australi. . . . cum suo titulo Lectio libri Exodi. In diebus illis Vene- 
 runt filii Israel. Statimque sequatur evangelium ; et legatur ubi leguntur 
 evangelia ferialibus diebus. . . . In illo tempore, Turba multa {Missal, Burntis- 
 land reprint, 1861-1883, coll. 253-254). 
 
 (4) The actual blessing of the palms was accompanied by an 
 
 exorcism and four prayers. 
 
 Finito evangelio sequatur benedictio florum et frondium a sacerdote . . . 
 super gradum tertium altaris. . . . Exorcizo te, creatura florum, &c. . . . Oratio 
 Omnipotens sempiierne Deus ; qui i?i diluvii, &c. Deus, cuius filius pro salute, &c. 
 (this prayer occurs in Rouen and Hereford books). Deus, qui dispersa con- 
 
 ^ The numbering of the sections as previously given is kept for convenience of 
 reference. 
 
 * [Dr. Legg's MS C (the Crawford MS now in the Rylands Library at 
 Manchester adopted by him for his text) simply says: * Deinde fiat benedictio 
 florum et frondium ' (p. 92) ; ' Post hec aspergantur flores et frondes ' (p. 93) ; 
 ' Hiis ita peractis statim distribuantur palme ' (p. 94). There is no specification of 
 place.]
 
 290 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 gregas, &c. (this prayer occurs in Rouen books). Domine lesu Christe, Fill 
 Dei vivi, mundi conditor, &c. (Ibid. coll. 255-257). 
 
 (5) It has been already stated that the distribution of the palms 
 
 was accompanied by the same antiphons as at Rouen and 
 Hereford. 
 
 (6) The procession passed through the west door of the cathedral 
 
 round by the southern alley of the cloisters to the north-east 
 angle of the church where the first station was held. On the 
 road were sung two antiphons ; if necessary others were sung, 
 two of which were those beginning A nte sex dies (see Rouen 
 and Hereford (2), ante). At the station, the Gospel Cum 
 appropinqiiasset was read by the deacon (this was the 
 Gospel before the blessing of the palms in Rouen and 
 Hereford). 
 
 Meantime the Blessed Sacrament was being brought from 
 the church by two clerks of the second form with cross, 
 lantern, and two banners ; they took the short way, passing 
 along the north side of the church, appearing in sight of the 
 multitude just as the words Benedicttis qui vefiit, &c., at the 
 close of the Gospel were being said by the deacon.^ 
 
 Deinde per medium chori et ecclesiae exeat processio per ostium ecclesiae 
 occidentale . . . et sic circa claustrum et ita per portam canonicorum usque 
 ad locum primae stationis, quae fit ex parte ecclesiae boreali in extrema parte 
 orientalis cimiterii laicorum {or 'videlicet ante crucem in septentrionali 
 cimiterio', Processionale, ed. Henderson, pp. 47-48). In eundo antiphona 
 Prima autem azimoru77i. Antiphona Cum appropinquaret. Si autem non 
 sufficiunt hae duae antiphonae praedictae usque ad locum primae stationis, 
 tunc sequantur hae antiphonae, scilicet ant. Cum audisset, ant. Ante sex 
 dies sollefinitatis, ant. Ante sex dies passionis. Hie fiat prima statio. vide- 
 licet ex parte ecclesiae boreali in extrema parte orientali; et legatur hoc 
 Evangelium Cum appropinquasset lesus . . . ab ipso diacono ... ad borealem 
 converse {Missal cc^. 258-261 ; Process, pp. 48-49). 
 
 Dum distribuuntur rami praeparetur feretrum cum reliquiis in quo Corpus 
 Christi in pixide dependeat et ad locum primae stationis a duobus clericis de 
 secunda forma (deferatur) ; non procedatur sequendo, sed ad locum primae 
 stationis obviam veniendo . . . ; lumen deferatur in laterna praecedente cum 
 cruce denudata et duobus vexillis praecedentibus {Missal col. 258). Et in 
 fine Evangelii ad haec verba Benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini primo se 
 ostendant {Process, p. 49). 
 
 * [As the Corps-Saint procession did not (see above pp. 278-279) at the close of 
 the thirteenth century as yet form part of the Sarum rite, MS C simply says : 
 'Deinde eat processio ad locum prime stacionis cantore incipiente ant. Prima 
 autem ', &c. (p. 94).]
 
 HEREFORD AND ROUEN 291 
 
 (7) It has been already pointed out that the particular cere- 
 
 monies of the adoration of the Blessed Sacrament at the first 
 station were substantially the same at Salisbury as at Rouen 
 and Hereford.^ 
 
 (8) The adoration finished, the procession retraced their steps to 
 
 the south side of the cathedral singing various antiphons and 
 responsories ; a second station was made near the entrance of 
 the cloister, the Gloria latis being sung by seven boys in loco 
 eminentiori.^ 
 
 Deinde eat processio ad locum secundae stationis ; et feretrum cum capsula 
 reliquiarum pariter cum luce in laterna inter subdiaconum et thuribularium 
 deferatur, cum vexillis ex utraque parte, cantore incipiente antiphonam Dignus 
 es Domine. Ant. Occurrunt turbae. Si autem non sufficiant hae duae anti- 
 phonae ad locum secundae stationis, tunc cantentur haec duo responsoria 
 vel unum eorum. ^ Dominus lesus. if Convenenmt. ^ Cogitaventnt. 
 if Testimonium. Hie fiat secunda static, videlicet ex parte ecclesiae australi, 
 ubi septem pueri in loco eminentiori simul cantent if Gloria laus, &c. 
 {^Missal coW. 261-262). 
 
 The Processional, Harl. MS 2945 (f. 36 b), is more precise : ' Tunc pro- 
 cedant et intret processio per portam cimitorii canonicorum, praecedente 
 feretro cum omnibus ministris praedictis usque locum secundae stationis quae 
 fit in extrema parte occidentali eiusdem cimitorii ante ostium claustri ubi 
 pueri cantent Gloria laus ; cantore incipiente istam antiphonam Dignus es 
 Domine, &c. Alia ant. Occurrunt turbae. Si vero non sufiiciant ', &c. 
 
 (9) After the second station the procession, singing the antiphon 
 
 Colleger imt po7itifices, passed again into the cloister, this time 
 keeping the straight route along the north alley, and so 
 out before the west door of the church. Here was held the 
 third station. The if Unus autem was sung by three clerks, 
 and the procession entered the cathedral, passing under- 
 neath the Blessed Sacrament held aloft in the doorway ^ (as 
 explained above). Meantime the Resp. Ingrcdiente Domino 
 was sung. 
 
 Peracta hac statione eat processio per medium claustri a dextera manu 
 usque ad ostium ecclesiae occidentale, cantando ^ Collegerunt pontifices. 
 Hie fiat tertia statio, scilicet ante praedictum ostium, ubi tres clerici de 
 
 * The introduction of the Prophet at Salisbury (/"rf^vt-jj/^/ra/t? pp. 50-51), here 
 omitted, is interesting for liturgical drama, but is no part of the rite. 
 
 " [I think it worth while expressly to note that MS C uses the same words : * in 
 eminenciori loco ' ; MS A : 'in eminenti loco ' (ibid, note 2).] 
 
 * [Dr Legg's MS B (MS 2565 of the University Library at Bologna) has this 
 rubric : ' Tunc intrent in ecclesiam sub capsula reliquiarum ex transverse ostii 
 elevata, cantando ', «S:c. (p. 96 note 9). From this we may gather that previous to 
 the adoption of the Corps-Saint ceremony at Salisbury relics were carried instead 
 of the Blessed Sacrament.] 
 
 U a
 
 292 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 superiori gradu in ipso ostio . . . conversi ad populum cantent if Unus 
 autem. Repetitio Ne forte. His finitis intrent Ecclesiam per idem ostium 
 sub feretro et capsula reliquiarum ex transverse ostii elevata, cantando ^ In- 
 grediente Domino {^Missal col. 262). 
 
 The Processional, Harl. MS 2945 (f. 38 b), has : ' per medium claustri vel 
 cimitorii a dextra manu usque ad ostium ecclesiae occidentale non circu- 
 eundo.' 
 
 (10) The fourth station was before the great Crucifix, with Ave 
 rex 7ioster, and ceremonies h'ke those of Rouen and Hereford. 
 
 (11) After the salutation of the Crucifix the procession straight- 
 way entered the choir singing the responsory Circumdederunt 
 with its verses. The prayer Oninipotens sempiterne Deus qui 
 humano generi was said, and the Mass began. 
 
 Qua finita (the full Antiphon Ave rex noster, &c.) intrent chorum. ... In 
 introitu chori 'BjL Circumdederunt, &c. "5?" Eripe me. Oremus. Oratio 
 Omnipotens, &c. {Frocessionale p, 54). 
 
 On a review of the foregoing there can be no doubt that, so far as 
 the Palm Sunday procession is concerned, the rite of Hereford, whether 
 in regard to its general arrangement or its particular details, comes 
 incomparably nearer to that of Rouen than does Sarum. Indeed, it 
 may be called a close copy. There are one or two points of resem- 
 blance which are the more significant from their minuteness, so that 
 they may easily escape observation. For example, at Rouen it was 
 expressly prescribed that the antiphon Collegerunt pontijices was to 
 be begun by the cantor at the entrance of the Aitre-Notre-Dame. At 
 Hereford there was no atrium to enter ; but for all the change of cir- 
 cumstance there is the precise direction that the Collegerunt pontijices 
 is to begin when the choir reaches the door of the cloister, with this 
 special direction — that the antiphon immediately preceding is to be so 
 lengthened, and that the choir shall reach the cloister with its finish. 
 
 [What precedes represents the case as, on the basis of the docu- 
 ments then available, it stood twenty years ago. To-day, 19 16, as 
 regards Salisbury, we are able with the text of the Missal of about 
 1300 in print to see into the earlier history of the rite. We can now, 
 so it appears to me, say : (i) that the Sarum rite as originally settled 
 in the thirteenth century knew nothing of the Corps- Saint in the Palm 
 Sunday procession ; (a) but that already by the close of the thirteenth 
 century some Sarumites (whether of Salisbury or not non liquet) had 
 adopted this element ; (3) that from whatever quarter the Salisbury 
 people borrowed their Corps- Saint ceremonies (unless indeed they 
 made up a * rite ' of their own) it was not from Hereford or Rouen ; 
 (4) that, as regards the sum and substance of their rite for the Palm
 
 HEREFORD AND ROUEN 293 
 
 Sunday procession, that is as regards the stuff that matters, namely 
 what was said or sung, prayers, lessons, antiphons, &c.,they kept their 
 old and traditional texts intact ; and these, as we have seen, were 
 quite distinct from those of Rouen and Hereford. It may or may not 
 be possible from examination of existing documents to fix some day 
 the date at which the church of Salisbury adopted the Corps-Saint in 
 the Palm Sunday procession. This is, I think, a matter of mere 
 curiosity. What is of more importance is to notice its introduction as 
 a symptom of the increasing prominence given, even by the insular 
 English Church, to the public worship of the Blessed Sacrament 
 which has obtained such extension in post-Tridentine times. Rut this 
 particular form of devotion, it is necessary to insist, has a long history 
 behind it, going back indeed to the eleventh century. It was a sort of 
 natural process, essentially a popular movement, cropping up or 
 bursting forth in the last two or three centuries of the Middle Ages 
 in the most unexpected places and in the most unexpected forms 
 among the common Christian people; and in those centuries the 
 mferior clergy, the secular priests, or the bulk of them, could still be 
 ranked, in spite of their official character and functions, as really part 
 and parcel of that people. The method of imposing pieties and 
 devotions on the people from above by superior order jirbi ct orbi is 
 a much later developement ; and from what I sometimes read it may 
 not be amiss, I think, even in the interest of historical enquiry, to 
 recall the fact and emphasize the entirely different processes of those 
 earlier ages in which are to be sought the origins of so many of our 
 so-called modern popular devotions.] 
 
 But Sarum did not stand alone in adopting change; and before 
 passing on it is in place to say a word as to York also. So far as 
 it is possible to judge from the printed missals and the manuscripts 
 used by Dr Henderson for the reprint, which seem to contain the best 
 evidence on the question, the Corps-Saint at the Palm Sunday proces- 
 sion looks like a mere addition, a loan from the use of other churches, 
 awkwardly and ungraciously foisted into the original rite. Nor was 
 the practice to be found at St Mary's Abbey at the close of the four- 
 teenth century, as appears from the MS Ordinale of that house.^ But 
 
 ' By the kind permission of the Master and Fellows of St John's Colleee 
 Cambridge, a copy has been taken of the original manuscript in their possessiSn.' 
 The book IS the most curious and important of the English monastic ceremonials 
 which have survived; it was drawn up as a record of existing observance and for 
 practical use by a commission appointed under the authority and by command of 
 the archbishop in the year 1390. It has a further value as a witness to the 
 rXed state"""' ^' ^ ""'" "■^''" '^' ^'^^' Benedictine houses were in their mos^
 
 294 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 this is not peremptory evidence for the cathedral, since experience 
 shews that, given a great monastic church in a cathedral town, the 
 two, cathedral and abbey, seemed to like to find as many small 
 opportunities as possible of differing in ritual observance. 
 
 In dealing with the second part of the subject, the question whether 
 the rest of the offices of Holy Week shew other points of agreement 
 between Rouen and Hereford, with a different custom at Salisbury, it 
 will not be necessary to quote the same detail of rubric. Taking each 
 day, such agreement and divergence are found in the following cases : — 
 
 On Holy Thursday. 
 
 (i) The lesson of Holy Scripture at the Mandatimi (viz. chapters 
 xiii and xiv of St John's Gospel) is at Salisbury ^ divided 
 into two portions, one (ch. xiii 1-15) read before the washing 
 of the feet, the other (the rest of ch. xiii and ch. xiv) after. 
 [The thirteenth-century MSS direct that the whole lesson 
 be read before the washing of the feet (p. 107).] 
 
 At Rouen ^ and Hereford ^ the whole lesson is read after. 
 
 (2) At Salisbury the washing of the feet is performed by the two 
 
 priests who had washed the altars.* At Hereford by the 
 bishop and dean ; ^ at Rouen by the archbishop, and (in 
 1450) some dignitaries of the chapter.^ 
 
 (3) As regards the Psalms and antiphons sung during the Manda- 
 
 Uim^ though the differences are considerable, still those of 
 Rouen and Hereford much more nearly resemble each other 
 than does Sarum correspond to either. 
 
 (4) Salisbury has preces and a prayer before the second lesson 
 
 from St John.^ [In the thirteenth-century MSS there is of 
 course no second lesson, only preces and the prayer (p. 108). 
 See at (i) above.] These do not exist at Rouen'' and 
 Hereford.!" 
 
 ^ Missal, Burntisland reprint, col. 311, 313. 
 
 ' Ordinarium of c. 1450, Migne P. L. 147 col. 129; Processional of 1645, 
 p. 140. 
 
 ' Ordinale, Harl. MS 2983, s. xiv, printed in the Missal, ed. Henderson, p. 460. 
 
 * Missal coh 311. ^ Missal p. 460. 
 
 ' Ordinarium of c. 1450, col. 1 27- 128 ; Processional, 1645, p. 131. 
 
 '' Salisbury Missal col. 311 ; Hereford Missal p. 460; Rouen Ordinarium of 
 c. 1450, col. 129. The Processional oi 1645 is so far altered that it does not enter 
 into terms of comparison. 
 
 " Missal col. 312. 
 
 " According to the Ordinarium of c. 1450, col. 129. The Processional oi 1645, 
 however, shews preces and a prayer ^r<? consuetudine locorum (p. 139). 
 
 '" Missal p. 460.
 
 HEREFORD AND ROUEN 295 
 
 Good Friday. 
 
 (5) At Rouen ^ and Hereford ^ the cross to be venerated is un- 
 
 covered cum baculo, i. e. by the bishop or officiant ; at 
 Salisbury ^ it is uncovered by the priests who hold it. 
 
 (6) At Rouen "* and Hereford ' the cross is placed in the Sepulchre 
 
 between the rite of its veneration and the procession to bring 
 the Blessed Sacrament to the altar for the Mass of the Pre- 
 sanctified. At Salisbury the ceremony takes place after the 
 Vespers.*' 
 
 (7) At Rouen ^ and Hereford {the gemiine rite) the cross only was 
 
 placed in the Sepulchre ; at Salisbury ^ the Blessed Sacra- 
 ment was placed there also. 
 
 A few words are necessary to explain the parenthesis, ' the 
 genuine rite ' of Hereford. The fourteenth-century Ordinale 
 directs as follows : ' Afterwards let the holy cross be carried 
 by the priests to the door of the Sepulchre, and let it be 
 there washed with wine and water and wiped with a towel, 
 the choir meantime singing in an undertone the resp. Tenebre 
 facte sunt, &c., &c. Whilst it is being placed in the Sepulchre 
 let them sing the antiphons /;/ pace in idipsum, Caro mea. 
 Let the bishop cense the Sepulchre and the cross, and, a 
 candle being lighted within, let him close the Sepulchre. 
 The choir humbly continues Scpulto Domino' ^ The printed 
 Missal preserves this rubric ; but for the words ' let the bishop 
 cense the Sepulchre and the Cross ', substitutes the following : 
 ' Meantime let the bishop honourably depose the Body of our 
 Lord in the Sepulchre with the cross, and cense the Body of 
 our Lord and the cross.' ^'^ It would appear therefore that the 
 practice of placing the Blessed Sacrament in the Sepulchre 
 
 ^ Ordinarium, c. 1450 : 'Dominus archiepiscopus vel sacerdos crucem cum baculo 
 discooperiat genibus flexis' (col. 130). The Rouen Missal of 1499 has: 'Tunc 
 sacerdos crucem totaliter discooperiat genibus flexis.' 
 
 ^ Missal p. 94. 3 ^jissal col. 329. 
 
 * Ordinarium, c. 1450, col. 130. ^ Missal p. 96. 
 
 * Missal CC)\. 332. ^ Ordinarium, c. 1450, col. 130. 
 
 " Missal col. 332-333- [The following is the rubric in Dr Legg's MS C : ' Deinde 
 exuat sacerdos casulam et assumens secum unum de prelatis reponat crucem in 
 sepulchro cum corpore dominico', &c. (p. 115).] 
 
 ' ' Postea sancta crux ante hostium sepulchri deportetur et lavetur cum vino et 
 aqua et lintheo tergatur, choro interim submissa voce cantante vel potius lamen- 
 tante hoc responsorium Tenebre facte sunt. . . . Dum ponitur in sepulchro cantent 
 ant. In pace in idipsum. Ant. Caro mea. Episcopus turificet sepulchrum et 
 crucem, et accenso intus cereo claudat sepulchrum. Chorus humiliter prosequitur 
 resp. Sepulto Domino' (Harl. MS 2983, f. 30a). 
 
 ^" Missal pp. 95-96.
 
 296 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 was not a part of the genuine Hereford rite, but was borrowed 
 from Sarum in the course of the fifteenth century .^ 
 
 (8) At Rouen ^ and, as has been seen, at Hereford the cross was 
 
 washed before being placed in the Sepulchre. Not so at 
 Salisbury ; [and no such washing is mentioned in the thir- 
 teenth-century MS]. 
 
 Holy Saturday. 
 
 (9) The prayer for the benediction of the incense at Rouen ^ and 
 
 Hereford ^ is the same : Veniat omnipotens Deus. At Salis- 
 bury there are three prayers, of which this is not one.^ 
 
 (10) In the second Litany at Rouen ^ and Hereford ^ the procession 
 
 started from the choir to the font at the invocation Sancte 
 lohamies Baptista ; at Salisbury,^ punctually at Sancta 
 Maria. 
 
 (11) The same invocation in the third litany was the signal at 
 
 Rouen ^ and Hereford ^" for the return from the font to the 
 
 choir. At Salisbury ^^ this litany was replaced by a doggerel 
 
 which hardly deserves the name of litany or hymn — Rex 
 
 sanctorum angelorum. 
 
 Here it may be allowed to break off for an incidental note ; the 
 
 survival is too interesting to be passed over. At the end of the third 
 
 litany of Holy Saturday, which of course was finished in the choir, 
 
 ^ This clears up the awkwardness of the printed Hereford rubrics in which, as 
 they originally stood, 'Corpus Domini' referred only to the Host of the Mass of the 
 Presanctified. The Holy Thursday rubric, ' Ponantur a diacono tres hostiae ad 
 consecrandum, quarum duae reserventur in crastinum, una ad percipiendum a 
 sacerdote, reliqua ut ponatur cum cruce in sepulchre'' {Hereford Missal ^. 87) is 
 a mere copy of the Sarum rubric {Missal col. 303 11. 3-7). The Hereford Ordinale 
 (Harl. MS 2983) reads: 'Ponantur due hostie quarum tina consecrata reservetur 
 in crastinum' (fol. 29a); and below, ' Episcopus interim hostiaw in crastinum 
 reservandaw cum luminaribus', &c. (f. 29 a) ; instead of '^ tres hostiae . . . quarum 
 duae reserventur ', ' hostiai' in crastinum ', as in the printed Missal, pp. Z^, 89. 
 
 ^ Ordinariutn oi c, 1450, col. 130. 
 
 ^ Parochiale sive Sacerdotale Ecclesiae Rothomagensis, 165 1 (published by arch- 
 bishop Frangois H de Harlay), pars ii p. 399. There are one or two slight 
 variants (insertion of quaesufnus\ accende for intende, &c.), but these are later 
 changes ; the Rouen Missal of 1499 runs according to the Hereford text. 
 
 * Missal p. <)•;/. ^ Mma/ col. 336-337, 
 
 * Processional of 1645, p. 1 44. ' Missal p. 461. 
 
 * Missal col. 350 ; Processional, ed. Henderson, p. 84. [There is no direction on 
 this point in MS C ; but MS A has the rubric thus : ' cum qua (i.e. the second 
 litany) eat processio ad fontes benedicendos, scilicet ad pronuntiationem Sancta 
 Maria o(ra)^ (Dr Legg, p. 122 n. l).] 
 
 ' Processional oi 1645, P- ^49- 
 
 ^° ' Tres clerici tercie forme in capis incipiant terciam letaniam Sancte sanctorutn 
 deus, et sic in choro redeant cum perventum fuerit ad versum Sancte Johannes 
 Baptista' (Harl. MS 2983, fol. 31 a). 
 
 " Missal col. 347-349.
 
 HEREFORD AND ROUEN 297 
 
 the cantors, according to the Hereford rubric, said in a loud voice (on 
 a high note) Acccnditc, ' Light up '. Then all the candles are lighted 
 throughout the church, and the ruler of the choir sings the Kyrze 
 eleison} which is at once the concluding Kyric of the litany and the 
 Kyrie of the Mass- The origin of this evidently lies in one of those 
 traits of directness and simplicity which characterized the old Roman 
 rite before it was elaborated, polished up, and made fine with Gallican- 
 isms. According to the earliest extant Roman Ordos the Pontifif, 
 being fully vested in the sacristy ready to go to the altar, gave a nod 
 to a sub-deacon, a member of the schola, who thereupon went to the 
 sacristy door and called out to the seven acolytes, who, carrying seven 
 candles, were to precede the Pope to the altar : Accendite, ' Now, light 
 up '. The practice long survived, at least on Holy Saturday, in many 
 churches of France, of which Rouen was one.- There is no such 
 Accendite in the Sarum books. 
 
 The foregoing examples of resemblances in the rites of Holy Week 
 between Rouen and Hereford, and dissidence as between Rouen and 
 Sarum may suffice to confirm the view that an intimate connexion 
 exists between the two former, not the two latter. One further detail, 
 however, must be noticed which will lead up to the final section of this 
 paper, viz. the question how and when Rouen customs came to 
 Hereford. In the Exultet, or blessing of the paschal candle, of the 
 Hereford Missal there occurs this passage after the mention of the 
 Pope and the bishop of the diocese : — ' Necnon et pro Anglorum rege 
 N. et principe nostro N.' This passage of the Exultet in liturgical 
 books has been a very common pitfall. People have been determined, 
 or have found it convenient, to see more in the varying formulae 
 occurring at this point than there is any warrant for, although the 
 practical lesson taught by the present Roman Missal, in which we may 
 read, but do not say, a commemoration of the ' Emperor ' might be 
 thought a sufficient warning. In the Irish Missal of the twelfth cen- 
 tury, edited by the Rev. F. E. Warren, there occurs the expression : 
 ' Pro gloriosissimo rege nostro N. eiusque nobilissima prole.' The 
 editor regarded this as a formula which must have ' a special historical 
 significance ', and considered any other view as an ' unreasonable and 
 improbable hypothesis '. He accordingly spends some time and trouble 
 over hard Irish names to identify the superlative personages whom the 
 scribe had in mind. The same formula, though unknown in England 
 
 * Missal p. 112. 
 
 * The rubric of the Missal of 1499 is already carelessly expressed: ' Statim 
 accensis cereis incipiatiir celebratio misse ; et incipiant cantores solenniter Accen- 
 dite. Sequitur Kyrie el. ill.' In the Processional of 1645 there is nothing but an 
 ordinary rubric: 'Accenduntur luminaria in altari et cantores incipiunt solemniter 
 Kyrie' (p. 150).
 
 298 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 and in Rome, is scattered about in odd quarters over Europe ; thus an 
 Exidtet, copied by chance by a fourteenth-century hand in the martyro- 
 logy of the Celestines of Sens, has precisely the same form.^ In fact, 
 it is very difficult and very unsafe to attempt strict historical deductions 
 from liturgical formulae, new or old. The formula of the Hereford 
 Missal would, in view of the nearness of the Welsh border, make it an 
 easy matter to theorize on its possible historical significance. But in 
 consideration of what has gone before, it will be more to the point to 
 call attention to the fact that the Hereford form is found also in 
 the missals of Rouen, of course with the necessary variant ' King of 
 the French ' for ' King of the English ', and must have been used 
 almost in living memory some six centuries after it had lost its meaning. 
 The twelfth-century sacramentary of Rouen (Addit. MS 10028) un- 
 fortunately does not contain the Exidtet. The abbe A. Tougard has 
 been kind enough to examine for me the earliest missals of the diocese of 
 Rouen at the Public Library of that city. The manuscript numbered 
 Y 50 ', of the thirteenth century, reads : ' cum antistite nostro N. 
 necnon Francorum rege N. et principe nostro N.,' which is also the 
 form of the Missal of 1499, ^"^ it is maintained in the ' reformed ' 
 Missal of 1728 issued by archbishop de Lavergne de Tressan, and 
 abolished less than forty years ago.^ At the risk of offending against 
 sound principles in the matter of historical deductions from liturgical 
 formulae, I will venture to suggest that the words in question, occurring 
 in unbroken tradition in the Rouen Exidtet, date from a time when 
 there were Dukes of Normandy who owned the King of France as their 
 suzerain ; and it may perhaps be considered safe, in view of all that 
 has been said hitherto, to conclude further that the Hereford form 
 was simply borrowed from Rouen at some time during that period. 
 
 We may now address ourselves to the question. When and how 
 were the Rouen observances copied in Hereford ? Who brought them 
 thither ? 
 
 There is one certain point of departure: their introduction must 
 have taken place before the loss of Normandy in the reign of King 
 John ; and this, which hardly advances the solution much, is all that 
 can be asserted with anything like confidence. After a careful con- 
 sideration of the history of the see of Hereford in the eleventh and 
 twelfth centuries, the following seems to offer the most likely clue. 
 
 ' Addit. MS 17942, fols. 65 b and 66 a. The nobilissima proles occurs also in 
 Augsburg books, manuscript and print. 
 
 * Abb^ Tougard communicates the readings of two other manuscripts of the 
 Rouen library: H 459, s. xiii, a missal of the abbey of St Ouen, reads, 'antistite 
 nostro et abbate nostro et principe nostro'; MS H 33, s. xiv, has 'necnon et 
 gloriosissimo rege nostro ', but the calendar is not a Rouen one. The book is said 
 to come from Eu, on the borders of Picardy.
 
 HEREFORD AND ROUEN 299 
 
 First, it is necessary to put aside one apparently promising indication. 
 Just outside the walls of the city of Hereford there existed up to the 
 time of the Civil Wars of the seventeenth century a church of St Owen, 
 approached by a road from St Owen's gate ; the church was founded 
 towards the close of the eleventh century. Here is a direct reminis- 
 cence of Rouen. Circumstances which it would be tedious here to 
 detail make it difficult to bring this church into connexion with the 
 present enquiry. 
 
 There is another indication, however, which promises better. From 
 the Life of Robert Betun, bishop of Hereford 1131-1148, it is evident 
 that he was a man of what is called an essentially 'ecclesiastical' 
 spirit ; and that, like prelates of this type in all ages of the Church, he 
 devoted time, care, and thought to all that concerned the celebration 
 of the divine service.^ In the civil troubles early in the reign of King 
 Stephen, Hereford suffered severely ; the cathedral was sacked, divine 
 service was suspended, and the bishop himself had to retire and seek 
 refuge elsewhere for two or three years. When Stephen recovered 
 possession of the city in 1141, bishop Betun returned, recalled the 
 dispersed clergy, restored and reformed his cathedral church, which 
 had been turned into a fortress or made part of the castle, and renewed 
 the celebration of the divine offices.^ Of course, all this is no evidence 
 that he in any way changed the ritual observances ; but it must be 
 allowed that here was an occasion offered when, if there were a desire 
 to do so, such changes could be made with less than the usual 
 difficulty. 
 
 On the other hand, there is proof that the tractate of John of 
 Avranches, which is in fact a Rouen ceremonial of the eleventh 
 century, was known in the twelfth in the monastery of Llanthony, 
 from the priorship of which Betun was called to rule over the diocese 
 of Hereford. The Royal MS 8 D viii, at the British Museum, is a 
 miscellaneous collection which has been entitled Excerptioncs variae 
 ex patribus. From a calendar at folios 11-13, it is certain that this 
 was written at Old Llanthony ; the calendar does not give the feast of 
 St Thomas of Canterbury, and the manuscript may from the hand- 
 writing be fairly assigned to the middle of the twelfth century. Folios 
 132-133 contain an extract ' Ex consuctudinario Roto^nagcnsV ; this is 
 nothing else but a fragment of John of Avranches. It appears there- 
 fore that a copy of what is practically the most ancient Rouen 
 
 ' See, for instance, in Wharton's Anglia Sacra vol. ii, the passages: ' Porro 
 quam sedulus, quam devotus fuerat in divinis officiis ', &c. (p. 309) ; ' in Coena 
 Uomini quotannis*, &c. (p. 310). 
 
 ^ ' Episcopus igitur cum, pace restituta, in sua redisset, ecclesiam suam 
 reformavit, hostica de foris munimenta diruit et complanavit, spurcitias de intus 
 eliminavit, clerum dispersum revocavit, divinum officium innovavit ' (ibid. p. 314).
 
 300 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Ordinarium now extant was known in the first half of the twelfth 
 century under the title of ' The Rouen Consuetudinary ' in the house 
 of Llanthony, and that it can be thus brought into at least close con- 
 nexion with bishop Betun. It would be satisfactory, if it were 
 possible, to push the case further home. But after all, the question 
 who introduced Rouen books into Hereford is a point more curious 
 than important ; whilst the main fact, that they were so introduced, 
 seems assured. 
 
 No examination is here made of the actual text of the three Missals 
 — Rouen, Sarum, Hereford. Of course in the Middle Ages the liturgy 
 of each particular church was not stereotyped ; each use was from 
 time to time borrowing from its neighbours, adding, retrenching, 
 changing. Moreover, the extant material on which a proper com- 
 parison can be instituted is most inadequate. Still, taking even the 
 Rouen, Hereford, and Sarum Missals as they stand at the close of 
 the fifteenth century, it is impossible to go far in the work of con- 
 fronting the texts without observing that, where differences occur 
 among the three, the balance of agreement is between Rouen and 
 Hereford rather than between either and Sarum. What has been 
 hitherto adduced is perhaps sufficient to shew that such a thorough 
 and systematic comparison is desirable. When the precise relation of 
 any one of the chief Norman rites to our English uses has been fixed, 
 a considerable step will have been taken towards clearing up the 
 obscurity in which the whole subject of the origins of these latter is 
 involved.^ 
 
 In saying that the Palm Sunday procession at Hereford has been 
 copied from the observances of Rouen, it is not intended to imply that 
 the practice of carrying the Blessed Sacrament on that day is of Nor- 
 man and not of English origin. Although the observance is in fact 
 prescribed in Lanfranc's statutes for Canterbury Cathedral (which in 
 the twelfth and thirteenth centuries were known as ' the Bee Customs '), 
 and is not mentioned by John of Avranches, the question is not at all 
 an easy one to settle, and the difficulties are considerable either way. 
 It seems to me that we can deal with the question only by way of 
 (possibly quite deceptive) verisimilitudes. 
 
 ' [The Bayeux Ordinarium has since been printed, and shews that it is not from 
 Bayeux any more than from Rouen that Sarum derives. Is not ' Sarum ', the Missal, 
 simply, and no more than, a good sort of thirteenth-century compilation, and had 
 not St Edmund of Canterbury (of Abingdon, that is) a hand in it ? Whenever 
 I read the book this comes to me as patent enough on the surface ; and it is long 
 indeed that it has been a wonder to me that our experts can imagine it to be an 
 eleventh-century book and a production of St Osmund's episcopate.]
 
 XIII 
 
 OF SIX CANDLES ON THE ALTAR: 
 AN ENQUIRY^ 
 
 A FEW months ago Father Gavin, SJ., of Farm Street, kindly sent me 
 a little book which he had published on the mass : ' an explanation of 
 its doctrines, rubrics and prayers '. He told me that he thought it was 
 ' hardly worthy of (my) perusal ', because it was so ' elementary '. To 
 say the truth, I thought this to be somewhat of a slur on my character. 
 I have perused it, and I hope to ^ome purpose : herein let the copy 
 itself, underlined and marginated, and that amply, from beginning to 
 end, bear witness ; and perused it too with profit doubtless no less than 
 interest. I came to it beforehand as a reader with a kindly liking for 
 these expositions of the mass, the mass prayers that is, from the early 
 efforts of the ninth century downwards to this day. It is such an 
 exposition that attracts one, I think, most in Le Brun ; more than his 
 curious observations on the usages of French churches, and his elaborate, 
 or laboured, demonstration of the unity of the liturgical tradition and 
 exposition of the breach of such unity in the sad sixteenth century. 
 I was so far interested in F. Gavin's book that I determined to write 
 a paper on it. Then doubts arose with inevitable consequences ; for 
 alas ! I must put myself in the category which good and wise bishop 
 Westcott found represented among his own boys : of those with whom 
 * second thoughts '—by which I understand thoughts duly informed, as 
 
 distinguished from those involved in first or theoretical impressions 
 
 ' are best '} 
 
 Still, I am not going to part with Fr Gavin's book on any such 
 ambiguous terms. It is, he tells us, written ' to increase the love for 
 Holy Mass ', and is meant for all classes, ' Catholics and non-Catholics ' 
 alike ; but why ' especially for converts ' ? As now an old stager, 
 I think a good case could be made out for the converse intent. But 
 this consideration may make all of us only the more readily accept 
 and receive the little book that is offered. As it consists of a col- 
 
 * From the Downside Review, July 1906. 
 
 2 The curious can read the delightful letter itself in Vol. i of the bishop's Life.
 
 302 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 lection of twenty-eight Wednesday evening Instructions in Farm Street 
 Church, and is expressly dedicated to the ' members of the Sodality of 
 the Immaculate Conception ' there, I rather suspect that Fr Gavin has 
 a secret leaning to my view that his book is most needed to do common 
 and general duty and not to serve ' especially ' for a restricted class. That 
 the discourses have been appreciated the title-page itself tells us. They 
 were delivered in 1901 ; first printed, seemingly, in 1903 ; early in 
 1906 the book is in its ' fourth edition, revised, enlarged, and corrected 
 (Seventh Thousand) '. What words of mine could add anything to 
 commendation such as this ? 
 
 But, in spite of second thoughts, I was not going to be baulked of 
 a paper at Fr Gavin's expense after all. Putting aside graver matters 
 and leaving them behind with at most such gentle protest as may be 
 implied in the question self- addressed : ' Have not I too " power " of 
 treating of weightier matters in concern sicut et caeteri ? ' &c. . . . 
 leaving, I say, all such reflections, let us come with a good heart to 
 the tithing of mint and cumin and exercise ourselves therein. Looking 
 rapidly over my marginalia I see there is choice among a dozen items 
 for such discourse, easy, plain and ready at hand. I select six candles 
 because I see it is a subject of living interest, as evidently appears from 
 the fact that, along with the new Education Bill, it has since May 16 
 up to June 20 (the last number before me) been discussed, and indeed 
 with a certain natural heat, in the columns of the Guardian itself. 
 There is the item of ' vestments ' also which is much in the same case : 
 perhaps just now that is too burning a question altogether to be dealt 
 with by a stranger, although I think I have some things to say on the 
 subject that I have not at all events read elsewhere. 
 
 Now let us come to the text for our present discourse drawn from 
 Fr Gavin ; it is this : ' At the head of the procession [accompanying the 
 Pope from the sacristy to the altar for mass in the eighth and ninth cen- 
 turies] walked the seven regionary acolytes bearing lighted candles. . . . 
 The candles of the acolytes, which were eventually ranged in a row on 
 or before the altar, explain in the clearest way the origin of the seven 
 candles in a Pontifical High Mass, and through an obvious differentia- 
 tion, the origin of the six candles on the altar in a High Mass which is 
 not pontifical ' (p. 187. I see, by the way, that this is not Father Gavin 
 but Father Thurston : the differentiation does not matter — the text is 
 the thing). 
 
 It may be the churlishness of uncorrected age, it may be only 
 increased experience, that makes me in matters concerning the 
 liturgy diffident, untrustful, suspicious, when I am told in regard to
 
 SIX CANDLES ON THE ALTAR 303 
 
 things not of common knowledge or observation that they are 
 * obvious ', or ' in the clearest way ' appear ; yet more when such round 
 and simple affirmations are made in respect of technical questions 
 which no one— the affirmers particularly included in this universal nega- 
 tive—has ever really examined. I must not be understood as objecting 
 in any degree to 'happy thoughts', guesses happy or unhappy, 
 or hypotheses, either ' working ' or such as will not work, provided all 
 these are given and proposed as such and no more. Thus they will 
 be understood as inviting, not barring the way to, investigation. The 
 present case is however somewhat different. I see, of course, there 
 were in the eighth and ninth centuries seven candlesticks on the floor 
 and that now there are seven (or six) on the altar. What I want to 
 know is, are these the same as those ? and if so, how did they get 
 there ?— that is to say, so far as I want to know anything about the 
 case at all. And indeed, in regard to ritual matters generally this 
 elementary notion I believe to be a sound one : that as to the thing in 
 itself that forms the subject of the enquiry, apart from the question of 
 taste, good or bad, its virtue (if any) lies in its actual prescription : its 
 interest or value for common folks, the non-rubrician, the non-Lazarist 
 (to give the class a proper name), lies in the consideration or the 
 knowledge how the thing just came to be. I am not going here to 
 ask Fr Thurston to give me the information ; to explain, that is, the 
 passage from floor to altar, if only for the reason that I am precluded 
 from this course by two little words in his account : ' on or '. The 
 correspondents in the Guardian, at once more prudent and more 
 pointed, evidently too more interested if not more interesting, carry us 
 a step further forward, and, by the way, exemplify a common weakness 
 of the ritualist in adducing great causes for very small effects, or (like 
 the symbolists) seeing wonders and profundities where there is only 
 the common-place. Here for instance is what I read : ' Turning to 
 the row of six lights [on the altar] they appear to have originated in 
 the Roman basilicas where there were no reredoses to be obstructed 
 by them. The seven lights carried before the Pope, placed of old 
 upon the pavement, about the time of the Italian Renaissance began 
 to be set upon the altar it would seem, and are (if I mistake not) first 
 heard of in this position at Rome at the end of the fifteenth century. 
 From Rome they spread with the Renaissance largely under the 
 influence of the Ceremonialc Episcopornni, first printed in 1600, and 
 priests used them without the middle one as a row of six, the seventh 
 being reserved for bishops. Concurrently with the spread of this 
 Roman custom, the old Gothic arrangement of the altar began to be 
 broken up . . . huge gradines . . . long candles . . . average Roman 
 Catholic church in this country ' {Guardian, June 6, p. 952). This
 
 304 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 reads like a theoretical and actual commentary on Fr Thurston. 
 Another correspondent in the same issue cannot get behind ' John 
 Burchardt, 1493'; and from Burchard's use of the expression ' wt?^.? 
 debito ' instead of ' more consiteto ' nicely infers that ' six lights were 
 a novelty in his time ' : then as a deduction from ' the vigorous way 
 he had of enforcing new ideas of his own upon the Roman Church and 
 abolishing old customs ' we arrive at the verisimilitude that ' he 
 (Burchard) himself invented this morem debittim \ 
 
 So far as I have read Burchard's diary and can combine the im- 
 pressions so derived with the impressions gathered from the fifteenth 
 century MS missals of the curial type that have come in my way at 
 the Museum or elsewhere, I have been disposed to think the new 
 school of liturgiologists are on the score of Burchard too superstitious, 
 and that they have not caught his character aright. But to do this, it 
 is necessary, I fancy, to be interested in this class of persons, the cere- 
 moniars, quite apart from ' liturgiology '} But be this said by the 
 way ; what I want to come to is something plain which I wish to deal 
 with plainly. The writer in the Guardian^ last quoted, says : ' in view 
 of the notion that the use of these six lights is non-Roman, can any- 
 one shew an earlier reference ? ' I at once cut this sentence in two, 
 and send the first part of it to the right about, but take a hint from 
 the second to go henceforward in this matter my own way. 
 
 The first mention in the diary of a papal ceremoniar of six (or is it 
 seven ?) candles on the altar, occurs in what is, so far as I know, the 
 earliest specimen of such a document extant, namely, that kept in the 
 first decade of the fifteenth century by the ceremoniar of the anti-Pope 
 Benedict XIII (Peter de Luna), and printed by Muratori Scriptt. 
 iii 2. It is many years since I read or even referred to it ; and 
 as the volume of Muratori is not at hand I must speak from recol- 
 lection.'^ It covers a time when Benedict's curia had its shifting 
 
 ^ I may perhaps say so much, as having once in the Downside Review (Dec. 1892) 
 ventured on a little study of Burchard's successor [see Paper No. XXIV below]. 
 Catalanus, who from his own point of view had carefully read all these ceremoniars, 
 from Burchard to his own day, finds only one intelligent man among them, Mucan- 
 tius. As for the rest, what he has to say of them is this : that ' ceremoJiias ipsas ex 
 usu callebanf only: that all their business was carried on ^ pe7-functojie ^ : and in 
 a word they were of the class of ^ ignorant es ceremoniarii (who) si de ritibus 
 interrogentur proinpte respondent " sic vohiere priores " '. 
 
 '^ [The Diary is printed coll. 777-830. The passage referred to in the text is 
 at col. 782 in the account of Saturday, 29 May, 1406, Vigil of Pentecost ; at 
 the Office before the Mass : * et erant candelae sex super altare, sed non accensae ' ; 
 the litany finished, the priest vesting for Mass, the cantors ' pro introitu missae 
 cantaverunt solemniter Kyrie eleison, et candelae accensae sunt, et tunc facta 
 confessione', &c. A * feast of seven candles ' was with the diarist a technical term, 
 designating what is now called a ' double of the first class ', as it was still many 
 centuries later in several churches of France (e. g. Reims).]
 
 SIX CANDLES ON THE ALTAR 305 
 
 residence in southern France on the shores of the Mediterranean. 
 The diarist is somewhat of a good gossip and gives a h'vely, sometimes 
 comical, picture of the straits to which this curia was reduced. Bene- 
 dict was a stickler about many things, his own dignity first of all and 
 ritual among the rest, under whom the mos consuetus or debitiis was 
 not likely to suffer by excess or defect so far as things lay under his 
 control. But these are mere presumptions. Let us go further and 
 consult the predecessors of ' Christopher Marcellus's Ceremonial, 
 printed at Venice in 151 6', which has been already cited in one of 
 the letters to the Guardian : observing by the way that the author 
 of that book itself seems to be A. P. Piccolomini, bishop of Pienza, 
 and its date about 1488. 
 
 The ceremonial that first concerns us is Mabillon's fifteenth Ordo, 
 printed under the name of Petrus Amelii.^ In its primitive form this 
 book seems to have been compiled about the middle of the fourteenth 
 century and in the pontificate of Clement VI (i 342-1 352). Our text 
 does not present, however, but only embodies this original, and is 
 drawn from a private copy that passed through the hands of suc- 
 cessive ceremoniars.^ The book continued in practical use at all 
 events as late as Eugenius IV (1431-1447). Our print, then, presents it 
 in the form of a working copy for current sacristy and curial practice, 
 in which, besides the necessary changes involved in the transfer of the 
 papal chapel from Avignonese to Roman surroundings, it takes account 
 from time to time of a great number of minute variations, novelties^ 
 failures, or changes, extending over the course of nearly a century, not 
 infrequently induced by the express order of the Most Holy at the 
 moment when he was officiating in his chapel, and entered in the book 
 with exact note of year and day : sometimes with the curt expression 
 'ei dene', et male\ of the high approval or disapproval of the 
 ceremoniar himself. 
 
 The following are, so far as I see, the details in this Ordo proper for 
 our present purpose. In regard to the third mass of Christmas day, it 
 is said that, after the second mass at St Anastasia's, the Pope returns 
 vested to St Mary Major's, rests awhile, and at the proper hour goes 
 with his crowd of attending clerics, from cardinals downwards, to the 
 sacristy, says terce and is vested sollemniter ; others concerned vest 
 themselves too, and then they proceed processionally to the altar 
 with cross and seven torches {faculis), ' et curia debet dare presbyte- 
 
 ' See Kosters (J.), Studien su Mabillons romischen Ordines{}li\ya.%\^x, Schoningh, 
 1905) p. 77 sqq. and p. 100. 
 
 ^ [For the succession of ceremoniars at this time see Father Ehrle's Historia 
 Biblioihecae Rotnanorum Pontijicum vol. i (1890) p. 740. j 
 
 U68 X
 
 3o6 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 rium, &c.' ^ As to what is done with our seven candles or what becomes 
 of them nothing is said beyond this : ' at the Latin gospel seven cande- 
 labra are carried, and immediately after is said the Greek gospel with 
 two candelabra lighted, and the other five are carried in altari.' ^ 
 
 It is evident that in this passage our text is not that of the original 
 Avignonese draft, but a later adaptation to the circumstances of Rome ; 
 at what date, whether immediately on the return of the papal court or 
 some time after, does not appear. A deviation from the ancient 
 practice may, however, be noted: from the earliest times of which 
 we have record two lighted candles were considered sufficient for the 
 reading of the gospel at the Pope's mass ; here there are seven at the 
 Latin gospel, and at the Greek only two. Again, what does in altari 
 mean ? Commonly of course ' on the altar ' ; but here the expression 
 is combined with portantur. Does portantiir here mean the same 
 as ponuntur (or reponuntnr), or does it mean something else ? 
 I have no intention of making nice inferences or introducing to notice 
 any important verisimilitude, if only because on these ticklish subjects 
 we are so commonly ready, from some particular gust or other, to land 
 ourselves in mistakes ; besides it is a matter of common experience 
 for all of us how there are in this world so many differences without 
 any distinction. Let us then see whether by going further backwards 
 we can get any light thrown on our present difficulty. But before 
 passing on let us observe that according to this Ordo XV the seven 
 candlesticks are noted as carried in the procession of the Pope's mass 
 on the feast-days of the very first rank only : Christmas day, Holy 
 Thursday (chrism), Easter day, Whitsunday, SS. Peter and Paul, 
 Assumption (' prout in aliis sollemnibus '), All Saints ; ^ on other 
 occasions the Pope, so far as I see, seems to have been content with 
 two candles, whether in procession or otherwise. 
 
 ' The presbyteritwi is a distribution of money or fees among the Court, from 
 high cardinals to ofificials who are nobodies ; or it means handfuls of coin thrown 
 to be scrambled for among the crowd. 
 
 ^ Here is the original text of the account so far as is necessary : ' intrat sacrarium 
 seu vestiarium cum episcopis, presbyteris, diaconibus cardinalibus, capellanis, 
 subdiaconis et reliquis ordinibus ; et cantant tertiam ; qua dicta induunt cum 
 sollemniter sacris vestibus albis, et quilibet in ordine suo ; et sic processionaliter 
 procedunt ad altare cum cruce et septem faculis : et curia debet dare presbyterium, 
 &c. Quod si Papa non sit in Urbe (the cardinal of the title of St Anastasia says 
 mass there). . . . Notandum quod si Papa (alternatives according as the Pope 
 will or will not take upon himself the various items making up the burden of this 
 tiring day). . . . Hora ergo competente indutus sollemniter summus Pontifex cum 
 capellanis, subdiaconis, acolythis processionaliter cum septem faculis cruce et 
 incenso incipit missam, ... Ad evangelium latinum portantur septem candelabra, 
 et immediate dicitur evangelium graecum cum duobus candelabris accensis, et alia 
 quinque portantur in altari' (Mabillon Micsetwi Italicuvi ii p. 453). 
 
 => Mus. ItaL ii pp. 453, 482, 504, 512, 517, 519, 521.
 
 SIX CANDLES ON THE ALTAR 307 
 
 Mabillon's next ceremonial in order of antiquity — his fourteenth — 
 grew gradually under the hands of its compilers during the first fifty 
 years of the fourteenth century. These compilers were in the main 
 two cardinals, Jacopo Stefaneschi (called Gaetani) and Napoleon 
 Orsini. It goes under the name of the former, who was nephew of 
 Boniface VIII, was created cardinal in 1296, and died in 1341- 
 Stefaneschi seems to have begun to gather materials and notes in 
 his uncle's lifetime, perhaps with a view to the composition of his 
 metrical work on the election and coronation (Dec. i294> Jan. 1295) 
 of this latter. The book was completed in its present form by about 
 the middle of the fourteenth century, but it must have been in constant 
 course of compilation and correction, as occasion served or required, 
 under Stefaneschi's hand up to the time of his death, and indeed also 
 in the pontificate of Clement VI (1342-1352).^ 
 
 In the two orders of the coronation, that for Rome and that for 
 Avignon, mention is made of the seven subdeacons in the procession 
 carrying seven torches. It is said in the later form that at the gospel 
 of the mass they accompany the Latin and Greek gospellers ' accord- 
 ing to custom ' (p. 266, cf. P. Amelii's account of Christmas day). 
 But a coronation is a case of secular parade, it may be said, and 
 John XXII was crowned in the cathedral of Lyons, What was the 
 ordinaiy rite of the Avignonese court ? How did the traditional rite 
 fare when the Pope celebrated great functions in his own chapel : and 
 especially in those earlier days of the exile before the great palace was 
 built, with a chapel (and the same may be said of the neighbouring 
 cathedral) that was at best a poor substitute for the great basilicas of 
 Rome ? For, after all, even papal ceremonies must forcedly yield to 
 the exigencies of the space in which they have to be carried out. And 
 it has to be remembered that, whilst to a secular prince court is paid 
 in the halls of his palace, it was the special privilege of the Pope that 
 court should be made to him most specially in church ; suitors of all 
 kinds flocked to Avignon in proverbial crowds ; what then happened 
 to processions with the subdeacons and seven torches, &c., when the 
 whole confined space of the chapel was packed so that there was not 
 room to stir ? 
 
 Although our ceremoniars, being here good rubricians and not 
 
 ' Chapters 1-9 must have been noted down between the years 1304- 1 328: 
 ch. 10-23 are the order of the Pope's coronation in Rome in the latter part of the 
 thirteenth century : ch. 24-44, the order of the coronation outside Rome, drawn 
 up specially for that of John XXII in 1316 : ch. 45 is an interpolation of the year 
 1389. There are other large interpolations in about twenty chapters, from ch. 64 
 onwards, besides extracts from ceremonials belonging to Cardinal d'Estouteville. 
 The passages of interest for us are all part of Stefaneschi's own work. See Kosters, 
 pp. 66 sqq. 
 
 X a
 
 3o8 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 diarists, have left us no detailed record of the shifts to which they 
 were put in the days of the exile, a lengthy chapter ^ in Stefaneschi's 
 work is instructive from this point of view. Like the immediately 
 preceding chapter (47) it speaks throughout of the Pontifex, and in 
 ch. 47 this (according to the title) is the Pope himself; but the title of 
 ch. 48 i + SS) states that it is concerned not with the Pope but with a 
 cardinal-bishop only, and it gives the full and detailed order of his 
 mass. This ch. 48 { + S^) contemplates the ceremonies from three 
 points of view : where there is a sacristy ; where there is no sacristy 
 but it is the custom to vest at a distance from the altar and go to it 
 processionally ; thirdly, the case where there is neither sacristy nor 
 room in the building itself for the full and ancient ceremonial. In this 
 last case the * Pontiff ' is to be vested at the side of the altar {itcxta 
 altare) where he is going to say mass ; as to his ministers, this only 
 is mentioned in particular, that the two ceroferarii are to be ready 
 vested by the side of the altar {ceroferarii sint parati iiixta altare) 
 and the thuriferar is to be on the other side {sit paratus in sinistra 
 parte cum thuribulo)? As regards their candles, it is directed that the 
 ceroferars are to take the candlesticks with the lighted candles off the 
 altar {et accipiant de altare candelabra cum cereis accejisis, p. 295)' 
 From chapter 47 (p. 382) it appears that the Pope's mass days were 
 divided into two classes : processional days, and days when the Pope 
 vests near the altar {prope altare). We have seen from Petrus Amelii 
 that these processional days, at least with the seven candlesticks, were 
 even after the return to Rome but seven in number. From a list that 
 seems to have formed part of Stefaneschi's own compilation it would 
 appear that in the middle of the fourteenth century the Pope's mass 
 days were, in round numbers, about fifty in the course of the year 
 (p. 377 sqq.) ; but our ambiguous text from Petrus Amelii as to 
 lights in altari relates only to the seven processional days. How 
 stands it with the others ? 
 
 Chapter 69 of Stefaneschi will throw light on the question. This 
 chapter relates to Christmas day : its text, given in the footnote,^ 
 
 ^ Ch. 48 and ch. 53 from 1. 5 are to be read continuously (pp. 288-9, 
 291-310). 
 
 " In the text is given what I think is the actual meaning as regards place ; still 
 if the critic will prefer to read iuxta as ' in front of ' or * behind ', I have nothing 
 to say. 
 
 •^ ' intrat sacrarium cum episcopis cardinalibus, diaconis et subdiaconibus, et 
 reliquis ordinibus, et dicunt tertiam ; qua dicta, induunt se sollemniter vestimentis 
 albis et processionaliter vadunt ad altare sicut moris est. Nota quod semper, 
 quando Papa celebrat sollemniter, debent poni super altare faculae septem, nisi 
 aliquibus paucis diebus, et curia debet dare. Deinde dominus Papa incipit missam 
 . . . legitur primo latina epistola et postmodum graeca; sicut etiam legitur 
 evangelium latinum et graecum ' (p. 327).
 
 SIX CANDLES ON THE ALTAR 309 
 
 should be compared with that of P. Amelii cited above, p. 306 n. 2. But 
 Stefaneschi has a passage to which there is nothing in P. Amelii to 
 correspond, unless it be the incidental notice already mentioned that 
 after the Latin gospel two lights only are used, and the other five 
 ^ portantur in altari '. Stefaneschi's rubric runs : ' Note that always 
 when the Pope celebrates solemnly, seven torches ought to be put 
 upon the altar except upon some few days.' The last five words 
 taken in connexion with the ' always ' shew, I think, that this pre- 
 scription must apply to the fifty days with ' some few ' exceptions, and 
 not to the seven only. Moreover these words occur in a chapter on 
 the masses of Christmas day the terms of which expressly apply to the 
 city of Rome, which chapter (unless it be no part of Stefaneschi's work, 
 and of this there seems no evidence or indication) therefore dates from 
 the thirteenth century. We know from Innocent III that in his time, in 
 the last days of the twelfth century or the early years of the thirteenth, 
 even on ' processional days ' it was the practice in Rome at the papal 
 mass to have only two candles on the altar (De sacro altaris mysterio 
 lib. ii cap. 21). Are we to suppose the change was made from two 
 to seven in the course of the thirteenth century? Or is this note an 
 Avignonese interpolation in an old Roman rubric ? The text in itself 
 would seem to read as if this latter were the case ; moreover on the very 
 next page of the print of Stefaneschi is an interpolated extract from an 
 * old ceremonial of Cardinal d'Estouteville ' ^ which is couched almost 
 in the same words, but at the critical point omits the passage as to 
 the seven candles on the altar.^ The presumption of interpolation 
 might seem then fairly strong. 
 
 But we may not stop here. A contemporary, and indeed the suc- 
 cessor, of Innocent III has also to be heard. Towards the close of 
 the twelfth century Cardinal Cencio Savelli, Camerlengo of the Roman 
 Church, afterwards Honorius III, wrote an Ordo of the customs and 
 ceremonies of that church on the chief feasts of the year. Referring to 
 Mabillon's print, on the very first page, for the Pope's third mass on 
 Christmas day, we find as follows : ' after terce they vest and go 
 processionally to the altar as is the custom. It is to be noted that 
 seven torches ought to be on the altar during the mass : and " curia 
 debet dare"' (Mus. Ital. ii pp. 167-168).^ Are the words printed in 
 italics part of the genuine text of Cencius, or an interpolation? 
 
 ' This is the only place in which I observe the designation ' ex ceremoniali 
 antiquo ' ; elsewhere ' ex ceremoniali ' only. Whether our book is in question, 
 or whether Cardinal d'Estouteville had besides his current copy an old book also, 
 can only appear on examination of the cardinal's manuscript still extant (see 
 Kosters, pp. 68, 70). 
 
 '^ ' sic processionaliter accedunt ad altare cum cruce et septem faculis, et curia 
 debet dare' (p. 328). 
 
 ^ The following is the text, to be compared with Stefaneschi's, p. 308 n. 3 above :
 
 310 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 [The real state of the case as to the so-called ' Ordo Romanus auctore 
 Cencio de Sabellis cardinale ' of Mabillon deserves to be disentangled 
 and simply and clearly described ; it is as follows : 
 
 The original MS of the Liber Ceiismim of the Roman Church com- 
 piled by him dates from the year 1192, and is now MS Vat. 8486. It 
 originally contained in its tenth and eleventh gatherings an Ordo 
 Romanus. These two gatherings are now wanting {Le Liber Censuum 
 de VEglise Romaine, ed. by P. Fabre and L. Duchesne, vol. i (1905) 
 p. 26. It is as well to remark that the portions of this volume to be 
 cited below are by Mgr Duchesne). 
 
 This MS Vat. 8486 was, with certain omissions and additions, copied 
 between the years 1228 and 1231. Among the pieces omitted by the 
 copyist was the Ordo (ibid. pp. 18, 28). This copy is now at Florence, 
 Riccardi MS 228; and between f. 72 and f. iii of the MS in its 
 present state, a number of new gatherings were inserted. On two of 
 these gatherings inserted in 1254 is a Roman Ordo (see details ibid. 
 p. 28 ; cf p. 20). It is this Ordo (printed by Duchesne pp. 290-314) 
 which was printed by Mabillon, not directly from the Riccardi MS, 
 but from a copy two or three times removed. Mabillon in his print 
 gives it the title * Romanus Ordo de consuetudinibus et observantiis, 
 presbyterio vel scholari, et aliis ecclesiae Romanae in praecipuis 
 sollemnitatibus. Auctore Cencio de Sabellis cardinale ' {Mtis. ItaL ii 
 p. 167). And thus it comes that the Ordo is always cited as written 
 by Cencius ; for no one of course, until the case of the MSS of the 
 Liber Censuum. was investigated by the late M. Paul Fabre and 
 Mgr Duchesne, knew any of the circumstances explained above. In 
 the Riccardi MS the Ordo bears the title ' Romanus Ordo &c. . . . 
 sollempnitatibus ' simply, without any attribution of authorship to 
 Cencius. And Mgr Duchesne says (p. 290 col. i) that the Riccardi 
 MS 228 is the original from which ' les autres MSS (i. e. all other 
 extant MSS except MS Vat. 8486) d^rivent ' (cf. also his genealogical 
 tree, p. 32). 
 
 Mgr Duchesne in his * Avis ' before his edition of the Ordo says 
 that there is nothing to shew that the Ordo in Cencius's original MS 
 of 1 192 (Vat, 8486) was an Ordo compiled by himself: ' Cencius s'est 
 born6 a transcrire, en le completant, un texte d'un usage courant/ &c. 
 But I can see nothing to shew that the Ordo now found in the Riccardi 
 MS, and inserted in it in 1254, is textually and verbally that now 
 missing in the original MS Vat. 8486, or that in the text of 1254, so 
 
 * et intrat sacrarium cum episcopis, cardinalibus, diaconibus, subdiaconibus et reliquis 
 ordinibus, et dicunt tertiam ; qua dicta induunt se et processionaliter vadunt ad 
 altare, sicut est moris. Notandum quod septem faculae debent esse in missa super 
 altari, et curia debet dare. Ueinde dominus Papa incipit missam . . . legitur prius 
 atina epistola et postmodum graeca. Expleta vero missa ', &c.
 
 SIX CANDLES ON THE ALTAR 311 
 
 far as its ritual directions are concerned, we have anything else than 
 the text giving the then ' usage courant ' of the Curia ; in fact nothing 
 to evidence the practice of having seven candles on the altar at the 
 Pope's mass in Rome in the last decade of the twelfth century. For 
 it is to be recalled that it is but this one point that we are concerned 
 with, and the question is simply this : Did the words in relation to the 
 Pope's mass ' Notandum quod septem faculae debent esse in missa 
 super altari ' stand in the now missing Ordo of the MS of 1192, or is 
 this an addition recording the later usage of 1254 ? ^ This, then, is the 
 case as regards the so-called ' Roman Ordo of Cencius '. 
 
 Now that we have full information as to the state of the MSS and 
 know what the Ordo printed by Mabillon as Cencius's really is, it 
 seems to me that there is nothing necessarily, indeed probably, con- 
 tradictory in the witness of Innocent III and that of the Ordo printed 
 by Mabillon. Innocent III says that in his time (he wrote whilst still 
 Cardinal, that is before 1198) only two candles were on the altar when 
 the Pope celebrated solemn public mass. Nothing can be more cate- 
 gorical and precise than his words, and it seems to me impossible for 
 that ingenious class of persons, the harmonists, to get over them or 
 round them. First he says that it is the actual, present, practice that 
 he means to record. ' Consuetudinem autem apostolicae sedis, non illam 
 quam olim legitur habuisse, sed eam quam nunc habere dignoscitur 
 prosequendam proposui ' {Dc sacro altaris mystcrio, praefat. vers. fin.). 
 Next, that it is the Pope's mass on a great feast, a stational solemnity, 
 that he means to describe (lib. ii cap. 5). Finally, lib. ii cap. 21 is given 
 up to our special point ; its title runs : ' De candelabris et cruce quae 
 super medio coUocantur altaris ' ; and in the text he writes, and his 
 words are so precise that we cannot get behind them either : ' in cor- 
 nibus altaris duo sunt constituta candelabra, quae, mediante cruce, 
 faculas ferunt accensas, &c. . . . Inter duo candelabra in altari crux 
 coUocatur media '. 
 
 To make a long story short, until better instructed by some friendly 
 neighbour I should say that the case is simply this : That some time 
 between the last decade of the twelfth century and 1254, the date at 
 which the Ordo was inserted in the Riccardi MS 228, a change took 
 place in regard to the number of candles on the altar when the Pope 
 said public mass. This was the period of the constitution of the Rite 
 or Custom of the Curia, the Pope's Chapel. Those who are more or 
 less acquainted (and it is quite easy to learn enough) with that very 
 modernizing epoch, with the upcrop of curial Franciscans and other 
 
 ' It is to be remembered that the chapter cited does not relate to the uses or 
 customs of the churches of Rome, but only to the practice in a public mass celebrated 
 by the Pope himself.
 
 312 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 up-to-date persons who were ready on slight encouragenient or none 
 (and there was plenty) omnia nova facere, will not be surprised at 
 the mere jump from two to seven candles ; and the ' Ordo sanctae 
 Romanae ecclesiae ' (as that stickler for law, order, and tradition, 
 Ralph of Tongres, still loved to call it nearly two centuries later) 
 might easily become in this detail, or in any detail indeed, a thing of 
 the past.^] 
 
 Here I should have ended were it not for a historical generalization 
 quite slowly arrived at on my own account, which I may formulate 
 thus : with a long record of progressive victory in the Church where 
 * regimen ' is concerned, Rome has, in the course of centuries, in the 
 matter of ' religion ' (and of ritual as an item included herein) suffered 
 defeat steadily all along the line ; has been, in a word, ' catholicized '. 
 When therefore I wish to find the origin or early examples of usages, 
 devotion, piety, which friends or the public prints tell me are specially 
 characteristic of ' modern Romanism ', an acquired instinct sends me 
 now as it were naturally to ' Teutonic and Celtic ' sources. I notice 
 that with others really, though it may be quite unconsciously, the 
 instinct is much the same. And so I find F. Gavin select for com- 
 mendation, as more specially agreeable to our modern sentiment, not 
 the mass prayers for the feasts of the Blessed Virgin in the Roman 
 missal, which are of genuinely Roman origin, but those in the Gela- 
 sian Sacramentary (p. 39), which are of Gallican origin. As to usages 
 that I know to be genuinely modern, the mere habit has now grown 
 upon me to turn for their genesis or primitive exemplification first of 
 all to Northern Germany — the region from Poland to the shores of 
 Holland — in the fifty or sixty years preceding the outbreak of the 
 Protestant revolt. Thus, for instance, in this Review^ I pointed out 
 (March 1893) how mass before the Blessed Sacrament exposed was 
 a recognized practice at that time in Westphalia.^ I keep, however, no 
 books of mediaeval liturgy by me ; only one book of the kind that 
 I now want happens by chance to be at hand, the Sacrist's Register 
 of the old Minster at Utrecht (St Saviour's — is that a reminiscence of 
 Canterbury, or the Lateran ?) a manuscript of about 1525-1530. Its 
 title was promising : ' Ordo ornamentorum exponendorum secundum 
 exigentiam cuiuslibet festi (et) candelarum lampadumque ardere con- 
 suetarum in ecclesia Sancti Salvatoris Traiectensis per totum annum.' 
 
 * It may be useful to add the reminder that because this or that change was made 
 in the ritual of the Papal Chapel, it does not follow that the same changes were 
 made in the ' Basilicas of Rome '. There are many reasons ; among the rest this 
 one, that in the thirteenth century (as any one may see who will look at the itineraries 
 of the Popes in Potthast's Regesta) the Papal Chapel as a rule was not in Rome to 
 set a pattern to anybody. 
 
 - See Paper No. XXV, p. 450 below.
 
 SIX CANDLES ON THE ALTAR 313 
 
 On glancing through the contents I found not six lights indeed but 
 five on the high altar on ferias, and seven and nine on feast days 
 according to grade. It is not likely that chance should have thrown 
 in my way a case that is unique, but I am content with this sample 
 verification and — having first made sure by a careful examination of 
 the text throughout, and of the old Dutch translation, that our five, 
 seven, nine lights are altar lights ' as a row ' just like the six on our 
 high altars to-day — now leave others to pursue further enquiries.
 
 XIV 
 
 ANGILBERT'S RITUAL ORDER FOR 
 SAINT-RIQUIERi 
 
 This Ritual Order ^ was noticed by Mabillon nearly two centuries 
 ago,^ but as yet has never appeared in print, although it is some 
 years since the late Professor Waitz, then the Director of the 
 Monumenta Germaniae Historica, said of these directions drawn up 
 by Angilbert, ' sane sunt digna quae edantur '. I had been in hopes 
 that Dom Suitbert Baumer, whose attention I had called to this 
 document, might, on a not distant visit to Rome, copy it and print 
 it himself. But this can never be. Now, unexpectedly, the oppor- 
 tunity comes to me, and it was the first task immediately undertaken 
 
 1 From the Downside Review y March 1895. [This piece was edited by F. Lot in 
 App. VI of his Hariulfus in the Collection des textes pour servir a r etude et d, 
 Penseignement de Fhistoire (1894). I had no idea that any such vokime was even 
 contemplated ; it appeared about the same time as this paper. Doubtless, however, 
 the liturgist will not be sorry to have Angilbert's text accessible in such a volume as 
 the present. I had intended to collate my print with the original MS, but by some 
 mistake the paper was published without my having so much as seen the proofs; 
 the text as issued shewed several errors. These are now corrected.] 
 
 ^ The Vatican MS Regin. 235, from which this document is taken, is a quarto 
 of 84 leaves: ff. 1-72 are of the twelfth century, and contain various works 
 of Guibert of Nogent ; f. 73 is, but for some half-erased scrawls, blank ; 
 flf. 74-84 have nothing to do with the foregoing, are in other hands, and all 
 relate to the Abbey of St-Riquier. Waitz assigned these last leaves to the 
 eleventh century. This is exact so far as concerns ff. 74-82* (to the end of the 
 Institutio of Angilbert) ; the rest, which need not detain us further here, comprises 
 scraps in various hands, some as late apparently as even the thirteenth century. 
 It is hard to see how this can be the manuscript found by abbot Gervinus in 
 the abbey of Gorze (as conjectured by Waitz M. G. SS. xv pp. 173-174), since 
 {a) it gives no account of the abbats of St-Riquier, {b) it does not contain 
 obits of brethren. It seems, for reasons indicated below, very doubtful also whether 
 it could have been the manuscript used by Hariulfus (see ibid. p. 173 n. 4); the 
 extract from Nithard, who it is now ascertained was also abbat (commendatory) of 
 the monastery, could easily have been obtained by Hariulfus from some other 
 source. 
 
 The ff. 74-78* contain Angilbert's account of his works at St-Riquier and of the 
 relics and treasury he gathered together there. This had, with some variations, 
 been incorporated by the chronicler of the abbey, Hariulfus, in his work (lib. ii 
 capp. iv-vi ; ed. Lot capp. viii-x) and printed by d'Achery more than two centuries 
 ago ; Waitz has printed the account {M. G. SS. xv pp. 174-179) from the manuscript. 
 
 As regards his copy, Hariulfus, who completed his work in the year 1088, writes : 
 ' Hue usque sanctissimi viri Angilberti scriptura de constructione et dedicatione sive
 
 ANGILBERT'S ORDO 315 
 
 on sitting down at last in the work-room of the Vatican Library, in 
 deh'ghtful liberty to make use of its treasures. In the circumstances 
 perhaps it may be allowable to print in the Downside Review, which 
 is record as well as reading, a piece in itself well deserving attention, 
 which could, there is reason for believing, find without difficulty 
 hospitality in such well-established specialist periodicals as the 
 Biblioth^que de I'Acole des Charles or the Nenes Archiv. But from 
 the nature of its subject also, it cannot be out of place here, for it is 
 in more than one respect the most curious document relating to the 
 monastic ritual and observance of the age of Charles the Great, and 
 precedent to the reforms of St Benedict of Aniane in the second 
 decade of the ninth century ; and almost certainly it is the only one 
 of its kind of any value which still remains inedited. Though it 
 does not contain, as I had hoped might be possible, new information 
 as to liturgical changes made by Alcuin, it is of particular interest 
 from its highly personal traits, as illustrating the later years of one 
 of the most interesting and prominent characters of the great Caro- 
 lingian revival, Angilbert, perhaps Charles's most intimate friend. 
 
 But, it will be asked, where was Saint-Riquier ? and who was 
 Angilbert that he should be thus concerned with such matters as 
 this Order deals with ? I will answer briefly both questions ; and 
 first for Saint-Riquier. How many travellers who have just crossed 
 
 ornatu ecclesiae Centulensis digesta est, quae ab ipso venerabili viro usque ad haec 
 nostra tempora per CCC annos et amplius valde inveterata, non sine labore ad 
 futurorum eruditionem a nobis huic operi inserta est' (lib. ii c. vi ad fin.; c. x ed. 
 Lot). From these words it would appear that Hariulfus had copied either Angilbert's 
 autograph or a contemporary copy, hard to read either from indifferent writing 
 (which might indicate an autograph) or from the bad state of the original through 
 damp or neglect. 
 
 This is just the impression also given by the condition of the document here 
 printed, Angilbert's histihitio, which occupies f. 78 line 11 to f. 82. The chapters i 
 to IV, viii and ix, perhaps part of x, and the close of the work are wanting. 
 Chapters vii and xvii both break off imperfect in the middle of a sentence ; a fact 
 which the scribe emphasizes by the word Interruptio in capital letters ; moreover 
 the state of the text at the end shews that the original here must have been in 
 a bad state when the copy was taken. Hariulfus tells us that the originals from 
 which he copied contained ' alia multa ... ad decoreni divini officii . . . ab eo (Angil- 
 berto) honeste statuta ' (lib. ii c. vi ; c. x ed. Lot). He evidently refers to the ritual 
 order here printed ; and he devotes his next chapter (vii ; c. xi ed. Lot) to an 
 extract from this order, not identical however with any portion contained in the 
 MS Regin. 235. [M. Lot seems to take Hariulf's extract (see his note / p. 70) as the 
 close of Angilbert's Instittitio ; to me it seems as if from the beginning, and to be 
 much of the nature of a preface.] The probabilities would seem to be that the copyist 
 of this manuscript and Hariulfus worked independently ; that both had before them 
 the original manuscript of Angilbert or a contemporary copy ; but that the Institutio 
 was, when the Kegina copyist used it, in a more imperfect state than when it was 
 used by Hariulfus. Chapters i-iv related probably to Christmas, Epiphany, Puri- 
 fication, and Lent. 
 
 ' Annal. Betted, lib. xxvi num. 68. It seems clear that Mabillon never saw the 
 manuscript, but relied on an account of it, drawn up perhaps by Dom Estiennot or 
 some other of his brethren in Rome.
 
 3i6 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 the Channel and hurry off from the coast in the Paris train think of 
 stopping at Abbeville ? A few curious persons go up to look at its 
 big, unfinished, dilapidated church, and look at the old ' dragon's 
 skin ' in the nave with more curiosity probably than at the gloomy 
 old building itself. And how many of those who stop at Abbe- 
 ville hear of, or think of seeing, Saint-Riquier, numbered once 
 among the greatest monasteries of the West ? It is now many years 
 since a traveller, who had just sought in vain some traces of the 
 Cluniac priory of Saint-Pierre-d'Abbeville,^ found himself circling 
 the town on his way, by the then recently opened line of rail, to the 
 now forgotten village of Saint-Riquier, or, as it was called in the old 
 days, Centule. The village was some distance from the little shanty 
 of a roadside station ; the country seemed unlike Picardy, with its 
 bare cultivated wolds or formal poplar plantations ; there were hedge- 
 rows and lanes, and trees and bushes that recalled somewhat the 
 English west country. There was nothing to break the stillness 
 of the air on that bright summer's day but the hum of the insect 
 tribe or the footfall of some chance wayfarer in that pays perdu. 
 Suddenly, at a bend of the road, there rose up, as on a bank, a tall 
 edifice with ranges of lofty windows of the type so common in the 
 new buildings erected almost everywhere by the Maurists in their 
 numerous monasteries in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. 
 This is Saint-Riquier. The very simplicity, solidity and size of the 
 structure makes it effective ; but this is, after all, a poor substitute 
 for the picturesque south side of the monastery with its irregular 
 range of buildings, Gothic and Renaissance, figured in the Monasticon 
 Gallicanum (pi. 79). Ascending the gentle hill as far as the wide 
 square or place, on the right hand is the great gateway, a sort of 
 ample portictis, doubtless occupying the site, as it recalls also the 
 idea, of the arctis occidentales of Angilbert's document here printed. 
 The Church stands opposite the entrance gate, a noble and perfect 
 specimen of fourteenth-century Gothic, admirable in its lines, pro- 
 portions, and symmetry. How comes it that this lovely building — 
 a little monotonous, perhaps, from its very perfection — is so little 
 known and visited? High up on beams around the sanctuary, as at 
 Winchester or Laon, are relic chests set there at the close of the 
 seventeenth century by a commendatory abbat, a model for men of 
 that class, of whom, as a rule, little good is to be said. This one 
 employed his revenues, his credit, his influence, and spent his best 
 energies in restoring to Saint-Riquier something like its ancient 
 
 ' [In the church of which was buried Dom Claude de Vert, a writer to whom 
 I must ever feel indebted as introducing me to the study of liturgy and teaching 
 me that it is (or should be) first and foremost a study in life,]
 
 ANGILBERT'S ORDO 317 
 
 splendour. His humble tomb— a mere flat stone — is in front of the 
 choir gates. But not even his stringent injunctions could prevent 
 the grateful community from recording his good deeds and giving 
 him his just title — our 'new Angilbert'. The monastic buildings 
 are (or were) used as a petit sdminaire^ but the church with its 
 ample choir, though decently — nay, well — cared for, is desolate and 
 silent. Though monumental still and not unworthy, either in its 
 buildings or in its small but highly curious treasury, of the long 
 history of now well-nigh thirteen centuries since its foundation by 
 Saint Richarius, Saint-Riquier, with its handful of village folk, a 
 contrast to the busy town of the thirteenth century, is now little 
 more than a memory. 
 
 And Angilbert ? Forgotten too, though he was a true Knight of 
 the true Table Round. The names have got all mixed in that 
 romancing way the poets love so well ; the real value of the 
 Arthurian cycle and the cycle centering round Charlemagne has 
 somehow, thanks to these deft-witted folk, become transposed ; and 
 we hear of Sir Lancelot, and Sir Gawain, and Sir Bedivere — phan- 
 toms — when the real living men, who gathered round Charles the 
 Great, the true knights who fought in their day the battle for man- 
 kind against darkness, and ignorance, and barbarism, and unbelief 
 in God and man, and misbelief, aye and against themselves, are 
 very dim figures in most people's minds. But these are the heroes, 
 the heroes of a true tale, our benefactors now, even after the lapse of 
 a thousand years and more. And a chief among these knights of 
 old was Angilbert. Whether it was in matters of war or matters of 
 peace, diplomacy, the council chamber, the schools, literary labours, 
 in sports or worldly festivities, or the solemn rites of the high days 
 of Holy Church, the best of these men seem to have found them- 
 selves at home in all, to have found time for all, to be interested in 
 all. With all their faults and their failings, and these were not a few, 
 they were animated by a noble enthusiasm. With the material and 
 artistic achievements of that later epoch we call the Renaissance 
 theirs cannot be considered as coming into rivalry ; but in what was 
 good and best — in high courage that no difficulty could daunt, in the 
 sense of the responsibility and the fullness of life, in an intense 
 realization of its worth in all, even its lighter manifestations, the 
 Carolingian Renaissance of the eighth and ninth centuries need fear 
 no comparison. 
 
 Angilbert had been brought up from his earliest years in the 
 Frankish court, and when Charles's son, Pippin, was in the year 
 781 crowned King of Italy, the keen eye of the father, that ruler of 
 men, saw no one more fit than Angilbert, though still a young man,
 
 3i8 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 to place by the side of his son, as ruler, mentor, guide, governor, 
 in the newly-formed Italian court. This was a task demanding 
 equally personal tact in the common intercourse of daily life to 
 keep the youthful monarch in hand and control, and those higher 
 qualities, the larger grasp, necessary to secure the general interests 
 of the newly-planted foreign dynasty. Angilbert met all these 
 demands upon him. But his was a genius as versatile as, when 
 engaged in responsible duty, it was sure. He had not in him 
 merely the stuff of which the courtier and the statesman are made. 
 His was a mind readily open to every current of liberal and 
 honourable endeavour. He had already, before passing into Italy, 
 met Alcuin, and seems to have exercised over the proved and sober 
 scholar that same fascination and quality of charm which made 
 itself felt in all Angilbert's relations with his kind. ' My son most 
 dear,' ' My sweetest son,' ' The son, the inheritor, of all my scholar- 
 ship,' are Alcuin's familiar words in his regard. And during his 
 residence in Italy Angilbert did not fail to profit by the help which 
 the schools of that country afforded. After the lapse of some seven 
 years or so, Charles recalled Angilbert from Italy to have him once 
 more at his own side. At the court of Charles he found the warmest 
 welcome, not merely from a grateful sovereign, but by and by also 
 from one who, as her husband ^ describes her in later years, was the 
 very picture of her illustrious father ; for he found favour at a proper 
 age, at once, and without delay, in the eyes of Bercta, Charles's second 
 daughter. The lady did the wooing, it would seem ; and well she might, 
 for with all his singular endowments and his power to deal with men, 
 Angilbert betrays also a weakness, a fastidiousness, that might 
 easily make him, unless roused by a stronger countervailing call 
 of duty, yield to force of fate. Bercta, young as she was, was a 
 woman of masculine vigour, inheriting all her father's imperious 
 spirit, with a voice deep and firm, and a countenance that expressed 
 command ; she appreciated to the full her position, and used all the 
 opportunities it gave. Two sons were the issue of this union, one of 
 whom, Nithard, soldier and man of mark in the reign of Lewis the 
 Pious, son of Charlemagne, inheriting his father's literary talents, 
 was also the historian of his own times, the Clarendon of his day. 
 A man of letters himself, Angilbert was the patron and happy 
 companion of men of letters too ; and here, in days when rivalry 
 in such matters was keen, he kept his liberty apart from fashion, 
 and patronized, or pleased himself to call to his table, those whom 
 he would, not those whom fashion or influence might point out as 
 
 [' husband'— of course secundum quid. Charles objected to his daughters 
 marrying ; and there were several.]
 
 ANGILBERT'S ORDO 319 
 
 the most proper objects for such distinction. His own particular 
 part in the literary tournament was marked out for him by the very 
 name with which his father-in-law chose to greet him in familiar 
 intercourse — Homer. He was to be the epic poet who should cele- 
 brate in stately verse the heroic deeds of the monarch. Only a 
 fragment of the poem still remains, a description of a great hunting 
 scene. After a glowing panegyric of Charles, a mere debt of duty, 
 of Pippin his quondam pupil, of Bercta his imperious spouse in the 
 glittering splendour of attire and equipment she loved so well, Angil- 
 bert describes the scene with all the spirit and verve of one who 
 knows how to enter to the full into the pleasures of the chase. Into 
 the amusements of life, though by disposition of a distinctly religious 
 tone of mind, Angilbert had entered with all the zest of a free and 
 generous nature.^ 
 
 But other prospects open too before him, and about 793 he becomes 
 abbat of Saint-Riquier ; lay abbat, that is, like so many of his suc- 
 
 1 [In here reprinting this paper I think it due to the reader to say why this poem 
 is in the text above unequivocally assigned to Angilbert, though this explanation 
 may seem to savour of scrupulosity or be judged as merely tedious. It is a piece 
 of 536 lines, seemingly but part of a larger scheme, an epic glorifying Charles the 
 Great. It survives in a single MS, of the eleventh century, which gives no name 
 of author. There can be on this point no question of ' certitude ' or ' knowledge ', 
 only of a cumulation of ' probabilities ' ; and the field is free for any kind of con- 
 jecture or argument. The piece has commonly passed as Angilbert's since G. H. 
 Pertz assigned it to him nearly a century ago. In the last forty years or so objec- 
 tions have been raised mainly by the neo-Latin philologists on the technical points 
 of vocabulary, style, use of earlier poets, versification, &c., as compared with known 
 productions of Angilbert; as if, for instance, the 'Elegy' and the ' Long Story' 
 could not come from the same pen. The philological objectors have found allies, 
 and also hearers, in other camps. The general result of these discussions may be 
 summed up in the words ' not proven ', or in a profession of simple agnosticism. 
 But considerations left in the background by these critics must also come into 
 play : the literary sense, and ideas derived from intimate acquaintance with con- 
 temporary writers as well as with the history of the times. These, as things stand, 
 are not altogether common qualifications. 
 
 This poetical piece, in the judgement of the competent critics, stands alone in its 
 age : it is essentially the production of a layman, and it breathes an atmosphere 
 instinct with the life of that vigorous age. The writer is also possessed in a marked 
 degree among his contemporaries of a real poetic gift. When we place the poem 
 in its age and look round at the literary men of the time, considered in themselves 
 and in the verses they have left us, one name, and one name only, suggests itself as 
 fittingly that of the man who, from his natural character also, could write it : the 
 man designated by Charles, in the Academy of Literature and Learning which it 
 was his pride to have gathered around him, as ' Homer'; Charles's * Homer' was 
 Angilbert. 
 
 In spite, then, of the phalanx of the philologists and their allies, it seems to me 
 only reasonable to conclude, on the probabilities, that this poem is really his. This 
 indeed was the conclusion of Ebert, a man possessing in a particular degree the 
 qualifications mentioned above. As venturing to feel myself not altogether without 
 claim to sharing in those qualifications, I have no hesitation in saying that this 
 conclusion is, on a view of all the elements of the case, the only ' right judgement ' 
 on the matter. Nor let it be thought that this matter itself is a slight one and not 
 worth the trouble of concluding on. On the contrary it is one of notable account 
 for the just appreciation of Charles's age itself]
 
 320 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 cessors, among the rest his son Nithard. As if urged by premonitions 
 of what was by and by to come, he threw himself into work there 
 with his accustomed freshness and energy. It would require an 
 article by itself to give some idea of the wonderful institution that 
 arose under his hand in the course of the next seven or eight years. 
 But though his whole heart was in his work he could not rid himself 
 of his past life and make it as though it had not been, Charles's 
 reliance on his discretion and tact was complete, and it was now 
 that he was called on to undertake the most delicate task perhaps 
 that fell to any diplomatist in the long and difficult reign of Charles 
 the Great. Thrice in these eight years he went, on his master's behalf, 
 as ambassador to the Pope, once in regard to the troublesome question 
 of the worship of images which involved awkward political considera- 
 tions also ; the second time (an easier matter) as to the Adoptionist 
 controversy ; and the third time as the confidant of Charles's most 
 secret plans and aims, on the one hand to recall the Pope to a sense 
 of his personal dignity and the conduct befitting it, on the other to 
 obtain from him co-operation in the plans of the King of the Franks 
 for his own temporal aggrandizement. It is a curious evidence of the 
 singular capacity and versatility of the man that in everything 
 Angilbert undertook he was successful. But he had other interests 
 more immediately and more intensely absorbing ; it is in this period 
 that fall his relations with Bercta. Then suddenly^ the scene changes. 
 A word of w^arning comes, and he listens to it. Alcuin writes to him 
 with affectionate solicitude ; he fears that Angilbert, now freed from 
 the highest responsibilities, may allow himself to be carried away by the 
 current of pleasure ; he bids him give up the world. This advice is 
 backed by that of Adalard, afterwards abbat of Corbie, who at this 
 time and for the next forty years or so never found the atmosphere of 
 a court or the tortuous wiles of policy and intrigue any particular 
 snare for himself Bercta's part at this juncture and her influence 
 in this resolution is not stated. It is characteristic of Angilbert 
 that he goes at once ; and so the most gifted spirit and finest gentle- 
 man of his day cuts short his brilliant career, and retires now per- 
 manently; and, devoting himself to the monastic life, he buries himself 
 in seclusion at Saint-Riquier. 
 
 By the year 800 the new buildings were ready, and Charles, with a 
 splendid court, came there to spend the Easter of that year with his 
 friend and favourite, the abbat, who had perhaps more than any one 
 else contributed to prepare the way for the scene that was enacted the 
 
 ' 'Suddenly' ; this is clear and evident on the face of the facts. But Angilbert 
 himself says so in the epitaph he wrote for himself : ' Sed stibiia ereptus tanto de 
 culmine sorte' (see below, p. 321 n. 1).
 
 ANGILBERT'S ORDO 3^1 
 
 subsequent Christmas Day, when Charles, amidst the applause of 
 Romans and of Franks, was crowned Emperor by the Pope at St Peter's 
 in Rome. From this time forth Angilbert concentrated his attention 
 on, and became absorbed in, the interests of his beloved foundation, on 
 promoting good studies there, and in rendering glorious in every way 
 possible in the eyes of men the service of God. The document now 
 printed shews the minute care he took in regard to every detail. He 
 breathed his last on February i8, 814, just three weeks after his 
 master and friend, Charles the Great, between whom and himself, 
 from the days of their youth upwards, there had reigned a constant 
 affection. In accordance with his last wish, he was buried just 
 immediately on the threshold of the great church, with no better 
 monument than a flagstone, so that none could well enter the noble 
 building which he had raised to the glory of God without treading 
 under foot the dust of Angilbert.^ 
 
 iNSTiTUTio Sancti Angilberti abbatis de diversitate 
 
 Officiorum. 
 
 Dominica Palmarum omne vespertinum et nocturnum officium in 
 ecclesia Sancti Salvatoris et Sancti Richarii celebretur. Post capi- 
 tulum vero procedentes veniant ad Sanctam Mariam, ubi tertia 
 cantata, et ramis ac palmis acceptis, per viam - monasterii una cum 
 populo accedentes ad portam beati Archangeli Michaelis paradisum 
 
 ^ [Angilbert wrote his own epitaph. It is printed, but unrecognizable, in M.G. 
 Poet, i p. 420 (No. xxii, the first thirty lines only) as if the composition of an unknown 
 bishop Bernowinus, whom Angilbert seems to have patronized. This piece, along 
 with others, was restored to its true author by Traube in his first book, brought out 
 under the dMS^\ctsoiY)\imm\tr {Karolingische Dichtungen, Berlin, Weidmann, 1888, 
 p. 51 sqq.). I cannot forbear quoting the first lines, so perfectly do they illustrate 
 the nature of the writer : 
 
 Haec qui sacra petis venerandi culmina templi, 
 
 Eximios cultus quae pietatis habent, 
 Hoc relegas carmen nostri miserabile casus, 
 
 Ultima quern vitae contulit hora mihi. 
 Dives eram quondam, lato famosus in orbe, 
 
 Principibus multo carus amore piis. 
 Gloria me rerum magni referebat opima, 
 
 Sed regum solita pluris amicitia. 
 Propterea populi largo venerabar honore 
 Muneribus nimiis atque favore precis. 
 Sed subita ereptus tanto de culmine sorte . . . 
 Thus he looks back over his earlier career. Then he turns to his later life, the 
 home he had chosen for his ' rest ', and to the final resting-place of his mortal 
 remains. The Angilbert of former days and of his last years is ever the same man ; 
 not even the experiences and cares of these years could quench the fire of that 
 living soul.] 
 
 ^ The five words following, ' monasterii . . . accedentes ', omitted by the copyist, 
 are inserted in margin by a contemporary, and probably the same, hand. 
 
 1868 Y
 
 323 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 ingrediantur ; et coram Sancta Nativitate oratione facta, per ostium 
 medianum et per cocleam ^ meridianam ascendentes ad Sanctum 
 Salvatorem perveniant, ubi honore condigno ab illis missa celebretur. 
 Quod si ratio aeris hoc non permiserit, de Sancta Maria per longaniam ^ 
 terratenus usque ad ascensorium ipsius longaniae quo sursum ascendi- 
 tur veniant. Quibus ibidem sursum ascendentibus per ipsam longa- 
 niam pergentes ingrediantur per ostium Sancti Mauricii ; atque sic 
 per medium aecclesiae accedant ad Sanctum Salvatorem missam ad 
 perficiendam. 
 
 VI. De Cena Domini et Parasceve. 
 
 In vigilia Cenae Domini omne officium in aecclesia Sanctae Dei 
 Genitricis Mariae et Omnium Apostolorum celebretur. In Parasceve 
 vero vigiliae in tribus choris impleantur : quorum sit unus fratrum 
 coram altare ipsius Sanctae Crucis ; alius puerorum in throno Sancti 
 Richarii ab occidente ; tertius vero infra buticum,^ hinc et inde, 
 sicut iam supra scriptum est.* Sollemnes autem orationes et adoratio 
 crucis per choros quatuor dividatur. Ex quibus unus sit fratrum 
 coram Sanctae Crucis altare ; alius puerorum in prescripto throno 
 Sancti Richarii ab occidente (fol. yS^) . . . Dei; quartus vero coram 
 Sancto^ Salvatore. Cum autem ad adorandam crucem perventum 
 fuerit, statuatur crux una coram eodem altare, quam fratres, antipho- 
 nam Ecce lignum crucis canendo, ibidem adorent. Alia statuatur 
 coram altare sanctorum martyrum Quintini,*' Crispini et Crispiniani, 
 quam populus vulgaris adoret. Tertia vero ponatur ad Sanctum 
 Mauricium, quam pueri descendentes ordinabiliter per choros, primus 
 de Sancto Salvatore, secundus de Sancto Richario, et tertius de throno 
 eiusdem, eandem antiphonam canendo venientes adorent.'^ Eadem 
 vero nocte, vigilie diei Sancti Sabbati more solito per tres choros in 
 Sancto Richario impleantur. 
 
 ^ Coclea. The bell turret at Downside (including its spiral staircase) is precisely 
 a coclea in the sense of Angilbert. 
 
 "^ Longania. A gallery. 
 
 ' Biiticum. Mabillon suggests a ciborium or baldachin on four columns ; but 
 this can hardly by any possibility be right. 
 
 * This shews that the lost early chapters must have been, like those preserved, 
 of a ritual character, and not have consisted of the inventories drawn up by Angilbert 
 as M. Lot is disposed to think (see his p. 297 n. i). 
 
 ^ The first line of this page is almost entirely cut off by the binder. What 
 remains is however sufficient to leave no doubt of the accuracy of the reading of the 
 second half of the line as printed in the text. F'rom the context above it would 
 seem the missing words were ' tertius infra buticum '. 
 
 ^ Quintini originally omitted ; added by scribe in margin. 
 
 ' Opposite this the same scribe has added Nota in margin.
 
 ANGILBERT'S ORDO 323 
 
 VII. De Sabbato Sancto, et die Pasche. 
 
 In Sancto etenim Sabbato omne officium quod fieri debet antequam 
 perveniatur ad fontes, ad Sanctum Richarium impleatur. Hoc autem 
 facto descendant ad fontes letaniam ad faciendam, illam tamen in 
 qua continentur cxxxv nomina sanctorum, excepto ordine angelorum, 
 patriarcharum et prophetarum, atque deprecationes diversas/ quae 
 quarta in scripto nostro in quo reliquae continentur habetur. Haec 
 enim semel tantummodo dicatur. Ibique omnia ^ quae ad hanc con- 
 veniunt rationem peracta,^ scola cantorum ascendat ad Sanctum 
 Salvatorem officium suum ad perficiendum. Ceteri vero ministri ad 
 ea quae tunc expediunt agenda revertantur in secrctarium, unde 
 iterum preparati procedant ad Sanctum Salvatorem, ibique missam 
 condigne perficiant. Ad quam missam ilia letania fiat primum 
 septenaria quae in eodem scripto prima habetur. Deinde quinaria, 
 quae secunda ibi continetur. Novissime autem ternaria, quae illic 
 tertia constare videtur. Eadem vero nocte nocturni et matutini eo 
 ordine ut supra scriptum est per tres choros in Sancto Salvatore 
 peragantur. In die autem sanctissimo Paschae tam de processione 
 et reliquo officio quam et de missa ita ut in Nativitate Domini - omnia 
 peragantur. 
 
 Ordinavi enim ut in die sanctissimo Paschae et in Nativitate Domini 
 fratres et ceteri omnes qui in aecclesia Sancti Salvatoris ad missam 
 audiendam steterint in eadem aecclesia communionem percipiant. 
 Dum vero fratres vel reliqui clerici ab illo sacerdote qui ipsa die 
 missam cantaverit communicantur, sint duo sacerdotes alii cum 
 duobus diaconibus atque subdiaconibus, quorum unus viros, alter in 
 eadem aecclesia communicet mulieres, ut clerus et populus simul 
 communicati benedictio(fol. 79*)nem sive completionem missae pari- 
 ter possint audire.^ Qua finita, laudantes* Deum et benedicentes 
 Dominum simul egrediantur. Hoc autem facto remaneant iamdicti 
 sacerdotes duo, ex quibus unus ad unum ostium, alter ad alterum, 
 pueros ex ambulatoriis descendentes communicent. Et cum haec 
 omnia adimpleta fuerint, descendat unus ex una parte, alter ex 
 altera, cum eorum ministris, et sic ad extremum stantes gradum 
 communicent illos qui ad cetera supranominata loca communicare 
 non occurrerint. Nam et in illis diebus cum missae in eadem 
 Sancti Salvatoris aecclesia celebrantur, ordinavimus ut quatuor 
 sacerdotes quatuorquc diaconi '^ et quatuor INTERRUPTIO.'^ 
 
 * So in MS. ^ Cf. footnote 4, page 322. 
 
 ' The binder has so far snipped the top margin as to cut away the contraction 
 marks of the first line of the page. 
 
 * laudentes, MS. 
 
 ' Sub originally written before diaconi, and then erased. 
 
 * Here occurs in MS blank space of two lines. 
 
 Y a
 
 324 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Ad sollemnes letanias faciendas conveniant cruces et processiones 
 vicinarum aecclesiarum ad Sanctum Richarium. De Durcapto i ; de 
 Drusciaco i ; de Bersaccas i ; de Villaris i ; de Monte Angelorum i ; 
 de Monte Martyrum i ; de Angilbertivilla i. Quae omnes simul 
 coniungant se in paradysum coram Sancta Nativitate, ubi oratione 
 peracta cruces in eodem loco hinc et inde ordinate persistant. Popu- 
 lus autem in ingressu porte Beati Archangeli Mychaelis honeste 
 ordinatus, ita tamen ut viri a septentrione, femine vero a meridie 
 prestolentur, donee fratres cum scola de aecclesia beati Richarii 
 egrediantur. Qui eo ordine exeant ut primum tres situle cum aqua 
 benedicta per portam eiusdem Beati Mychaelis precedant ; deinde 
 thuribula tria cum thymiamate. Tunc cruces septem sequantur, ex 
 quibus sit media crux Sancti Salvatoris ; quas sequatur capsa maior 
 ipsius Sancti Salvatoris : ad cuius dextram partem vadant sacer- 
 dotes tres cum aliis capsis minoribus tribus ; ad levam similiter. Post 
 quos sequantur diaconi vii, subdiaconi vii, accoliti vii, exorcistae 
 vii, lectores vii, et ostiarii vii. Deinde reliqui monachi septem et 
 septem per loca convenientia ambulent. Et ideo eos septenos am- 
 bulare decernimus ut (fol. 79^) in nostro opere gratiam septiformem 
 Sancti Spiritus demonstremus ; et quia tantam fratrum multitudinem, 
 si bini vel terni incederent, unum vix miliarium caperet. Tunc 
 sequatur scola laicorum puerorum cum flammulis septem.^ Quos 
 statim subsequantur nobiles viri septem et septem, a preposito vel 
 decano electi ; feminae vero nobiliores similiter observent. Tunc 
 iterum procedant septem iamdictae forinsecae cruces; ipsas sequan- 
 tur pueri et puellae quae canere sciunt orationem dominicam et 
 fidem, vel cetera quae eis auxiliante Domino insinuare precepimus. 
 Hos statim subsequantur honorabiliores viri vel femine ex familiis 
 quae in eo loco fuerint constitutae. Deinde mixtus populus, infir- 
 morum videlicet ac senum, pedestri ordine sicut ceteri septem et 
 septem ; novissime autem qui aliter non possunt equitando per loca 
 congrua eo ordine subsequantur. 
 
 His ita constitutis, eodem primo die vadant per medium monasterii 
 per publicam viam et per portam meridianam murum girando ; re- 
 vertantur per portam septentrionalem. Ordo itaque psallentium talis 
 esse debet, ut cum primum promovendi sunt cantent antiphonam 
 Exurge Domine, adiitva nos ; et facta oratione secundum consue- 
 tudinem, continuo egrediantur, et mox omnes antiphonam Excla- 
 meimis omties ad Dovimtmi cantare incipiant. Quam subsequantur 
 aliae tres, id sunt : Iniquitates nostrae, Domine, imdtiplicatae stmt, et 
 Exaudi nos^ Domine, et Domine, non est alius Deiis preter te, donee 
 egrediantur portas, meridianam scilicet et septentrionalem. Et tunc 
 
 ^ Long floating banners ending in two or three sharp angles.
 
 ANGILBERT'S ORDO 3^5 
 
 fratres psalmos eorum alternis versibus cantare incipiant. Scola 
 siquidem puerorum, et ceteri qui possunt, simbolum Apostolorum 
 protinus cantare incipiat ; deinde, post pauca, simbolum Constantino- 
 politanum ; inde fidem Sancti Athanasii ; novissime autem orationem 
 dominicam ; post haec laetaniam generalem quae prima in nostro 
 continetur scripto. Deinde vero scola puerorum faciat laudes pro 
 salute totius Christianitatis. His siquidem finitis cessent (fol. 80*) 
 fratres a psalmis et faciant letanias simul cum eisdem pueris, prime 
 Gallicam, secundo Italicam, novissime vero Romanam. Nam pueri 
 forinseci et puellae sine litteris auxilium habeant de scolariis et 
 geniciariis, ut in his que ceperant et sciunt psallentes existere possint^ 
 donee ilia quae dicta sunt impleantur ; ut precedentes et sequentes 
 haec omnia audientes Deo Omnipotenti referant grates. Hoc etenim 
 cavendum est ut omni sic temperentur qualiter, cum revertentes 
 in monasterium introierint, omnia quae superius leguntur possint 
 esse completa, et tunc omnes incipiant TV Deuvi laudajnus, Te 
 Domimnn coiifitetmir, quem versibus alternis psallendo compleant. 
 Et si evenerit ut ante finiatur, tunc cantent Kirie eleison et Christe 
 eleison quousque perveniant ad Sanctam Nativitatem, quatenus per 
 omnia et in omnibus a cunctis laudetur Deus et benedicatur nomen 
 Domini nostri lesu Christi qui est benedictus in saecula, Amen. 
 In quo loco ab omnibus simul oratione finita, et repositis simul ^ in 
 Sancto Richario crucibus vel ceteris quae portaverant, ascendant 
 fratres ad Sanctum Salvatorem cum illis qui nobiscum cotidie cruces 
 sequuntur missam ad perficiendam. Qua peracta, cruces quae vene- 
 rant cum nostris maneant, et populus ad domum suam revertatur. 
 Et his duobus diebus tam cruces quam et populus in locis supra- 
 nominatis sibi constitutis in processione et missarum sollemnitatibus 
 eandem observent rationem. 
 
 Secundo etenim die eundcm ordinem quo supra et viam usque ad 
 iamdictam portam observantes, pergant recto itinere per ecclesiam 
 Sancti Martini in Villaris ; et inde iuxta eandem villam, ad sinistram 
 tamen partem earn dimittentes, perveniant ad illam aecclesiam in 
 Monte Angelorum. Inde vero per mansum et per brogilum ^ ipsius 
 aecclesiae exeuntes revertantur per ipsam septentrionalem portam 
 ad Sanctam Nativitatem ; ubi oratione finita accedant omnes ad 
 Sanctum Richarium missam ad perficiendam. Qua audita forinsecus 
 populus redeat ad domum suam. 
 
 Tertio autem die de sepedicta aecclesia promoventes per prefatam 
 
 ^ Simul. This word is underlined in MS, as if (it might be thought) for omission. 
 The word evidently has reference to the crosses brought from the surrounding 
 villages which were to be left along with ' ours ' for these Rogation days. 
 
 ' Brogiluvi, broilum, brolium, a wood or plantation.
 
 326 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 portam egrediantur ; inde recto itinera perveniant ad illam aeccle- 
 siam in Monte Martyrum ; ubi finita oratione revertantur per Angil- 
 berti Villam ; et inde iuxta murum per portam meridianam et per 
 viam publicam, et sic coram mansionibus fabrorum vel ceteris usque 
 ad portam quae ipsis mansionibus coniungitur. Inde perveniant ad 
 Sanctam Mariam missam ad celebrandam. Forinsecus autem populus 
 cum crucibus suis, propter (fol. 80'') vigiliam Ascensionis Domini, 
 laudantes Deum et benedicentes Dominum redeant ad aecclesias suas 
 ad audiendam missam. Quarto nanque Ascensionis Domini die fratres 
 in Sancto Benedicto vestes induant, et in eadem Aecclesia Sanctae 
 Mariae tertia cantata, acceptis reliquiis et crucibus vel ceteris quae ibi 
 dimiserant per medium monasterii et per portam Sancti Gabrielis 
 accedant ad Sanctum Salvatorem, ibique honore condigno missam 
 perficiant. 
 
 XI. QUALITER PRO TRIBULATIONE CRUCES SEQUI DEBEANT. 
 
 In tempore autem illo cum pro qualibet tribulatione cruces se- 
 quendae, ieiunia observanda, et Dei Omnipotentis misericordia ma- 
 xime est deprecanda, primo die per medium paradysi, et per portam 
 beati Archangeli Mychaelis exeant, et inde per viam publicam usque 
 ad ianuam per quam ingreditur in Baldiniacum campum. Inde 
 recto itinere aquam transeant per pontem iuxta murum, et inde per 
 ianuam occidentalem quae habetur in platea, et per arcus similiter 
 occidentales revertantur per portam beati Mychaelis usque ad glorio- 
 sam Nativitatem. Ubi oratione peracta, et crucibus vel ceteris 
 quae portaverant in Sancto Richario remissis, ascendant ad Sanctum 
 Salvatorem ad missam audiendam. Secundo die per supradictam 
 portam beati Mychaelis exeant et inde per arcus orientales et per 
 ianuam orientalem quae habetur in platea ingrediantur broilum. 
 Unde recto itinere introeant per posterulam orientalem in hortum "^ 
 fratrum, et sic per curticulam domni abbatis et per salam vel portam 
 monasterii necnon et per portam beati Gabrihelis perveniant ad 
 Sanctam Nativitatem. Ubi oratione finita veniant ad Sanctum Richa- 
 rium ad missam perficiendam. Tertio namque die, de prefata aecclesia 
 promoventes, ipsam viam teneant quam pridie tenuerant quousque 
 supradictum hortum ^ egrediantur. De quo egressi per campum 
 Centulensem et per broilum fontem girando, recto (fol. 81*) itinere 
 exeant per ianuam iuxta portam meridianam. De quo loco per viam 
 publicam coram supradictis mansionibus fabrorum ad portam quae eis 
 coniungitur accedant ad Sanctam Mariam ad celebrandam missam. 
 
 ' orlum cod.
 
 ANGILBERT'S ORDO 3^7 
 
 Nam his diebus tres cruces et tres capsae minores, tria vasa cum aqua 
 benedicta (et) tria turibula tantum portentur, nisi aliter a priore vel 
 a fratribus consideretur. 
 
 XII. De Sancto Pentecosten. 
 
 In sancto Pentecosten vigiliae ad Sanctam Mariam fiant. Inde vero 
 fratres ad Sanctum Richarium tertiam cantent ; unde vestibus ornati 
 exeant per portam Sancti Gabrihelis et canendo perveniant ad Sanctam 
 Dei Genetricem et ad Apostolos, ibique missa celebretur. 
 
 XIII. De Assumptione vel Nativitate Sanctae Mariae. 
 
 In Assumptione etenim beatae Mariae omne officium tam in die 
 quamque in nocte in aecclesia ipsius impleatur. In Nativitate autem 
 illius tam de officio quamque de processione ita ut in Purificatione 
 ipsius, exceptis candelis, omnia perficiantur. 
 
 Capit(ulum) XIIII. De Festivitatibus Beati Richarii. 
 
 Omne officium nocturnale seu matutinale in aecclesia ipsius perficia- 
 tur. In die vero fratres post capitulum ad Sanctum Benedictum vestes 
 induant, et in aecclesia Sanctae Mariae tertiam cantent. Indc per 
 medium monasterii cum populo procedentes per portam Sancti Gabri- 
 helis paradysum ingrediantur, et coram Sancta Nativitate oratione finita 
 perveniant ad altare beati Richarii, ibique honore condigno missam 
 perficiant. Quod si hoc ratio aeris non permiserit, sicut in diebus 
 dominicis ita processio agatur. 
 
 XV. De Sollemnitatibus Sanctorum Apostolorum et 
 Martyrum, Confessorum atque Virginum. 
 
 Omnia officia in festivitatibus sanctorum coram altaribus in quibus 
 reliquie eorum sunt positae vel in aecclesiis quae in eorum venera- 
 tione sunt consecratae percelebrentur. Ceterae vero horae seu sol- 
 lemnitates sicut superius comprehensum est apud Sanctum Richarium 
 omni tempore impleantur. 
 
 XVI. De ViGILlIS VIVORUM HOMINUM SEU ET DE AOENDIS 
 
 Defunctorum. 
 
 (fol. 8i^). Precipue autem, quod omnibus Christianis necessarium 
 esse duximus, statuere curavimus qualiter fratres in predicto sancto 
 coenobio Deo militantes ob amorem Dei et dilectionem proximi non
 
 3^8 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 solum tantum pro nobis et illis seu etiam pro salute vivorum omnium, 
 verum quoque ob memoriam cunctorum fidelium defunctorum per 
 singulos dies ac noctes vespertinos, nocturnos atque matutinos ^ devo- 
 tissime eo ordine ut in sequentibus declaratur celebrare studerent ; 
 quatinus nobis et cunctis successoribus nostris, qui per tempora, 
 divina disponente dementia, in prefatum sanctum locum successuri 
 sunt, et haec quae summa cordis devotione statuimus conservare 
 voluerint, ad perpetuam mercedem, illisque pro quibus haec omnia 
 aguntur ad remissionem proficiant peccatorum. 
 
 XVII. De circuitu orationum. 
 
 Omnibus horis vespertinis more solito celebratis, quando ad 
 Sanctum Richarium expleverint omnia, pergant fratres psallendo 
 usque ad Sanctam Passionem. Ubi oratione facta in duos dividantur 
 choros, quorum unus pergat ad Sanctam Resurrectionem, alter ad 
 Sanctam Ascensionem. Deinde oratione peracta veniat unus chorus 
 ad Sanctum lohannem, alter ad Sanctum Martinum ; et post exinde 
 per Sanctum Stephanum et Sanctum Laurentium ceteraque altaria 
 psallendo et orando coniungant se ad Sanctam Crucem ; et ibi peracta 
 oratione accedant simul ad Sanctum Mauricium, ubi per singulos 
 cotidianos dies ac noctes, sicut superius est insertum, vesperos, no- 
 cturnos et matutinos ob memoriam omnium fidelium defunctorum 
 persolvant. Quibus illic ita expletis subsequatur continuo ipso ordine 
 quo supra officium aliud pro salute vivorum ; ea tamen ratione ut per 
 longaniam deorsum pergendo vesperos, et iuxta temporis qualitatem 
 nocturnos, usque ad Sanctum Benedictum impleant. Quicquid autem 
 in ambulando remanserit diligenter in aecclesia ipsius in nomine 
 Domini perficiant. 
 
 Cum enim vesperos et matutinos ad Sanctum Salvatorem can- 
 taverint, tunc descendat unus chorus ad Sanctam Resurrectionem, 
 alter ad Sanctam Ascensionem, ibique orantes vadant similiter ut 
 supra canendo usque ad Sanctum lohannem et Sanctum Martinum ; 
 ubi oratione (fol. 82*) facta ingrediantur hinc et inde per arcus 
 mediae aecclesiae et orent ad Sanctam Passionem. Inde ad Sanctum 
 Richarium pei-veniant, ubi oratione finita dividant se iterum sicut 
 ante fuerant, et veniant per Sanctum Stephanum et Sanctum Lauren- 
 tium psallendo et orando usque ad Sanctam Crucem. Inde vero 
 iterum ad Sanctum Mauricium et per longaniam usque ad Sanctum 
 
 * [In M. Lot's print the words 'nocturnos atque matutinos' have fallen out. 
 I mention this on account of their importance for the earliest history of our present 
 Office for the Dead, The expression is repeated below where M. Lot has the 
 correct text.]
 
 ANGILBERT'S ORDO 3^9 
 
 Benedictum omnia sicut paulo superius scriptum est ad laudem et 
 gloriam Domini nostri lesu Christi peificere studeant. 
 
 In diebus autem dominicis vel ceteris precipuis sollemnitatibus 
 post peracta officia et omnium orationum circuitum, tam de aecclesia 
 Sancti Salvatoris quam et Sancti Richarii seu Sanctae Mariae cetero- 
 rumque Sanctorum revertentes, vesperos ac matutinos pro salute vivo- 
 rum per longaniam deorsum pergcntes, ita ut in cotidianis fieri solet, 
 implere non negligant. Nocte^ vero in aecclesia Sancti Benedict! 
 vigilias celebrantes ^ 
 
 In sollemnitate etenim Sancti Mauricii ordinavimus ut post peractum 
 officium omnis chorus simul pergat psallendo ct orando per Sanctum 
 Laurentium et Sanctum Martinum ; inde per arcum ipsius aecclesiae 
 vadant per Sanctam Passionem ad Sanctam Resurrectionem. Ibi ora- 
 tione finita veniant ad Sanctam Ascensionem ; inde vero per Sanctum 
 lohannem et per arcum eiusdem aecclesiae veniant ad Sanctum Richa- 
 rium, Ubi peracta oratione, per Sanctum Stephanum et Sanctum 
 Quintinum veniant ad Sanctam Crucem. 
 
 Pueri INTERRUPTIO. 
 
 SUPPLEMENTARY NOTE. 
 
 [The most convenient starting-point for a consideration of the 
 history of the development of the Litany of the Saints in the new 
 period opening with the last two or three decades of the eighth 
 century is furnished by the Ritual Order of Angilbert, abbat of 
 St-Riquier, printed above. So far as I know this is incomparably 
 the most instructive document of the time in regard to the part taken 
 by the people in the religious services. In a letter of Alcuin's we get 
 a glimpse of the people joining in a litany of sorts ; but in fact it all 
 seems the noisy shout of a crowd just repeating the ejaculation of 
 Kyrie eleison. Or again, in another document, we see the people 
 joining the priest in singing the Sanctis of the mass preparatory to 
 his silent recitation of the Canon. Angilbert gives us a fully detailed 
 account of the celebration of that thoroughly popular devotion, the 
 procession of the Rogation Days as carried out at St-Riquier about 
 A. D. 800, and affords such a picture as we can find nowhere else. 
 
 ' Xocte, on an erasure, seemingly written by another hand. 
 
 '^ The sentence here breaks off, and a blank space of two lines follows in MS.
 
 330 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 All is on the grandest scale, and all is a pattern of order and good 
 organization. The procession went seven abreast : ' if we all went 
 two and two, or three and three, the procession of the brethren only 
 would extend nearly a mile in length,' says Angilbert. It is well to 
 give the composition of the piece in some detail. First the people of 
 the seven neighbouring parishes, each with its cross, assembled and 
 were ranged in order in the parvis before the Church of the Nativity. 
 Before the gate of St Michael were ranged the inhabitants of St-Riquier 
 itself, men on the north side, women on the south. Then came out 
 the monks' procession through St Michael's gate, three carrying holy 
 water vats, three with smoking thuribles. Then (beginning the 
 arrangement of seven abreast) came seven crosses — that of the 
 Church of St Saviour in the middle; then seven carrying capsae of 
 relics, with the great capsa of St Saviour's in the middle ; then seven 
 deacons, seven subdeacons, and acolytes, exorcists, lectors, ostiarii, 
 seven of each ; then the monks, seven and seven. Going seven and 
 seven, says Angilbert, we shew forth the sevenfold gifts of the Holy 
 Ghost. Now comes what is the most interesting part of the pro- 
 cession (where shall we find such details elsewhere ?) — the school of 
 lay boys, the abbey school, headed by seven banners floating in the 
 breeze ; immediately following whom come nobiles viri, seven and 
 seven, chosen by the dean and provost of the monastery ; then femi- 
 nae fiobiliores, also in ranks of seven. Then the seven crosses of the 
 neighbouring parishes, close following on which are the boys and girls 
 who (rustics as they are, villagers) know how to sing the Lord's Prayer 
 and the Creed, * and other things which by the help of our Lord we 
 have caused them to be taught '. Then come the honorabiliorcs viri 
 vel fe7ninae of the town of St-Riquier itself and the neighbouring 
 parishes ; then the mixtus popiihis, the lower classes of St-Riquier 
 and the villages, the old and the feeble, all seven and seven. Lastly, 
 such of the old and weak as cannot walk close up the procession on 
 horseback. 
 
 All this was just the inise en schie ; the actual piece was the 
 singing. After an antiphon and prayer at the start, whilst the com- 
 munity were filing out of the monastery precincts, all the brethren 
 joined in singing four antiphons ; and when they had passed out 
 of the monastery gates they began to sing psalms alternis vcrsibiis 
 — an arrangement I fail to understand with precision. But at any rate 
 it is clear that psalmody still survived as the substantial and primitive 
 devotion of the Rogation days as centuries before (see p. 128 sqq. 
 above) ; the times, however, were no longer as in the fifth or sixth 
 century, when Latin was the native tongue of all : the lay folk must 
 be content now with something simpler. This is what was provided
 
 ANGILBERT'S ORDO 331 
 
 for them : the boys' school, ' and others who can ', sing the Apostles' 
 Creed, and then after a while * the Creed of Constantinople ', then ' the 
 faith of St Athanasius ', and last the Lord's Prayer. * After all this, 
 the General Litany, which stands first in our book ; then the boys' 
 school sing laiides for the good estate of all Christendom.' Then 
 comes a stop : the monks and the school and ' the rest who can ' 
 having done their separate devotions, the monks now join forces with 
 the boys, and all sing litanies together, 'first the Gallic, then the 
 Italic, then the Roman ' ; not these alone, however, for Angilbert 
 means all to join in, learned and ignorant alike ; and so he writes : 
 ' The village boys and girls who have no learning are to have help in 
 joining in from the scholars and the getiiciarii} so that after all they 
 may be able to join in the singing.' We are not concerned with the 
 final Te Deiim as they approach the monastery on the procession's 
 return. What is interesting to note is that the village boys and girls, 
 sme litteris, are supposed to be able, with the help of better instructed 
 comrades, to sing these litanies : and why not ? with their short 
 responses, ' Ora pro nobis ', or ' Miserere nobis ', or ' Te rogamus audi 
 nos ', or ' Christus vincit ', repeated over and over again. Such prayers 
 might, under the proud instruction of the children who ' have grammar', 
 well be said in all the solemnity of the Latin tongue by the gamins also 
 of these Picardy villages, at least on Rogation days. Such litanies, once 
 adopted, were sure in the long run to become the essentially popular 
 and the dominant feature of the Rogation processions ; they were 
 sure to spread, whilst the psalm singing was sure to dwindle until 
 to-day there is just a faint trace of the original element, viz. in 
 Psalm Ixix (Ixx) sung immediately after the Litany of the Saints 
 on the Rogation days. 
 
 Next, for the first litany sung in the procession as ordered by 
 Angilbert he refers to a particular compilation of his own, ' . . . laeta- 
 niam generalem (he says) quae prima in nostro continetur scripto '. 
 The litany of ' 135 names of saints, besides the order of angels, 
 patriarchs, prophets and divers deprccationcs ' was the fourth in that 
 scriptum. It was a collection. In it were included also the Holy 
 Saturday litanies called septenaria, qninaria, ternaria ; - and doubtless 
 
 ^ M, Lot (p. 358) is puzzled about this word, as I was ; he suggests 'dcolitres'. 
 The case is a particularly troublesome one ; I am disposed to think that as used 
 by Angilbert the word is rather to be connected in idea with genitium (see 
 Ducange s. v.) than, as M. Lot suggests, w'w^c^ gynueceitm (for which also see 
 Ducange), and that we are to understand here ' the school boys and the young 
 gentlemen', much as centuries later in, say, abbat Whiting's curia at Glastonbury, 
 which was for boys and young lads of gentle birth an introduction to polite life in 
 the world and service at court or in the houses of the great nobility. St-Riquier in 
 those days was no ordinary monastery, and •■\ngilbert no ordinary abbat. 
 
 * There seems, however, to be some confusion, due probably to the eleventh-
 
 S^2 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 also the laiides and the Gallic and Italic and Roman litanies ordered 
 to be joined in by all the company together, from the learned monks 
 down to the boys and girls of the neighbouring villages, who were 
 si7ie litteris. 
 
 This is the state of the case then at one place about the year 800 : 
 but that was at princely St-Riquier, under that man of pre-eminently 
 princely spirit among his contemporaries, the abbat Angilbert. How 
 stood it elsewhere ? Just as the first half of the eighth century is the 
 English, or insular, period of the origins of the Litany of the Saints, so 
 the second half, when we hear nothing from England, is the period of 
 the continental origins of that Litany. That is to say, so far as evidence 
 is concerned, the preceding period, the sixth and seventh centuries, is 
 no more than darkness and void, into which we can, of course, project 
 any purely imaginative ' history ' of litanies that we please. I keep 
 here, for discipline, to the evidence. What we want for our purpose 
 is a complete survey of all the extant psalters of the eighth century 
 with a view to ascertaining exactly which contain litanies of the saints 
 and which do not. This would not be so difficult a task, seeing that 
 in the disputes or discussions over the Athanasian and other Creeds 
 in the last fifty years the psalters of the eighth century have probably 
 all been laid under contribution. But unfortunately for our particular 
 purpose, enquirers have been little interested to note the presence 
 in or absence from them of Litanies of Saints. Our statistics are at 
 present at fault.] 
 
 century scribe in copying a but half-legible original ; for the three Holy Saturday 
 litanies are described as the^r^/, second and third in eodejn scripto.
 
 XV 
 
 A LETTER OF ABBAT HELISACHAR^ 
 
 [When this letter of Helisachar, arch-chancellor of the Emperor 
 Lewis the Pious, to his friend Nibridius,- archbishop of Narbonne, was 
 first printed by me in 1886, my sole object was to illustrate the reforms 
 of the Roman Antiphonar carried out in France in the ninth century 
 as explained in § i below. My object in reprinting it here is quite 
 different : namely, to shew that Helisachar's letter betrays an intimate 
 acquaintance with the Huciisque preface which separates the Grego- 
 rianunt of Pope Hadrian from its Carolingian Supplement ; and that 
 this is the case too with Benedict of Aniane's preface to his Concordia 
 Regularum ; whilst the compiler of the Supplement to Alcuin's 
 Comes, or list of lessons at mass throughout the year, in his preface 
 utilizes Huaisqjie wholesale.^ The ultimate aim is to shew how all 
 this supports, and indeed makes practically certain, Alcuin's author- 
 ship of Hucusque, and accordingly of the Carolingian Supplement to 
 the Gregorianum. 
 
 I. 
 
 Before we can properly estimate the particular value of the witness 
 thus borne by our letter to Hiicusque, it is necessary that we should know 
 
 * Originally printed in Netces Arcliiv xi (1S86) pp. 564-568 ; the introductory 
 matter in the Neiies Archiv is wholly different from the present paper. 
 
 ^ The name occurs as Nibridius, Nidibrius, Nimfridius, and Nifridius. 
 
 ^ What is thus attempted has been overdue some twenty years. So far back as 
 1894, in a note to his edition of Thalhofer's Handbuch der katholischen Liturgik 
 (1894) i p. 73 n. 5, the late Adalbert Ebner explained that he was not satisfied as to 
 the Hucusqiie being an original document, and was disposed to think that the 
 original was the preface to the Supplement to Alcuin's Comes which the writer of 
 the preface Huaisque had utilized and adapted to his own purposes. So soon as 
 this first part of Ebner's edition of Thalhofer came to my hands and I saw what he 
 had said, I wrote to him pointing out that a third document, Helisachar's letter, 
 must be taken into account at the same time, shewing him by the favourite method 
 of a large and full table in parallel columns how, when the texts of the three docu- 
 ments are confronted with each other, it is the Hucusqtie that clearly appears as the 
 original document known to and utilized by the other two writers ; and known 
 indeed in such a way and so familiarly (and I now add that this applies also to 
 Benedict of Aniane) that, writing independently and with different liturgical or 
 quasi-liturgical objects, they rendered its terms as if instinctively, and adapted them, 
 each in his own way, to their individual needs of the moment. Ebner, when the 
 three texts were thus put before him, at once recognized that this was the true state 
 of the case, and in his Quellen und Forschungen (1896) p. 386, like the true savant 
 that he was, in plain and simple terms corrected himself accordingly.
 
 334 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 something about the writer of that letter. Although he exercised an 
 influence more considerable perhaps than any of his contemporaries, 
 unless it were his closest and dearest friend Benedict of Aniane, over 
 the ecclesiastical order, and also over the mind of his master Lewis 
 the Pious, his very name may not improbably be unknown to most 
 readers of this paper. I have therefore to give in the briefest form 
 a sketch of his career ; and the rather inasmuch as I do not know of 
 any book in which this has been done — at all events from our special 
 point of view. But first it will be necessary to say something (a) as 
 to the subject-matter of Helisachar's letter ; and (d) as to the date of 
 the events to which it relates. 
 
 As to (a) : — 
 
 Amalar thus writes in the prologue to his work (written after 831) 
 De ordine Antiphonarii — that is to say, the ' Roman' antiphonar (of 
 course he was a strong ' Romanist ') compiled by him according to his 
 ideas of what a Roman Antiphonar ought to be : ^ ' On the verses, 
 which any one using the present volume will find wholly changed [i.e. 
 from the Roman text, and chant ?], the priest of God Elisagarius 
 laboured and sweated — a man learned among the first and most 
 deeply versed in Scripture and the divine worship, a man also first 
 among the foremost {inter priores primus) of the Palace of the most 
 excellent Emperor Lewis. And not only he, but such men skilled and 
 versed in the matter as he could bring together, sweated in the present 
 business also ' (Hittorp de divin. Eccl. officiis, Paris 16 10, col. 503-504 ; 
 Migne P.L. 105. 1244 B). 
 
 To be clear as to the precise subject of Helisachar's reform to 
 which Amalar alludes in the passage just quoted, we cannot do 
 better than take up the Roman Breviary. At the end of each 
 lesson for matins, i. e. the night office, is a long responsory which, in 
 its simplest form, is thus made up : first, a biblical text (or an adapta- 
 tion of one), which is the ' responsory ' in a strict sense ; on which 
 follows a 'verse', also from Scripture; and after that the second half 
 (or part) of the preceding ' responsory '. For instance, to take a case 
 at the very beginning of the book, the responsory at the end of the 
 
 ' It is to be observed, however, that Amalar had the conscience, or conde- 
 scendence, to indicate by a letter attached to each item of his new Roman 
 Antiphonar the source whence he derived it : he uses the letter ' R ' to indicate the 
 pieces he drew from the Roman Antiphonar actually in use in Rome ; * M ' for the 
 pieces of the old Roman Antiphonar introduced into Metz nearly a century before, 
 as improved on and developed there since ; * I C ' ' ubi nostrum ingenium cogitavit 
 aliquid posse rationabilius illis ordinare ' — ' I C ' standing, as he says with modest 
 deprecation of judgement on his own compositions, for ' Indulgence and Charity'; 
 not, be it observed, for ' i(ngenium) c(ogitavit) '. So that at all events it was possible 
 to distinguish in Amalar's Antiphonar his own modern and modernest compositions 
 from the rest.
 
 ABBAT HELISACHAR 335 
 
 eighth lesson at matins of the first Sunday of Advent : — Responsory : 
 ' Audite verbum Domini gentes, et annuntiate illud in finibus terrae *. 
 Et insulis quae procul sunt dicite : Salvator noster adveniet.' Verse : 
 ' Annuntiate, et auditum facitc : loquimini et clamate.' And then 
 comes a repetition of the second half of the ' responsory' proper: ' Et 
 insulis quae procul sunt dicite : Salvator noster adveniet.' It is obvious 
 that, with an arrangement of this kind, to be tolerable at all the ' verse ' 
 must be such that its last words, when followed by the second half of 
 the ' responsory ', will make sense and form a continuous phrase. But 
 the authentic and native Roman method of singing these responsories 
 knew no need for such clever dovetailings ; for according to that 
 Roman method the ' responsory ' was simply repeated in its entirety 
 after the 'verse'. 
 
 It is interesting to observe what was done by the early Romanizing 
 reformers and cantors when the Roman Responsale and AntipJionarium 
 were introduced into Gaul in the eighth century : they took the new 
 text, but instead of adopting the Roman method of using, and singing, 
 this text, they continued the old Hispano-Gothic method of dimidiation 
 of the ' responsory ' (i. e. repetition of its second half only) after the 
 * verse ', and continued solemnly to sing nonsense until the Goths 
 appeared at court : it was at this period that was initiated the work 
 to which Amalar alludes, and which Helisachar in his letter presently 
 details — namely, a systematic revision of the ' responsories ' and their 
 accompanying * verses ', so as to adapt them to the non-Roman 
 method of dimidiation described above.^ Helisachar may be left him- 
 self to describe the situation as he found it : 'I think your holy 
 paternity remembers (he says to Nibridius) that now some time ago, 
 when the Emperor's order obliged you to come to the palace at Aix- 
 la-Chapelle, for the settlement of some ecclesiastical affairs, and 
 attached me to his immediate service [offitiicvi palatiniini) there, often, 
 when we assembled to celebrate the night office, whilst the Scripture- 
 reading left our minds tranquil and at peace, the responsories (sung 
 thereafter), as you were wont to say, were wanting alike in significance 
 and good sense {auctoritate et ratione), and the verses sung by our 
 cantors [i. e. at the court] and yours [i. e. at Narbonne] oftentimes did 
 not fit into the responsories, and they left your mind in a state of 
 mystification what was the meaning of it all.' 
 
 It did not strike these venerable men, any more than it struck 
 Amalar some fifteen years later when he in his turn set himself to 
 
 ' One may well ask what a man like Alcuin thought of it all. That excellent and 
 wary old scholar probably thought that he had enough to do in carrying out what 
 was entrusted to him to do, without stirring up a hornets' nest about his ears by 
 affronting self-satisfied musical people.
 
 336 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 compile a new antiphonar, that the proper remedy was simply to sing 
 these Roman responsories as they were sung in Rome itself. On the 
 contrary they must stick to their own local and traditional system of 
 dimidiation ; and so there was nothing for it but to alter the text by 
 substituting 'convenient' new texts that would fit their own system. 
 And the Roman Breviary still to-day shews in the responsories of the 
 night office how successful in the long run were these Hispano-Gallic 
 reformers of the liturgy and chant, for the system of ' dimidiation ' now 
 in the Roman book reigns supreme. As to the original texts thus 
 suppressed, in the absence of any authentic local Roman Antiphonar 
 of the eighth or ninth century, who shall say what has become of them, 
 or what remains of the original Roman stock, or what is the composi- 
 tion of the reformers?^ How Helisachar dealt with the situation, and 
 the thoroughness of his measures, may be read in his letter. 
 As to {b) : What is the probable date of the letter ? — 
 Ernst Diimmler (the editor in M. G. Epp. v, 1899, pp. 307-309) 
 assigns it to some time between 819 and c. 82a. Now Helisachar arrived 
 at Aix-la-Chapelle with his master Lewis, as said before, at the end of 
 February or in the first days of March 814, Being the man he was, and 
 always near the monarch's person, we may be sure that he was not 
 wanting in assiduous attendance at the Palace Chapel. Nor would it 
 take a man of Helisachar's qualities and acquirements very long to recog- 
 nize that, with mind engaged doubtless on their side of the business, the 
 cantors were quite content to sing what was too often nonsense. Again, 
 we know that his friend Nibridius of Narbonne actually spent the 
 Christmastide of 814 at Aix-la-Chapelle: of this there is the best 
 
 ^ In the text above I speak only of responsories of the night office, as to which 
 all is plain sailing. But something was done also to the ' antiphons ', i. e. here the 
 introits, offertories, and communions of the mass. In this matter, whilst the 
 Mozarabic books — missal and breviary alike— give us ample assurance (even apart 
 from any other evidence) that the system of ' dimidiation ' was the native Spanish 
 one in mass as at office, the present Roman books will not help us to understand 
 the difficulty about antiphons ; for the simple reason that at some tirne which has 
 yet to be accurately determined the offertories and communions were reduced to 
 a simple antiphon without verse or repetition. In the case of the introits, whilst 
 there is a repetition after the verse (or ' psalm '), it is a repetition of the entire 
 antiphon in the ancient and Roman manner. But all this, as a whole, seems 
 a comparatively late reform, or rather reversion ; for it is evident from the Missal 
 MS B vill of the Vallicellian Library, which has disappeared since 1870, of the tenth 
 or eleventh century, that, so far as the offertory is concerned, the system of ' dimi- 
 diation ' was at that date in full vogue in Rome (see Tommasi's Responsorialia . . . 
 Romanae Ecclesiae, 1686, praef p. 34; ed. Vezzosi iv pp. xxx-xxxi of the second 
 pagination). Thus we have the offertory for the first Sunday of Advent : Antiphon: 
 'Ad te Domine levavi . . . inimici mei: Etenim universi qui', &c. ; Verse : ' Dirige 
 me in veritatc ', &c. ; repetition : ' Etenim universi ', &c. ; and dimidiation of the 
 antiphon of the Offertory seems to have been the system of the Vatican Antiphonar 
 of the twelfth century edited by Tommasi {Antiqui Libri Missarion, 1691 ; ed. 
 Vezzosi vol. v). It would thus seem that at some undetermined date, in the ninth 
 or tenth century probably, under either Gallic or Teutonic influence, the Hispano- 
 Gallic system of dimidiation found its way even into the mass chant in Rome.
 
 ABBAT HELISACHAR 337 
 
 warrant in a privilege dated December 28 of that year in which the 
 Emperor Lewis records the fact — ' quia vir venerabilis Nifridius Nar- 
 bonensis urbis archiepiscopus adicns obtutibus nostris, dcprecatus est ', 
 &c. (Bouquet vi 469). It would seem that the confidential grumblings 
 in the imperial chapel between the two friends recorded in the letter 
 may, in all the circumstances of the case, be assigned with more pro- 
 bability to that than to any later occasion. Accordingly the compila- 
 tion of Helisachar's antiphonar may, with some confidence that we are 
 right, be assigned to the early years of Lewis's reign.] 
 
 IL 
 
 The following is Helisachar's letter as to the Antiphonar: — 
 Reverentissimo meritoque venerando Nidibrio, Narbonensis ecclesi^ 
 flore virtutum exornato archiepiscopo, Helisachar inutilis et omnium 
 exiguus in Domino Deo aetern^ prosperitatis salutem. 
 
 Meminisse credimus sanctam paternitatem vestram, quod dudum 
 quando apud Aquasgrani palatium me offitium palatinum, vosque 5 
 propter ecclesiastica dirimenda imperialis iussio obstringeret, et fre- 
 quenter una nocturnis horis ad divinum celebrandum offitium con- 
 veniremus, animumque nostrum sacr^ scripture lectio serenum effice- 
 ret ; sed ut referre solebatis responsoria auctoritate et ratione carentia, 
 versusque qui in quibusdam responsoriis a nostris vestrisque cantoribus 10 
 inconvenienter aptabantur, animum vestrum magna ex parte obnubila- 
 rent, mihi imperando iniunxeritis, ut adhibito sollerti studio pro captu 
 ingenii in divinarum scripturarum pratis versus convenicntes indagarem, 
 et in responsoriis auctoritate et ratione refertis, congruis in locis apta- 
 rem. Sed licet hoc negotium vires meas excedere, meamque insipien- 15 
 tiam tale quid nullo modo posse iudicaverim, non prcsumpsi tamen 
 omittere quin id quod vestra sanctitas imperaverat summa cum devo- 
 tione exequerer, fisus in illius gratuita misericordia qui potens est per 
 inutilem et exiguum servum vestro sancto desiderio satisfacere, et 
 quod vestry dcvotioni et mentis debebatur meq quoquc imperiti^ 20 
 administrare. Adgrediens itaque hoc opus, aggregatisque ' hinc inde 
 antiphonariis cantoribusque, adhibita etiam librorum copia et peritis 
 lectoribus, coepimus diligenter concordiam probare antiphonariorum. 
 Sed quamquam in gradali cantu qui solummodo auctoritate sanctarum 
 scripturarum nitet minime discordare possent, in nocturnali tamen qui 25 
 sive ex auctoritate divina seu ex sanctorum patrum dictis compositus 
 extat,^ paucissimi in unum concordare reperti sunt ; quoniam qu^dam 
 
 ' ' aggregatosque ' cod. 2 Originally ' erat ' ; corrected by same hand. 
 
 1568 '/^
 
 338 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 in eis scriptorum vitio depravata, quedam imperitorum voto ablata, 
 qu^dam etiam sunt admixta. Unde liquido patet quod antiphonarius 
 
 30 bene apud urbem Romanam ab auctore suo editus in nocturnalibus 
 officiis, ab his quos supra memoravimus magna ex parte sit violatus. 
 
 Quamquam igitur ab his qui capacitatis ingenio pollent, facile 
 queant approbanda eligi et improbanda reici, propter simplices tamen 
 minusque capaces modis omnibus imperiis vestris parendum fuit. 
 
 35 Collatione ergo antiphonariorum celebrata eorumque lectione dili- 
 genter approbata, utque magna dissonantia perspecta est, antiphonas 
 et responsoria qu^ erant auctoritate et ratione carentia, qu^ etiam 
 digne in Dei laudibus cantari nequibant, respuimus. Ea vero qu^ 
 auctoritate plena sunt locis suis ordinavimus, eisque ex eadem auctori- 
 
 40 tate amminiculante eorundem librorum copia versus congruentissimos 
 iuxta capacitatem ingenii nostri adscivimus, ut videlicet iuxta sanctio- 
 nem ^ vestram, unde responsorium erat, inde etiam conveniens foret et 
 versus. Erant sane quedam antiphon^ vel responsoria auctoritate 
 plena et in Dei laudibus decentia qu^ neque a nostris neque a vestris 
 
 45 cantoribus sciebantur. Unde nostri fuit studii quosdam melodi^ artis 
 magistros advocare, a quibus vestri nostrique ea avidissime didicere. 
 Ita vero res divina amminiculante gratia successit, ut quod auctoritas 
 et ratio vindicabat in eodem opere poneretur, et quod deerat pluri- 
 morum documento suppleretur ; ^ quodque vitio scriptorum, insolentia 
 
 50 cantorum, aliquibus in locis depravatum erat aut quorundam imperi- 
 torum demptum vel additum fuerat, artis studio corrigeretur limaque 
 rectitudinis poliretur. Quia ergo hoc opus vestra iussione peractum 
 vestr^que devotioni est dedicatum, etsi non illis quibus forte non 
 placebit, nostris tamen vestrisque cantoribus precipue necessarium, 
 
 56 humiliter exoro, ut a paternitate vestra benigne suscipiatur et in Dei 
 laudibus devotissime utatur. His vero quibus animo sedet ad dili- 
 genter transcribendum hoc opus commodate. Fastidiosis autem et 
 ingratis ad reprehendendum potius quam ad discendum paratis 
 minime pandite. Eos itaque quibus commodatum fuerit deposcite, 
 
 60 ut nihil ex eo demant, nihil in eo addant vel mutent ; quoniam iuxta 
 beati Hieronimi sententiam ^ nihil profuit emendasse libros, nisi emen- 
 datio librariorum diligentia conservetur. In pr^fato namque opere si 
 quippiam quolibet modo non humilitatis, sed mordacitatis voto repre- 
 hendi potest, sciatur potius id simpHci dissimulatione actum quam 
 65 neglegentia aut imperitia pretermissum ; quoniam oportebat quod 
 multorum longo et devotissimo usu in divinis cultibus detritum erat, 
 
 ^ Originally ' sanctitatem ' ; corrected by same hand. 
 ^ Originally ' supplementor ' ; corrected by same hand. 
 
 ' 'Ad Domnion. et Rogatian. 0pp. ed. Vallarsius ix 1523-24' {M. G. Epp.v 
 p. 308 note 2),
 
 ABBAT HELISACHAR 339 
 
 nostro etiam silentio potius comprobari quam piesumptione^ aliqua 
 tangendo preiudicari. Quicquid namque in eo ordinatum sanctitas 
 reppererit - vestra, nisi neglegentia rursus aut incuria depravatum fuerit, 
 nihil reor repperiri posse quod non in Dei laudibus aut auctoritate 70 
 sicut premissum est sacra, aut sanctorum patrum dictis compositum, 
 aut multorum usu pia devotione longo iam tempore vindicatum, de- 
 center assumi potest. Quia autem sicut premisimus nostris vestris- 
 que cantoribus hoc opus oportunum esse iudicavimus, oportet ut sive 
 ab his sive ab illis summopere observetur, quatinus versus conve- 75 
 nienter positi atque ordinati secundum artis cantilenq modum honeste 
 canantur et in responsoriorum convenientibus locis aptentur. Qua- 
 propter necesse est, qui ad melodi^ artis normam decoremque com- 
 positi sunt, et cantoribus magnum documentum ct, ut ita dixerim, 
 quendam ducatum in eadem arte prebent, bene intelligantur ; ut his So 
 bene notis nullatenus in quoquam ab eiusdem artis auctoritate oberre- 
 tur. Sancta deus Trinitas te mei memorem in sua sancta militia 
 prolixo tempore consei-vet, honorabiliter venerande et venerabiliter 
 honorande pater. (MS Harl. 2637 foil. 53''-55% saec. x.) 
 
 III. 
 
 Helisachar was a ' Goth ' — by which we understand a native of 
 ' Gothia ' or ' Septimania ', the sunny land which runs along the 
 Mediterranean from the mouth of the Rhone to the Pyrenees ; 
 the people whereof in feeling, sense, mind, soul, were as unlike the 
 Germanic Franks as the Irish peasant of to-day is unlike the peasant 
 race of the soil of Somerset. It was a land ideally loved by its children. 
 Any one who cares to know how the Goth, in even high honour and 
 station in the realm of the Franks, loved and sighed for the country 
 of his birth, can find satisfaction in the verses in which the gifted 
 Theodulph, bishop of Orleans, describes a journey back to the bright 
 home of his boyhood.^ There is another characteristic of ' Gothia ' 
 which recalls the Ireland of more modern times: it possessed some- 
 how a power of fascination of its own that made aliens who came to 
 dwell there Gothis ipsis Gothiores. This is well evidenced in the tragic 
 history of the family of that hero and monk known to ecclesiastical 
 
 history as St William of Gellone ; it is also exemplified curiously 
 
 perhaps fatally would be the juster word— in the case of Lewis the 
 Pious, the youngest, weakest, and most devout of the three legiti- 
 mate sons of Charles the Great, who was destined to inherit, for his 
 
 > ' sumptione ' cod. 2 ' repperererit ' cod. 
 
 ' M. G. Poetae aevi Karolini i p. 497 sqq. 
 
 Z 2
 
 340 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 own and their misfortune, the whole of his father's vast dominions. 
 Born in 778 hterally in the purple, for his father declared him king of 
 Aquitaine at his birth, on Easter day 781 consecrated with unction 
 of royalty by Pope Hadrian I in Rome, he the same year, infant as he 
 was, took possession of his kingdom in Toulouse, the capital. It was 
 thus, with southern influences all about him, that Lewis grew up and 
 lived ; and by the time that, in 814, he succeeded to the imperial 
 dignity, he had passed body and soul, it may be said, into the hands 
 of the Goths : Helisachar and Benedict of Aniane were his most 
 intimate confidants and trusted friends. 
 
 Of the beginnings of Helisachar nothing is known. Although by 
 and by he enjoyed the abbatial dignity and the revenues of several 
 Benedictine houses, and those of the greatest like St-Riquier and 
 St Maximin at Treves, he himself was not a monk but a canon. This 
 appears quite clearly from the letter which St Benedict of Aniane 
 wrote from his deathbed — ' in extremis positus ' he says ; and indeed 
 it is dated the day before he died — to his monks at Aniane giving 
 them his last farewell, his last words of counsel : * Elisacar quoque, 
 qui pre omnibus super terram omni tempore nobis extitit amicus 
 fidelissimus canonicorum, et fratres ipsos in meo habetote semper loco, 
 et ad eum semper sit refugium vestrum '.^ The first public notice of 
 Helisachar is in April 808, when he appears as chancellor of the 
 kingdom of Aquitaine ; in other words, in a position betokening 
 personal and confidential relations with the king his master. Two 
 acts only are extant during the time of Helisachar's Aquitanian 
 chancellorship : one in favour of Fridegisus, abbat of St Martin's 
 at Tours, who was later on to succeed him when in August 819 he 
 relinquished the archchancellorship of the Empire ; ^ the other in 
 favour of certain members of the monastery (of canons) of St Hilary 
 at Poitiers who, wishing to embrace an arctior vita, had retired to 
 Nouaille, where they might live as monks, the rest remaining at St 
 Hilary's to live, strictly, as canons : ' sub lege regular!, sicuti cenubiales 
 more antiquo, secundum constitutionem beati Benedict!, vivere con- 
 suerunt, et actenus vivunt . . . ut, sicut isti in hanc cellulam 
 [Nouaille] divoluti monachicam vitam ducere videntur, ut illi qui 
 ibi {at St Hilary's] remanent canonicam institutionem pleniter in 
 Dei voluntate nostroque servitio debeant observare '.^ In this passage 
 
 ' M. G. SS. XV p. 220. The sense is : for your monastic observance hold close to 
 the thirty brethren of Inde (the imperial monastery which Lewis had built close 
 to Aix-la-Chapelle that he might have Benedict always near him) and look up to 
 them as if it were I still living; but for all business matters always call on 
 Helisachar. 
 
 * Gallia Christiana xiv Instr. p. 14 no. xi. 
 
 ' Bibl. de V Ec. des Charles ii pp. 79-80.
 
 ABBAT HFXISACHAR 34i 
 
 we have as it were a kind of premonition of what was to be a great 
 feature of Lewis's imperial legislation whilst he was under the domi- 
 nant influence of the two Goths, Benedict of Aniane and Helisachar : 
 his legislation, namely, as to canons and monks, proceeding three or 
 four years later from the two great assemblies at Aix-la-Chapelle. 
 
 Charlemagne died January 28, 8 14 ; Lewis arrived at Aix-la-Chapelle 
 a month later: by April 8 Helisachar— ' Helisachar amatus', 'carus 
 Helisachar', as he is called in the versified panegyric of Lewis 
 written in the Emperor's lifetime by Ermoldus Nigellus,^ himself 
 a Goth— is found acting as archchancellor of the empire. The advent 
 of the Goths was signalized by a general clearing out of the court 
 of Charlemagne, from those veteran statesmen the brothers Adalard 
 and Wala, sons of Charles's younger brother Bernard, who from early 
 years had been trained and had long exercised themselves in all the 
 arts and responsibilities of government, down to Charles's numerous 
 unmarried daughters and their various belongings. These measures 
 reached indeed the height of a general vengeance on all those who 
 had been powerful or influential in the past. And so rose the day of 
 the new men : and it was the hey-day of Gothic power. 
 
 All that we are concerned with here is those two great measures 
 regulating monachism and the canonical life, but also embodying the 
 aims and desires of the two men who now formed what in later days 
 would have been called the monarch's ' conseil de conscience ', Benedict 
 of Aniane and Helisachar. These two measures were the ' forma 
 institutionis canonicorum ' issued by the council held at Aix-la- 
 Chapelle in August and September 816, and the monastic reform, 
 of the council at the same place, in 817:^ both enactments which 
 influenced and indeed determined the direction of the later ecclesias- 
 tical life of the Middle Ages. Though the records of these two assem- 
 blies are included in the collections of the Councils, they must be 
 viewed, if we are correctly to understand the contemporary situation, 
 distinctly as monuments of imperial legislation ; but this is the case 
 especially with the assembly of 816 as to canons and the canonical 
 life, the life of the clergy that is. It is Lewis himself who intervenes 
 
 ' Lib. ii 1. 389 ; lib. ill 11. 295-296. At the baptism of Heriold king of the Danes 
 at Aix-la-Chapelle in 826 (see Dom Bouquet, vi p. 56 note d) ' Hilduinus habet 
 dextram [of Heriold], Helisacharque sinistram sustentat ' (lib. iv II. 413-414). 
 
 ' The documents relating to the Council of 816 are now at length available in 
 a critical edition in Mon. Germ. ConciL ii pp. 307-456. At pp. 464-466 is a notice 
 only of those relating to the meeting of 817, which must be sought for in various 
 collections besides the Councils, in Herrgott's Vctus disciplina monastica, and in 
 vol. i of Boretius's edition of the Capitular ia. A useful collection, with texts for the 
 most part revised on iMSS, is to be found also in vol. iii (1907) of Dom Bruno 
 Albers's Consuetudines Monasiicae. I follow the dates adopted in the M. G. volume : 
 hitherto this whole question has been involved in considerable obscurity.
 
 342 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 in settling this form of institution of the clergy ; ^ it is he who issues 
 a circular letter couched in stringent terms to the archbishops of his 
 dominions containing instructions as precise as they are minute for 
 bringing into force the new regulations. Moreover he intimates that 
 special missi coming from himself will see to the enforcement of the 
 new code punctually and at once ; and he directs that any person 
 recalcitrant is not to be left to be dealt with by the local bishops, 
 but is to be sent to the Palace, to him, Lewis — ' ante praesentiam 
 nostram ' — to be reckoned with : * quatenus a nobis iuxta quantitatem 
 culpae digne corrigatur '.^ 
 
 Behind all this, in the case of a man of Lewis's character, there 
 must have been a driving force : some man, some individual person, is 
 at the back of these measures. Who should this be ? It is unfortunate 
 that whilst the memory of St Benedict of Aniane has engrossed, per- 
 haps unduly engrossed, the attention of the later religious historians, 
 that of Helisachar has been allowed on all hands to fall, not merely 
 into the background, but into entire obscurity ; and the historians of 
 the canonical order, for their part, have been too busy in carrying back 
 the institute of regular canons to a fictitious antiquity to bestow much 
 care on the abbat Helisachar. Yet, when all the circumstances of the 
 case are considered, and the men of the day reviewed, who else but 
 that abbat of canons, so many years all-influential with Lewis, and 
 known as a zelator for discipline, can well have been the instigator 
 and manager of the reform of his own canonical order ? For as we read 
 the very detailed, comprehensive, and efficient decrees of the assembly 
 of 8 1 6, of one thing we can, on the grounds of mere good sense, be 
 sure, namely that some one, some individual man, is ultimately 
 responsible for the whole scheme ; and that man, one who intimately 
 knew from experience the life for which his legislation was made.^ 
 
 ^ See M. G. Concil. ii p. 312. ^ Ibid. pp. 458-464. 
 
 ^ Mabillon and those who followed him have been content to note abbat 
 Helisachar by the way as a pluralist holder of several Benedictine abbeys, and let 
 him pass, without any comment or enquiry whatever, as if a monk. But the 
 attestation of his most intimate friend and companion, Benedict of Aniane, is too 
 formal to admit of any question on the subject of his status as a canon, not a monk. 
 Writers of the history of the canonical order have also been content, without any 
 enquiry either, to father on Amalar the ' forma institutionis canonicorum ' of Aix-la- 
 Chapelle in 816 (e.g. du Molinet Antiquitez des Chanoines, Paris, 1674, i'^ partie, 
 Seconde Rdflexion p. 7, Onzi^me Reflexion p. 1 1 ) referring to the Chronicle of Adhemar 
 de Chabannes as authority [M. G. SS. ii p. 119). But Adhemar wrote more than two 
 hundred years later. He was indeed a diligent student of Amalar as a ritualist, and 
 was brought up in the midst of the neo-liturgical movement of which the monastery 
 of St-Martial at Limoges was an active centre ; but he was also unfortunately 
 a retailer of stories— veritable cock-and-bull stories — about subjects of this kind. 
 Amalar was not a canon, and there is nothing in his books which indicates that he 
 had any sort of interest in or acquaintance with the discipline and observances of the 
 canonical life. He is full and explicit as to cantors, and has no difficulty in saying
 
 ABBAT HELISACHAR 343 
 
 Some six months after the second marriage of Lewis, Helisachar 
 retired from the archchancellorship, but in no degree whatever from 
 his position and place in the Palace. And he remained the ever 
 faithful and wholly devoted friend of Benedict in the declining days 
 and last hours of that great monk ; he was by his side in his death 
 agony and received his last breath. The record as it stands in 
 Benedict's Life by Ardo has traits that are truly touching, and shews 
 Helisachar on his best side as a man capable of deep and sincere 
 afifection that lasts beyond the grave. But he was also a man of much 
 worldly prudence, and recalled to mind at once the old warning word : 
 Vae soli. Helisachar had no intention of going under. On the death of 
 the Emperor's director Benedict, those still surviving elder statesmen 
 of the great days of Charles, Adalard and Wala, now both monks, who 
 in the seven years since the advent of the Goths had been kept in exile 
 and disgrace, were recalled and brought into the Emperor's most 
 intimate counsels; and from that time forward Helisachar is found 
 in close alliance with them, these three now forming the omnipotent 
 camarilla that, as against outsiders, kept Lewis — the weak as well as 
 the Pious — to itself. We get a glimpse of the new state of affairs in 
 a letter addressed by Agobard, one of the chief magnates of the 
 empire and, from his personal character, one of the most influential 
 prelates of the day, ' to the holy fathers Adalard, Wala, and Helisachar '. 
 Agobard had come to court about the business of the Jews with a view 
 to keeping these presuming persons in their proper place. He describes 
 the end and upshot of his mission : ' The time was fixed for my depar- 
 ture, and you heard me muttering rather than speaking against those 
 who supported the complaints made by the Jews [that is, of course, the 
 three favourites and ' holy fathers ' named above] ; and when you had 
 heard what I said and had turned the tables upon me (' modificata 
 quae diccbantur altrinsecus '), you rose, and I too. You went into the 
 presence of the Prince, and I was left standing outside the door. After 
 some little time you caused me to enter ; but I heard nothing about 
 my business and only received my cotigL What you may have said 
 to the most clement Prince, how he took it, or what answer he made, 
 I never heard ; I did not go near you afterwards.' ' Quamobrem 
 recessi turbatus ; arripui iter incertus, perveni domum confusus ', and 
 so on ; and that was all the satisfaction he received for his zeal and 
 trouble.^ 
 
 what he thinks of them ; but that is another matter. From his books we can, how- 
 ever, easily gather that he was just the kind of person who might be employed 
 to collect a body of likely passages from the fathers and ecclesiastical writers 
 for other busy, practical people, who had in hand the business of drawing up the 
 ' forma institutionis canonicorum ' that was actually adopted by the assembly 
 of 816. * P' L. 104. loi.
 
 344 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Things went on so for some ten years. By and by the child of his 
 later years, afterwards king Charles the Bald, was born to Lewis ; 
 and now the concern was how to carve out a kingdom for this new 
 comer — a delicate business, inasmuch as Lewis had made in 817 
 a division of his dominions among the three sons of his first marriage. 
 Discontent and impatience of the palace favourites grew, and came to 
 a head on the appointment of the youthful and brilliant Bernard, 
 Duke of Septimania (a young gothicized Frank of the imperial house), 
 as chamberlain of the Palace. In 830 the crash came which was to 
 begin the troubles, the wars, the savagery of the next thirteen years, 
 wherein the empire of Charles the Great came to ruin ; and the poli- 
 tical divisions and rivalries of Western Europe, which still subsist, came 
 into being. It was the end of the dominance of the Goths : Wala, 
 their then ally, was exiled to the shores of Lake Leman, Helisachar, 
 despoiled of his abbeys, to some place unknown. He seems to have 
 recovered his liberty in 833, but history has nothing more to say of 
 him, and his death is not recorded. 
 
 IV. 
 
 It remains now to shew the way in which (a) Helisachar in his letter 
 printed above, (d) the writer of the preface Htmc codicevi of the 
 Supplement to Alcuin's Comes (Lectionar) giving an account both 
 of it and his own work (Tommasi ed. Vezzosi v p. 314 ; E. Ranke 
 Perikopensystcvi Appendix pp. xxi-xxii), and {c) Benedict of Aniane 
 in the preface to his Concordia Regulariim (Migne P. L. 103. 713- 
 716) betray acquaintance with or utilize the preface Huciisque inserted 
 between Hadrian's Gregorianum and its Carolingian Supplement. 
 
 {a) The relative portions of Helisachar are p. 337 1. 27 to p. 338 1. 34 
 (' . . . quoniam qu^dam . . . parendum fuit ') and p. 338 1. 45 to 1. 6a 
 (' Unde nostri fuit studii . . . diligentia conservetur '). It will be unneces- 
 sary to confront the entirety of these passages with parallel pieces of 
 Huciisque ; a few specimens will be enough : the enquiring or curious 
 reader can easily complete the task for himself. 
 
 Helisachar. Hucusqiie. 
 
 P- 337 1- 27-p. 338 1. 34 : . . . quo- Praefatus sane sacramentorum li- 
 
 niam qu^dam in eis scripton/m vitio bellus licet a plerisque, scriptorum 
 
 depravata, qu^dam imperitorum veto vitio depravante, qui non ut ab auctore 
 
 ablata, qugdam etiam sunt admixta. sua est editus haberetur, pro captu 
 
 Unde liquido patet quod antiphona- tamen ingenii ob multorum utilitatem 
 
 rius befte apud urbetn Romanam ab studii nostri fuit artis stilo corrigere.
 
 ABBAT HELISACHAR 
 
 345 
 
 auctore suo editus in nocturnalibus offi- 
 ciis, ab his quos supra memoravimus 
 magna ex parte sit violatus . . . 
 
 P. 338 1. : Unde nosiri fiiit 
 studii quosdam melodig artis magi- 
 stros advocare . . . ; 11. 49 sqq. : . . . 
 quodque vitio scriptomrn, insolentia 
 cantorum, aliquibus in locis deprava- 
 tuni erat aut quorundam imperitorum 
 demptum vel additum fuerat, artis 
 studio corrigeretur limaque rectitu- 
 dinis poliretur. 
 
 P. 338 11. 56 sqq. : His vero qiiibus 
 animo sedet ad diligenter transcriben- 
 dum hoc opus commodate. Fasti- 
 diosis autem et ingratis ad reprehen- 
 dendum potius quam ad discendum 
 paratis minime pandite. 
 
 Non igitur ingratis et fastidiosis sed 
 potius studiosis et devotis ita ilia col- 
 legimus, in quibus cut animo sedent 
 potest reperire unde . . . 
 
 {b) The preface Himc codiceni prefixed to the Supplement to Alcuin's 
 Conies is from beginning to end practically a shortened rewrite of 
 the preface Hiiaisqiu\ adapted to the particular purpose of a Lectionar. 
 It would therefore be but waste of print to draw out the case here ; it 
 is enough to have stated a fact of which any person can convince him- 
 self who will confront the two documents. 
 
 (t-) In the case of Benedict of Aniane I shall give the parallel 
 passages in full so that the reader can decide for himself whether to 
 think (as I certainly do) that Benedict was acquainted with the 
 Hucusque, or was not. 
 
 Benedict of Aniane 
 
 (Migne/*. Z. 103). 
 7 1 5 A : ... placuit otnnes ex omni- 
 bus in unum coarctari sententias quae 
 cum Patris Benedicti concordare no- 
 scuntur Regula, quatenus utius ex 
 multis collectus existeret codex . . . 
 
 715 B : . . . Noverint tamen omnes 
 qui hunc lecturi sunt libnim quoniam 
 non vanae laudis instinctu nee arro- 
 gantiae fastu quasi meum . . . 
 
 716 A : . . . cupiens ostendere no- 
 men ; sed dilectionis affectu animae 
 meae omniumque legere cupientium 
 salutis augment© a me esse coeptum. 
 
 . . . Vos vero omnes qui hunc audi- 
 turi lecturique estis librum, supplex 
 
 Hucusque. 
 
 Si cui autem placent ea quae sine 
 fastu arrogantiae summo %\.\x^\o pwque 
 collegimus amore suscipere, precamur 
 ut non ingratus nostra existat labori 
 
 Noverit itaque nos perspicacitas 
 lectoris non alia huic inseruisse operi 
 nisi ea quae a probatissimis . . . exarata 
 sunt viris. Ex multis ergo tnulta col- 
 legimus ut multorum utilitati pro- 
 spiceremus. . . . 
 
 Obsecramus itaque vos quicumque 
 hunc codicem ad legendurfi sive tran-
 
 346 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 exoro ut dum ex vobis spiritalia sump- scribendum sumpseritis ut pro me 
 
 seritis mella, pro meis reatibus Domino ad Dominum preces fundatis qui ob 
 
 nan dedignemini fundere precem . . . utilitatem plurimorum ea colligere at- 
 
 Sumite ergo gratanter a nobis utilem que corrigere studuimus. 
 vobis contractum libellum . . . 
 
 On all this I have two observations to make before concluding : one 
 on the value and implications of the use of Hucusqiie by these writers ; 
 the other on the history of that preface itself in modern days. 
 
 1. The use of Hucusque by the writer of the Supplement to Alcuin's 
 Comes is quite natural and what might be expected on the supposi- 
 tion that Alcuin is the writer of Huctisque, and it calls for no further 
 remark. 
 
 But it is otherwise in regard to the use of that document by 
 Helisachar and Benedict. These were the two men, it has been said, 
 the most deeply in the confidence of the Emperor Lewis the Pious, 
 who on his accession became at once the two most powerful men in 
 the State. That both of these should use Huaisqtie, one in a letter to 
 a friend, which is however a sort of explanatory preface to the new 
 antiphonar which had been compiled by his order, the other in the 
 preface to his great work of the Concordia Regularum, and use it in 
 such a way as to shew that they had it as it were by heart and fused 
 its words with their own thoughts on a similar occasion, seems to me 
 of the highest significance in more than one respect and wholly to 
 confirm what I wrote in 1894 that ' it is hardly too much to call the 
 preface Hucusque a State Paper of the time ' (see p. ^"^ above).^ 
 
 2. As to the modern history of Hucusque, from the sixteenth 
 century to to-day : — 
 
 * It seems desirable to mention at least in footnote two passages, one taken from 
 the Prologue to the Institutio for Canons settled at the assembly at Aix-la-Chapelle 
 in 816, the other from Lewis the Pious's Capitulare Ecclesiasticutn of 818-S19 
 embodying a Summary of his ecclesiastical legislation of the previous two or three 
 years. The passages in question are as follows : 
 
 Prologue to Institutio Capitulare Ecclesiasticum c. 3 
 
 {M. G. Concil. ii 313 11. 4, 7-9) [M.G. Capit. reg. Franc, i 276) 
 
 . . . omnium tamen animis sedit, ut operae pretium duximus, Deo an- 
 
 ex canonica auctoritate et sanctorum nuente, apud sacrum conventum ut ex 
 patrum dictis, veluti ex diversis pratis dictis sanctorum patrum velut ex diversis 
 quosdam flosculos carpentes, hanc insti- pratis quosdam vernantes flosculos car- 
 tutionis formam excerperent et canonicis pendo, in unam regulam canonicorum et 
 observandam conferrent. canonicarum congerere et canonicis vel 
 
 sanctimonialibus contradere. 
 
 The words of Hucusque are: 'Idcirco operae pretium duximus ea, velut flores pra- 
 torum vernantes carpere, et in unum congerere, atque correcta et emendata . . .' 
 
 Of course flosculos carpere or congerere and vertiantia prata is an old story ; 
 I leave it to the reader to settle for himself, in view of what has been said as 
 to the relation in which Helisachar stood to this assembly, and as to his use of the 
 preface Hticusque in his letter to Nibridius of Narbonne, whether the same sort of 
 use has been made of that preface in these legislative enactments. I should say 
 ' yes ' if I were asked the question.
 
 ABBAT HELISACHAR 347 
 
 (a) It was first printed by Pamelius in 1571 from a twelfth-century 
 Sacramentary, and Grimoldus abbat was given as the author of the 
 second of three books or parts into which that Sacramentary was 
 divided ; the first part bore the name of Gregory ; the third was 
 anonymous but conjectured by Pamelius to be by Alcuin. The MS 
 thus adopted by Pamelius for his edition of the Gregorianum is in its 
 contents so confused and divided that both the Gregorianum of 
 Hadrian and Alcuin's Supplement are unrecognizable and lost. 
 
 {b) Menard (1643), who found the preface, of course without any 
 name of author in the Sacramentary written for the priest Rodradus 
 (see above, p. 67), took Rodradus to be its author; but being able to 
 make nothing out of HKctisque, and finding the whole matter rather 
 absurd, dismissed it as being of no value and did not print it. 
 
 (c) It remained thus neglected for a century until Muratori (1748), 
 having now genuine manuscripts of Charles the Great's Gregorianum 
 (Hadrian's 6^;'^^ + Charles's Supplement), in the Dissertation prefixed 
 to his collection entitled Liturgia Romana Vettis, again called atten- 
 tion to the preface Hucusque : ' . . . quem proferam et ego ante 
 Benedictionem Cerei ' — that is, between Hadrian's Gregorianum and 
 the Carolingian Supplement — ' ex Othoboniano (codice) ', as he clearly 
 says in col. 80 (cf. p. 75 n. i above). At col. 81 Muratori tells us 
 what he thought of the preface, for he expressly calls it ' Adnotatio 
 Alcuini ', ' Prologus ', ' Praefatio Alcuini ' (cf. col. 80 at top). In the 
 book as published the matter fell out otherwise to the confusion of 
 later generations of the learned ; it is no use repeating the story, and 
 it will be enough here to refer to p. 75 above. 
 
 (ii) The first writer, after Muratori, to revive interest in Hucusque 
 was the Protestant clergyman Ernst Ranke in 1847 (Das kirchliche 
 Perikopensystem pp. 67-80, where he discusses the whole subject with 
 intelligence) ; it was from him that I gained understanding of the 
 usefulness of Hucusque, and was led in particular to see that instead of 
 entering on futile considerations and still more futile discussions as to 
 ' Gelasius ' and ' Gregory ' and their authorship of the Sacramentaries, 
 attention must first be concentrated on the history of the Roman 
 Sacramentaries in Gaul in the eighth and ninth centuries and, for 
 a beginning of all, the Sacramentary sent by Hadrian to Charles the 
 Great must be recovered.^ 
 
 {e) Mgr Duchesne deals with Hucusque in his Origines ist ed. 1889 
 pp. 115-116, 4th ed. (1908) pp. 121-122; M. Netzer in his Intro- 
 duction de la Messe romaine (1910) pp. 181, 183, etc. To M. Netzer 
 
 ' It is unfortunate that in M. G. Epp. v pp. 579-580 Dummler was unaware of the 
 true state of the case ; but this is surely not his fault — and he still prints the preface 
 under the name of Grimoldus abbat of St-Gall with the date 841-871.
 
 348 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 its author is still Grimoldus. To both these writers Hticiisque seems to 
 have been of much the same sort of use as it was to Menard more than 
 two centuries and a half ago. 
 
 (/) Since the MS went to press I have seen Dom Morin's article 
 ' Une redaction inedite de la preface au supplement du Comes d'Alcuin ' 
 in Rev. Binid. t. xxix (191 2) p. 341 sqq. At p. 343 sqq., referring to 
 Ebner's remarks in Quellen (see above p. 333 n. 3), he confronts (pp. 344- 
 346) extracts from Hticusque with Helisachar's letter and the preface to 
 the Supplement to the Comes. His way is different from mine, and 
 the two attempts supplement each other. What is important is his 
 conclusion : 
 
 ' L'edition supplementee du sacramentaire gregorien, avec la note 
 caracteristique Hticusque, est bien decidement I'oeuvre d'Alcuin' 
 
 (P- 345)- 
 
 In a foot-note he deals with those delicate critics who have not been 
 able to make up their minds to allow that this is the case, and adds 
 what I think to be the very just remark 1 ' Au fond, la grosse difficulte 
 me semble venir de ce qu'on n'a pas suffisamment approfondi la 
 question par soi-meme '. Morin's conclusion is practically the same 
 as that which Ebner came to when I wrote him two-and-twenty years 
 ago : ' Alcuin's authorship of the Prologue (he says), and consequently 
 of the Supplement [to Greg, "that is] must be considered as raised to 
 the highest degree of probability '. I prefer Dom Morin's way of 
 phrasing the case.
 
 PART II: ANTIQUARIAN 
 
 XVI 
 
 SOME ANCIENT BENEDICTINE CONFRA- 
 TERNITY BOOKSi 
 
 Among ancient memorials of monastic life and practice the Con- 
 fraternity Books have been perhaps the most neglected. It must be 
 owned that at first sight they present little to attract the enquirer. 
 Obituaries, on the continent at least, have received competent atten- 
 tion from editors and historians, although some of these learned 
 persons stoutly maintain that obituaries have no claim to be admitted 
 into the category of strictly historical material at all. Dealing with 
 suffrages for the dead and thus depending on anniversaries, they do 
 profess to record a definite fact, the day of death, but a fact after all 
 which can rarely be of practical use for historical or critical purposes 
 unless, as occasionally happens, the year is stated as well ; and the 
 present value of obituaries is more in the seeming than the reality. 
 A Confraternity Book offers still less: it is an enrolment of the living, 
 presenting nothing but long lists of bare names, broken here and there 
 by a rubric or heading, or (in later times, and then most sparingly) a 
 cursory note of a benefaction or oblation. Unpromising as such a book 
 may at the first glance appear, there is much to commend it to the 
 philologist, the historian, even to the genealogist, but certainly to those 
 who are interested in the social and ecclesiastical life of the Middle Ages. 
 
 Within the past year a large quarto has been published, of four 
 hundred pages, exclusive of indexes, devoted to the ancient Confra- 
 ternity Books of no more than three Swiss monasteries, St-Gallen, 
 Reichenau, and Pfaffers.** The existing St-Gallen book, whilst com- 
 prising copies of earlier admissions to fraternity, was actually begun 
 about the year 8io ; from that time the entries are contemporary and 
 extend over the whole of the ninth century. The editor has appended 
 
 ' From the Downside Review^ January 1885. 
 
 * Mon. Germ. Libri Confraternitatum Sancti Galli, Augiensis, Fabariensis, ed. 
 Paulus Piper, Berolini, 1884, pp. x, 550.
 
 S50 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 the oldest profession book of the monastery which, though now de- 
 tached, seems originally to have formed part of the same volume ; 
 the professions range from about the year 720 to the second half 
 of the eleventh century, and are original from about the year 808 
 onwards. 
 
 The Reichenau manuscript, though hardly so ancient, is a truly 
 venerable volume. The first hundred and thirty-four pages were 
 written in the years 826-834 ; the remaining thirty, in the tenth and 
 eleventh centuries. The circumstances in which it found its way to 
 its present resting-place, the Public Library at Zurich, deserve to be 
 recorded. It may be premised that Dr Ferdinand Keller, now or 
 lately President of the Zurich Antiquarian Society, had been on 
 excellent and friendly terms with its recent possessors, the monks 
 of Rheinau, by whom he has been allowed liberal use of their manu- 
 script treasures. When the cantonal representatives decreed the 
 suppression of Rheinau and the civil authorities took forcible pos- 
 session of the monastery, Dr Keller hastened to the spot. The library 
 had already been compared with the catalogue, and was in the hands 
 of the officials. The Reichenau Confraternity Book had never been 
 incorporated in the Rheinau library, being doubtless looked on as 
 a sort of family memorial of bygone days. These were no reasons 
 for Dr Keller ; he urgently called for the book and demanded that it 
 should be given over to the spoiler ; nor did he cease in his insistence 
 until, with sorrowful reluctance, it was delivered up.^ ' To this we owe 
 it that the precious codex did not find its way to Italy or England or 
 some other land,' remarks the German editor in wholesome horror of 
 English acquisitiveness. To most persons probably the transaction will 
 suggest reflections of quite another kind. It might have been remem- 
 bered too, that if the present century has seen the dispersal of valuable 
 libraries, with loss of some of their contents, and the sale or alienation 
 of inestimable manuscripts, it is not monks who have been responsible 
 for the one, or have profited by the other. Besides, it is somewhat 
 premature to congratulate ourselves unreservedly on the garnering of 
 all this harvest into a few great public institutions. It yet remains to 
 be seen whether public libraries will succeed, as did the monasteries, 
 in preserving through all perils of war and civil disturbance, and 
 danger of fire,^ their manuscripts for four, six, eight hundred, a thou- 
 sand years. 
 
 * Libri Confrat. p. 147. 
 
 " It is a singular fact that, whilst monasteries seem to have been particularly 
 unfortunate in this matter of fires, the libraries have so commonly been saved. It 
 may not be without interest to recall a quite recent example, at Admont in Styria, 
 in the year 1863. All the abbey buildings, even the church, perished in the flames 
 except the library, which contained some 1,000 MSS, the loss of which would have
 
 CONFRATERNITY BOOKS 35^ 
 
 The Pfaffers confraternity records are much less considerable than 
 either of the foregoing. They occur scattered through the pages of a 
 Gospel book ; the entries which have been printed range from the year 
 830 to the fifteenth century. The best known English example is the 
 Cotton MS Domitian vii. the famous Liber Vitae of Durham, the title, 
 by the way, under which the St-Gallen book is mentioned by writers 
 of that monastery in the tenth century.^ If the edition of the Durham 
 book, put forth by the Surtees Society in 1841, has not been used to 
 the extent which its value would warrant, this is probably owing to the 
 absence, in accordance with the restrictions placed on the editor by 
 the Society's rules, of the extended and elaborate explanatory notes, 
 and the full indexes (149 pages) with which the German editor 
 Dr Piper has enriched his own volume. A Confraternity Book is 
 necessarily disjointed reading at best, even when accompanied by the 
 helps which bring it into relation with the history of the time ; when 
 destitute of such helps the most ardent enquirer who is not also editor 
 may be excused for soon growing impatient.^ Recently the British 
 Museum has acquired amongst the Stowe MSS an interesting volume 
 which belongs to this class, the so-called Hyde Cartulary, being really 
 the Confraternity Book of St Grimbald's house of Newminster (later, 
 Hyde) at Winchester.^ 
 
 Before going further, it may be well to give some more precise 
 explanation as to the object and use of these books. A passage from 
 
 been irreparable. The church has been since rebuilt in noble proportions ; it may 
 be added that the community in completing its fittings and ornaments have shewn 
 themselves, like the brethren in former days, patrons at once discriminating and 
 appreciative of local talent. 
 
 ^ See p. 354 n. 4 below. 
 
 2 [It is indeed true that almost everything that would make these bare lists of 
 names useful for historical purposes yet remains to be done. I would repeat that the 
 Durham book ought to be edited with the same care and elaborate annotation as is 
 found in the volume which gave rise to this paper. A beginning has been made and 
 a specimen given ; of course by a German, as we insulars are commonly engaged in 
 more ' profitable' ways : namely, by that veteran and indefatigable enquirer into late 
 Merovingian and early Carolingian history and its remoter recesses, H. Hahn. See 
 his article ' Die Namen der Bonifazischen Briefe im Liber vitae Ecclesiae Dunelm- 
 ensis ' in Neues Archiv xii (1886) pp. 1 1 1-127. He calls for a ' griindliche Ausgabe 
 dieses Buches ' and says that until this is given ' bleibt es ein zwar interessanter 
 aber doch unhandlicher und nicht sehr werthvoUer Torso'. And so it still remains 
 after a lapse of thirty years. He adds, with perhaps a certain merciful regard for 
 our insular ways, that ' Freilich wiirde eine solche Arbeit eine ausserst miihselige 
 werden, die grosse Opferfreudigkeit und Entsagung fordert'; which in mere 
 English means that there is nothing to be got out of it in name or fame. An 
 adequate instrument of, and necessary condition for, the work is already at hand, 
 that is, an accurate print of the original part of the book by Sir E. M. Thompson 
 in Catalogue of Ancient Manuscfipts Part ii (1884) p. 81 sqq., which indeed seems 
 to have been the cause and occasion of H. Hahn's essay.] 
 
 ■■ [This MS has been since printed under the editorship of the late Mr de Gray 
 Birch for the Hampshire Record Society under the title Liber vitae : Register and 
 Martyrology of New Minster and Hyde Abbey, Winchester (1892).]]
 
 S5'2' LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 the sixteenth-century writer of the Rites of Durham as to the Liber 
 Vitae has been often quoted. It will be more satisfactory to giv^e an 
 extract from the proem to the Newminster volume which, though 
 longer, has the advantage of affording authentic details, and giving 
 expression to the actual intention of the original compilers in the early 
 part of the eleventh century. ' Here follow in due order ', so runs 
 the proem, ' the names of the brethren and monks (of the monastery 
 of Newminster), and of our confratres,^ and benefactors, living and 
 dead, by whose alms, through the bounty of Christ, this family is day 
 by day supported ; that by this written remembrance on earth they 
 may be inscribed on the page of the heavenly record. And let there 
 be entered here the names of all who commend themselves to the 
 prayers and fraternity of this community, so that a commemoration 
 of them may be made daily in the holy solemnities of the Mass, and 
 in our psalmody, and their names presented daily before the holy 
 altar, at the morning and the principal mass by the sub-deacon, and 
 be recited by him so far as time permits in the sight of the Most 
 High. And that, after the offering of the oblation, they may be 
 humbly commended to Almighty God, by the placing (of this book) 
 upon the holy altar, during the Canon, on the right hand of the 
 cardinal,^ who is celebrating the mass. In order that, as commemora- 
 tion is made of them on earth, so in the life beyond, by the mercy of 
 Him who alone knows how all there are or are to be, the glory of those 
 of greater merit may be augmented, and the cause of those of lesser 
 desert may be helped. Rejoice therefore and be glad, for your names 
 are written in heaven.' ''' 
 
 In accordance with the purposes here set forth, the Durham and 
 Newminster books are small thin and handy volumes, properly suc- 
 cessors of the ancient diptychs, and so differing in general appearance, 
 as well as in the character of their contents, from the large and heavy 
 fifteenth-century Benefactors' Book of St Albans, which was also 
 destined to be placed on the altar.* For want of an explanatory 
 proem, it does not appear with certainty whether the Swiss books 
 
 ' ' familiariorum ' ; see Ducange s.v. faviiliares, towards the end. 
 
 "^ The title was common in churches of canons, in the tenth and eleventh centuries ; 
 this instance of its use in a monastery as designating a priestly member of the 
 community is singular, but may perhaps find an explanation as a survival from the 
 days, before St Ethelwold, when Newminster was inhabited by canons. 
 
 ' Stowe MS 960, pp. 15-16 ; ed. Birch pp. 11-12. 
 
 * ' Statuimus etiam omnium benefactorum nostrorum nomina in praesenti con- 
 scribi matricula et super magnum altare reponi ', Riley's edition of Trokelowe, 
 p. 429, in which volume the earlier benefactors' book (fourteenth century) is printed. 
 The Cotton MS Nero D vii is a later copy ; several of the illuminations in this MS 
 are interesting for the form of the Benedictine habit in England in the fifteenth 
 century, which is much the same as that of the English Congregation at present ; 
 see especially f. 43*^ and f. 81*. The book was used later for confraternity entries.
 
 CONFRATERNITY BOOKS 1^53 
 
 were used in the divine service in the way above described, but some 
 such official use, so to speak, seems to be imph'ed by a colophon added 
 by a Reichenau scribe at the end of his labours. ' The names enjoined 
 upon me to enter in this book, but omitted by carelessness, sloth, or 
 forgetfulness of mine, I commend to Thee, O Christ, to Thy Mother, 
 and all the heavenly host, that here and in life eternal their happy 
 memory be kept in honour.' ^ 
 
 On the most cursory examination, the reader cannot fail to be struck 
 by the widely spread connexions of such a house as Reichenau in those 
 early days. The compiler of 826 starts with a list of fifty-six monas- 
 teries and churches which, in virtue of the special conventions usual 
 then and later, had entered into communion of prayers and spiritual 
 benefits with his own community, and whose members he proceeds to 
 enroll name by name. These churches are situated in all parts of 
 Germany, some near at hand, like St-Gallen or Murbach, some distant, 
 as Priim and Gorze. In the list we find, too, Nonantola, and Flavigny, 
 and Senones, St-Medard at Soissons, St-Vaast at Arras, St-Germain- 
 des-Pres, and St-Denis. This list exhausted, he adds other communi- 
 ties, with which conventions had perhaps been made, or whose names 
 had been received, whilst he was actually engaged in making his tran- 
 script : the famous nunnery of Faremoutier ; Charroux in the diocese 
 of Poitiers; at Lyons the canons of the Cathedral, of St-Juste, and 
 others ; the monks of L'lle-Barbe ; the nuns of St-Pierre-le-Puellier ; 
 the houses of SS. Gmlia and Faustina at Brescia ; St-Ouen of Rouen ; 
 Old Corbie near Amiens, and many more. It need hardly be pointed 
 out how important these lists are, amongst other purposes, for monastic 
 and ecclesiastical statistics. 
 
 A still greater interest attaches to the pages of these books which 
 record the admissions of lay people, or secular clergy, to fraternity and 
 their enrolment as fratres conscripti of the monastery. Some pages 
 present all the most illustrious names in the history of church and state 
 in the revived western Empire of the ninth century, — with a whole 
 genealogy of the royal house from Pippin to the last degenerate 
 princes of the Carolingian line — who, one after another, came to seek 
 ' society ' in spiritual benefits and good works with the monks of 
 St-Gallen or Reichenau.^ Page after page follows, filled with the 
 names of the laymen and women, now known only by their entry 
 in this Book of Life.^ Sometimes, it is true, the most exalted personages 
 appear in the simplest guise, and it is left for the modern editor to reveal 
 
 ' Libri confrat. p. 302: * eorum beatitudinis celebretur memoria.' 
 ^ Ibid. pp. II, 15, 18, 20, 35 (in the St-Gallen book); p. 262 sqq. (in that of 
 Reichenau). 
 ' e.g. at St-Gallen, ibid. pp. 39-41, 55-63. 
 1868 A a
 
 354 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 to us in the unpretending list, ' Hludowich, Karolus, Richgart, Hemma, 
 Berehta, Irmingart, Hiltigart,' the family of the powerful King Lewis 
 of Germany ; ^ or in ' Heil wic, Velf, Chuanrat,' the family of the Empress 
 Judith, wife of Lewis the Pious, and mother of Charles the Bald.^ There 
 can be no doubt, however, that we may apply to these earlier days the 
 better knowledge we possess of later times and see here, as in the four- 
 teenth and fifteenth centuries at Durham or Hyde. Canterbury or 
 St Albans, confratres of all degrees and states of life, gentle and simple; 
 some pilgrims from afar ; some people of the town and all the country 
 round about. The total number of these fratres conscripti of St-Gallen 
 alone, in the course of the ninth century, is not less than 1700. 
 
 ' But,' it may be asked by some who have the idea that such aggre- 
 gations of lay people to religious orders, the ' third orders ' and * ter- 
 tiaries ' as they are now called, were an invention of the thirteenth 
 century, and that like the name the thing is new, — ' but, is it possible 
 that all these were confratres and consorores, admitted to participa- 
 tion in the good works of the monks ? are they not merely benefactors ? ' 
 Such a notion is not borne out by the intrinsic evidence of the books 
 themselves : it is clear on the face of them, in regard to fraternities 
 registered with communities and churches, that they have reference 
 exclusively to communication of spiritual benefits, and there is nothing 
 whatever to suggest that there is any difference in this respect with 
 regard to the lay persons enrolled. It has been already mentioned 
 that in these books the scribes are very chary of anything like explana- 
 tion ; but the St-Gallen book in a leaf now missing, seen by Goldast 
 in the beginning of the seventeenth century, had the entry ' In nomine 
 Dei factus est noster frater Hugo rex, et Hluthere,' &c.^ Again, 
 monastic tradition in this matter shews neither break nor change. The 
 St-Gallen chronicles themselves for the tenth century afford many 
 examples which shew that these admissions to fraternity were matters 
 of ordinary and regular occurrence ; not merely so, but one passage, 
 already alluded to, affords evidence that they were recorded in the very 
 book of which the extant portions are now published.^ 
 
 To English readers the most interesting entries will doubtless be 
 those relating to the visit to St-Gallen of bishop Kenwald, of Wor- 
 cester, in October 929.^ We catch another glimpse of, seemingly, the 
 
 ^ Libri Confrat. p. 365. ^ Ibid. p. 393. 
 
 « Ibid. p. 6. 
 
 * See the passages quoted from Ekkehart iv in Ducange s.v. Fratres conscripti; 
 and especially the extract from cap. 11, 'et cum se orationi eorum committerent 
 abbas intulit, immo ut fratres conscripti sitis volo quia alia vobis dona dare non 
 habemus. Laetis ob hoc omnibus itur ad ecclesiam, recepti manibus abbatis 
 singuli in libro vitae scribuntur' ; compare Meyer von Knonau's note 1301, in his 
 edition of Ekkehart (St-Gallen, 1877). 
 
 * Ibid. p. 100 and cf. pp. 136-137. They were first published in the beginning of
 
 CONFRATERNITY BOOKS 355 
 
 same pilgrimage in a note appended to a Jumieges list in the Reichenau 
 book : ' In the name of Christ we commend to you King Athelstan 
 and archbishop Wulfhclm.' ^ Athelstan occurs also in the Pfaffers 
 book, but this time as already deceased and commended to the prayers 
 of that community by his half-brother, King Edmund the Elder, and 
 archbishop Odo of Canterbury.^ These last entries record a visit to 
 Pfaffers at the time, perhaps, when St Odo was journeying to Rome 
 for the pall, and preserve the names of his retinue, but in a form so 
 corrupt as to suggest they may have been first taken down from dicta- 
 tion.^ Such relations subsisting between these Swiss monasteries and 
 England go far to confirm the tradition which makes the venerable 
 Gregory, abbat of Einsiedeln in the tenth century, an Englishman of 
 royal descent. It may well have been that on some such pilgrimage 
 to Rome, a companion, say, of St Odo, charmed with these solitudes, 
 remained behind, and that his uncouth English name was exchanged 
 for that of the apostle of his native country. 
 
 The original portion of the Durham Liber Vitae was written, in the 
 judgement of Sir E. M. Thompson, ' within the half-century following 
 the destruction of the monastery of Lindisfarne by the Danes in 
 793 and before 875 '. It seems to have been then compiled from 
 earlier records going far back in the history of Lindisfarne. The 
 scribe has classified this earlier material under headings, such as 
 kings and dukes, queens and abbesses, abbat-priests, abbat-deacons, 
 &c. Henceforward the entries are contemporary, and in many hands ; 
 for the tenth century they are few ; they greatly multiply with 
 the definite establishment of the monks at Durham in the eleventh. 
 Margins and blank spaces were first filled in ; by and by additional 
 leaves had to be added, which carry on the names of confratres and 
 consorores to the sixteenth century. The Newminster book, which was 
 started between 1020 and 1030, adopts much the same plan : it opens 
 with lists of the West Saxon kings, ancestors of the founders, of the 
 archbishops of Canterbury, the bishops of London, Rochester, Win- 
 chester, Chichester, Sherborne,'^ Wilton, Crediton, and Wells, doubtless 
 commended to the community by the then occupants of those sees ; 
 
 the seventeenth century, by Goldast, and have been reprinted by Mabillon (in Acta 
 viii pp. 236-237) and by Stubbs (in the Introduction to Memorials of St Dunstan). 
 ' ' Aethelstaenum regem cum Wlfehno archiepo et nostris fidelissimis vivis ac in 
 pace quiescentibiis vestro servitio in christi nomine commendamus.' This, so far 
 as I can make out, is the last entry but one (' Wighart ') in the Jumieges list {Libr. 
 Con/rat. p. 238). 
 
 * ' Athalsten rex, Otmundus rex, Odgiva, Odo archiepiscopus ' (p. 363). 
 
 ' The Odgiva, whom the editor identifies with Edmund's half-sister Edgiva, wife 
 of Charles the P'at, is surely his mother Edgiva who (like Edmund and Odo) was 
 still living. 
 
 * This list shews that at an early date, long before William of Malmesbury, there 
 must have been much confusion in regard to the succession of bishops of Sherborne. 
 
 A a 2
 
 c^!^6 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 next follow dukes and deceased benefactors, the monks of the house 
 itself and those in communion of prayers at the cathedral, at Abingdon, 
 and Ely, and the nuns of Romsey, then lay confratres or consorores 
 continued with breaks, and in various hands, to the suppression. It is 
 pleasant to observe among the bishops of Winchester in this confra- 
 ternity book of Hyde, indeed the latest entered, the name of Bishop 
 Henry of Blois, the long continued feud with whom occupies so con- 
 siderable a place in the history of the monastery. A page or two 
 before, among royal personages, occurs his mother Adela, daughter of 
 William the Conqueror, as ' monacha '. 
 
 We have said that with the establishment of the Cathedral monas- 
 tery of Durham the admissions greatly multiply. The entries of the 
 twelfth century must comprise at least 2,000 names ; many must be 
 priests or clerics, the bulk are evidently lay persons. There are several 
 monks, but we have only been able to find one entire community, that 
 of Worcester at some time during the episcopate of Bishop Sampson 
 (i 096-1 1] 2). We at once recognize Hemming, who compiled the 
 Worcester Cartulary, and the chronicler Florence ; the name which 
 immediately precedes him, Columbanus, may suggest how it was that 
 the chronicle of Marianus the Irishman so soon found its way to 
 Worcester. Indeed, the list, generally, seems to afford evidence that 
 many different nationalities were represented in that community.^ 
 Among twelfth-century names which we should hardly expect to find 
 is Walter Mapes,^ but perhaps he reserved most of his dislike of 
 monks for display in his books, and for the Cistercians ; he seems 
 to have come to Durham in company with St Thomas's faithful friend 
 and follower Herbert of Boseham, whose name immediately precedes 
 his own. We are less surprised to meet here that constant pursuer of 
 good works, the great Justiciar Ranulf de Glanville,^ a confrater whose 
 good offices, as in duty bound, must many a time have eased the com- 
 munity of Durham from anxiety. Indeed there seem to be many 
 indications that the lawyers were pretty strongly represented in our 
 old Benedictine confraternity books. 
 
 To have a picture to the life of the good turn which some of these 
 powerful lay brethren could do the vowed religious, we may turn to 
 
 ' By some mischance twenty or more names belonging to the Worcester com- 
 munity, forming the third column in this page of the MS, have been omitted in the 
 print of the Ltder Vitae p. 14 ; the names there printed as col. 3 are marginal 
 entries of later date, unconnected with Worcester. The omitted names are (after 
 Ambrosius) : Maurus, Henricus, Ageluuinus, Gilebertus, Freauuinus I, Martinus, 
 Alfuuius, Aegelricus, Freauuinus II, Clemens, Nicholaus, Vincentius, David (this 
 name is touched up with red like Mauricius), Arnulfus, Athelelmus, Gregorius, 
 Alduuinus, Patricias ; the four following are in a slightly later hand : Aldredus, 
 Germanus, Laurentius, Rogerius. 
 
 ' Liber Vitae p. 19. ^ Ibid. p. 17.
 
 CONFRATERNITY BOOKS 3.57 
 
 an incident in the life of Ranulf's master, King Henry II. In June 
 or July 1 1 84 Henry stopped at St Albans; on the morrow of his 
 arrival he asked leave to enter the Chapter-house, ' to pay a visit to 
 my brethren ' he said, declaring himself a confrater of the community. 
 He entered in humble guise, followed by a great train of nobles, among 
 whom was Walter of Coutances, bishop of Lincoln. The king was 
 set in the abbat's chair, the bishop on his left, the abbat on his right, 
 then, bowing to the monks on either side, he with great instance begged 
 their prayers. It seems an odd moment for the bishop to choose to 
 renew an old complaint of his predecessors against the great exemp- 
 tions and privileges granted to the monastery by the partiality of 
 Adrian IV, to which they had never been able properly to accommodate 
 themselves. Now, however, bishop Walter again raised the question. 
 The abbat was ready ; placing his hand on the king's knee he cried 
 out, ' Behold my peace,' as though, says the chronicler, he had said, 
 ' Behold the witness of that compact of peace and amity struck and 
 confirmed between you and us.' The king's turn on the bishop of 
 Lincoln, as reported, could not have been pleasant ; and he added by 
 way of general advertisement : ' Whoever shall shew hostility to this 
 abbat and community will have to deal with me.' ^ It was a regal 
 rough way, in days when kings were rough, of recognizing that, when 
 a monastery granted fraternity, the grantee, on his side, was bound to 
 protect the interest, to maintain the honour, of his monastic brethren. 
 
 This view is very clearly expressed in the forms of admission, of 
 which two occur in Consuetudinaries of St xAugustine's, and another 
 in that of Westminster.- The MSS are of the thirteenth and fourteenth 
 centuries, but the practices they prescribe, though differing in some 
 small details, are traditional and were in vogue a hundred or two 
 hundred years before. We may take the formula of admission from 
 the earlier, the ceremonies from the later St Augustine's form, as the 
 more concise. A prelate or legate of the Holy See received special 
 honour. Introduced into the Chapter-house, he was placed in the 
 abbat's seat, he himself said Bencdicitc, and might prefer his request 
 for admission to 'society' sitting. The prayer granted, he was at 
 liberty either to sit or stand, whilst the abbat, holding his hand out- 
 stretched on the gospel book, formally admitted him in these words : 
 ' On the part of God, and holy Mary, and Saints Peter and Paul, and 
 Saint Augustine and his companions, and of Saint Benedict and of 
 
 ^ Gesta abb. S.Albatti i 197-198. 
 
 ^ Cotton MS Faustina C xii, f. 2 (imperfect at the beginning); MS Vitellius D 
 xvi, f. 3 ; MS Otho C xi, flf. 122-123. [The Faustina and Otho MSS have now been 
 printed under the editorship of Sir K. M. Thompson in vols, xxiii and xxvii (1902, 
 1904) of the Publications of the Henry Bradshaw Society. The \'itellius MS is an 
 Ordinale; it is a good deal burnt but still usable.]
 
 358 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 the Saints we grant to you, that you be henceforth partaker of those 
 good things which God has given us to accomplish, in mass and in 
 matins, in vigils and in prayers, in fastings and alms, and of all the 
 good works which shall be done in this house for ever. And you on 
 your part shall grant to us a participation in those good things, which 
 God has granted you to perform.' Whereupon the prelate kissed the 
 gospel book ; the abbat kneeling kissed his hand, and afterwards his 
 face. If he had been hitherto standing the abbat signed to him to sit, 
 and the whole community came forward one by one, beginning with 
 the seniors, and saluted him as the abbat had done. Lay magnates, 
 and clerics, and knights, and men and women of lower degrees, all 
 received fraternity kneeling ; if the petitioner was a person of high 
 rank, a distinction was made in his favour, in so far as a place was 
 assigned to him near the seniors of the monastery, or on the steps at 
 the abbat's feet. After the words of admission, the confratres kissed 
 the abbat, and then went to kiss all the brethren, beginning with the 
 youngest on the right-hand side. Consorores kissed the gospel book. 
 The abbat afterwards assigned them their places and bade them sit 
 down; then addressing them, he pointed out how henceforward they 
 were bound to help the house, in word and in deed, and that what 
 they had perhaps hitherto done in this kind out of mere good will 
 had now become a matter of duty. The chapter was then closed in 
 the usual way. 
 
 In days of social upheaval, like the present, when the highest 
 interests are sometimes made to subserve petty and trivial ambitions, 
 and the effort is made to counteract, in some measure at least, the evil 
 by a grading and ranging of pious associations, it may be salutary to 
 look to days when, because they were Christian, worldly distinctions 
 formed no bar to Christian equality, and brotherhood in the ways of 
 Holy Church was not abused to gratify an unworthy worldly vanity. 
 In the great mediaeval monastery, the Chapter-house will to-day be 
 filled with a brilliant company, whilst an offshoot of the royal house, 
 potent beyond his peers,^ forgetting his worldly rank and dignity, 
 
 ' See, for instance, the letter of fraternity of John de Warenne, the last of the 
 Plantagenet Earls of Surrey in Hist. Dunelm. Scr. ires pp. cxii-cxiii ; see other 
 fraternity letters, in the same volume, pp. ccclvii, ccccx, ccccxvii ; in Raine's Priory 
 of Coldingham p. 90, and in Stevens ii Appendix pp. 144-145. In the Durham 
 Letter-book, Cotton MS Faustina A vi, flf. 37-39, are six letters which are evidently 
 inserted as specimens or precedents for letters of this kind, issued during the prior- 
 ship of William de Tanfield (1309- 131 3). The first three are letters of fraternity 
 properly speaking, i.e. grants to persons who had petitioned for such admission, 
 the first and an always essential condition : I. a littera generalis couched in such 
 general terms as would apply to the majority of confratres (the actual grantee here 
 was W. de Brokesby, probably the Exchequer official mentioned in Hist. Croyl. 
 contin. p. 482) ; 2. a littera specialis, that granted to John de Warenne just men- 
 tioned, specifying certain quite personal details; 3. a letter of ' sorority '.—The
 
 CONFRATERNITY BOOKS 359 
 
 comes to commend himself to the prayers of the poor of Christ, and 
 to be numbered among them ; accustomed to precedence and com- 
 mand, like the least of his servants he makes petition and suit, and has 
 to take here a lowly place. To-morrow it will be filled with a nameless 
 band ; but all alike seek and obtain the same gift of brotherhood, in 
 and through the house of St Cuthbert, or St Augustine, or St Alban. 
 
 The introduction of the mendicant orders does not seem to have 
 lessened or checked the admissions to fraternity of the Benedictines, 
 which kept on in a regular and steady flow. The Durham Liber Vitae 
 must contain about seventeen or eighteen thousand names, spread over 
 eight hundred years. Documents published by Mr Riley, in the series 
 of St Albans chronicles, give more exact data for some years of the 
 fifteenth century. In 143 1, seventeen persons were admitted to frater- 
 nity at St Albans ; ^ in 1423, twenty, among whom was that special 
 friend of St Albans, Humfrey, 'the Good' Duke of Gloucester;- in 
 1428, sixteen persons;^ in 1429, thirty-four;* in 1430, the precise 
 number is not stated, but it cannot have been less than between twenty 
 and thirty.^ Stevens printed ^ from a now much damaged Evesham 
 register two lists, evidently admissions to the fraternity of that monas- 
 tery in the years 1^44 and 1450 ; the earlier comprises nearly fifty 
 persons, the latter more than eighty. All classes are represented, 
 seemingly in just proportion, neighbouring rectors, London merchants, 
 judges, townspeople of Evesham and inhabitants of the neighbouring 
 towns and villages (generally husband and wife together), knights and 
 country gentry, the greater nobility, and members of the houses of 
 both York and Lancaster."' 
 
 Mr Shepherd, who in his account of the Canterbury Christ Church 
 
 other three are merely concessions made inei-o motii convenius, of a share in good 
 works, without question of fraternity, to a nobleman, a lady of high rank, and 
 a faithful servant, who had in their several ways earned the gratitude of the 
 community. 
 
 ' Amttndeshain vol. i pp. 65-66. "^ Ibid. pp. 6667. 
 
 ' Ibid. pp. 21, 22-23, 24-25. If the admissions on pp. 67-68 actually belong to 
 1428, a large addition would have to be made to the number in the text. 
 
 * Ibid. pp. 36, 40, 41 (evidently a fraternity list). 
 
 " Ibid. pp. 51, 56. 
 
 ' Stevens Two Additiofial Volumes to the Monasiicon ii App. p. 145. 
 
 ' It would seem that most of the members of the royal family were confratres or 
 consorores of one or other of the great Benedictine monasteries in the fifteenth 
 century. At St Albans, besides Humfrey Duke of Gloucester, we find the Duchess 
 of Clarence {Amundesham i p. 41). At Croyland : Henry VI ; Margaret Duchess of 
 Somerset ; and Margaret Countess ot Richmond, mother of Henry VII {Hist. Croyl. 
 contin. pp. 530, 539-540). At Canterbury Cathedral: Thomas Beaufort, Duke of 
 Kxeter ; Cardinal Beaufort ; Anne Duchess of Exeter, sister of Edward IV ; Anne 
 Duchess of Buckingham, his aunt: his Queen, Elizabeth; Richard Duke of 
 Gloucester (Richard III) ; Cecily, sister of Elizabeth of York, the wife of Henry VII 
 {Hist. MSS Comm. Xinth Rep. \ pp. 112, 113, 115, 116, 1 17, 1 18). At Evesham: 
 John Duke of Bedford; Cecily, mother of Edward IV (Stevens, ttbi supra). 
 A little research would probably discover many more.
 
 36o LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 conventual registers in the appendix to the Ninth Report of the 
 Historical MSS Commission, mentions several letters of fraternity, 
 remarks in regard to the last extant register, 1506-1532 (there is a 
 gap in the records from 1532 to 1541), that it begins to drop ' reference 
 to spiritual and almost to ecclesiastical matters ', deeds preponderating 
 enormously. In the early part of this register, ' a few letters of con- 
 fraternity are found, mostly granted to obscure men and their wives — 
 to bailiffs of the conventual manors, London citizens and the like — 
 very few of which have any historical significance. Towards the end 
 of the volume these become fewer and fewer '.^ It is not improbable 
 that the new men who came to the fore, even in the early part of the 
 reign of the second Tudor, cared little for such benefits. But one of 
 the very last confratres of the Canterbury Cathedral community 
 of whose admission there is record, is surely one of the most illus- 
 trious ; in 1530 a letter of fraternity is granted to Thomas More, 
 knight, Lord Chancellor of this most flourishing kingdom of Eng- 
 land.^ Mr Shepherd makes this further and most significant remark 
 in reference to the register quoted : ' There is one kind of lease which 
 first makes its appearance in the early portion of this volume ; the 
 deeds by which rectories were let to farm ; these appear to increase in 
 numbers in the direct ratio of the decrease of letters of confraternity. 
 Some families of no mean rank may be traced in the registers, 
 beginning as officials of the convent or of the archbishop, then becoming 
 lessees of the whole or part of a manor or of a rectory, their descen- 
 dants finally emerging after the Reformation with the position of 
 freeholders.' ^ 
 
 The day is past when the subject of the suppression of the monas- 
 teries can be treated in such a style as that adopted by Burnet, or 
 when such a perversion can pass current among educated men as fact. 
 Whilst the suppression is recognized as a social revolution, it is becom- 
 ing recognized too that it was a revolution that brought heaviness to 
 most English hearts, and cast a cloud over men's daily life. If the 
 monastic churches and treasuries were rich with the accumulations of 
 ages, the enjoyment of them lay with the public at large, all over the 
 land, on feast and gaudy days. If many of the monasteries were like 
 palaces, or as Leland says of St Edmundsbury, like 'a city' in its 
 ' incomparable magnificence ', with the exception of a comparatively 
 small part reserved for the use of the monks themselves, they prac- 
 tically belonged to the public also, to poor and to rich, who came in 
 and went out much as they liked. It was little consolation to most 
 people to reflect that if the treasuries were rifled and the monasteries 
 
 ' Ninth Rep. i p. 119. * \w^_ p. 121, s Ibid. p. 119.
 
 CONFRATERNITY BOOKS 361 
 
 pulled down, a great show was being made with the spoils of the first 
 a long way off at Court and out of their sight, or that from the 
 materials of the second new nobles built big houses for themselves, 
 which other men might not enter unbidden. Nor in making up the 
 sum of the sorrow that was caused must the confraternities be left 
 out of account, for they formed a network of associations of many 
 thousands of men and women spread over the whole country, to 
 whom, living, the interests and prosperity of the house they regarded 
 as in a measure their own, in which they had part and lot, had been 
 dear, and whither they had looked, when God should take them hence, 
 for faithful prayers that they might be admitted into the joy of their 
 Lord.
 
 XVII 
 
 A BENEDICTINE CONFRATER OF THE 
 NINTH CENTURY 1 
 
 In a previous number of the Downside Review, attention was called 
 to a side of Benedictine history which, though greatly overlooked, is 
 full of interest — the special relation between monks and people living 
 in the world implied by the old name of 'fraternity'. Quite lately 
 two books, full of learning, have dealt with the subject, one by a 
 French layman, the other by a German priest. Where religious 
 practice is concerned, M. A. Molinier's work is as full of misapprehen- 
 sions as in many respects it is abundant and accurate in its informa- 
 tion ; Dr Ebner is much more interesting, for he seems to enter into 
 the spirit of the institute he describes, and really understands 
 the subject he discusses. For the period called by him the first, 
 extending into the tenth century, he has surveyed the whole field, 
 with a single exception: of the Spanish documents illustrating the 
 subject, which are both curious and numerous, he seems to have but 
 slight knowledge. But, as it stands, Dr Ebner's book is a most 
 valuable contribution to Benedictine history ; and it may be hoped 
 that the favourable reception it has met with will encourage him to 
 publish the result of his labours on the later period. 
 
 The present paper has a very simple aim — by the help of a single 
 document, to recall if possible for a moment from oblivion a Bene- 
 dictine confrater of the ninth century ; to see what sort of a man he 
 was ; and perhaps to gain from him some idea of the character of some 
 among that multitude whose names lie written even yet in the ' book 
 of life ' of many a monastery, but who must remain mere names on 
 which at most the philologist may exercise his skill. 
 
 In the month of June, 839, Pippin, king of Aquitaine, gave to a 
 Burgundian named Heccard, already well provided with this world's 
 goods, the estate of Perrecy near Autun, and the gift was confirmed 
 by his father, the Emperor Lewis the Pious, in the following year, and 
 almost in the last days of his life. Count Heccard, though a man of 
 standing, was, it is clear, a nobleman of only second or third rank, or, 
 as we should say, a wealthy country gentleman. This new property 
 
 ^ From the Downside Review, July 1892.
 
 A BENEDICTINE CONFRATER 363 
 
 was no sooner acquired than he resolved to found at Perrecy a priory of 
 Benedictine monks, to be colonized from and to be dependent on the 
 abbey of Fleury-sur-Loire. Fleury it is true was at some distance 
 from his own residence ; but in this case, as in so many others, it was 
 not always the monastery which was the next door neighbour to 
 which a confrater looked as his spiritual home, and among the family 
 of which he was admitted to number himself. There were other 
 houses, as famous and of as good repute, nearer lo him than Fleury; 
 it is probable that Heccard's affections were drawn thither by a special 
 devotion to St Benedict himself, whose relics or some at least (not to 
 renew an old and ever new dispute) rested in that great monastery. 
 The actual transfer of the property and the foundation of the priory 
 were not to take place until after the Count's death ; he seems, how- 
 ever, never to have taken up his residence at Perrecy, but always to 
 have lived at his house of Sigy near Macon, further south, the church 
 of which place was dedicated, as he tells us, and perhaps through his 
 own instrumentality, to St Benedict. 
 
 Some five and thirty years passed. Heccard's wife Albegundis had 
 died childless; nor was there any issue by his second marriage with 
 Richildis. Two brothers, Theodoric and Bernard, were dead. The 
 sole survivor of the family besides himself was his sister Ada, a nun 
 of Faremoutier in the diocese of Meaux, which some readers may 
 recollect as intimately connected with the history of the English 
 Church in the seventh century. It may be mentioned by the way 
 that their mother's name was Domnana, which seems to have about it 
 some English reminiscences too. Heccard, now far advanced in years 
 and having no issue, set about the final disposal of all his worldly gear. 
 His will docs not pretend to detail more than a portion of his 
 personal effects, just so much as he specifically bequeaths as mementos 
 to various friends and relatives.^ But these bequests afford sufficient 
 information to give a notion of the man's pursuits and his interests, as 
 the rest of the will fills up the outline of his character : his reading, 
 his country sports, the reminiscences of his old military days, his 
 devoutness and piety, his capacity in matters of business, the good 
 terms on which he lives with his neighbours, tenants, dependants, 
 the rich and the poor. 
 
 To take first his books. He liked to read of the deeds of other 
 days. There was no history of his own Burgundian race and nation ; 
 
 ' This curious document, very generally overlooked by antiquaries whom it 
 might interest, was first printed by Pdrard in his scarce Reciieil de pieces ctirieuses 
 servant i\ P/iistoi/e de Boiirgogne ; a better print based on a copy of the Perrecy 
 cartulary among the Bouhier manuscripts at the Bibliotheque Nationale, with the 
 variants of Perard's text, a prefatory notice, and some useful notes, is given in the 
 Ihilletin de la Societd de Vhistoire de France, annees i^jj-/8j6, p. 189 sqq.
 
 364 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 but he has, in two tomes, the next best thing, the * Chronicles ', as 
 he calls them, of Gregory of Tours, true ' memoirs of his own times', 
 known to us commonly as the ' Ecclesiastical History of the Franks ' ; 
 and this at least recounts all that was then known or will ever be 
 known of the greatness and fall of the first Burgundian kingdom. As 
 a companion volume he has Paul Warnefrid's history of the Lombards. 
 Of law books he possesses, besides a copy of the Salic law, the Lex 
 Gundobaldi, the Burgundian Code of laws drawn up by king Gundo- 
 bald, the contemporary and rival of the Prankish conqueror Clovis ; 
 and the Roman revision of the same code known later as the Papianus. 
 He leaves the Gregory of Tours and Paul Warnefrid to Ansegisus, 
 archbishop of Sens ; his pacto Saleco, Salic law, to a namesake, one 
 Heccard son of Heccard ; his pacto Gunbaldo to a lay friend Gerbaldus ; 
 his pacto Romano to Walter, bishop of Orleans. Ecclesiastical law is 
 represented by a volume of excerpts from the canons of Councils 
 {canoTies scarsas), and a penitential. The universality of his tastes is 
 shewn by his ' book on agriculture ', bequeathed to Raganfrid, bishop 
 of Meaux, his ' book on the military art', given to Gerbaldus, and 
 ' a book on medicine ', which he leaves to Teutberga, wife of Lothar. 
 If his ' two books of Prognostics ', also a bequest to bishop Raganfrid 
 of Meaux, were the treatise of Hippocrates, here would be a second 
 work on the healing science. His books of devotion comprise first a 
 Bible, which he leaves to the church at Sigy ; a book of the gospels in 
 the Teutonic tongue, left to Bertrada, abbess of Faremoutier, an item 
 of evidence among many that German was understood in the Prankish 
 half of the Carolingian empire even in quarters where we should least 
 expect it ; finally a little psalter, and a book of prayers and psalms, 
 both of which are handed to his sister for her use. The Pastoral Care 
 of St Gregory, the Lives of St Gregory and St Lawrence, the Life of 
 St Anthony, Ambrose de ministcriis (the de officiis ministrormn), a 'little 
 book of St Mary of Egypt ', along with a ' libello Isidoro ' given to 
 Walla, bishop of Auxerre, complete Heccard's library.^ Is it possible 
 
 ' [In the Revue des Bibliotheques, July-Sept. 1896, abb^ Paul Lejay printed, 
 from MS 167 of the Fonds Baudot in the Public Library at Dijon, two catalogues 
 (AandB)of the library of the priory of Perrecy, both of the eleventh century. M. Lejay 
 points out that no. 27 of A (= B 26), Frognostica, occurs also in Heccard's will; 
 in B, the book in question is distinctly stated to be the Prognostica of Julian of 
 Toledo ; but Julian's Prognostica is a work in three books, that in Heccard's library 
 was in two. M. Lejay also calls attention to A 23 (= B 51), the Pastoral Care of 
 Gregory, a book also in Heccard's Collection. It is to be noticed further that 
 no. 48 of B is 'Liber salice legis cum canonibus', no. ']^ ' Gesta francorum ' ; but 
 who shall say whether this latter be the Gregory of Tours not specifically 
 bequeathed in Heccard's will, or the former the pacto Saleco given to Heccard 
 son of Heccard ? There are two books in B that one would like to know something 
 more about: no. 32 ' Hildefonsus ' and no. 43 '■Gradate wasconicum' — what was 
 that? 
 
 M. Lejay's introduction gives some interesting information as to the later history
 
 A BENEDICTINE CONFRATER 365 
 
 that this last may be a copy of the pseudo-Isidorean decretals ? 
 Heccard was not content to possess books and give them away — that 
 is, after his death ; he also borrowed books, and, what is more, faith- 
 fully returned them, after death too, as witness a special clause in 
 his will: 'and return the books (he tells his executors) belonging 
 to the monastery of St Benedict at Fleury which are kept in that 
 little hutch {in ilia utica parvula) at Sigy, in my closet, where is the 
 chest in which I have my deeds in the Lombard box.' All which 
 shews that Heccard was a man of precision and method. He has also 
 something of the spirit of a collector and connoisseur in matters other 
 than books ; for he mentions in his will several engraved gems ; an 
 amethyst with an eagle, left to his wife Richildis ; another ' in which is 
 sculptured a man who kills a lion ', and this is left to his sister ; also 
 an onyx seal ; and a ' beryl with a serpent sculptured in it '. Most of 
 his jewels, ' quidquid de gemmis habemns ', are left to his wife, but to 
 pass after her death to Fleury ; so too his ' lesser belt ' studded with 
 jewels, and his 'greater belt' with jewels; the condition seems rather 
 hard, seeing that, as he himself says, this last-named belt was very 
 largely composed of jewels that once had been hers. But perhaps she 
 was a devota too. 
 
 Heccard's cares were not confined to books and curios; his will 
 shews he believed in the old proverb, ' Love me, love my dog '. Some 
 dozen hounds are specially bequeathed in couples to friends and rela- 
 tives: two, and two falcons, ' to our senior' — can this possibly mean here 
 his intendant and steward, factotum and crony? He gives two more 
 and a sparrow-hawk {sparvarius) to his namesake Heccard son of 
 Heccard. If our confrater had given up the business of war and confined 
 himself now to country sports, he still kept a small armoury, which 
 was distributed, like his pack of hounds and his horses, piecemeal among 
 numerous legatees. Those interested in military antiquities may 
 perhaps gather some interesting details from the list, which, however, 
 makes no such splendid show as the collection of his contemporary, 
 the very powerful and eminent and wealthy Evrard, Count of Friuli. 
 Here it will be sufficient to note, as shewing once more that Heccard 
 was nice and choice in all his tastes, that his swords comprised a 
 spada spansiga and a spada indica—3. Toledan and an Eastern 
 blade, or in other words, the best that money and care could procure ; 
 the former was given (with two hounds) to a godson Richard ; the 
 latter, also with two hounds, to Thericus, son of Nivelong, one of his 
 executors, who receives moreover his tabulas saraciniscas. Those 
 who have access to books, as the present writer has not, can say what 
 
 of Heccard's foundation at Perrecy ; but nothing additional for our confrater 
 except that Almoin (of Fleury) calls Heccard ditissimus.\ '
 
 366 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 game, probably, this may be. Of furniture and articles of domestic 
 use Heccard's will contains little notice except numerous drinking- 
 cups, and carpets, which by the way fall largely to the share of his 
 many episcopal friends; even the abbess of Faremoutier, along with 
 such mementos as the gospels in German, and the Life of Saint 
 Anthony, and the engraved beryl, has ' the glass cup which belonged 
 to my brother Bernard '. If we may trust the editor of the document, 
 there is one item among these moveables which is a curiosity indeed : 
 * furcella argentea cum cusilares ii,' ' une fourchette et deux cuillers 
 d'argent.' It cannot be said that this 'furcella', at any rate, is a 
 pitchfork, whether for haymaking or for defence. These articles are 
 left to Richildis ; and here in all likelihood we have an example of 
 a table-fork a full century and a half earlier than that famous case 
 of the noble lady who introduced from Constantinople to Venice such 
 unheard-of fastidiousness, and thereby raised all the ire and indigna- 
 tion of St Peter Damian : ' Why, she uses a little gold-pronged 
 instrument to convey her food from her plate to her mouth, instead of 
 the fingers that God gave her.' This is supposed by the recent historian 
 of The Fork in Europe to be the earliest instance of its use in the 
 west ; yet it is more than probable that Heccard, and then Richildis 
 his wife, possessed the offending instrument, and that Professor 
 Lumbroso begins his story ever so much too late. 
 
 It may be interesting to compare Heccard's domestic chapel, left 
 to his wife for her lifetime and then to pass to Fleury, with that of 
 Count Evrard of Friuli, especially as it may help us to form some idea 
 of the status of the former. Evrard, it has been mentioned, was 
 a man of the highest rank. Though his, like Heccard's, was only 
 a domestic chapel, he must do no less than follow the fashion of the 
 cathedral or the monastery, and the altar stood under a ciborium, or, in 
 modern rendering, baldacchino, which was surmounted by a cross of 
 gold adorned with crystals ; underneath, immediately over the altar 
 apparently, hung a golden crown, with a relic of the true Cross, and 
 pendent to this another golden cross, with a small reliquary suspended 
 from either arm. There were besides two portable altars, one of 
 crystal enriched with silver. The sacred vessels and utensils in 
 Evrard's chapel comprised a chalice and paten of gold, two of silver, 
 one of ivory and one of glass, both enriched with gold, and one a nut 
 mounted in silver and gold ; a reed of gold for communion, two silver 
 thuribles, two silver candlesticks, a basin and jug of silver, ivory 
 diptychs set in gold, a comb enriched with gold, a silver fan, and 
 'tables for singing' enriched with gold and silver, besides numerous 
 reliquaries of crystal and ivory. The vestments and altar-cloths were 
 of silk, one set silk and gold thread. The books consisted of a missal
 
 A BENEDICTINE CONFRATER 367 
 
 and a book of epistles, with covers of silver and gold, and two gospel 
 books with covers of gold for high days ; a second set of six volumes 
 with ivory covers. The male members of the family were provided 
 for private devotion each with a psalter ; that of Gisla, Evrard's wife, 
 had a commentary ; the youngest daughter had two prayer-books, one 
 with psalms. This just accords with what has been already noted in 
 Heccard's case. 
 
 But by the side of the bravery and splendour of Count Evrard's 
 chapel, Heccard's seems modest indeed. The books comprised a 
 missal containing also the epistles and gospels, a gospel-book, 
 and an antiphonar (and gradual) in two volumes. The altar vessels 
 and plate consisted of two silver chalices and patens, a glass chalice 
 of sapphire colour {calice vitreo de saphiro), four silver cruets, two 
 thuribles, a greater and a lesser, a gold candlestick ; a cross of 
 gold with a relic of the true Cross, probably hanging over the 
 enriched altar {altario niaiore parato), and a cross of silver with a 
 similar relic and other relics of the Passion, two little ivory reliquaries, 
 a little pail for holy water, and a hand-bell. There were four 
 chasubles, one of bright red, one chestnut coloured {castanea, which 
 sometimes at least designates a stuff), one dark blue, one green ; two 
 albs, stoles, girdles, and maniples, besides three other maniples, one of 
 green embroidered, one of silk, one of skin or fur [dc gliso). The altar- 
 cloths or vestings were, one of cloth of gold, or silk and gold, one of 
 silk, one of linen (distinct from the corporal). There were also 
 hangings {drappc) worked with feathers, or embroidered to imitate 
 feathers ; a similar cloth for the lutrin ; and a carpet. A batchino 
 (basin ?) ad lumviaria, together with a bursa cum brisdo ct amiania 
 (which last item the learned may be able to explain) complete 
 Heccard's chapel stuff. 
 
 His will affords, however, points of more interest than can belong 
 to such dry enumeration. First he names his executors, fifteen in 
 number ; two or three ecclesiastics apart, he selects these confidential 
 agents, as appears from the document itself and from other deeds 
 relating to the priory of Perrecy founded soon after, among his own 
 tenants and dependants : a fact which shews the good relations 
 existing between lord and vassal, since these executors will have to 
 deal with the disposal and ownership of estates which they themselves 
 have actually held under the testator. So far as his particular 
 wishes are concerned, especially in regard to the projected priory, he 
 refers them to a paper of instructions how they are to proceed in 
 detail, which he had already drawn up in duplicate ; one copy he kept 
 in his own hands to be passed on to the executors after his death ; 
 the other, for security and that there might be no mistake, he had
 
 368 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 deposited with his sister at Faremoutier. He adjures his executors : 
 ' dispose of all things as for the salvation of my soul, just as I have 
 written down in the instructions which I have left. Act as though 
 you were forthwith to render an account before the judgement seat of 
 Christ. And if any one of you shall go against this disposition which 
 I have made, and shall not return to himself and amend herein, let 
 him answer for it in the sight of God and of all His saints ; and incur 
 (Heccard, it will be seen, had not read his Bible for nothing) the divine 
 anger as did Dathon and Abiron, and as did Ananias and Saphira 
 who lied to the Holy Spirit.' But from this outburst he turns to them 
 in another mood : ' but now I earnestly entreat of your charity to 
 dispose of my substance in this wise.' He calls his property as a 
 whole by the one word ' my alms ', and in fact he disposes of all in 
 charity and beneficence in one way or another. Perrecy and its 
 dependencies are to be given to Fleury for the long-meditated founda- 
 tion; a reservation is made of a hamlet (Balgiacum), then held by 
 Leutboldus, one of his executors, the proceeds of which are to be 
 devoted to supply St-Andoche at Autun with wax and oil for lights. 
 He next founds a perpetual anniversary, both at Fleury and Fare- 
 moutier, but with a nice distinction : at Fleury for his father and 
 mother, his two wives Albegundis and Richildis, his brother Theodoric, 
 and himself; at Faremoutier for his first wife Albegundis, his sister 
 Ada, the reigning Abbess Bertrada, and himself. This foundation of 
 an anniversary is the only other landed estate bestowed on Fleury ; 
 and he assigns the revenue to be inalienably applied to providing the 
 clothes of the monks. The rest of his possessions being scattered, 
 their administration from the abbey might have been attended with 
 many inconveniences. He accordingly kills two birds with one stone, 
 by making handsome provision in real property for numerous friends, 
 on condition of their payment to Fleury, within twelve months of his 
 decease, of a money fine ; thus securing a substantial benefaotion to 
 the house of his predilection, whilst imposing on his legatees a very 
 moderate charge, compared with the value of the bequests in land 
 thus falling to them. Several churches, far afield, share in the 
 liberality of the Count — St Martin's at Tours, and even St Peter's at 
 Rome, to which is made the large bequest of two hundred shillings. 
 Everything not specifically disposed of, whether real or personal 
 property, he wills to be given to the poor or to any whom he may 
 have wronged. And to give his executors the widest powers he adds, 
 with a little reminiscence from his old readings, ' do you have sedulous 
 care to make good any deficiency caused by my forgetfulness, for non 
 omnia possumus omnes '. 
 
 There is still one more bequest, and it is the last. ' Let Bernard
 
 A BENEDICTINE CONFRATER 369 
 
 son of Malquin give two hundred shillings for the property I leave 
 him at Mallido, &c., &c., and this sum distribute among my friends, 
 as well to those who are nobles as to those who are of low estate. 
 And I pray you for the love of God, that, wherever it be I die, you will 
 cause me to be buried at St Benedict's at Fleury ; and if the times be 
 such that there be difficulty in the way of conveying me thither, wait 
 until a favourable moment shall come and then carry there my bones ; 
 and give half a silver pound to those who shall dig my grave.' This 
 savours of superstition, some may say ; some, that this savours too 
 much of love of places, and shews a want of 'detachment'. But 
 whatever others may do, St Benedict, whilst zealous of the mcliora 
 charismata, has ever known how to draw men into the narrow way by 
 the cords of Adam. 
 
 Bb
 
 XVIII 
 
 AN ANTIQUARY OF THE NINTH CENTURY i 
 
 The CaroHngian age was essentially an age of a new birth, political 
 and social, and it was no exception to the rule which prevails in 
 such periods of renewal, namely that the renewal is accompanied 
 by a lively interest in an idealized bygone time. In other words, 
 times of renaissance are times of antiquarian research. It may 
 seem strange to envisage the Carolingian epoch from this point of 
 view ; yet the names Flaccus and Homer, Naso, Menalcas, and 
 the rest which the principal courtiers and the chief scholars of the 
 palace gave to themselves, and their great master Charles delighted 
 to give them in familiar intercourse or in private correspondence, 
 as though they were so many knights of a literary Round Table, 
 shew the spirit which prevailed in quarters that gave the tone 
 to the whole society. It is true the reminiscences revived were 
 largely those that centred round the ancient Pagan Empire of Rome, 
 which was to be revived in Christian guise a few years later ; and it 
 is characteristic that Eginhard, in his life of Charles the Great, 
 follows the very details of expression used by Suetonius ; yet in an 
 academy of which Alcuin was the chief ornament such tendencies 
 must needs be kept in restraint, so penetrated was he with the 
 Christian spirit. These efforts of the day were not confined to 
 admiration for the literary performances of antiquity. Notwith- 
 standing the ravage which Italy had suffered at the hands of suc- 
 cessive hordes of barbarians, she was yet, in the West, the classic 
 land of the arts. The name of Rome exercised a fascination not 
 merely political, though it would be no injustice to Charles to say 
 that this was the main value of Rome or the Pope in his eyes. But 
 there were others of more simple mind, men bred in the cloister, 
 who were content to make their long pilgrimage from Swiss or from 
 German monastery merely to wonder at and admire relics of past 
 greatness, and to gather up the fragments of antiquity that fell in 
 their path, copying inscriptions from bridges and gates and tombs, 
 from triumphal arches and statues and churches ; nay, certainly one 
 
 ' From the Downside Review, July 1894.
 
 AGNELLUS OF RAVENNA 371 
 
 from St Gregory's library in the monastery of St Andrew on the 
 Caehan Hill.> 
 
 Next to Rome, Ravenna might best excite the enthusiasm or the 
 curiosity of the antiquary. Like Rome, it was once the seat of empire, 
 but of Christian empire. It possessed, moreover, its monuments of 
 the short-lived Gothic revival under Theodoric, was then for some 
 two hundred years the seat of the exarchs, and became politically the 
 first city of Italy. It is no wonder if in splendour and richness of art 
 productions of late date it vied with Rome itself. Though, alas ! it had 
 not on the spot a powerful protector, as Rome had in the person of 
 the Pope, to conciliate whom Charlemagne had ever a concern, and 
 who was there to keep watch and guard against the attempts of the 
 spoiler. Before Charlemagne the art treasures of Ravenna were 
 defenceless, and they fell an easy prey to his desire to deck out 
 his new buildings at Aix-la-Chapelle with plunder from the then 
 queen of the Adriatic. Though he was full of greed, and there 
 was none to say him nay or effectually thwart his will, he yet 
 sought, in a quarter where he felt he would not be refused, some 
 colour of permission to cart away the precious things he was longing 
 to secure. Charles addressed himself to the Pope, who would be the 
 less likely to deny to him the spoil of Ravenna inasmuch as, the 
 wants of the monarch supplied from another quarry, there might be 
 better grounded hope of security for Roman monuments. In regard 
 to the Pope's right it may be said that the Lombard had dispossessed 
 the exarch, or the exarch's master the Byzantine emperor ; Pippin, 
 Charles's father, dispossessing the Lombard, had given Ravenna to 
 the Pope. Yet from the Ravennese point of view it is hard to see 
 Pope Hadrian's justification for salving Charles's uneasy conscience 
 in regard to the coveted spoil. However this may be, it is what 
 Hadrian the First, in acknowledging the receipt of what he calls 
 Charles's refulgent and nectareal rescripts, states that he has done : 
 
 ^ It will be in place to give it in the pages of the Downside Review. 
 ' In bibliotheca sancti Gregorii, quae est in monasterio Clivi-Tauri, ubi ipse 
 Dialogos scripsit. 
 
 Sanctorum veneranda cohors sedet ordine . . . 
 
 Divinae legis mystica dicta docens. 
 Hos inter residens Agapetus iure sacerdos, 
 Codicibus pulchrum condidit arte locum. 
 Gratia par cunctis, sanctus labor omnibus unus : 
 Dissona verba quidem, sed tamen una fides.' 
 From this description it may be gathered that the walls, or some parts of them, 
 were relieved by pictures or mosaics, whether of the doctors of the Old or the New 
 Law; and that the founder of the library— that is, the collector of the books- 
 was, perhaps, Pope Agapetus (535-536)- There follows a note which seems to give 
 the dimensions of the building : — ' In fronte pedes xxv. In agro pedes xxxiii. Item 
 in Tabernae, in fronte pedes xi. In agro pedes xxxi ' (Mabillon Vetera Analecta 
 t. iv p. 497). 
 
 B b 2
 
 372 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 the marbles and mosaics of the palace, on floors or on walls, with 
 ready mind, pure heart, and exceeding great love of his Excellence, 
 he gives him leave to pull up and down, and take away ; and as 
 though what is thus specified were not sufficient, the words (vague 
 enough to cover anything) ceteraque exempla are added at the end.-^ 
 Some words proceeding from a Ravennese author writing a few 
 decades later in regard to the period of Charles's depredations, 
 though couched in the form of prophecy of future events, may rather 
 be taken as inspired by regret at these very losses of the past. ' But 
 I tell you, my brethren, my fellow citizens (he says), that a time shall 
 come on our city such as none can remember, and she shall be 
 despoiled of all her good things, even by her in-dwellers ; and there 
 shall come from the west, for her defence, men having their beards 
 shaven, and they shall be the very men who shall chiefly inflict 
 damage upon her.' '^ And this writer, Agnellus, or Andrew as he was 
 also called, is our antiquary of the ninth century. 
 
 He was born soon after the year 800, and belonged, as he takes 
 care to let us know in a set genealogy, to one of the most distin- 
 guished and influential families of Ravenna. He was from his 
 earliest years destined for the ecclesiastical state, and was brought 
 up among the clergy of the Cathedral. By the time he was twelve 
 years old, he received from archbishop Martin a benefice in the 
 shape of the monastery of St Mary ad Blachernas ; to which, later, 
 on the resignation of his uncle, Sergius the deacon, was added the 
 monastery of St Bartholomew. Besides his benefices he inherited a 
 private fortune, in itself a very useful help in pursuing such a fancy 
 as antiquarian research. By and by he was ordained priest, and 
 became, as we should say nowadays, a canon of the cathedral, 
 and indeed one of the most distinguished members of the capitular 
 body. Add to all this the excellent opinion entertained by himself 
 as well as by others of his literary capacity, his artistic and practical 
 skill in architecture and every handicraft — a fact which he is good 
 enough to vouch for — and (what every reader of his book will readily 
 allow) the enquiring spirit of a curious collector, it will be easily 
 understood how it came to pass that his brethren of the clergy pitched 
 
 ' Jaffi^ Bibliotheca rerum Germanicarum iv p. 268. 
 
 ' Agnelli Liber Pontificalis Ecclesiae Ravetinatis (in Mon. Germ. SS. rer. 
 Langobardicarutn) p. 384. The work was first published by the Benedictine 
 Bacchini, with ample notes, or rather dissertations, and appendices, in two quartos, 
 Modena, 1708. Bacchini's edition was repeated entire in part i of vol. ii of Mura- 
 tori's Scriptores rerum Italicarum. Although the latest edition, that in the SS. rer. 
 Langob. (pp. 275-391), is the most convenient, and the notes of the editor are full 
 and numerous, Bacchini's, if tediously lengthy, are still useful, and should by no 
 means be neglected by any one who wishes really to understand this singular and 
 curious history of the bishops of Ravenna.
 
 AGNELLUS OF RAVENNA 373 
 
 upon him, though one of the youngest members of their body, to write 
 the Lives of the Archbishops, or, in other words, a history of the 
 ancient and illustrious Church of Ravenna. 
 
 The collection of lives of the Popes which has long gone under 
 the general name of Anastasius, a writer of the ninth century, but 
 now is commonly called the Liber Pontificalis, was commenced, as 
 is well known, at a much earlier period, and was regularly con- 
 tinued. This work, when letters revived in Carolingian times, formed 
 a model for others of a similar character. Paul the Deacon, during 
 his sojourn in Charles's court, wrote a similar series of lives of the 
 bishops of Metz ; about the same time, or perhaps a little later, 
 a Neapolitan wrote the lives of the bishops of his native city. 
 Agnellus of Ravenna followed these existing examples, but in a way 
 quite his own. Whilst the Neapolitan writer, finding very little of 
 the nature of historical memorials relating to his church, makes up 
 for the deficiency by copying long passages from earlier writers 
 bearing on general history, Agnellus, besides a habit of sermonizing 
 in which he is ready to indulge at any moment with or without 
 excuse, scanned every corner of Ravenna and its buildings to recover 
 the records of the past. He does not indeed neglect written 
 memorials ; but he is neither a formal historian nor a mere compiler. 
 In the latter case he would have made more abundant and careful 
 use of home sources like the lost Annals of Ravenna or the Chronicles 
 of archbishop Maximian, or the Roman Liber Pontificalis, which would 
 have afforded him additional material in regard to the bishops of his 
 own city. He makes indeed good use of the archives of his church ; 
 but it is not this which gives its special character of value to his book. 
 The method and cast of his work is genuinely archaeological, and it 
 may be fairly called the first essay in ecclesiastical history by the aid 
 of monuments. 
 
 In connexion with Ravenna the monumental documents which 
 most readily occur to mind are the mosaics with which its buildings 
 were so richly adorned. Agnellus has largely used them for his 
 purpose. From the latter part of the fourth century he gathers from 
 them a description of the persons of most of the archbishops, whether 
 they were tall or short, bald or grey, bearded or shaven, ruddy or 
 sallow, even noting the colour of their eyes. He anticipated thus 
 the doubt of the enquirer : ' And if any among you should wonder 
 how it is that I can thus give an account of the persons of the arch- 
 bishops, I would have you know that I have derived my knowledge 
 from their own portraits taken from the life in their own days.' ^ 
 
 ^ Pp. 297, 348. The references throughout are to the edition of Holder-Egger in 
 M. G. Scriptores rerwn Laiigobardicarum.
 
 374 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 These mosaics at Ravenna did not exist in a continuous series like 
 the pictures of the Popes in the old basilica of St Paul's at Rome, 
 but were scattered up and down the churches and other buildings of 
 the city, and each was generally to be found in the edifice or edifices 
 which the particular archbishop had himself either built or adorned ; 
 and he is careful to specify the place where these various mosaics 
 may be found. In this respect he shews no less antiquarian exacti- 
 tude and minuteness when dealing with another and less debatable 
 class of ancient memorials — inscriptions, of which his pages furnish an 
 abundant store. The mosaics were frequently accompanied by inscrip- 
 tions, some of considerable length, in verse or in prose ; besides these, 
 he scans, and takes notes from, the doors and fronts of churches, the 
 pavements, the columns, the arcadings ; nothing escapes him. And he 
 is not averse to reducing the wonderful, which others would see, to the 
 merely ordinary. Thus the roof of the outbuildings of the church of 
 St Stephen which had been built by archbishop Maximian shewed letters 
 that had evidently puzzled his predecessors ; ' at the summit of all the 
 columns the name of Maximian is graven ; on the monastery roof you 
 will find tessellated letters ; these have led astray the unwary and igno- 
 rant, but the skilled know that what is written there is MV. SI. VA.' ^ 
 If the inscription is too much damaged or defaced to be copied entire, 
 he gives the substance with an ' as far as I can make out'.'^ But he only 
 has recourse to such an unsatisfactory method after an expenditure of 
 much time and care in deciphering ; so at the bath built for the clergy 
 of the cathedral by archbishop Victor in the sixth century, close by 
 the bishop's house, and still in use in Agnellus's own day, ' the walls 
 are enriched with the most precious marbles and divers representations 
 in mosaic, with an inscription in gilt letters which we have been able 
 to read after painful and laborious effort ' ; the verses were worth 
 recovering, for they record the fact that Victor fixed Tuesdays and 
 Fridays every week as the bathing days for the cathedral clergy.^ 
 In another case he tells us that an inscription had defied all his 
 efforts.* 
 
 It must not be supposed that he confines his attention, in thus 
 collecting these memorials, to the chief buildings of Ravenna. 
 Archbishop Maximian builds a house in the town and leaves his 
 name to be read on the tiles ; this inscription does not escape Agnellus, 
 who records its exact situation and the very words : ' I found them 
 thus, " Maximianus episcopus Ravennae," and I saw and read them 
 myself'^ This discovery was apparently made on the occasion of 
 building a house for himself close by, as to which he gives details 
 
 ' P. 328. 2 P. 299. => P. 325. 
 
 ' P. 336. ' P. 330.
 
 AGNELLUS OF RAVENNA 375 
 
 shewing that the destruction of ancient Ravennese monuments is 
 not all to be put down to the greed of the Franks. After stating 
 that Odoacer erected a small palace on an island about six miles 
 from Ravenna still called Palazzuolo, he continues : ' and now in our 
 own days I commanded my servants to demolish the aforesaid palace, 
 and I had the materials brought to Ravenna to be used for my house, 
 which I have built on property coming to me from my mother, which 
 is now called " The priest's house ", in the quarter named ad Ninipheos, 
 close to the church of St Agnes the Martyr.' ^ 
 
 In the same curious spirit in which he had examined mosaics he 
 overhauls the church treasuries and gathers inscriptions from precious 
 covers of gospel books," from chalices,^ chrismatories,* or embroidered 
 hangings.^ It has been already mentioned that he searched the 
 various archives ; those of the cathedral had unfortunately suffered 
 greatly in the archiepiscopate of Damianus (692-708) ;*' but many 
 important documents were still left, and he incorporated some that are 
 highly curious in his book.'' At San Vitale he seems to have got hold 
 of the building accounts ; it must have been some such source as 
 accounts that has enabled him to give so many dated particulars 
 of alterations in various churches and their ornaments in successive 
 centuries.^ 
 
 Many persons were on the look-out to contribute their mite to the 
 materials Agnellus was collecting for the greatly desired work. He 
 
 ' P. 303. 2 pp, 2^\, 332, ^ P. 306. 
 
 * P. 331- ' PP- 324, 332, 378. " Pp- 365, 366. 
 
 ■' A document issued by Pope Felix IV some time between 526 and 530 gives an 
 interesting illustration of the care with which all documentary evidences relating to 
 a church and the acts of its bishops were registered and preserved. ' Notarii vero 
 iuxta ordinem matriculae, primicerii, secundicerii, tertius, quartus, quintus, sextus, 
 Septimus, suo periculo in cunspectu presbiterum et diaconorum documenta eccle- 
 siastica sub fidelium brevium discriptione suscipiant ; ut, quotiens exigerit causa, 
 fideliter proferantur, cuntradant atque recipiant. . . . Ideo enim universa descri- 
 benda suntecclesiastica documenta, ne uUomodoaut suscepta pereant, aut tempore, 
 quo sunt necessaria utilitatibus ecclesiasticis, exiberi non possint. Qui tamen notarii 
 in officio suo observantes strenue, consequantur sine inminutione commoda sibi 
 vel prioribus suis antiquitus deputata ', Cv:c. (p. 320). This throws light back also on 
 the Roman practice ; and there can be little doubt, from many indications that 
 have recently come to light, that the archives of the Roman Church in the sixth 
 and following centuries were better ordered and better organized for practical 
 purposes than, say, the Record Office in Fetter Lane. If some of our modern 
 critics would take the time and trouble really to familiarize themselves with the 
 extant memorials of the decadence and early Middle Ages, instead of merely 
 ' consulting ' them and using ' texts ', the learned and unlearned world would be 
 relieved from a vast amount of what can only be called the ' oil lamp and cabinet ' 
 style of criticism, which makes us think ourselves much more wise than it behoves 
 us to think. But then if the hard rule of knowledge were enforced, the occupation 
 of so many of the critics would be gone, and the empty laudations of so many of 
 their admirers would be lost too. 
 
 * Pp. 318-319, and note 8 ; cf. p. 273 1. 32. ]5ut, unfortunately, elogium here may 
 mean something else ; and it is possible that the dates of alterations, e. g. pp. 307, 
 329, were gathered from inscriptions, though the fact is not mentioned.
 
 ^'j6 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 has left us an account of one of these unexpected finds of a friend of 
 his which it may be interesting to give in full as a specimen of the 
 curious autobiographical style in which the whole work was con- 
 ceived. He had come to the end of the life of his first bishop Peter, 
 who died, he says, about 425. ' Some say that he was buried in the 
 Ecclesia Petriana, which he himself had founded. Now, know for 
 certain that I will tell you the truth and no lie. One day when I 
 was staying at my monastery of the Blessed and ever Virgin Mary, 
 called ad Blachernas^ which is not far from the Guandelaria Gate, as 
 I was busily engaged over the lives of these bishops of Ravenna, a 
 doubt occurred to my mind as to the burial place of this holy man. 
 As T was thinking over the matter, one of my body servants came 
 and told me that George, now priest of the church of Classis, had 
 come to see me. But at that date he held the cure of St Severus ; 
 he was a most venerable, constant, and resolute person, and with no 
 weakness of any sort. When he was introduced and had taken a 
 seat, I at once began to ask of him whether by any chance he had 
 heard from old men or had ever discovered anything as to the tomb 
 of this blessed man. " Come with me ", he replied gaily, " and I will 
 shew you the very treasure you most desire to find." So we got on 
 horseback and hastened to Classis ; and I ordered my men who had 
 accompanied us to keep at some distance. And then we entered the 
 chapel of St James,^ which is within the precincts of the Baptistery 
 of the aforesaid church.^ There we saw a tomb of precious marble,^ 
 and with much effort we managed to raise the cover somewhat. 
 Within we found a coffin of cypress wood, and lifting up the lid 
 we both saw the body of the holy man as if he had been buried 
 but an hour before ; he was of lofty stature, of pallid countenance, 
 all his limbs were intact ; only the little cushion on which his head 
 rested was decayed. The body gave forth an odour as if we smelt a 
 fragrant incense mixed with myrrh and balsam ; and there fell upon 
 u.s dread and terror, exceeding great, and such a sorrowfulness that 
 for sobs and sighs we were hardly able to close what we had so 
 readily set ourselves to open. The odour overcame us altogether, 
 
 ' Monasteriiim in this particular case evidently means 'chapel'; of. p. 319 n. i, 
 and p. 328 1. 16. [In Mittheilimgen d. hist. f. oesterreichiiche Geschichts' 
 forschung ix (1888) is an article by Franz Wickhoff on 'Die " monasteria " bei 
 Agnellus ' (pp. 34-45). He holds as against Bacchini that this word really means in 
 Agnellus a 'monastery'. He deals with the cases of a 'monastery' in conjunction 
 with a baptistery at pp. 40-41, and considers this one at the Ecclesia Petriana to 
 be ' ein Raum zwischen Baptisterium und Kirche '. I prefer (after considering 
 Wickhoff) to keep to ' chapel '.] 
 
 ''■ It is difficult to say precisely to which church the writer refers ; St Severus was 
 on the road to Classis. 
 
 ^ ' Ex lapide proconiso precioso.' See the different interpretations of the word 
 given by glossaries.
 
 AGNELLUS OF RAVENNA 377 
 
 and was such that our nostrils were not clear of it for more than a 
 week. And on the tomb was his image, wonderfully depicted, with 
 the words Domnus Petrus Archiepiscoptcs.'^ 
 
 Diligent as he was, there was no small difficulty in finding materials 
 to construct the history of the early days of the Church of Ravenna. 
 Here he could expect no help from friends. It was in vain Moses 
 might advise, Interroga patres ttios ct dicent tibi ; or Job, Interroga 
 generationes pristinas; the writers of the Vitac patruvi could say 'a 
 certain old man told me'; or Gregory, the bishop of the see of the 
 Roman Church, ' such-and-such a one informed me,' ' but I can do 
 nothing of the sort like them. I am like one who finds himself in 
 woods and wilds, and sees all about him great trees, dense and 
 dark, and places impassable for thickets and briars, knowing not 
 which side to turn, and what path to take to bring him once more 
 into the open. And so I, in undertaking to recount the story of the 
 holy pontiffs of the Church of Ravenna, have entered as it were on 
 the perils of the sea, and it is as though the stormy tempest buffeted 
 me. and as if all the cerulean waters of the deep in a tumult of waves 
 were pursuing me.' ^ But Agnellus was equal to the occasion ; he 
 had as profound and justified a belief as the newspaper writer or 
 novelist of the present day in the value and virtues of padding. 
 Nor, with the candour that characterizes him, has he any hesitation 
 in propounding in bare words the theory which so many hagiographers 
 before and since his day have followed without explaining their 
 methods. ' Lest there should be gaps in our account of the suc- 
 cession of bishops, by the help of your prayers (he says, addressing 
 his brethren), I have composed the lives of them all ; and I do not 
 think I have told falsehood herein, for they were all men of prayer, 
 and chaste, and lovers of almsgiving, and fishers of men.' ^ In this 
 way the ground can be easily covered. To take, for instance, Saint 
 Marcellinus, the tenth bishop ; his name is something to begin 
 with ; he was ittstiis et tivioratiis^ and so forth, at length ; a remini- 
 scence of the discovery of bishop Peter supplies the fact, or con- 
 gruence, that at his burial the nostrils of the assistants perceived 
 the odorous fragrance of most precious myrrh ; some say he was 
 buried in the Church of St Probus ; finally he held the see blank 
 years, blank months, blank days. This mode of writing history is 
 simple, and promises nothing but platitudes and sameness. Yet 
 this is not so ; Agnellus's padding, differing from that common in 
 
 ^ Pp. 290-291. It is interesting to compare the long account Agnellus gives of 
 the ' elevation ' and examination of the relics of St Maximian. in the year 833, 
 which he superintended (p. 333). 
 
 ^ P. 279. ' P. 297.
 
 378 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 our day, is well worth reading as a genuine rendering of the thoughts 
 and ideas of the Ravennese higher clerical society of the day. It is 
 in the padding too, to a considerable extent, that Agnellus gives so 
 full a personal revelation of himself that the reader can picture the 
 very man that he was ; a vain, busy little person, painstaking and 
 minute, on occasion fussy, with note-book ever in hand, and eyes for 
 everything ; full of vivacity and life, and somewhat much of a chatter- 
 box ; if now and then irritable, yet really kind-hearted ; and, for 
 all his chattering, endowed with a fund of strong good sense. Many 
 passages of his book shew that he was a man of keen sensibilities. 
 With a bright and handsome face, a musical and well-modulated 
 voice and a winsome charm of manner, to back his substantial 
 qualities and his marked character, it is no wonder that he was 
 really liked, really respected and trusted. ' Agnellus lepidus ' ^ is 
 the description that more than once falls from the pen of the only 
 writer (a contemporary) who gives us an account of him, as best fitted 
 to sum up in a single word this antiquary of the ninth century. The 
 writer adds that there was no one in Ravenna of the time to be 
 compared to him. 
 
 Thanks to his not unpleasing self-conceit, we can follow the author 
 step by step in the gradual composition of his work. The under- 
 taking once fairly launched, his brethren of the clergy felt their 
 honour engaged in it ; they were eager for the completion of the 
 work — too eager, according to the author's mind, or rather his pro- 
 testations. They pestered him in their anxiety to know how it was 
 progressing ; and nothing would do but, for all the world like an 
 admired author of the nineteenth century in one of the Parisian 
 literary salons under the Restoration or the July Monarchy, Agnellus 
 must give to a select audience of his friends, and the dignified upper 
 clergy of Ravenna, readings from the great book now in hand. They 
 seem to have been satisfied, for the readings appear to have been 
 many; but candour requires the confession that the Liber Pontificalis 
 of Ravenna cut up in mere bits must have fallen rather flat. The 
 meetings were held now in the house of one, now another of the 
 clergy ; sometimes in one or other of his own houses. Agnellus, 
 however, always remained the master of the ceremonies ; he has 
 no scruple in saying ' Let this suffice for to-day ; I have a head- 
 ache'; or 'I am not well'; or 'Now it is time to return home, 
 and when leisure serves we will resume the life of this pontiff.' 
 Sometimes his fancy runs in a poetic vein ; with a Virgilian re- 
 miniscence he bids them note how the long-drawn shadows mark 
 the fall of day, and how the sunset warns his hearers to disperse.^ 
 
 ' See the verses p. 275 1. 18 ; 276 I. 56 ; also 11. 30 sqq. "^ P. 302.
 
 AGNELLUS OF RAVENNA 379 
 
 On another occasion, whether it be that the tumult of the waves had 
 buffeted him exceedingly at that point of the composition, the reading 
 is accompanied by a storm ; he is, or affects to be, downright angry 
 with his brethren for simply asking him to continue, and he threatens 
 to break off for good and all if ever they presume to importune him 
 again. It was on the occasion of St Aurelian, the twenty-second 
 bishop, of whom really there was nothing to be said except that he had 
 continued a building begun by his immediate predecessor, Peter, and 
 that he died on May 26. It was hard in such a case to be pressed 
 for something long. He accordingly breaks out, ' Oh ! my friends, 
 what a burden have you not placed on my shoulders. I really have 
 not been able to find out anything about him, except that he 
 obtained for the cathedral a property, which it still possesses in the 
 territory of Comacchio. But as you press me, lest the story should 
 seem short, relying on the help of heaven, our own learning, and 
 your prayers, I will boldly proceed in the narration. But I am alto- 
 gether weak of body just now, and can scarcely continue; still, with 
 God's help, let us begin. But do not repeat what you did yesterday. 
 Have a care you do not press me too hard. Think over it ; my gift 
 is not mine but God's. Oh ! miserable I, who am daily plagued 
 with your hard questions. Desist. But if you will break me down 
 with your excessive demands, and worry me to finish this Pontifical 
 with speed, consider first your own want of capacity, and then mine. 
 Two and thirty years and ten months is it since I saw the light 
 of day ; but never have I been so harassed, so cornered, as by you 
 yesterday. And if you take so much pleasure in thus harrying me, 
 pulling me, dragging me about, scourging me so, I give in ; do 
 what you will. And after all is done, depart from me, let me suffer 
 by myself, and turn you yourselves away from me ; what is already 
 written, keep ; but from me no more shall you hear. I will finish this 
 life of Aurelian, and then hold silence. What is the use ? Why do 
 you quarrel with me ? Unless the Lord give me the tongue wherewith 
 to speak, as it pleases Him, I am nothing.' He proceeds to recall the 
 cases of Ezechiel, Moses, David, Samuel, and then resumes his own 
 case thus : ' I have told you all these things ; it is for you to bear 
 them in mind. And know that the time will come when, if I leave 
 this Pontifical half finished, you will reach the point where it breaks 
 off, and will remember with a sigh what I have been saying to you. 
 But that will be of no use. And if you then beg me to finish it, I will 
 not listen. I desire that by God's providence my labours be brought 
 to their due conclusion ; you, with your over-eager hurry, really wish 
 me to leave them off. I do not intend to hurry. I remember the 
 words, my dear friends, whereby in the life of Blessed John I declared
 
 38o LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 myself a debtor to you in regard to the discussion of that question of 
 the river Etham',^ — and then, resuming a discourse broken off in the 
 course of the ' Hfe ' of a preceding archbishop, he plunges into a long 
 biblical discussion. It is not impossible that Agnellus's hearers may 
 from their point of view have been at times simply bored by his padding, 
 and would readily have taken his sermons for granted if he would 
 only have advanced with his facts ; or, wishing for a deal of interesting 
 matter in any case, they would have him make bricks without straw. 
 
 But he was something of a wag, too, in his way. Another day the 
 meeting was at one of Agnellus's own houses, St Bartholomew's. 
 He is in some embarrassment, he says ; they had honoured him by 
 coming under his roof, yet he felt that the hospitality he could offer 
 them was altogether unworthy of so noble a company. ' Neither 
 my table nor my cellar is adequate to afford you fitting refreshment. 
 At the same time I should feel it a disgrace if, after you had come to 
 my monastery, the house of St Bartholomew, you were to leave it 
 hungry, without receiving from our apostle bit or sup. Let the four 
 feet be brought, and place the table upon them. The four firm feet 
 are the four evangelists,' &c., &c. ; and then he regales them with 
 another sermon.^ As Agnellus approaches his own age, with the 
 seventh century these discourses become rare; his materials grow 
 more abundant, tradition flows more freely ; much that he has to say 
 is nowhere else to be found ; he can now obtain his tales from the 
 ' old men ', and in the hands of this writer they lose nothing in the 
 telling. There is neither time nor space here to touch on the innumer- 
 able hitherto neglected illustrations of ecclesiology with which his 
 work abounds ; ^ perhaps now that the work is accessible in the con- 
 venient volume of Lombard Historians, some one may be found to 
 bring out its value in this regard, as Hefele did for the Cassinese 
 chronicles of Leo Marsicanus and Peter the Deacon. Agnellus 
 .survived the dispersal of most of the treasures which he had so 
 carefully — nay, so lovingly — scrutinized, which were his pride and 
 were the joy of his heart. Indeed the final crash came when he 
 had hardly reached middle age. As he approaches his own day 
 the lives become singularly mutilated in the MS that has survived ; 
 some stop in the midst of a sentence. This is the case with 
 the life of archbishop Martin (who died about 817), as to whom 
 much is wanting. Of the life of archbishop Petronax (c. 817-834) 
 not a word has survived. An incidental notice may perhaps 
 
 ' Pp. 315-316. ' P. 323- 
 
 ^ Ferd. Piper made good use of the work — and was the first to do so to my 
 
 knowledge— in his Einleihing in die momonetttale Theologie (Gotha, R. Besser, 
 
 1867) pp. 349-363-
 
 AGNELLUS OF RAVENNA 381 
 
 explain the suppression, for no one can accuse Agnellus of failing 
 to tell the unpleasant truth if facts demanded it, or hiding his 
 opinions as to deeds and conduct when these were really blameworthy. 
 He narrates, in another part of his book, how the Emperor Lothar, in 
 the days of Petronax, coveted the tomb-stone of Archbishop Maurus 
 {c. 642-671) in the church of St Apollinaris. ' It was porphyry (he 
 says), most precious and bright and pellucid like glass ; and when the 
 doors in front of it were opened, and you looked at it, you could see 
 as in a mirror, whatever passed by. But twelve years ago almost 
 (he must have been writing in 841 or 842) the I'^mpcror Lothar ordered 
 it to be taken up, and it was wrapped in wool, placed in a wooden 
 box and carried away into France. He ordered it to be placed as 
 a table over the altar of St Sebastian (perhaps at Soissons). The 
 archbishop (Petronax) gave me the command to go and superintend 
 the removal, lest by carelessness of the workmen any accident should 
 occur and the stone be broken. But my heart was too full of grief, 
 and I went away by myself, alone.' ^ 
 
 But there was an experience harder yet in store for Agnellus : 
 after Petronax, the throne of Ravenna was occupied by archbishop 
 George, an intimate friend of Agnellus ; ' we were like own brothers 
 together up to this time ', he says.- But the exalted dignity to 
 which, whilst still young, George found himself raised, brought out 
 all the weakness of his character ; he was arrogant, vain, unjust, 
 prodigal. One of his first steps was to turn against Pope Gregory IV 
 who had consecrated him. To satisfy his vanity he must needs stand 
 godfather to Rotruda, daughter of the emperor Lothar, and to compass 
 this object he squandered vast sums of money. Up to this point it 
 is probable that, though his friend must have felt bitterly the havoc 
 made in the Ravennese treasury, he had come to no open breach 
 with Agnellus, for at the baptism at Pavia he was the most honoured 
 of the archbishop's following. On George's receiving the newly 
 baptized princess at the font, * he handed her to me (says Agnellus), 
 and I clothed her with my own hands, and her shoes which I put on 
 her feet were ornamented with gold and "jacinth"'; and it is not too 
 much to believe that he satisfied himself as to their exact texture. 
 Passing over his remarks on the rich dress of the empress, it may be 
 enough to note an incident that took place just before the mass, as 
 adding one feature more to the archbishop's character. ' He said 
 he had a burning thirst, and drank off, on the sly, a cup full of 
 foreign wine, and after this partook of the heavenly table.' ^ 
 
 ' P. 352 ; cf. p. 299, the tomb of bishop John. 
 
 « Pp. 366-367 ; 388-391- 
 
 ' The editor, p. 388 n. 6, thinks it is not clear whether this passage relates to the 
 archbishop. The case is hardly, at the utmost stretch of scruple, doubtful.
 
 382 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Of such a man Agnellus was not likely to be longer a close friend. 
 With all his oddities the pages of Agnellus bespeak throughout a 
 man of sincere and genuine piety, and wholly devoted to, wrapped up 
 in, his state and calling. And George gave offence in a practical way 
 otherwise : to meet his profuse expenditure, he not merely swallowed 
 up the savings of his predecessors, and laid hands on the Church's 
 treasure, but he ground down all his clergy and seized their benefices, 
 among the rest Agnellus's monastery of St Bartholomew. He was 
 moreover bent on carrying on his quarrel with the Pope, and for the 
 purpose of securing a powerful support, soon after the death of 
 Lewis the Pious in 840, the archbishop set out for France, where 
 Lewis's sons, on the one side the Emperor Lothar, whose good 
 graces he had already secured to himself, on the other Lewis and 
 Charles, were contending for the pre-eminence. George's train con- 
 sisted of three hundred horses, laden with goods, the plunder of 
 his church; he carried with him, moreover, the ancient documents 
 of the archives, to serve as pieces dappui in his great process for 
 independence of the Pope. He arrived at Lothar's camp on the eve 
 of the battle of Fontenay (June 25, 841), which dealt, in fratricidal 
 strife, a fatal blow to the Carolingian empire ; never was such slaughter 
 known or heard of in the history of the Franks. Agnellus's descrip- 
 tion of the fight is drawn from the poets, with his lucida tela, and 
 pavida corda, and splendida scuta, and so forth. All these fine words 
 are not worth a fraction of the few simple lines which the warrior 
 historian Nithard, who was himself present, gives to the scene ; or the 
 rude verses in which another combatant sings his lament over that 
 tragedy of empire.^ But when dealing with his own subject his narra- 
 
 ^ This soldier poet writes with singular directness and power, if in defiance of 
 correctness of diction, with here and there a reminiscence of the vernacular. It is 
 worth while to quote a verse or two : 
 
 Fontaneto fontem dicunt, villam quoque rustici, 
 Ubi strages et ruina Francorum de sanguine : 
 Horrent campi, horrent silvae, horrent ipsi paludes. 
 
 Gramen illud ros et imber nee humectat pluvia, 
 in quo fortes ceciderunt, proelio doctissimi, 
 Pater, mater, soror, frater, quos amici fleverant. 
 
 Angelbertus ego vidi, pugnansque cum aliis. 
 Solus de multis remansi prima frontis acie. 
 
 Ima vallis rctrospexi, verticemque iugeri, 
 Ubi suos inimicos rex fortis Hlotharius 
 Expugnabat fugientes usque forum rivuli. 
 
 Karoli de parte vero, Hludovici pariter, 
 Albent campi vestimentis mortuorum lineis, 
 Velut solent in autumno albescere avibus. 
 
 Maledicta dies ilia, nee in anni circulo 
 
 Numeretur, sed radatur ab omni memoria, 
 lobar soils illi desit, aurora crepusculo.
 
 AGNELLUS OF RAVENNA 383 
 
 tive is vigorous and vivid, and of the highest interest. He describes at 
 length the capture of the vain-glorious archbishop by the victor 
 Charles, the indignities offered him, his abject condition, Charles's 
 scorn and eventual clemency ; he tells how the guardians of the 
 treasures brought from Ravenna were scattered, how these precious 
 objects, of inestimable worth, fell a prey to the soldiery, were lost 
 and dispersed ; how the ancient charters were trampled in the mud or 
 torn to pieces by the point of the lance ; how the great company which 
 left Ravenna with such bravery came straggling back, begging their 
 way as best they could along the road. The archbishop returned too, 
 promising amendment, and then ' mentitus est omnia quae dixit, et 
 non recordatus iusiurandum quod Domino pollicitus est ' — he belied 
 all he had said, and remembered not the oath which he had made to 
 the Lord. Agnellus does not care to inform even himself as to the 
 exact circumstances of the death of his former friend ; there were 
 sinister rumours abroad, ' but it is no business of mine to report them : 
 he died, and now is buried.' With this catastrophe the work of 
 Agnellus, young as he still was, is done ; and there remains no trace, 
 no record, of him more. 
 
 Noxque ilia, nox amara, noxque dura nimium, 
 In qua fortes ceciderunt, proelio doctissimi, 
 Pater, mater, soror, frater, quos amici fleverant. 
 
 M. G. Poet, ii pp. 138-139. Cf. the verses of that true Carolingian ' patriot', Florus 
 of Lyons, ibid. pp. 559-564.
 
 XIX 
 
 ABOUT AN OLD PRAYER BOOK ^ 
 
 How is it that when I propose to write something for the Down- 
 side Revieiv it is something else that actually finds its way into 
 print? The 'first form of the present paper, for instance, gave in 
 imagination some notice of the memorable journey of the Louvain 
 nuns of St Monica's to Ghent on account of the plague, of the rather 
 mysterious difficulties attending the election of Rev. Mother Throck- 
 morton as Prioress, and of that singular storm at Wells early in the 
 seventeenth century whereof we have two narratives from opposite 
 poles of the ecclesiastical world that excellently exemplify the theme 
 an elegant essayist has been lately illustrating to the edification of 
 us all, the importance, namely, of 'the Point of View'. This first 
 vision passed, and the paper then came to appear as a little discus- 
 sion on the feasts of the Blessed Virgin in the West in the seventh 
 century, designed to illustrate a curious but somewhat puzzling 
 phenomenon that had been pointed out elsewhere. No sooner had 
 this theme taken definite shape than it was whisked away into 
 futurity by an unexpected call, to serve as a sort of guard or courier 
 to a mere packet of leaves of vellum some sixteen inches by nine, in 
 transit from the far West up to London. A companion on the 
 occasion was a little quarto paper book, mami recentissima as proper 
 catalogues would have it, on the fly-leaf of which had been hastily 
 scribbled on the eve of departure these words : ' N.B. Galba A. xiv ; 
 What is this prayer book ? ' The next working morning soon after 
 ten I was turning over its leaves ; and although it was scorched, and 
 burnt, and washed with water — characieribns paene evanidis as the 
 catalogues again have it — before I had gone very far in the perusal 
 of the volume, this fitful changeling of a paper had assumed a third 
 and, I suppose, final form. 
 
 Is the subject *An Old Prayer Book' a 'dull' one? Any subject 
 is sure to prove dull to somebody. My own preference would be for 
 the dullest form possible, viz., a sheer and mere list of contents, since 
 no one has ever drawn up such a list and it is worth making. In 
 
 * From the Downside Review y March 1907.
 
 ABOUT AN OLD PRAYER BOOK 385 
 
 Germany, or in France, there are three or four organs that would 
 find place for such a notice ; in England we are mostly above such 
 things. So be it ; and I will keep my list to myself. Still, having 
 looked into the book, I should like it to be known, and some notice 
 of it to come into print as soon as may be ; so I turn to an old friend 
 for hospitality, and propose to notice at once in the Downside Review 
 some items of the contents. 
 
 But first of all it will be in place to say a few words on a subject 
 deeply, vitally interesting, and yet I fancy little known and less 
 considered, viz., the history and vicissitudes of what I may call 
 ' English piety '. In using such an appellation I duly have before 
 my eyes the fear of the high prophets of our Historical School, who 
 in matters of such kind will allow only of the ' typical ', not of the 
 'racial'. Moreover, as some persons will hear only of what is 
 
 * British ', and others (these mostly of an ecclesiastical type) will 
 have it to be we are Anglo-Celts not Anglo-Saxons, it would appear 
 doubtful if there be room left for any piety that can be called 
 
 • English '. But I think both classes are only people who have a little 
 way of overlooking facts in favour of fancy theories. Up to the 
 time of the Reformation three periods in England are marked by an 
 extraordinary outflow of devotional products, especially of prayers, 
 characteristic of their own particular epoch : first, the end of the 
 seventh century and the eighth ; secondly, from 950, and perhaps 
 even from the accession of Athelstan, to the Norman Conquest ; 
 finally, the fifteenth century. 
 
 In the devotional products of the first period, as I read them, the 
 Celt (that is, the Irishman) and the Roman are pouring their respec- 
 tive pieties into this devoted isle, and we absorb both kinds ; but 
 the English mind and religious sense assert themselves in the process 
 of fusion and contribute to the resultant a quality and measure 
 possessed by neither Celt nor Roman alone ; the Celt brings ' all 
 heart ' and much fluency with little mind ; the Roman brings all 
 mind and — I was going to say ' no ', but had better perhaps prefer 
 ' small ' — heart. The one commonly by excess of words and some- 
 times by extravagance of form brings us easily and soon within the 
 verge of unreality ; the other has the right sense, the right mind, 
 but leaves us cold as marble. As being a sort of hybrid half-Celt 
 I may give my own view of what I seem to discern as the specifically 
 ' English ' quality in the prayers of this earliest devotional literature, 
 viz., strong feeling controlled and also penetrated by good sense. 
 The third of the periods specified above, the fifteenth century, is on 
 its religious side briefly characterized by Cardinal Gasquet in two 
 pages of the preface to his Great Pestilence (pp. xvii-xix), which 
 
 1668 C c
 
 386 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 would admit of a volume of commentary without modification of the 
 general lines there laid down. 
 
 The second and intermediate epoch of English devotionalism is 
 coincident with the great monastic movement of the tenth and 
 eleventh centuries. To have said so much is perhaps already to 
 have created prejudice against it as ' monkish ' ; but then it is to be 
 remembered that those were days when Aelfric the homilist was 
 a monk ; days it is good to read about in the little pages which the 
 late Professor Earle, a man who both knew and felt, wrote for the 
 S.P.C.K. The Anglo-Saxon translations of several of the prayers of 
 this period have been printed from some MSS in the philological 
 periodicals of Germany ; for in England our dominant schools and 
 scholars in history seem to have an easy way of being ' above MSS '. 
 But, after all, the Latin pieces are the originals, and it was the 
 Latin prayers that first came from English hands. Some day or 
 other, perhaps, the contents of these Latin prayer books of the tenth 
 and eleventh centuries may appear in print, and then at length we 
 may be able to speak with understanding of the change that was 
 effected in ' English religion ' [sit venia verbo /) by the Norman 
 Conquest — a revolution symbolized for us by the story of Lanfranc 
 and St Elphege, and the story of abbat Thurstan of Glastonbury and 
 his monks, which have been related for us — crambe repetita usque ad 
 nauseam — by our successive historians to this day. 
 
 But the Galba MS has been waiting too long whilst I have been 
 gossiping. I will take the first prayer on which my eyes fell on 
 opening the volume. It begins well enough (f 20 a) : ' Helper of 
 those that labour, Ruler of all the good. Rampart for our protection, 
 and Defender of believers ', &c. ; an expression soon follows : ' Precor 
 ut me homunculum quassatum et miserrimum ' — ' me poor battered 
 manikin ' — a relic of the ancient Celtic piety, little suited to the 
 commonplace Anglo-Saxon, which was so widely spread in the 
 England of the seventh century (cf. the prayer of abbat Hygbald, 
 Book of Cerne, ed. Kuypers, p. 207, and p. 133 11. 5-6). The very 
 next page, f 21a, begins a long prayer of a different character, 
 though, like the foregoing, it is of an intensely personal cast. As it 
 has not yet appeared in print I here translate the beginning of it. 
 It runs thus : 
 
 O Lord, hear my prayer, for I know already that my time is near at hand. 
 Grant to me, O Lord, wisdom and understanding, and enlighten my heart 
 that I may know Thee always all the days of my life, for Thou art God, and 
 there is none other but thou alone; who hast come down from heaven, and 
 by Thy Holy Spirit hast filled Mary with light. Thee, therefore, O my God, 
 do I humbly entreat that Thou wilt enlighten my heart, for my sins are with-
 
 ABOUT AN OLD PRAYER BOOK 387 
 
 out number exceedingly. Grant me, O Lord, I beseech Thee, that I may 
 be able to bewail them through faith and charity and through Thy wondrous 
 Name. I adjure Thee that in whatever day I call upon Thee, Thou wilt 
 deign to hear me speedily as Thou didst graciously hear the prayer of Tobias 
 and of Sara. Pour out to me tears of the heart, as Thou didst lay the foun- 
 dations of the earth upon the waters, for my heart has grown hard as if 
 a stone; I have sinned, O Lord, I have sinned exceedingly in my life; 
 I acknowledge all my iniquities. I entreat of Thee ; to Thee do I cry. Do' 
 Thou stretch out Thy right hand and deliver me from my adversary as Thou 
 didst deliver the Three Children from the furnace of burning fire. Therefore 
 I pray. Thee, O God, heavenly King, give me temperance and chastity, 
 humbleness and faithfulness and truth, that I may be found worthy to per- 
 severe in good works. As indeed the desire of my heart is, whatever it be 
 I have said or thought or done from my youth upwards. I beseech Thee, 
 O Lord ; to Thee do I cry with a great cry out of my whole heart. I praise 
 thee, I magnify Thee, with all Thy holy apostles and martyrs. Do Thou 
 deign to send to my help Thine angels and apostles. ... I pray thee, holy 
 Mary, Mother of my Lord, and all the holy Virgins, that they will hear me 
 and intercede with Thee for me a sinner, and obtain for me to come into the 
 way of truth. . . .^ 
 
 I do not know how it may appear to others, but it seems to me that 
 the man who wrote this prayer spoke simply out of his whole heart, 
 and his words strike straight home. I only give part as a specimen, 
 and perhaps there are those who in reading it will agree that since the 
 dark days when the monk of Winchester perhaps, or Glastonbury, or 
 Canterbury, wrote this prayer, our way up to the present has not 
 been in all directions, and in all parts, progress. 
 
 Among the very numerous prayers that follow I recognize some as 
 being copies or adaptations of those in our English prayer books of 
 the first period, MS Reg. 2 A xx, and the Book of Cerne, At f. 64 
 another hand, shaky as if that of an aged person, enters a prayer for 
 dead benefactors. At f. 76 a is a Litany of the Saints, which, towards 
 its close, at f. 77 b, has this series of invocations (some names are 
 imperfect, being partly illegible through the effects of the fire) : 
 ' Machuti, Byrnst[ane], Aelf [ege], Grimbald, Haedda, Dunstani archi, 
 Oswold archi, Athelwold, Byrnwold.' Now we can recognize where 
 we are — at Winchester. Note in passing the vocatives in ' i ', or 
 the absence of the inflexion form ; note, too, the unknown ' St Byrn- 
 
 ' The MS at the points indicated by dots is altered and hardly legible. The 
 prayer occurs also in Arundel MS 155, f. 174a; this more modem text is made 
 somewhat more smooth and also more flat and commonplace ; e. g. deflere per 
 fidem becomes delere per /idem ; cordis is omitted after lacrimas. The text after 
 'Te laudo et magnifico' is different. In the Arundel MS the prayer is attri- 
 buted to St Gregory, with one of those promises to reciters current in all ages. It 
 is needless to say that such attributions of authorship in prayer books like this one 
 are as a rule wholly untrustworthy. 
 
 C C 2
 
 388 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 wold '.^ At f. 84 b begins a set of bidding prayers ; the text, so far as 
 legible, though much shorter, is the same as that in the so-called 
 Durham Ritual (Surt. Soc. vol. x p. 175 sqq.), except that after the 
 suffrage for the Christian people is this one : ' Pro nosmet ipsos (sic). 
 Fiat Domine misericordia super nos quemadmodum speravimus in te.' 
 The Galba MS also reads pro unitaie ecclesiae, instead of sanitate, 
 as printed in the Durham book ; sanitas is a word used indeed in 
 the earliest litanies of Charlemagne that we have, but it has reference 
 to something secular, the army, &c., &c. The collects at the end are 
 different from those in the Durham book ; at f. 86 b is a text 
 exasperatingly burnt, just at the critical point. This prayer runs : 
 ' Familiam huius sacri cenobii quaesumus Domine, intercedente beata 
 Dei genetrice Maria semperque uirgine, et beato Michaele archangelo 
 necnon et ' ; so ends the page. The top of the next page is burnt, 
 although I seemed to be able to read as the first legible word 
 prmcipe. Here came in with helping hand the copy of Cotton MS 
 Titus D xxvi, the Prayer Book of New Minster at Winchester, which 
 with a quantity of similar ancient material is stored at Great Ormond 
 Street. The Titus MS contains this prayer, and continues the text 
 thus : ' beato Petro apostolorum principe atque sancto Benedicto 
 confessore tuo cum omnibus Sanctis, guberna moderamine ; ut adsit 
 nobis in securitate cautela et inter aspera fortitudo. Per.' The 
 monastery designated by these patrons would seem to be the New 
 Minster, the house founded in vow by Alfred, in act by Edward 
 his son, the burial place of Alfred himself, Ealhswith his queen, and 
 of Edward ; though the patrons given in the prayer are perhaps 
 unfamiliar. St Benedict I take to be mentioned not as a patron but as 
 the founder of Western monachism.^ 
 
 There follow in the Galba MS a few short pieces for confession ; 
 then a prayer for the dead ; then this one which is precise : ' O God 
 Almighty, give, we beseech Thee, rest everlasting to the soul of Thy 
 servant King Ethelred, and to all who by their alms have increased 
 
 ' [Perhaps (as a friend suggests to me) the same as St Berinwald of Benton in 
 Oxfordshire (Stanton's Menology, Supplement p. 688) and ' Saint Bemold en Ben- 
 tone ' of a French version of the Resting Places of Saints, printed in Gaimar (Rolls 
 series) vol. i p. xxxix.] 
 
 ' [The late Mr W. de Gray Birch gives [Liber Vitae : Register and Martyrology 
 of New Minster, London and Winchester, 1892, p. viii) a list of dedications of New 
 Minster occurring in documents of the tenth century and early eleventh ; to this 
 list may be added ' St Peter prince of the Apostles and St Edoc ' {Liber de Hyda, 
 Rolls series, p. 203 ; Edociiis is a form of Judoc, occurring also elsewhere, as in 
 the calendar of a psalter of the second half of the tenth century, now Salisbury MS 
 150: at 5 id. Jan. ' Sancti Edoci conf.'). In the account of the building of New 
 Minster {Liber Vitae pp. 3 sqq.) different dedications are mentioned as given to 
 various parts of the completed church on its consecration by St Dunstan ; among 
 these patrons is St Michael (p. 10).]
 
 ABOUT AN OLD PRAYER BOOK 389 
 
 this monastery to the praise and glory of Thy Holy Name.' Let 
 those who will not follow me refrain ; but I like to think of this 
 prayer as written by one who had known that Unready descendant of 
 a line of heroes, and perhaps familiarly talked with him ; for we have 
 to think of the communities of Winchester in those days, of the Old 
 Minster, and the New Minster, and the nunnery of St Mary's, as of 
 Westminster in later times, with the King and the Queen in and out 
 of their precincts perhaps daily, and the royal children growing up 
 from earliest years in terms of intimacy, in some cases doubtless 
 affection, with their cloistered friends. This very MS must have been 
 written at the latest at a time not very far distant from Ethelred's 
 death (1016) ; it is a private prayer book written in more hands than 
 one, and this prayer is the latest indication of date that I have 
 observed in the volume. In the circumstances the presumption is 
 a fair one that our prayer is no mere formal composition, but was 
 written by the hand of an actual friend. 
 
 Immediately following this prayer for Ethelred is a second litany, 
 quite different in character from the one already noticed, and of the 
 same inordinate length as that contained in the Psalter of bishop 
 Leofric of Exeter (Harl. MS 863). I think our second Galba litany 
 much more interesting than Leofric's, as being wholly of a non-liturgical 
 and quite personal character. I had hoped to have given some account 
 of it in this paper, but to do so, I find, would double a probably already 
 excessive length. Opportunity may perhaps be afforded later for 
 dealing, and in connexion with Leofric's litany, with this interesting if 
 somewhat eccentric product of old English devotion.^ At ff. iio-iii 
 we come across a portion of that very curious prayer, no. 19 in the 
 Book of Cerne, which embodies the Mozarabic mysterium cruets of 
 Good Friday. At f. 119 a, written in quite a different hand, which 
 has copied at least one of the Anglo-Saxon pieces in this volume, is a 
 prayer referring to a church dedicated to SS. Peter, Paul and Andrew, 
 which I cannot at present identify. At f. 125 a, in yet another hand, 
 is a collect of St Ethelwold, ' Deus, qui praeclari sideris ', &c., which 
 I do not find elsewhere. But one more item from our old prayer 
 book, and I have done. It is written in a trembling hand, as if that 
 of a person advanced in years ; it must be given in the original for 
 reasons which will be at once obvious to a reader. The first part is 
 illegible ; then : 
 
 Nee me velis contempnere, Pro peccatorum pondere. Exaudi me mise- 
 
 * [The opportunity has come, and it is greatly to be desired that this Galba 
 Litany, so far as it can be recovered, should be printed for purposes of comparison 
 with the Litany of Leofric in vol. ii of the Leofric CoUectar now being published for 
 the Henry Bradshaw Society.]
 
 390 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 rulam Tuam Machute famulam. Confer mihi angelicum Tuum clemens 
 auxilium. Tuam super me dexteram Protende serenissimam. A cunctis me 
 contagiis Tuis munda suffragiis. De . . . de (?) cyrographo, peccatonim . . . 
 
 So ends the page, and the top half of the next is burnt to illegibility. 
 Then, after some fragmentary words, the piece proceeds as follows : 
 
 Hostes omnes inuisibiles Procul et uisibiles A me clementer [Pabiice], 
 Gratamque Deo perfice. Tu recita Altissimo Precamina haec Domino . . . 
 
 Here, if I mistake not, we have the work of a nun of St Mary's 
 Convent in Winchester, as well as a record of the curious fancy which 
 made of St Machutus, that is the Breton St Malo, a bishop of 
 Winchester. In the invocations cited above from the first litany in 
 the Galba MS it may be observed that he heads the list of Winchester 
 bishops. But I think there are features in our rhymed prayer that 
 have better claims to notice than this one : the pathos of that ' exaudi 
 me miserulam ' ; the quiet attempt at literary effort implied by the 
 ' dexteram serenissimam ' ; and, indeed, the form altogether, when it 
 is considered that the piece comes from a tenth- or eleventh- 
 century nun. 
 
 The volume ends with a number of prayers to saints, now almost 
 wholly illegible, which shew the favourite devotional cults of the time. 
 The following list (drawn from the pencillings in the margin by the 
 official cataloguist) has therefore some interest : Holy Cross, St Michael, 
 St Edmund, St Stephen, the Invention of St Stephen (August 3), 
 St Machutus, St Christopher, St Denys, St Dunstan, St Edward King 
 and Martyr, St Edburga, St Elgiva, St Patrick, St Margaret. Then 
 comes a prayer in which King Edgar is mentioned ; then another 
 prayer of the Holy Cross. It is the last. 
 
 Will the day ever come when the prayers in this volume which the 
 fire has spared will see the light ? I have often dreamed of a Codex 
 preciim piariim (or Codex orationalis) Aevi Saxonici. The disputes of 
 the religious communions, the clangorous voice of the controversialist, 
 the cries of the partisan, even the suppressed bitterness of the man 
 who knows the better way but perhaps in spite of self is overcome by 
 the grudging spirit that he loves not, all assume their true character 
 before the records of the simple, or, it may sometimes be, exaggerated, 
 piety that have come down to us in these ancient devotions. Such 
 piety is disarming, and in face of it that which is churlish in us and in 
 our religious quarrels comes to appear before us for what it really is. 
 
 I have sometimes dreamed a dream that I do not expect or even hope 
 to see realized : will Downside Abbey ever give us such a Codexf It is 
 a truly eirenical work and well worthy of those whose watchword 
 is ' Peace '. Already a beginning has been made ; the corner-stone is
 
 ABOUT AN OLD PRAYER BOOK 391 
 
 indeed laid in Dom Kuypers's quarto containing the two most ancient 
 and important of old English Prayer Books ; whilst at Great Ormond 
 Street in the course of years a considerable body of like material has 
 been slowly accumulating ; and this collection has not been left to be 
 useless. When so much is poured forth in print, and by learned 
 societies too, that signifies so little, one wonders why so much is left 
 neglected and unknown that, to such as have eyes to see and heart to 
 feel and mind to understand, can tell us so much of the makers of oui 
 race and country.
 
 XX 
 
 GIFTS OF BISHOP HENRY OF BLOIS, ABBAT 
 
 OF GLASTONBURY, TO WINCHESTER 
 
 CATHEDRAL! 
 
 The following inventory of church ornaments of the twelfth century 
 will need no recommendation to those who care for such things. The 
 benefactions of Henry of Blois to his abbey of Glastonbury, of the 
 later greatness of which he may be said to be the founder, are 
 recounted in the history of that house printed by Hearne. The list 
 of gifts of this great prelate to the treasury of his cathedral church 
 of Winchester is, I believe, hitherto unpublished, and may, it is 
 hoped, be considered as not out of place in the pages of the Downside 
 Review. 
 
 The treasury of the church of Winchester, the capital of Wessex, 
 and the seat of kings whose sway extended over the whole of England 
 and beyond her borders, was doubtless from early times well furnished 
 through royal munificence. The Old Minster, as it was called after 
 his reign, does not appear to have owed much to the bounty of Alfred 
 the Great. His liberalities were reserved, as were those of Edward 
 the Elder, his son, for his own neighbouring foundation of New- 
 minster, over whose beginnings St Grimbald presided, and where both 
 kings had their sepulture. Athelstan, whose name figures as the donor 
 of holy relics in the records of so many churches, gave to Winchester the 
 head of St Justus,^ mentioned in the list printed below. King Edred 
 his brother (947-955) had a special affection for St Swithin's ; he gave 
 to it a cross of gold, an altar of gold, and a number of other precious 
 objects with a generous hand. Death prevented him from carrying 
 out his further projects, such as the adornment of the eastern part of 
 the church with gilt tiling.^ 
 
 ^ From the Downside Review, January 1884. 
 
 ^ Annales Wintonienses, A. D. 924, ed. Luard, p. 10. 
 
 ^ Wolstani Vita S. Ethelwoldi in Mabillon A A. SS. O.S.B. t. vii p. 600, 
 ed. Venet. : ' deauratis imbricibus adornare disposuit.' Is it mosaics for the interior 
 that are in question, or roof tiles? The 'golden altar' was doubtless a frontal 
 covered with gold plates ; ' quod postmodum Henricus Blesensis, frater regis
 
 BISHOP HENRY OF BLOIS 393 
 
 In the episcopate of St Ethelwold the cathedral, now placed in the 
 hands of the monks, was rebuilt. The saint's biographers give a full 
 description of the edifice, but they do not mention any gifts of his 
 to the treasury. From his liberality in this matter to his monastery 
 of Abingdon, it may be inferred that he was not less careful in 
 furnishing his cathedral church. It is incidentally noticed that the 
 lights burning before the shrine of St Swithin, whose cultus at this 
 time greatly increased, were placed in golden candlesticks. But there 
 is another side to the picture : when famine came, and the holy bishop 
 had no more money wherewith to relieve the needs of the poor, he 
 ordered that the church plate, and, in particular, a vast quantity of 
 silver vessels, should be melted down and turned into coin ; for he 
 could not endure the thought that the lifeless metal should remain 
 intact, whilst men, created in God's image and redeemed by the 
 precious blood of Christ, were perishing in hunger and want.^ 
 
 The troubled times of the Danish invasions were not likely to bring 
 about any augmentation of church treasuries. St Elphege, later the 
 martyr of Canterbury, followed at Winchester in the footsteps of his 
 predecessor, St Ethelwold, and caused to be distributed to the poor 
 the abundant store which he had designed for the adornment of his 
 church. 2 With the more peaceful days of Canute and Edward the 
 Confessor the tide turned, and the treasury was replenished. Canute 
 gave a shrine for the relics of St Birinus, a great image (perhaps 
 a crucifix), and a silver candlestick with six branches.^ Queen Emma, 
 widow of Canute and mother of Hardecanute and Edward the Con- 
 fessor, was a great benefactress; after the death of Hardecanute she 
 gave for the good of his soul, besides landed property, many ornaments 
 in gold and silver, with jewels, and precious vestments.* A few years 
 later, after her successful trial by ordeal, attributing her deliverance to 
 the protection of St Swithin, she and her friend and adviser Aelwin, 
 bishop of Winchester, vied with each other in enriching the treasury 
 of the cathedral.^ Out of some of these gifts of Emma, Stigand, 
 Aelwin's successor, caused to be made a cross of great size with 
 images of the Blessed Virgin and St John, admirably worked and 
 covered, as well as the beam on which they stood, with thick plates of 
 gold and silver." Getha, wife of Earl Godwin, was also a donor of 
 ornaments of various kinds." 
 
 Stephani ac Wyntoniensis episcopus, decentissime renovavit ', says the Liber de 
 
 Hyda (Rolls series) p. 151. This seems different from both articles 2 and 13 of 
 the list. 
 
 • Wolstani Vita p. 604. '^ AA. SS. O.S. B. t. viii p. 106. 
 
 ^ Ann. Wint. 1035, p. 16. * Ann. Wint. 1040, p. 18. 
 
 ^ Ami. IVint. 1043, p. 25. * Ann. Wint. 1047, pp. 25 and 30. 
 
 ■^ Ann. IVint. 1053, p. 26.
 
 394 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 The Conquest did not directly lead to the diminishing of these rich 
 accumulations. Bishop Walkelin, like so many of the Norman prelates, 
 busied himself in building a new church on a grander scale. His 
 brother Simeon, formerly a monk of St-Ouen at Rouen, and Godfrey 
 of Cambrai, successively priors, were long remembered for their noble 
 benefactions ; but the best gift was the care and love with which 
 Godfrey inspired his community for the observance and splendour of 
 the Divine service.^ Dark days were, however, at hand. William 
 Rufus, whose name has an evil mark in the annals of nearly every 
 English see, despoiled Winchester of all its great wealth of treasure.^ 
 Probably efforts were soon made to make up for these depredations ; it 
 is recorded that the relics of St Ethelwold were placed in a new shrine 
 in the year iiii ; ^ but if we may judge from the frequent mention in 
 the following list of objects I'edeemed, it would seem that the main 
 share in this good work of restoration was reserved for bishop Henry 
 of Blois, whose gifts must have equalled those of all who preceded. 
 
 Nephew, brother, cousin of three successive kings of England, Henry, 
 by birth, personal character, and by his actions, stands out, after 
 St Anselm and St Thomas, as the greatest English prelate of his 
 century. He early enrolled himself in the order of St Benedict at 
 Cluny ; in 1126 he was made abbat of Glastonbury ; in 11 29, bishop 
 of Winchester. He kept both dignities till his death in 1171, but the 
 higher, with its manifold cares, did not cause him to neglect his abbey. 
 Glastonbury, says the local historian, he sincerely loved ; through 
 his industry this church, which he found dilapidated and its possessions 
 squandered, obtained so many advantages, that his memory will 
 deservedly flourish in the same for ever and ever.^ But Glastonbury 
 we must leave aside on the present occasion. 
 
 In his brother Stephen's days his position forced him to the front, 
 even in the civil broils ; nor was he behind his neighbours and con- 
 temporaries in holding his own with the strong hand, or dealing a hard 
 blow when rudely pressed. Personal ambition, natural affection, the 
 repugnance of the princely prelate to submit to the yoke of Canter- 
 bury's superiority, a real care for the interests of the Church and her 
 freedom, but never mere irresolution or faintheartedness, made him 
 lean now to the one side, now to the other in the struggle. Enemies 
 he could not fail to make ; the most powerful of these he might have 
 overborne or disregarded, but accident gave them a handle whereby 
 they might, if not bring about his overthrow, at least hinder the 
 accomplishment of his great designs. In the fight in his own city of 
 
 ' Ann. Wifit. 1082, p, 33 ; Will. Malmesb. Gest.pont., ed. Hamilton, p. 172. 
 
 ^ Ann. Wini. 1090, p. 36. ' Ibid. p. 44. 
 
 * Stevens's Additional Vohiines to Dugdale's Monasticon i p. 428.
 
 BISHOP HENRY OF BLOIS 395 
 
 Winchester in 1141, which retrieved the desperate fortunes of his then 
 imprisoned brother, in the sacking of the town by his men, the abbey 
 of Hyde ^ was laid waste and its treasure dissipated, or reduced to 
 ashes. ^ The monks raised a loud outcry ; their fate they felt, perhaps, 
 the more bitterly, when they compared their own ill case with the 
 immunity of their brethren at the cathedral, which, protected by 
 Henry's great palace fortress far more effectually, it can hardly be 
 doubted, than by the piety of the Earl of Gloucester, had escaped 
 without damage. 
 
 The monks of Hyde laid all the blame on the bishop personally ; 
 they not merely claimed indemnity for losses sustained in the fight, 
 but, in appealing to the Pope, they accused him of purloining or 
 exacting from them a vast quantity of precious objects. The cause 
 once begun, the monks, backed as well by powerful friends of their 
 own as by powerful enemies of Henry, carried it on long and 
 perseveringly. They enlisted on their side King Stephen himself, and 
 what was decisive, the sympathies and services of St Bernard. After 
 the death of Pope Innocent II the case became grave ; with Innocent 
 Henry had been a favourite, and he felt himself secure. Now the 
 position was reversed; with the Cistercian Pope, Eugenius III, the 
 word of St Bernard was all-powerful. In 1148 the long-gathering 
 storm burst. The bishop did not appear at the council summoned by 
 the Pope to meet at Reims ; the worst construction was put on his 
 absence, and rumours were circulated that he was answerable for the 
 absence of other prelates besides ; the Pope suspended him by name 
 from the exercise of his episcopal functions for disobedience. At the 
 prayer of his brother Theobald, Count of Champagne and Blois, 
 the sentence was relaxed on condition that within six months he 
 should present himself in person before the Pope.^ It was not, 
 however, until three years after that he visited Rome to answer the 
 charges which the monks of Hyde, with many others, and St Bernard 
 on their account, were persistently urging against him. There he 
 was indeed received into favour, but only in facie hoininmn, as the 
 chronicler says. But, even so, he was not deterred from seeking to 
 recover the predominant position he had occupied in the time of 
 Pope Innocent. A renewal of the legateship denied him, he revived 
 an old scheme of his for the elevation of Winchester into an archi- 
 
 ' Hyde was the former house of Newminster, now removed to the other side of 
 the city. 
 
 ' See the Monasticon, ed. 1682, vol. i p. 210 ; and the preface to Liber de Hyda 
 (Rolls series) pp. xlviii-xlix. As the editor justly observes, for the whole story we 
 have only the account of Henry's foes. This remark holds good also for the 
 Historia pontijkalis quoted below ; its writer, if not John of Salisbury, was certainly 
 devoted to the interests of archbishop Theobald. 
 
 ' Historia pontificalis in Mon. Germ. SS. xx pp. 519-520.
 
 396 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 episcopal see ; finding this proposal was not entertained, he begged at 
 least the exemption of Winchester from the jurisdiction of Canterbury ; 
 again he suffered repulse. At last he asked exemption for himself 
 personally ; even to this prayer the Pope closed his ears. Finding all 
 such endeavours useless, Henry consoled himself for his ill success in 
 a way as characteristic as it was in that age singular, for it was not an 
 age of virtuosi, and a virtuoso the bishop was. Rome was the spot 
 where he might best indulge his tastes and fancies, and to these for 
 the moment he surrendered himself, putting as much assiduity, and 
 care, and thought into the collection of relics of art and antiquity as he 
 ever had employed in trying to compass the ends of his high ambition. 
 When they saw thus a great and wealthy prelate, venerable with 
 flowing beard, and of grave aspect, whose mien marked him out as 
 a prince among princes, intent on buying up old statues and idols, the 
 Romans were amazed ; it was beyond their powers of understanding, 
 and they set him down as a fool for his pains, whilst the literary 
 lampooned him and cracked classical jokes at his expense. The 
 bishop went on his way imperturbable, and having finished his 
 purchases and acquisitions, went home by way of Spain, made the 
 pilgrimage of St James of Compostella, and safely reached Winchester 
 with his precious spoil. The chronicler, though no friend of Henry in 
 general, amply avenges the bishop by some home-thrusts at the 
 Romans, which the curious may seek in his own pages.^ 
 
 On the accession of Henry H, the bishop took alarm, sent abroad 
 his treasures by Peter the Venerable, abbat of Cluny, who was in 
 England seeking his help, and left the kingdom secretly.^ Cluny, to 
 which he retired, was at that time in deep embarrassment from debt ; 
 all its friends, among the rest Pope Adrian IV and King Lewis VII 
 of France, had appealed to the bishop of Winchester as the fittest 
 person to relieve its necessities. His own inclinations to assist the 
 house of his profession induced him to lend a ready ear to such 
 entreaties. The first needs were met entirely out of his own resources : 
 for a year he bore the whole expense of maintaining the community — 
 some four hundred and sixty monks. He used his great personal 
 influence to recover the property of the house, and by prudent 
 administration succeeded in freeing it from debt, and bringing order 
 into its finances, thereby deserving the title of the greatest benefactor 
 of Cluny in that age." But this was a work of time. In vain did 
 
 ' M. G. SS. XX p. 542 ; the Winchester annahst knows little of this journey, and 
 the information he gives is inexact. Nos. 24 and 31, the great cameo in No. 13 of 
 the list, and the last item of No. 12, may perhaps have been brought from Rome. 
 
 "^ Chron. Roberti de Monte in Mo7J. Germ. SS. vi p. 505. 
 
 ' Chronicon Cluniacense, Reateil des hisioriefts de la France vol. xiv pp. 397-398.
 
 BISHOP HENRY OF BLOIS 397 
 
 archbishop Theobald of Canterbury write to him on behalf of the 
 king, entreating his return, now with promises of favour, now with 
 threats, urging the widowed state of his churches of Glastonbury and 
 Winchester, and their prior claims to his care.^ He bided his own 
 time. In 1162 he was home again and presided at the Council of 
 Westminster in which St Thomas was elected to the see of Canter- 
 bury, and on the octave of Pentecost, June 3 of that year, St Thomas 
 received consecration in his cathedral church of Canterbury from the 
 hands of bishop Henry. - 
 
 Henceforward he acquiesced in a second place in English eccle- 
 siastical affairs. In the ensuing contest between the king and the 
 archbishop, the side on which he ranged himself was the side of 
 the church's freedom. The letters addressed to the aged prelate by 
 St Thomas breathe an entire and unwavering trust and a filial 
 reverence and affection. It is probable that during these last years, 
 the most quiet of an always agitated life, his personal care was given 
 to the interests of Winchester and Glastonbury ; and it is to this 
 period that may be attributed the enrichment of the Winchester 
 treasury detailed in the inventory. On August 6, 1171, the king 
 set his foot on English soil for the first time since the martyrdom of 
 St Thomas ; he made straight for Winchester. The bishop, blind 
 and dying, discharged his last duty ; he upbraided the king bitterly 
 for the death of St Thomas, and forewarned him of the long years of 
 trouble and sorrow in later life, whereby he must expiate his crime. 
 Full of days he entered on his rest on August 8, 1171.^ ' Henry, 
 bishop of Winchester,' says the local chronicle, ' than whom no man 
 was more chaste and prudent, none more full of compassion, none 
 more solicitous for the advancement of sacred interests and the adorn- 
 ment of holy places, departed to our Lord, whom he had loved with 
 his whole heart, and whose ministers ... he had honoured as our Lord 
 Himself; may his soul rest in Abraham's bosom.' ^ And Robert de 
 Monte : ' On the church of Winchester he bestowed much wealth in 
 ornaments of gold and silver, and in silken vestments ; and with 
 a bountiful hand he dispensed his riches among churches and the 
 poor.' '' 
 
 The list of gifts is taken from Additional MS 29436 at the British 
 
 ' Bouquet Rec. des hist. vol. xvi pp. 492-493. 
 
 ''■ Radulfi de Diceto Ymagines histor., ed. Stubbs (Rolls series), i pp. 306-307. 
 Some readers may recall the close of the first act of Aubrey de Vere's St Thomas 
 of Canterbury. The church of Winchester, by an entry in its Martyrology, made 
 an annual commemoration of the consecration of St Thomas by bishop Henry of 
 Blois. See Usuardi Martyrologitwi, ed. Sollerius, p. 315 (the Altemps MS). 
 
 * Rod. de Diceto i p. 347. 
 
 * Ann. Wint. p. 60. ° Mon. Germ. SS. vi p. 520.
 
 398 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Museum, a cartulary of Winchester Cathedral in various hands from 
 the thirteenth to the fifteenth century.^ Folios 44-48, of the twelfth 
 and thirteenth centuries, are evidently a fragment of another book, 
 a necrology ; they contain the following list, notes of confraternity of 
 the community of St Swithin's with other monasteries, grants of 
 fraternity to illustrious personages, a page of the necrology itself, and 
 some detailed obituary notices. The list appears in a longer (fif. 47-48) 
 and a shorter (f. 46) form, both in a twelfth-century hand. It is 
 sufficient to print the former and give in the notes under the sign b 
 any addition afforded by the latter, which is in a somewhat different 
 order. The inventory of the plunder of the Winchester treasury at 
 the suppression (printed in the appendix to Strype's Cranmer, and 
 reprinted in Stevens, vol. i pp. 222-223, and in the new Monasticon) 
 is too vague and general in its terms to allow of the certain identi- 
 fication of the objects then seized with bishop Henry's gifts. The 
 division of the items is that of the manuscript ; the numbering is 
 added for convenience of reference. 
 
 Hec sunt omamenta que dominus Henricus episcopus Wintoniensis ecclesie 
 partim dedit, partim redemit.'^ 
 
 I. Crux nova et magna; ipsa et ymago eius operte auro et ornate multis 
 et pretiosis lapidibus. In procinctu ymaginis sunt clxii ^ lapides, et in pede 
 crucis xxxii. Habet et ipsa ymago coronam auro opertam cum bonis lapi- 
 dibus, vi saphiris, topatiis, iacinctis, et aliis bonis lapidibus xxii. Inter quos est 
 unus magnus saphyrus magni pretii. In eadem cruce iste sunt reliquie. De 
 cruce Domini in duobus locis ; de sepulchro Domini ; de loco nativitatis 
 Domini ; de loco ascensionis Domini ; de presepio Domini ; de monte Cal- 
 varie ; de cunabulo Domini ; de capillo sancte Marie ; de sepulchro sancte 
 Marie ; de sancto Abraam ; de sancto Ysaac ; de sancto lacob ; de sancto 
 Bartholomeo apostolo ; de sancto Matheo apostolo ; de sancto Stephano pro- 
 thomartyre ; de Sanctis Sergio et Bacho ; de sancto Georgio martyre ; de 
 sancto Pantaleone martyre ; de sancto syndonio ; * de lapide quem supposuit 
 lacob capiti suo. 
 
 ^ At folio 4* is the inscription 'Liber domini Thome Dakcomb, 1550'; and at 
 folio 3^ in a later hand, ' This Sir Thomas Dakomb was a secular priest and one 
 of the first petty canons of the church of Winton upon the establishment of King 
 Henry VIII, 28° Aprilis, anno regni xxxilio.' Dakomb's name appears in 
 another very valuable cartulary of Winchester Cathedral, now Additional MS 
 15350; in the Royal MS 15 C vii of the tenth century, also belonging to 
 Winchester, and containing the miracles of St Swithin ; and in a fifteenth-century 
 English Prymer, Additional MS 17011. From this last it appears that in 1557 he 
 was rector of Tarring Neville in Sussex. [See above at p. 141 n. i.] 
 
 "b begins: ' Obiit bone memorie Domnus Henricus Wintoniensis ecclesie 
 episcopus. Hie venerandus pater quantum decorem ecclesie Dei dilexerit, testantur 
 omamenta que eidem ecclesie contulit.' 
 
 ^ Originally cclxii ; the second c has been erased. 
 
 * Part of the holy winding-sheet (o-ti/Soi/toj/?), see Chififlet de linteis sepulchralibus 
 Christi p. 26.
 
 BISHOP HENRY OF BLOIS 399 
 
 2. Tabula aurea ad maius altare operta auro et ornata esmallis et multis 
 lapidibus pretiosis.^ 
 
 3. Eucaristium aureum,^ cum vasculo aureo quod intus est, exterius de auro 
 Optimo et lapidibus pretiosis ornatum, interius de argento. 
 
 4. Textus aureus ' unus quem emit pro c. marcis, in quo sunt lapides pre- 
 tiosi, inter quos sunt smaragdi et iacincti xxx. 
 
 5. Alii iiii texti aurei quos redemit. 
 
 6. Crux processionalis tota aurea, in qua habentur Ivi saphiri, et x topatii, 
 et vii granati, et x smaragdi, et cclvii perle orientales. Omnes isti lapides 
 pretiosi et magni pretii. 
 
 7. Alia crux aurea cum xxxiiii smaragdis. 
 
 8. Alia crux aurea cum ymagine ubi est de ligno Domini ; utraque crux 
 cum pede argenteo. 
 
 9. Calix aureus cum patena aurea operatus cum esmallis. 
 
 10. Alius aureus calix, quem redemit, similiter cum esmallis. 
 
 11. Capud sancti lusti martyris* bene ornatum auro et lapidibus pretiosis ; 
 et in eodem sunt reliquie unius Innocentis. 
 
 12. Scrinium unum aureum in quo sunt magne reliquie; scilicet de cruce 
 Domini; et reliquie sancti Laurentii, videlicet carbones conglutinati cum 
 adipe qui defluxit de corpore eius in craticula ; et duo anuli aurei, unus qui 
 fuit sancti Silvestri et sunt in eo reliquie de capillis apostolorum Petri et Pauli, 
 alius anulus qui fuit cuiusdam magne auctoritatis apostolici. 
 
 13. Altare aureum quod intus et extra auro et magnis lapidibus pretiosis 
 ornatum est ; ex una parte habens lapidem magnum qui dicitur cathmaieu, et 
 ex alia serpentinum et alios plures lapides pretiosos.* 
 
 14. Due Tabule pretiose intus auro et lapidibus pretiosis operte, inter quos 
 est unus lapis magni pretii in quo lesus Christus cuidam diadema imponit, et 
 beata Maria sceptrum tradit.* 
 
 15. Philaterium aureum cum reliquiis.'' 
 
 1 6. Duo candelabra aurea. 
 
 1 An altar frontal of carved wood, probably, covered with plates of gold ; esmallis, 
 ^maux, enamels. 
 
 2 A vessel for the suspension of the blessed Sacrament reserved, with an 
 inner cup. 
 
 ' A precious covering of plates of gold, encrusted with jewels, for the book of the 
 four Gospels, like the incomparable Golden Book at Ashburnham, which some 
 readers may have lately had the privilege of seeing at the British Museum. 
 
 * See above p. 392, a gift of King Athelstan. 
 
 ' At first sight this might appear to be a super-altar ; probably it was a rich 
 frontal like No. 2. The great cameo could hardly be fit for a super-altar. This is, 
 perhaps, one of the objects Henry acquired at Rome, and a priceless relic of 
 antiquity of the character of those preserved at St-Sulpice at Bourges (see Voyage 
 litteraire de deux religieux B^nedictins, 1717, i p. 32), and the Sainte Chapelle at 
 Paris (figured in Morand Hist, de la Sainte Chapelle p. 58), [or the great cameo 
 at Vienna that once belonged to Saint-Semin at Toulouse, for which see K. de 
 
 {tirage-H-part, 1894, pp. 36 and i pi.).] 
 ' What are these talmle } The pax } 
 ^ A little reliquary, such as could be hung round the neck.
 
 400 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 17. Scrinium argenteum in quo est aliud scrinium aureum cum plurimorum 
 Sanctorum reliquiis, et alie reliquie extra. 
 
 18. Item cassula aurea signata cum esmallis desuper.^ 
 
 19. Aliud scrinium argenteum deauratum in quo habetur musga et bal- 
 samum.'^ 
 
 20. Eucaristium argenteum cum vasculo aureo quod intus est. 
 
 21. Calix argenteus cum ansulis sine patena.* 
 
 22. Alius calix argenteus cum patena. 
 
 23. Duo candelabra argentea bene sculpta et deaurata magni ponderis et 
 pretii. 
 
 24. Duo alia argentea minora in effigie hominis conposita. 
 
 25. Tria thuribula argentea bene sculpta et deaurata magni ponderis et 
 precii. 
 
 26. Acerra argentea et deaurata. 
 
 27. Urceus magnus argenteus* ad aquam benedictam. 
 
 28. Duo candelabra argentea que redemit. 
 
 29. Pelves due argentee. 
 
 30. Vas argenteum ad spargendum aquam in dedicationibus. 
 
 31. Vas argenteum fusum in modum hominis. 
 
 32. Tabernaculum argenteum cum iiii columpnis argenteis, quod solet in 
 Natali Domini superponi altari cum cereo.' 
 
 33. laspides due ornate argento bene sculpto et deaurato. 
 
 34. Duo philateria argentea, in uno quorum habetur lapis in quem stillavit 
 sanguis Domini. 
 
 35. Maxima casula" operta auro et gemmis et bene ornata. Et alie viii 
 bone, et bene ornate aurifriso. 
 
 36. Cappa i tota deaurata cum morsu aureo. 
 
 37. Alie sex pretiose, ornate aurifriso cum morsibus aureis. 
 
 38. Alba serica una pretiosa auro bene et optime conposita. Item alia 
 bene ornata. 
 
 39. Dalmatica i sine auro. 
 
 40. Tunica i sine auro. 
 
 41. Stole due pretiose de aurifriso Venetie cum manipulis. 
 
 42. Due stole de Alimannia cum manipulis pretiosis.^ 
 
 43. CoUarium unum pretiosum.* 
 
 ' This entry is an interlineation by a somewhat later hand. Cassula, i.e. capsula. 
 
 ^ For chrism. 
 
 ' Probably ancient. * 'quern redemit ' <5. 
 
 " Can this be a ciborium or altar canopy ? More probably an altar candlestick ; 
 the use of candlesticks on the altar in Henry's days was rare. 
 
 ' ' quam redemit ' b. 
 
 ' Originally written : * alia stola . . . cum manipulo pretioso.' Altered by a 
 somewhat later hand. 
 
 * What is the particular use of the collarium, on which nearly all liturgical 
 writers and ecclesiologists are silent ? At Clermont, in Auvergne, colliers were, up 
 to the last century, in use on feast days, but they appear to have been no more 
 than the apparel of the amice. In his Trhor de la Salnte Chapelle des Dues de 
 Savoie (2nd ed. Lyon, 1875) M. Ad. Fabre discusses (pp. 25-30) the difference 
 between the collarium and the amice, but does not dispose of the question so 
 completely as he would appear to believe.
 
 BISHOP HENRY OF BLOIS 401 
 
 44. Dossalia' serica optima, quorum plura rotata- sunt, xxxix : et tria alia 
 deaurata. 
 
 45. Palle altaris vi. 
 
 46. Palla altaris una in quinque locis et in circuitu ornata aurifriso. 
 
 47. Pallium quod iacet super regem Willielmum.' 
 
 48. Mantilia serica ii. 
 
 49. Sandalium unum par. 
 
 50. Mantilia altaris linea ii. 
 
 51. Baculi episcopales iiii. 
 
 52. Mitre due. 
 
 53. Cornua eburnea ix, et ungula grifonis. 
 
 54. Pixis eburnea in qua ponitur Corpus Domini in Parasceve. 
 
 55. Vexilla serica v optima. 
 
 56. Cortina serica ad peregrines * et alia ad crisma. 
 
 57. Tapetia vii. 
 
 58. Duo panni lanei pendentes. 
 
 59. Pulvinar sericum unum. 
 
 60. Cerei iiii semper ardentes.** 
 
 61. Signa magna, id est campane, iiii ; et alia vii.* 
 
 62. Corona que pendet in choro auro et argento et ere splendide com- 
 posita. 
 
 63. Pannus laneus cui intexta sunt miracula beate Marie.'' 
 
 ^ Dossalia : hangings for the sides of the choir probably, behind the monks at 
 office. 
 
 - Rotata ; with patterns in circles or medallions. 
 3 William Rufus. 
 
 * Hangings put up when the sacred relics were shewn to pilgrims? See 
 P. Morettus De ritu ostensionis sacrarum reliquiarum p. 57. 
 
 8 A foundation ; a similar offering at Glastonbury ; see Stevens, op. cit. \ p. 429. 
 
 * ' et alia minora vii ' b. 
 
 '' A different hand gives in the shorter list, towards the beginning, an additional 
 item : ' Pes sanctae Agathae '. 
 
 Dd
 
 XXI 
 
 FROM AN OLD NOTE-BOOK » 
 
 Time flies fast, and so little is done in it. It is now some thirteen 
 years since the notes were written in the book I take down from a 
 shelf in our ' manuscript cupboard ' at Great Ormond Street.^ At 
 that time calendars, and martyrologies, and * proofs of cultus ' of 
 English saints were of absorbing interest, to some one at least ; a row 
 of note-books is proof of that.^ Most of the relative manuscripts 
 at the Museum, and I think all at Lambeth, had been examined ; 
 field-days at Oxford and Cambridge were within sight ; then came 
 a sudden stop, and from that day to this the collection has stood still, 
 with not much prospect, now, of its being ever resumed. But, im- 
 perfect as they are, the gleanings have in some measure served the 
 purpose for which the work was undertaken ; * and now, even at this 
 late date, I feel disposed to ask for hospitality in these pages for some 
 disject memoranda made as manuscript after manuscript passed 
 through my hands — mere odds and ends gathered as the fancy of 
 the moment dictated, or simple aids to memory and helps to find 
 ' curiosities ', when required, at some later time. 
 
 The first manuscript which, on opening the note-book, catches my 
 eye — viz. Harleian MS 3866 — is one of the class which I found it 
 convenient to designate as ' Norwich- Sarum ', if only to distinguish 
 the books from the rarer ' Worcester-Sarum '. It is singular to 
 notice how many liturgical books formerly in use in the diocese 
 of Norwich have survived. Of course, as the cathedral was monastic, 
 there could be no Norwich use ; that diocese, like others, adopted 
 Sarum, and doubtless at an early date ; it might be — though no 
 record says so — even in the thirteenth century. These monastic 
 cathedrals, much more than its own intrinsic merits, or even the 
 excessively fine opinion the Sarum people had of themselves and 
 
 ^ From the Downside Review, July 1897. 
 
 ^ [Where I was from 1892 to 1902 living with Dom (now Cardinal) Gasquet.] 
 
 ^ [Now Additional MSS 36598-36602 at the ]3ritish Museum, where I thought 
 they might be more useful than on my shelves. Quite recently I have come across 
 two or three more of these books ; they have been sent to the Museum to rejoin 
 those already there.] 
 
 * [To ascertain, so far as possible, the true dates of saints and collect liturgical 
 probaiiones cultus as a basis for the late Fr Richard Stanton's Menology (printed 
 in 1887 and 1892).]
 
 AN OLD NOTE-BOOK 403 
 
 their ways, have really made the fortune of the vaunted Sarum rite. 
 Fashionable, or current, as it became, there was also a certain under- 
 current of grudge against it, as being always in the way of supplanting 
 its neighbours, and particular dioceses made more or less of a show of 
 retaining particularity.^ The Norwich books may be easily identified 
 by their calendars ; besides the occurrence, in special manner, of 
 St Felix, the apostle of Kast Anglia, and St Edmund the Martyr, the 
 feasts of St Dominic and St Francis are also marked as ' synodal ', i.e. in 
 this case, prescribed for high-grade observance by diocesan ordinance. 
 It is one of the drawbacks of a miscellaneous note-book to be con- 
 tinually in the way of drawing one aside against one's will into by- 
 paths. Surely a missal (and such is Harl. MS 3866) is liturgical 
 enough ; but I find it taking me off at once to genealogy. The 
 calendar contains several entries as to the Bedingfeld family ; and 
 as they supplement the great pedigree drawn up by Davy, the 
 Suffolk genealogist and antiquary, I cannot find it in my mind to 
 pass them over here, especially as they can be linked on somehow 
 to the domus Gregoriana. For, to say nothing of more recent days, 
 the list of alumni Gregoriani counts two of the name in the seven- 
 teenth century — viz. Henry and John, sons of John Bedingfeld of 
 Coulsey Wood, second son of the first baronet. Our calendar entries 
 relate of course to a much earlier time. Here they are, in order of 
 date. ' Memorandum quod 15 die mensis Marcii, anno Domini 1438, 
 circa horam nonam ante meridiem, obiit Thorn. Bedyngfeld, miles, 
 cuius anime propicietur Deus.' This is that Sir Thomas Bedingfeld 
 w^hom Davy mentions only as ' living T412 and 141 7 '. Next : ' Anno 
 Domini 1480, 28 die Novembris, natus est Thomas bedyngfeld, filius 
 et heres Edmundi bedyngfeld, militis valentissimi ' ; he died without 
 issue in 1538, says Davy, and his next brother being a priest, the line 
 was carried on by the younger Sir Edmund mentioned below. Next, 
 at October 18 : ' Obitus Edmundi Bedyngfeld, militis, qui obiit in anno 
 Domini 1496.' This, the elder Sir Edmund, is the ' miles valentissi- 
 mus'; Davy can only say that his will was dated at Calais Oct. 12, 
 1496, and proved on January 28 following. Next, at November 17 : 
 ' Profescio {sic) domine marie Bedyngfeld apud Elyens anno Domini 
 1499 ' ; so far as age goes, on the assumption that she became 
 a nun, this might very well be a sister of the Thomas and the 
 younger Sir Edmund ; the ' apud Elyens ', which is quite clearly 
 written, seemingly can only mean ' by the bishop of Ely ' ; was she 
 a widow and vowess, and identical with the Mary Bedingfeld who, 
 
 * [Thus when the Sarum rite was adopted at St Paul's it was with the reservation 
 that the traditional ceremonial should be maintained. I cannot find this in the 
 late Dr Sparrow Simpson's Regisirnm Statu to nim,\>wX. I remember the fact clearly, 
 and I do not think my memory is here playing me false.] 
 
 D d 2
 
 404 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 according to Davy, was married in 1480 to William Grey of Merton, 
 Co. Norfolk ? Finally, one more entry at the bottom of the page for 
 September : ' Mortuus erat Mr Henricus Bedyngffeld, filius et heres 
 Edmundi et Gracie uxoris sue, hoc tempore anni circa festum Nativi- 
 tatis Sancte Marie anno Domini 1511'; this Henry, son of the 
 younger Sir Edmund, and Grace, daughter of Henry, first Lord 
 Marney, is not noticed by Davy. But enough of pedigree intri- 
 cacies ; though I should like to say, before passing to something 
 else, that the pedigree of the interesting Redlingfield branch of the 
 Bedingfeld family given in Records S. J. vol. v p. 568, is, so far as 
 the last generations are concerned, based only on conjectures and 
 congruities. 
 
 The Harl. MS 3866 gives (f. 228*), in the mass for the feast of the 
 Translation of St Edmund, this sequence, which I do not remember 
 to have seen in print : 
 
 1. Per fidem solam 3. Sepelitur caro cesa ; 
 Rex Edmundus suam stolam Sana tamen et illesa 
 Lavit Agni sanguine. De sepulchro toUitur. 
 Signum factus ad sagittam Sed pro nece sic illata 
 Penam necis exquisitam Vena quasi deaurata 
 Fert pro Christi nomine. CoUo circumducitur.^ 
 
 2. Perforatus mille telis 4. Ungues eius et capillos 
 Decollatur rex fidelis Tondet anus, stupet illos 
 Pro grege fidelium. Tot annis recrescere.* 
 Caput exit in loquelam,^ Opus furum inaniter 
 
 Cui lupus dat tutelam,^ ludex petit,® rex punitur,' 
 
 Predo patrocinium. Rota fertur acre.' 
 
 5. Domus ardet sacerdotis,* 
 Claud! saltant, et egrotis 
 Prestantur remedia. 
 Qui sic fecit et medetur 
 Promovere nos dignetur 
 Ad eterna gaudia. 
 
 ^ See Abbo of Fleury's Passio S. Eadtnundi cap. 13 (in Arnold's Memorials of St 
 Edmund's Abbey i p. 18). 
 
 * Ibid. The next line refers, I suppose, to the ravening wolf. 
 
 ^ This is a refinement on the naturalism of Abbo's ' tenuissima ruga in modum 
 fili coccinei ' (cap. 1 5 p. 20). 
 
 * See the end of Abbo's cap. 15. 
 
 ^ This must be a summary reference to Herman's story of Leofstan, the wicked 
 sheriff (Hermannus de Miractdis S. Eadmundi cap. 2, in Arnold, i pp. 30-31) ; but 
 the docket hardly seems to cover the document. 
 
 •■' This is the famous story of King Sweyn, which see at large in Herman, capp. 3-8, 
 pp. 32-39 ; and in Samson's Book of Miracles cap. 4 (in Arnold, i pp. 114-I19). 
 
 "^ This seems to be explained by Herman, cap. 11 pp. 40-41. 
 
 * The story, told darkly in the passage referred to in the note immediately 
 preceding, is given clearly by Samson, pp. 120- 121.
 
 AN OLD NOTE-BOOK 405 
 
 It will be seen that, considered as versification, this composition 
 cannot rank high ; but it has the merit of being (what so many- 
 pieces of this kind are not) at least intelligible from the beginning 
 to the end. It is however to be remembered that a sequence is to 
 be taken as a whole, words and song together. The sequence was 
 not intended for a band of choice warblers, or for a select company 
 called a schola, that was to perform whilst the dumb dogs admired, 
 or were bored. It was for popular singing ; and indeed, to hear a 
 sequence sung, even indifferently, is, such is the swing of it, such the 
 entrain, in itself an invitation to all and sundry to 'join in'. There 
 must be readers who can remember, on a feaiit day spent in some 
 out-of-the-way French village, anywhere from Normandy to Dauphiny, 
 hearing the whole congregation — man, woman, and child— sing out, 
 lustily and from the heart, a long sequence, without hesitation, doubt, 
 or fear, or the betrayal of the least symptom that they were using 
 a language foreign, unfamiliar, dead. And this essentially popular 
 character of the sequence explains how, as in the sequence given 
 above, as many facts as possible are crowded — nay, crushed — into 
 comparatively few lines. A sequence constructed thus, in honour 
 of some local saint, just touches on, or indicates by a word or two, 
 a whole narrative ; for instance, in that given above, ' rex punitur ' or 
 ' domus ardet '. And repeated as it was year after year, sung from 
 childhood to old age, the words were imprinted on the mind as part 
 of the song; and the sequence became a sort of memoria technica 
 that kept alive the memory of past graces, miracles, just as the 
 succession of kings and the battles and the dates and the rest of 
 it were stored away in the schoolboy's mind as late as sixty or 
 even fifty years ago by the gibberish lines that went under that 
 fine Latin name. The sequence sung on the feast of the local saint 
 thus corresponded in a way to the painted glass that told his 
 story to the eye on the walls of the church. By means of both, the 
 narratives of the deeds of the saints were kept alive from genera- 
 tion to generation, told by mother to child, or detailed by the 
 grandsire to grandchildren at the family hearth. We can get some 
 idea of this from the pilgrimage books printed in France (and else- 
 where, doubtless) in the seventeenth century, a sort of sacred Biblio- 
 th^que bleue, which are now ' rarissimes ', ' introuvables ', so that the 
 little scrubby ill-printed leaflets (for they are little more) sell for more 
 than their weight in gold. 
 
 It is very true that when the lines and ' verses ' of these sequences 
 are regarded in themselves, many are a mere jingling doggerel. I 
 have always found it difficult to understand how people can become 
 enthusiastic over sequences — often insufferable, as regards both form
 
 4o6 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 and sense — that come from the Middle Ages, and then freeze at once 
 into the coolness of critical depreciation over similar compositions, 
 but of a higher order of merit, to be found in modern French office 
 books. Whether sequences, however, be new or old, their disap- 
 pearance in recent times is much to be regretted from the point of 
 view of the interests of religion, and the hold of religion on the 
 people, in a country for instance like France, where their use was 
 traditional. The void is not made good by the ' cantiques ' of the 
 ' mois de Marie'. They corresponded, in a sense, to the chorales, 
 the singing of which in German churches by the great body of the 
 congregation, and especially by the men, is so solemn and almost 
 overpowering ; in either country the character of the people was 
 distinguished by the character of the song prevailing in each. If 
 the German hymn is solemn and impressive, the French sequence 
 had a freshness, a vigour, a brightness and a directness that we can 
 hardly well forgo in these days ; it was inspiring and inspiriting too. 
 
 I cannot resist the temptation of copying here another piece of 
 just the same character as the sequence for the feast of the Translation 
 of St Edmund, shewing how these compositions, which the people in 
 those ignorant ages knew by heart, served to keep alive local tradi- 
 tions, and gave to faith something of the sense of patriotism. I copied 
 out the document some five or six-and-twenty years ago, and can 
 only hope that it may still have the merit of being (what is so highly 
 appreciated in some quarters) ' inedited '. It comes from the Harleian 
 MS 863, a most interesting Exeter psalter of Bishop Leofric's time 
 (1046-1072). The calendar, which was edited by Hampson, dates 
 from a century later ; an obit in it relating to the great lawyer 
 Bracton set (as I remember) the late Sir Travers Twiss on a line of 
 enquiry developed at large in one of the prefaces of his edition of 
 Bracton's book. The litany in this manuscript is highly interesting, 
 though some of its best interest lies far over the sea. For this Exeter 
 litany — to this day the record of a grateful and affectionate heart — is 
 the earliest attestation of the liturgical cult of Pope St Leo IX and 
 St Bardo, archbishop of Mainz, both of whom Leofric must have 
 known in his younger days, and from whom he doubtless experienced 
 acts of kindness that explain his singular veneration for their memory. 
 So long ago as i88a, on my communication, Pastor Falk, the Mainz 
 antiquary, called attention to these features of the litany in the For- 
 schungen zur deuischen Geschichte (xxii p. 438) ^ ; but its interest is by 
 
 ' [Unfortunately, in printing these suffrages of our Exeter Litany, Pastor Falk, for 
 some reason improving on the information supplied to him, attributed the litany to 
 Xht twelfth century, thus practically nullifying its interest as witness or proof of cult 
 of Leo and Bardo.]
 
 AN OLD NOTE-BOOK 407 
 
 no means exhausted with these particular invocations, which in them- 
 selves are conclusive evidence that the manuscript must have been 
 drawn up under the personal supervision of Leofric himself. That 
 St Leo IX was intended, he left no room to doubt. For not merely 
 is the Great St Leo invoked long before, but the numeral 'IX' is 
 written by the original hand. It is worth while to observe that it 
 is just at this period that the successional number of the Popes is 
 introduced in their leaden bullae.' 
 
 Here is the hymn, or sequence, or whatever it may be called, con- 
 tained in the Exeter manuscript. It was sung at the procession on 
 the feast of relics : 
 
 In festo reliquiarum Exoniensis ecclesiae ad processionem. 
 
 Salve festa dies toto venerab'ilis aevo. 
 
 Qua datur in Sanctis gloria digna Deo. 
 Sunt decus ecclesie, mundi decor et robur urbis 
 
 Huius, quos hodie grex canit iste Petri. 
 Gaudeat Exonia tot sanctos concelebrando, 
 
 Per quos est votis sepe potita suis. 
 Hiis favet ipse Deus ; horum meritis et amore 
 
 Sepe nociva fugat, dat bona, mira patrat. 
 Labitur e turri quidam nee leditur. Alter 
 
 Hue manibus repens hinc pede sanus abit. 
 Et puer et mulier contracti restituuntur. 
 
 Hue dum muta venit, fit veniendo loquens. 
 Quedam surda" simul et muta sopore soluta 
 
 Hie meruit duplam vocis et auris opem. 
 Debilis et mutus a sancto Glastoniense 
 
 lussus ut hie vigilet, paret, ovansque redit. 
 Plaudit leta manu mulier prius arida nerves 
 
 Libera curvato cum fit ab ungue vola.* 
 Lumen aqua putei baculo mediante recepit 
 
 Cecus, ut in Syloe, sic operante Deo. 
 Innumeris aliis hos Christus mirificavit 
 
 Signis, que nequeunt sub brevitate cani. 
 In Domino Sanctis, sit in ipsis gloria Christo, 
 
 Nobis qui det eos semper adesse pios. 
 
 These verses are written in a hand of the fourteenth century. No 
 detailed record of the events here enumerated has, so far as is known, 
 been preserved. The lessons for the feast in the Legendarium of 
 bishop Grandison give only generalities. There is no mention in his 
 Ordinate of this Sahe festa dies ; but that may be because the 
 
 ^ [See now for all this The Bosworth Psalter pp. 162-163.] 
 « So MS.
 
 4o8 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Ordinate notices, on this feast, the strictly liturgical services in the 
 church only. Or it may not impossibly be that, after the way of 
 reforming people, Grandison made a clean sweep of many popular 
 observances, and the entry of these verses in the old psalter, now no 
 longer used for saying office, is an attempt by some lover of old times and 
 old ways to transmit to future ages a record of what was put aside as 
 not ' up to date '. Oddly enough, however, there does exist a docu- 
 ment relating to our Exeter miracles which has been in print for 
 some three centuries or so, though I do not remember to have seen 
 attention called to it. It enables us to make at least some conjecture 
 as to the date when the verses may have been written. What is more, 
 it gives assurance that at one time a ' history ' of the miracles was 
 written, and that by no less distinguished a person than Hildebert, 
 bishop of Le Mans (1097-1125), afterwards archbishop of Tours 
 (1125-1134), the friend of Henry I, St Anselm, 'Queen Mold', 
 archbishop Thurstan of York, and indeed of all the great personages 
 of the day. It is not quite clear what was the nature of this 
 ' history ' — whether merely a set of lessons for the feast, or a rhyming 
 office, a fashion much affected in later times, but already in vogue for 
 nearly a century before Hildebert in his own region, as appears by the 
 office of St Eutropius over which the Saintonge and neighbouring 
 antiquaries have of late years had so great a tussle. 
 
 Here is the best part of the document in question, a letter of 
 Hildebert to a friend who was canon of Exeter (lib. iii ep. 3) : 
 
 To my dearly beloved and venerated brother Clarembaldus, canon of the 
 Church of Exeter, Hildebert, bishop of Le Mans, greeting most warm in our 
 Lord. 
 
 I fear me, I fear me, brother most dear, that you will reproach me with 
 neglectfulness in having so long deferred satisfying you, after you have so 
 often asked me if I would not mind drawing out {adnotare non taederet) the 
 miracles which our Lord has deigned to work in the Church of Exeter, in 
 accordance with the authentic account sent to me. Wherefore you will accuse 
 me of not having written gratis a work desired of me, since it has had to be 
 obtained at the cost of such long waiting and of requests innumerable. . . . 
 In fact, however, from the time I learnt your wish, I determined at once to 
 comply with it ; but the accidental loss of the manuscript hampered the will 
 of the composer. After I had been without it for a considerable time, when 
 found and returned to me it stirred up that inclination for the work which had 
 cooled. I had just finished, when in came a messenger and handed to me 
 a paper in your name containing, he said, just what I had read in the first 
 copy ; he added that the second was sent to me lest I should excuse my 
 silence by the loss of the first. After I had taken the paper and read it more 
 than once, the spirit of the reader was moved ; for in it indeed were contained 
 certain miracles as in the first, but related in a different manner. However,
 
 AN OLD NOTE-BOOK 409 
 
 the differences which I noticed, I did not conceive to be contradictions. 
 Accordingly I determined to add nothing, to take away nothing, to change 
 nothing in what I had already done in accordance with the first copy. For 
 a varying report of the same event does not prejudice the truth of the story.' 
 I have therefore reserved to your judgement, my brother, to correct the work, 
 or to suppress it altogether if it be wrong. You will do the part of a friend 
 to remove from the eye what you know the tongue will be shy of.' 
 
 Then some final salutations, in which the writer takes the liberty 
 of punning— but punning handsomely— on the name of his friend: 
 * Clarembalde, immo Clare-valde '. 
 
 Beaugendre,Hildebert's editor, suggests that this letter was ' written 
 perhaps about the year 1102, that is after Hildebert's return from his 
 second journey to England ' ; it would be safer to be content with the 
 statement that it was certainly written before 11 25, the date of his 
 translation to Tours. I do not find in printed Exeter documents the 
 name of Clarembaldus ; he may perhaps be mentioned in the margin 
 of the old eleventh-century Martyrology, still at Exeter, which has 
 many twelfth-century obits that, in whole or in part, were long ago 
 copied by Henry Wharton. But it is evident, in any case, that this 
 canon of Exeter must have been a person of merit and repute in his day. 
 No less evident is it that, whatever the nature of the piece written by 
 Hildebert, it could not have been the verses printed above, as will appear 
 to any one who will give even a few minutes' attention to his ' poetical 
 works '. Indeed the late M. Haureau, than whom there could be no 
 more competent judge, considers Hildebert to be the first Latin poet 
 of the twelfth century, which is no mean praise. Our verses, however, 
 are indeed homely, and sound altogether as if they were of home 
 manufacture; but no one will be found to take exception to the 
 statement that the events they record were those which Clarembaldus 
 asked the bishop of Le Mans to eternalize by his highly admired pen. 
 Please note the action of the ' sanctus Glastoniensis '. Who was that ? 
 St Dunstan (his relics, that is) ? But after all the severe things that 
 bishop Stubbs has said of the ' Glastonbury Saints ', and Mr Plummer 
 after him in full hue and cry, the only safe thing to do is to assume 
 that there were no Glastonbury saints at all. As a private notion, 
 I am inclined to think both these writers are a little too peremptory. 
 But it is worth noting that here we have one of the Glastonbury band 
 releasing himself from the importunities of the petitioner by pointing 
 
 ' It is evident that the venerable Hildebert could teach the modern historical 
 critic a few lessons. But in the course of a varied and busy life Hildebert has 
 learnt much which the mere scholar cannot be expected to know. 
 
 - ' Si removeas ab oculis quidquid linguas noveris formidare. This shews clearly 
 that, whatever it be that Hildebert prepared,, it was destined to be read or sung 
 publicly.
 
 4IO LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 to hope of effectual succour further on along the road. This may be 
 taken as giving some countenance to the modern impeachment of 
 their quality. 
 
 But it is time to close. * Tempus nam prope est, iamque sol dupli- 
 cat umbras, et obtenebrescit dies, deficit hora.' And, as yet, only one 
 manuscript from the ' Note-book ' noticed ! One thing has such a 
 way of suggesting another in this world that there seems no making 
 headway out of the tangle. As it is, I must have already incurred the 
 reproach which was addressed with emphasis (according to the testi- 
 mony of an old story book that only seems to come out fresher and 
 younger for all the stories that have been told since) by a staid young 
 person of some six years of age to an elder, and it will be taken as 
 proved that the writer of this paper ' is a tatter-hox '.
 
 XXII 
 
 HOW A CATHEDRAL WAS BUILT IN THE 
 FOURTEENTH CENTURY ^ 
 
 Only two or three years ago the city of Florence held high festival 
 at the unveiling of the new fa9ade of its Duomo, our Lady of the Lily. 
 This great work was a pure product of local patriotism. Some thirty 
 or five-and-thirty years ago pamphlets and proposals were the order 
 of the day ; there were no great public funds to be drawn upon ; t^ere 
 were no millionaires, no great landowners, or greater coalowners and 
 such-like giants to appeal to ; the days of the Florentine bankers and 
 Florentine merchants were over long ago. But the people of Florence 
 set to work as best they could with the talent available within their 
 own walls, and by dint of patience and determination and making the 
 most of what was to be had, the undertaking, compared to which 
 the restoration of the fronts of our English cathedrals is rather like 
 child's play, was completed, and the ticklish operation of setting 
 a fair face to a masterpiece was done in such a way that the critics 
 were fain to be silent. But local patriotism, if it be a living thing, 
 means local rivalry. And Milan would cut a poor figure if it did no 
 more than look askance at the efforts of Florence to remedy a defect 
 which each on its own account had long contemplated with little 
 self-satisfaction. As yet, hand has not been actually put to the 
 business of replacing the condemned front of the great Lombard 
 cathedral ; though all have heard of the competition of architects. 
 The Milanese however have not contented themselves with plans 
 merely. Already in 1871 a spirited citizen, although he was not able 
 to lay down money enough to carry out such a colossal undertaking, 
 did what was within his power, and secured, as far as funds were 
 concerned, that at least these should not be wanting some day. 
 Count Giuseppe Resta accordingly assigned to the Committee of 
 Administration of the Venerable Fabric a sum of 50,000 lire, to 
 accumulate at compound interest until it should reach the amount of 
 six millions, then to be applied to the work. Nine years later one 
 Vincenzo Burocco left absolutely 1,000 lire {£40) for the same object. 
 
 * From the Downside Review^ July 1899.
 
 412 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 The restiveness of impatience shewed itself in the next legacy, whereby 
 Aristide De Togni left to the fabric his entire property on the 
 condition that the whole of it be spent within the next twenty years 
 on rebuilding the fa9ade. After this urgency no wonder that the 
 administration took active measures ; especially as the Government 
 was meditating what would be equivalent to a confiscation of their 
 patrimony. 
 
 Have more donations of the same kind poured in, in the wake of 
 that modest one of Vincenzo Burocco? Let no one despise such 
 evidence of what may seem, in view of the magnitude of the work to 
 be accomplished, an expression of impotent good will. For it was by 
 the Buroccos of the past, men who meant to do a work, who never 
 allowed themselves to be dismayed by the disproportion to mere 
 human eyes of the means to the end, who never allowed the sense of 
 poverty and powerlessness on the one hand, and on the other the 
 vastness of a design for God's honour and glory, to smother aspira- 
 tions which they held to be, in themselves, good and just, meet and 
 right. How many of those who gaze with wonder and admiration on 
 the glorious pile that rises to-day in pure and resplendent glory from 
 the Lombard plain, have thought of, have realized, its beginnings; 
 how it is a living, nay almost a divine, witness to the unquenchable 
 faith of so many humble souls ' whose names God knows ', for they 
 are written in the book of life. Yet there is still a record of them, or 
 of some of them, even here and now ; a record all the more significant 
 because it is entirely after the fashion of this world, a record too which 
 reveals what was the thorough good sense and practical spirit of these 
 Milanese people, commonplace enough doubtless to look at, yet with 
 hearts and souls big enough to conceive, plan, carry out a cathedral of 
 Milan. The account books of the building and all connected with 
 it and its adornment are preserved, with the minutes of their proceed- 
 ings, by the Committee of Administration, in their archives, in a 
 complete and unbroken series from the year 1387 to the present day. 
 And this Committee has had the happy idea, when publishing in nine 
 tall quartos the 'Annals of the Fabric' from the records of their 
 meetings, of giving also a full print of the accounts of the first five 
 years (i 387-1391). From this authentic source it is possible to gain 
 a full and lively idea of all that was done and discussed, even to the 
 minutest detail ; and so realize how a cathedral was built in the 
 fourteenth century. 
 
 The statement has often been made with more or less confidence 
 that the origin of the Duomo of Milan is due to the initiative and 
 munificence of Gian Galeazzo Visconti, Conte di Virtu, afterwards 
 (^395) Duke of Milan, the founder of the marvellous Certosa of Pavia.
 
 MILAN CATHEDRAL 413 
 
 The question is dealt with at length by the venerable historian Cesare 
 Cantu in the preface to the first volume of the Anttali, and he shews 
 that the original documents now published leave no reasonable or 
 indeed possible doubt as to the answer to be given, viz. that this is not 
 the case, but that the edifice is due to the initiative, public spirit, 
 self-sacrifice, and devotion of the population itself. 
 
 In the spring of 1386 the archbishop had issued a circular pointing 
 out how the existing cathedral was in a state of ruin and decay, and 
 encouraging his people to undertake the rebuilding of it — a work, as 
 he expresses it, plurimum siimpUiosuni. In October the Conte di Virtu 
 gave his consent to a collection by the clergy throughout the county 
 of Milan ; priests, each one with his servant, were to go from place to 
 place, and after celebrating mass in the morning, were to preach to the 
 people and induce the local clergy and civil authorities to make 
 a house-to-house collection. How far this was done does not appear, 
 but the accounts shew that the sum collected during 1386 and carried 
 to the credit of 1387 amounted to no more than L^t^^ ^^^- ^^-^ Until 
 about July of the latter year the city itself was content with the 
 produce of collecting boxes put up in the churches and elsewhere, as 
 in the market-place and on the site; special collections were made 
 also in the churches by bag [bursora portata), not plates. Early in 
 March some enterprising inhabitant of the Porta Nuova (at Milan the 
 name for the six quarters or divisions of the city was ' gate ') took it 
 into his head to carry round a bag and make a collection in his own 
 quarter, and on the 9th he paid in seven shillings and six pence. 
 The idea was taken up immediately by the Pavia Gate, where a 
 collection on the 23rd produced nearly seven shillings ; a second 
 application in the same quarter a week later produced just six pence. 
 And there, as if the pioneers were discouraged, the matter rested, for 
 nothing more is said of any such effort in April, May, and June. But 
 there was evidently some one who saw the possibilities that lay in 
 these timid attempts ; and by July a system on the same lines was 
 fully organized by those who had taken upon themselves to lead the 
 whole movement. It was arranged that a body of volunteers should 
 undertake Sunday by Sunday to go through each quarter of the city 
 in succession ; rich and poor flocked forward to the service, as the 
 presidents of the ' work ' declared in the following month in a letter to 
 the Conte di Virtu ; and the response on the part of the givers was, 
 they say, ' liberal and copious '. The accounts themselves give precise 
 
 * It would be dangerous for any one but an expert, and it seems commonly 
 dangerous even for experts, to attempt an approximation of the present value or 
 purchasing power of money of that date. It may be enough to say that the lira of 
 that time consisted of twenty soldi or shillings, and each shilling of twelve pence, 
 and on the whole must find a rough equivalent in our sterling coinage.
 
 414 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 information. The experiment was first tried on Sunday, 7th July, in 
 the quarter of the East Gate, the result being a collection of ^86 9^. ; 
 next Sunday the Porta Romana contributed £']o^ \6s. id.; the Pavia 
 Gate, on the 21st, ;^i53 8j, iid.\ the Vercelli Gate, on the 28th, 
 ^73 3"^- 5 ^^^ Como Gate, on 4th August, ;^i76 \is.\ and on nth 
 August, the Porta Nuova, £i']4 14-$". 10^. In fact these collections 
 had already proved themselves the main source of revenue. Mean- 
 time, as the patronal feast, the Assumption, was approaching, a letter 
 was sent by the presidents (their names do not appear) to the Conte 
 di Virtu, stating in general terms what had been already done, and 
 asking him to associate himself with the efforts of the citizens by 
 sending to Milan a contribution in aid of the special offerings to be 
 made in the old cathedral on the feast : — ' That you and the illus- 
 trious Ladies, your lady mother and the wife and the daughter of 
 your Lordship, would deign to send hither by such persons as you 
 think proper, your devout offerings in aid of the building fund, and 
 recommend your officials and the persons attached to your court to 
 join also in the good work ; for soldiers, and lawyers, and doctors, in 
 a word the nobles of your said city of Milan, will be all ready to offer 
 along with them, to the intent that the Almighty, who rewards 
 a hundredfold those who give for his sake, may preserve and happily 
 increase your good estate. Notifying also to your Highness that if 
 your pious and devout oblations are thus forthcoming, an arcading^ of 
 the aforesaid church can in a very short time be finished, and a marble 
 tomb, in which it has been already determined that the bones of the 
 Magnificent Lord, your father, of good and happy memory, should 
 rest, can be placed honourably under it.' This application to the 
 Count, including the lady mother, wife and daughter, even in view 
 of the bait thus held out, produced a response to the amount of 
 100 florins of gold or ;i^i6o, which brought up the collections of the day 
 to .£^311,'^ no great instance of liberality on the part of the Mag- 
 nificent Lord, when compared with the weekly contributions, noticed 
 above, of the various ' Gates ', or with the 6ffering of £2()() 4^. 3^. 
 made by the clergy of Milan on the i8th. 
 
 The works already in progress in a more or less languid fashion 
 were started with new vigour a few days before the Assumption. On 
 Saturday the loth of August the books were all made up and ruled 
 off. On Monday the 12th, a fresh beginning was made with pay- 
 ments 'to 84 navvies, £i'^ 13^. 6d.' and to four stonemasons, six 
 
 ^ Trahufta, not in Du Cange ; the glossary in the Annali has tribuna ; it can 
 hardly be a bay ? 
 
 ' Happily the accounts themselves give precise information as to the value at 
 this time in Milan of the florin of gold, viz. 32 soldi. Accordingly the sum of the 
 day's offerings was made up of ;^i6o given by the Count, and /151 by the people.
 
 MILAN CATHEDRAL 415 
 
 hewers, one master blacksmith whose business it was to sharpen the 
 tools {ad aguzandum fcrra), besides Mollus de Bussero with a cart 
 and two oxen ; and finally a horse and an ass are engaged in the 
 service, which appear later in the accounts as ' the ' horse and ' the ' 
 ass of the Fabric. Moreover there was not wanting that which might 
 give to all concerned great heart at the beginning of the great work, 
 as is betrayed by the payment of 5J. 3^/. to the carrier who brought 
 five brentas ^ of wine, a gift doubtless.- But this is not the place to 
 touch on the items of expenditure, which raise and settle a number 
 of questions of wide social interest. It is enough for the present to 
 touch on the means whereby the sinews of war were provided, and 
 to see how, generally, the managers set to work to attack the great 
 undertaking. 
 
 The collection on the Assumption made a noise in the city in 
 a very literal sense, if we may credit the entry in the accounts on the 
 19th, when payment is made to the trumpeters and fifers who 
 attended on the fathers of the city as they made their way in state to 
 the cathedral on that day. The oblation of the clergy on the 1 8th 
 was a more solemn affair. A formal letter was addressed to the abbat 
 of the great Cistercian monastery of Chiaravalle, inviting him to 
 attend, and on the preceding day a horse was sent to Corbeta on 
 which the archbishop might ride into the city — a rather primitive or 
 precise sort of attention ; even the fodder for the beast is noted in the 
 accounts. The work now proceeded regularly from day to day ; 
 every item, every step of progress can still be followed in the two big 
 books bound with leather thongs, bought on the 23rd of August — one 
 for receipts to be kept by the treasurer, one for payments to be kept 
 by the accountant. During the early part of September the presidents 
 carried a great point in obtaining from the archbishop letters recom- 
 mending the work to his diocesans ; they themselves drew out the 
 draft on the 7th ; by the 13th it had been sent to him. His approval 
 was soon obtained, and on the 30th notaries were busy making out 
 copies and issuing them throughout the diocese. 
 
 Matters had now so far proceeded that on the i6th of October a 
 meeting was held of the chief promoters — twelve nobles, nine canons 
 of the cathedral, the syndic, with sixteen citizens, and three lawyers, 
 
 ^ Brenta is a long wooden keg, somewhat curved on one side, fitting on the 
 back and used for carrying wine. 
 
 ■ As, for instance, on the following day, ' Portatura 2 brentarum vini donati 
 fabricae'; on the 14th, 'Pro portatura 6 brentarum vini donati per Georgium 
 Moresinum'. Similar entries continually occur. On the 5th of September there 
 is a gift of a brenta and a half from the nuns of St Radegund's convent close to the 
 site. The successors of these ladies less than thirty years later had a great struggle 
 to maintain their position in face of the continually growing need for more room 
 required for the cathedral ; at last they had to give way and migrate.
 
 4i6 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 as representing respectively the nobility, the clergy, the connmons, and 
 good counsel, to draw up, or rather give effect to, a general order or 
 code of bye-laws. Besides the appointment of a general treasurer, 
 accountant, paymaster, and an inzignerius (a combination of architect 
 and superintendent of the works, with subordinate inzignerii, or clerks 
 of the works under him) it was decided that a hundred ' deputies ' 
 should be elected among the citizens, men ' legal and sufficient ', of 
 substance and capacity. It should be their business in turn to oversee 
 the work and the officials — in other words, as interested parties to see 
 that there was a due return for money expended, and that nothing 
 was scamped, and generally to look after the interests of the fabric. 
 These hundred were divided into five-and-twenty sgnadrae, or bands, 
 of four each, one of the four always to be a canon of the cathedral. 
 Each squadra was to be in office a week, and during their week to 
 consult on, and look after, all the work done on the fabric ; to examine 
 the quality of the materials used, stones hewn and rough, lime, sand, 
 and so forth ; to be present (or some of them) at the listing of the 
 labourers and other persons employed when they came to work every 
 morning, which list when signed was to be the roll-call of the day, and 
 on it payments were made every evening ; to be present at the high 
 altar every day at the time of the offering, and to take account and 
 charge of what was offered in money and kind ; to oversee all receipts 
 and payments, and to see that exact record was kept thereof in 
 writing, for which they could be called to account should anything be 
 found to go wrong. Their office was gratuitous, but it was no sinecure. 
 The squadra of the week was responsible also for making due arrange- 
 ments for the week following ; and, to secure continuity of action, one 
 of the deputies of the outgoing squadra was to remain on the board 
 with the incoming squadra for their better information. So that in 
 practice there was always an acting committee of five. On the first 
 Sunday of every month the whole body of deputati was to meet along 
 with the Syndic of the city and two provisors — or, as we should say, 
 the mayor and two aldermen — for discussion of the concerns of the 
 fabric, and to settle the squadrae of the coming month. As an 
 instance of their caution, it may be mentioned that no less than six 
 lawyers were appointed as standing counsel ; and from the silence of 
 the accounts it may be gathered that they too rendered their services 
 gratuitously. Though it might not be without instruction, it would 
 be tedious to pursue the provisions whereby the duties of every one 
 connected with the work, either volunteers or employed on wages, are 
 laid down with a minuteness which shews that every detail had been 
 weighed and carefully considered beforehand. And so at last ' in the 
 name of Jesus Christ and His Immaculate Mother ' order was taken
 
 MILAN CATHEDRAL 417 
 
 for the continuous progress of ' the fabric of major Church of Milan, 
 which, by grace of God, and by the intercession of the same glorious 
 Virgin (under whose patronage long ago it was begun), now through 
 an inspiration all divine and by His merciful favour is in course of 
 building, and through the same Divine grace will one day be happily 
 completed '. 
 
 And all this time what was the attitude, what were the thoughts 
 and doings of the bulk of the population, the hard-working poor, the 
 young, the devout, the artisan, the busy shopkeeper, the frivolous 
 and fashionable, the leisured, the nobles? Did they content them- 
 selves with responding to the weekly collections, or dropping a coin 
 now and then into the church box, and otherwise remain absorbed 
 each in his own affairs, leaving the rest to the select deputies, and the 
 voluntary collectors, and the Divine favour ? The accountant of the 
 fabric, in the combined aridity and detail of his pages, gives a con- 
 clusive answer with an eloquence all his own. Hitherto gifts in kind 
 had been few and occasional ; in January and February a packhorse 
 and an ambler, which realized £^ \q>s. and £x a^s. respectively;^ in 
 June a bale of cloth, sold for ;^49 ^s. 2d. With the month of August 
 such items of receipt begin to multiply. First the produce of ' old 
 tiles sold ' appears every two or three days ; these may have come 
 from the old building, or more probably from houses being pulled 
 down for the enlargement of the site. On 2cth August ' for one pair 
 of tallies with five pegs ^ sold ', £^ was received ; then come one or 
 two small offerings or legacies ' to pay the navvies'. On 31st August 
 comes ' from a certain lady, a widow, who would not be named, 
 £24.1 lis.' ; on 1st September, offered by Alberto Porcallo, scribe, and 
 his apprentices learning the art, £'^6 4^-. ; on the 2nd, from a certain 
 woman for paying one navvy, y. \ on the loth, from a certain woman 
 who would not be named, ;^40 Sj. On the 14th, Francischina, wife of 
 Giacomolo della Porta, a number of amber beads ; next day, Marcolo 
 Carello, merchant of Milan, gives a piece of friar's-grey cloth {pctia 
 una drapi beretini frateschi), sold for £^4 i%s. On the 17th Septem- 
 ber the armourers of the city, thinking that every man with brawny 
 arms could at all events dig, came in a body ' to labour for nothing ', 
 and they made an offering of £$ 3^. 4^. besides. The ball once set 
 rolling, it went on apace. On the 20th is this item : — ' Offered by the 
 drapers, who came to labour gratis, ^42 is. 5^/. ' ; on the 23rd, ' offered 
 by our neighbours of the East Gate, who came to labour gratis, 
 
 ^ Probably these specimens of horseflesh were of the same race as the venerable 
 Apocalypse, once well known to dwellers in Downside. 
 
 - Pro pario uno talliarum cum rnzellis j. The skilled may find a better 
 version ; nor does the writer pretend to anything more than a desperate venture in 
 the text. 
 
 1868 E e
 
 41 8 LITURGICA HISTORIC A 
 
 ;{J^io i6s. 6d.' ; the same day, 'offered by the (twelve) servants (of the 
 commune) of Milan, who came in the intention to labour gratis but it 
 rained, so that they could not do so, ^14 p. ^d.' And thus they 
 come trooping on at each other's heels ' to labour for nothing ' but 
 God's honour and glory, and to pay for the privilege of labouring so 
 besides. On the 25th the skinners ; on the 26th, ' our neighbours ' of 
 St Michael's at the Sluice, of Great Lawrence's and of the Pavia Gate ; 
 on the 29th, ' all the braiders ^ of Milan, except Giorgio Coiro ', 
 evidently a curmudgeon whom the accountant at least did his best to 
 stigmatize to all posterity. On the 2nd of October come the shoe- 
 makers ; on the 3rd the embroiderers {magistri a rama), with * our 
 neighbours ' of S. Carpoforo and S. Eufemia ; on the 7th, the neigh- 
 bours of the East Gate, on the 8th those of the Roman Gate ; on the 9th 
 the grocers and the mercers {marzagoi'i) ; ^ on the loth the neighbours 
 of S. Simpliciano, along with the scholars of the school of St Catherine 
 of that parish, and these in the course of their digging came across old 
 coins which realized £6 13^. But to pass over the 'neighbours' from 
 this or that parish or quarter, the drapers and carders came on the 
 nth; \\\& fustanerii (workers in coarse cloths) on the 15th; the 
 butchers on the i6th; the bakers and millers on the 17th; the smiths 
 (i. e. goldsmiths and silversmiths and other artistic workers) and the 
 saddlers on the i8th ; and on the 23rd, by a great effort, as if not to be 
 beaten by anybody, the inhabitants of the Vercelli Gate, on coming to 
 labour for nothing, made an offering of ;^63a 11 shillings and one penny. 
 On the 29th came the blacksmiths, as heralding, on the next day, 
 a distinguished company — the notaries of Milan ; the Podesta, the 
 municipal officers, and his whole court ; the college of advocates ; the 
 procurators and notaries of the archiepiscopal and civil courts. Let us 
 try to fancy for a moment the Mayor (or Lord Mayor, as it is now) 
 and Corporation going out for an afternoon's digging on the Man- 
 chester Ship Canal ; but it is easier to imagine this than to imagine 
 them helping to dig out the foundations of a new cathedral. On the 
 6th came the Humiliati monks and the labourers on their estates ; and 
 on the 7th ' the noble and notable ' of the youth of Milan. These, one 
 and all, came to 'work for nothing', and to make an offering besides. 
 Nor is the mode of the offering without its significance. On the site 
 of the works was a collecting-box, into which contributions liberally 
 flowed ; this was from loungers, or passers-by who lingered for a 
 moment to see how ' the work ' progressed. But it was not here 
 
 ^ Frixarii, passementiers ; for which special commerce we seem to have in 
 English no equivalent. 
 
 ' The amount of the respective offerings is curious — of the grocers, ^57 5J. ^d. ; 
 of the mercers, £.^ 3^. dd.
 
 MILAN CATHEDRAL 4^9 
 
 that the volunteer workers gave their money ; but they came into 
 the church, up to the high altar, and on the altar itself the offerings 
 were laid. 
 
 To turn from the record of these joint gifts to such as were more 
 personal and individual. ' Offering made by a man who would not 
 give his name, or any account of himself, but he said that it was 
 the gift of a person who had come to true penitence, 2,000 florins of 
 gold, which makes ;^3,200.' Nor is this the only appearance of a 
 penitent in these pages ; more than once with a pledge of sorrow came 
 a Magdalen, it may be believed, though the accountant does not 
 designate the offerer so. Entries like the following will give an idea 
 of the way in which the whole population of the city united in one 
 intent: — 'By the young men of the East Gate, £^i 5^-. 2d.'; 'by 
 Francischino Carcano, for the soul of Sempliciano Limiate, who 
 formerly resided with him ' ; ' by Damiano Pessina and his wife, their 
 workpeople and household ' ; ' offered on the high altar by a certain 
 illustrious and exalted lady who would not be named ' ; ' from a col- 
 lecting bag carried about by Guglielmo di Alessandria ' ; ' from a 
 grocer as the price of a piece of marble sold to him, on his proposal 
 that he would have certain figures of saints carved on it, and afterwards 
 that he would give it back again to the said church ' ; ' from the 
 masters and scholars of the Grammar School ' ; ' from the pupils of 
 the school of St Babilas ' ; ' by all the bands of the flagellants of 
 Milan' (only ;^i2 gs. 3^.); 'by the noble citizens of Milan when 
 dressed in white they went out to meet the lady duchess, daughter of 
 the illustrious prince and our excellent Lord, the Conte di Virtu, on 
 the occasion of her marriage'. In the summer of 1389 the young 
 girls of nearly every parish in Milan, each rivalling with the other, 
 offered the proceeds of a cantegola (a concert ?) in aid of the funds. It 
 was from the women that the offerings in kind mostly came, the 
 sacrifice of some personal vanity generally. But not always so, as 
 witness the following entry on 4th November, 1387: 'by Manuel 
 Zufoneri, the price of a cloak offered yesterday at the high altar of the 
 said church by Cathellina of Abiate, which cloak the said Manuel 
 thus redeemed and gave back to the said Cathellina, for she was so 
 miserably poor and was in great need of it ' {quae ipsa valdc indigebat). 
 The following are entries of payments two or three years later : ' to 
 Catherina of Abiate, serving the fabric without any salary, given in 
 view of her poverty, that she may have wherewith to sustain life ' ; ' to 
 Catherina of Abiate who carries the pannier of the fabric, for her 
 journey to Rome, to meet expenses on the road, in consideration of 
 what has been done by her in seiving the fabric '. This last was 
 in the Jubilee year of 1390. If the accountant's words as they stand 
 
 E e 2
 
 420 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 do not tell all the story of the poor Cathellina it would be useless to 
 say more. 
 
 We have still to pass for a moment to the Broletto Nuovo on a day 
 of the weekly or fortnightly sale of miscellaneous goods and items 
 ' offered ' on the altar, like the cloak of Cathellina. The Broletto of 
 Milan was the centre of the civic, administrative, and commercial life 
 of the town — Guildhall, Mansion House, Law Courts, Exchange, 
 Market, all gathered in one — a sort of town within a town, summed up 
 in the word business. Here the odds and ends that had accumulated 
 on the hands of the custodians of the fabric were disposed of by 
 public auction. It was a rather formal affair, at least on the side 
 of the sellers, for the sale was conducted in the presence of the acting 
 squadra of deputies of the fabric, sitting with two aldermen of the 
 city. The things are put up without any order : a lady's houppelande 
 and hood {ppellanda a domina) of dark violet cloth braided around the 
 neck and sleeves ; a man's loose cloak drapi misgii ; two silver pins 
 with a pearl at the head ; a knife-case with four knives, the handles of 
 ivory, old, and mended blades ; ^ three daggers ; four helmets ; three 
 pairs of gauntlets ; a checked banker ; a copper mortar ; two head 
 mufflers ; a string of amber beads ; a little cross of copper gilt ; 
 a lady's cote-hardie or riding habit of light blue with 104 buttons of 
 silver gilt, and another white, with 199 round gilt buttons on the hood 
 and sleeves ; one jerkin with stuff buttons ; one gown of scarlet cloth 
 with Venice braid around the sleeves and throat, without buttons ; 
 one gown with ^6 buttons of silver enamelled, and gold embroidery 
 around the neck ; one set of furs, minever ; one blue velvet gown ; one 
 green velvet gown, offered by Rugirina, widow of the deceased lord 
 Alberto Visconti ; one jacket of black fustian ; two pairs of boots ; 
 one long towel, offered by a miller's wife ; and so on, and so on. 
 
 There is neither space nor call to recount the works of the next 
 year or two ; how ' The Fabric ' carried a canal round the city and 
 dug a new dock to facilitate the transport of the stone, which came 
 from quarries on the Lago Maggiore, to the site. Everything is full 
 of life, spirit, enthusiasm ; not the enthusiasm of mere vague feeling 
 that evaporates into fine sentiment and sickliness, but an enthusiasm 
 in possession of itself, controlled and directed by an abiding and 
 determinate sense of the end to be achieved ; and that end, one proper 
 to ennoble high and low, rich and poor, ignorant and taught, and so 
 bring all to an equality, for the end was not self but God. A truce to 
 all attempts to idealize the middle ages. It was essentially a rough- 
 and-tumble time, insupportable perhaps to our more delicate organisms; 
 
 ^ [' mended blades ' : I cannot pretend to gloss this now, and cannot recover the 
 particular entry in the big quarto.]
 
 MILAN CATHEDRAL 421 
 
 a time of plenty of salt beef and salt fish for those who could get it, an 
 age of peas and beans for ever, with a scant stock of clean linen, little 
 furniture, and less comfort, an age when a brass pot and half-a-dozen 
 pewter plates were heirlooms among country people; a day of 
 shambles, and gutters, and narrow streets, and odours, and smoky 
 rooms with little ventilation or too much, of bad drainage or none, 
 days of hardness and discomfort ; a time when gold and silver plate 
 enough to ransom a province decked the buffet to-day and went into 
 the melting-pot to-morrow. But those ages had at all events one 
 great virtue ; it was a time when men were wholly convinced that in 
 spite of all drawbacks life was thoroughly well worth living ; and 
 when they seemed to enter (one way or the other) into the meaning of 
 the words, redeeming the time because the days are evil. But is not 
 this a mere ' Gothic ' view of things, and, after all, what are stones 
 piled on one another but stones still ? What can they, without breath 
 or soul, tell us of life ?
 
 XXIII 
 
 CHARACTER SKETCHES FROM MEDIAEVAL 
 INVENTORIES! 
 
 ' The nineteenth century will one day be christened the century of 
 curiosity, curiosity of every kind ; sometimes indiscreet, noisy — nay, 
 unwholesome ; but not infrequently too, useful, well informed, stimu- 
 lating, and abounding in revelations of unexpected truth.' So writes 
 a quite recent editor of a specimen of the class of documents on which 
 the present paper is based. This too manifest characteristic of our 
 time is apt to call up the uncomfortable remembrance of an old- 
 fashioned nursery rhyme, the hero whereof is ' Goosey, goosey, gander '. 
 But, to reverse the common proverb, it is true that every fault has in 
 it some spice of a virtue ; and if the curiosity of the present time is 
 often impertinent, ill-mannered, it also may help to correct a smug 
 self-satisfaction which is a happy mother of the worst sort of ignorance, 
 and a bar to all improvement. This curiosity of ours has led us to 
 pry into every nook and corner of the past ; and explains the ever 
 accumulating load of account books, livres de raison^ inventories, wills, 
 that issues from the press. We literally penetrate everywhere, * up- 
 stairs and downstairs and in my lady's chamber ', ransacking wardrobes, 
 opening (though not fingering) jewel caskets, turning over every item 
 of a batterie de cuisine^ rummaging the master's books and confidential 
 papers, giving a hasty but sufficient glance into the hutch that does 
 for the serving man's sleeping place ; who shall say then that, though 
 it be the past that is dealt with, we are not thoroughly impertinent 
 after all ? 
 
 Perhaps on a comprehensive review of this mixed medley of life's 
 common gear, and life's daily way, a sense may come to the reflective 
 mind that little indeed divides us from the centuries that went before ; 
 that the fourteenth century and the nineteenth, however much circum- 
 stances may have seemed to change, have a oneness of life even in 
 their petty details, and that we are much the same sort of men as 
 those who went before. 
 
 ' A paper read at a meeting of the Guild of St Gregory and St Luke. Printed 
 in the Downside Review, March 1894.
 
 MEDIAEVAL INVENTORIES 423 
 
 From this point of view, as revelations of individual character, 
 with their unexpected touches of nature, it is proposed to notice here 
 a few mediaeval inventories. Not the giants in that kind, like those 
 of the four noble brothers, the sons of King John of France, namely, 
 his heir King Charles the Fifth, and the Dukes of Anjou, Berry, and 
 Burgundy, whose inventories afford a picture of dazzling splendour, 
 and in the reading pass like a dream rather than a record of simple 
 matter of fact. As the eye runs over, for instance, the list of plate 
 of the Duke of Anjou,' we are inclined to conclude to the distmct 
 inferiority of the goldsmiths and silversmiths of the present day as 
 compared with those of the fourteenth century. In fashioning the pre- 
 cious metal fancy has run riot, ingenuity is boundless. But the precious 
 metal itself, wrought into forms of such variety, is often only a foil 
 or a setting for enamels, the brilliancy and delicacy of which our 
 most skilled workers can only look at with despair. The next 
 succeeding generation shews a triumvirate of no less noble brothers, 
 our hero-King, Henry V, and the Dukes of Bedford and Gloucester, 
 evident rivals of those French princes whose collections they must 
 often have heard of, and in part certainly seen. It is impossible not 
 to give expression to the passing feeling of regret at the neglect with 
 which, in comparison with our French neighbours, English antiquaries 
 have treated these lovers and patrons of art ; a neglect which has 
 perhaps encouraged these same neighbours to account for the disap- 
 pearance of nearly all the precious things accumulated by the sons of 
 John of France on the theory that they were carried off into England, 
 spoils of war, by the sons of our Henry IV. 
 
 Our business, however, is not with amateurs such as these, or the 
 great collectors of a yet later time, the Medicis and the Pietro 
 Barbos, but with commonplace people, with small folk. The clergy 
 first : and as, for reasons which will appear, there is a little difficulty 
 and delicacy about the matter, let us get over the introduction 
 quickly. Here is Messire Hugues du Chataignier, a member of the 
 venerable Chapter of the Metropolitical Church of Rouen, in the 
 year 1368. There is no need to stand on ceremony further ; his 
 
 » [When this paper was written a view of the Duke of Anjou's gold and silver 
 plate was possible only in an incomplete form as found m vol. 11 of Laborde s 
 Notice des ^maiix du Louvre (1853) PP- i-"4, comprismg 796 numbers m 
 all This was a vision of artistic splendour. Since then the complete m- 
 ventory has been found, and, with omission of mere common silver objects, now 
 fills in print over six hundred pages large octavo, and comprises some 3,600 
 numbers; plate and jewels, edited by H. Moranv.lld (1903/906), a volume of 
 the Collection d' Inventaires publih par la section d' Archiologie du CoviUe des 
 Travaux historiques. This forms an almost incredible record of faste and vain- 
 elorv. Almost all the plate was in the melting-pot, and the jewels pledged, a few 
 years later. The owner's taste had turned in another direction, the possession of 
 the kingdom of Naples.]
 
 424 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 house is open and its contents are now at least free for the inspection 
 of all. As we look round, on entering, there is nothing inviting to 
 see ; in the hall or dining-room three or four tables on trestles, 
 a couple of forms, as many dressers or buffets on which is an assort- 
 ment of cups, dishes, plates and such like, brass the best, others 
 pewter, many battered and well used, two or three stools, finally one 
 or two wash-pots and basins, for meals in those days meant a good 
 deal of washing and rinsing and cleaning afterwards. Further on is 
 the canon's own room, almost as bare as the hall ; a table of walnut 
 wood, a little stool, a dozen or so of worn cushions in the window seats; 
 in the alcove or bed place a couple of good feather beds, one or two 
 coverlets ; in the fire-place andirons; a dresser against the wall, one 
 or two bits of carpet on the floor ; and quite a collection of trunks and 
 chests. In the rest of the house there is very little furniture ; in the 
 pantry an array of dishes and plates and drinking vessels, all of mean 
 quality and base metal ; there is a great wine cooler, of tin or pewter ; 
 the only articles to attract attention are a few bits of carpet, half-a- 
 dozen cushions covered with silk, to be brought out on great occasions, 
 and four candlesticks of Limoges work. Indeed there are one-and- 
 twenty candlesticks in all, a number quite out of proportion to the 
 supply of other articles : the old gentleman did not like to be in the 
 dark. He indulges in another fancy, curious in an ecclesiastic, quite 
 a passion for arms and armour : three or four old breastplates and 
 gauntlets might induce the belief that he was a collector of curios in 
 this kind ; the bulk however is not antique, but new, good and prac- 
 tical, bassinets, gorgets, gauntlets, half-a-dozen complete suits ; 
 swords, five ; and here is a handsome instrument of a thoroughly 
 practical character — a heavy club with an iron spike at the head, of 
 the kind grimly called by the Flemings, its inventors, a ' Godendac ', 
 a ' Good morning to you '. 
 
 Now let us begin rummaging in these well-bound coffers in the 
 old man's room. Here is his wardrobe ; a fair, but not an undue, 
 supply of clothing, of the usual bright colours affected by the clergy 
 at that date, green and red, well lined with fur ; expense has not been 
 spared here to secure warmth and comfort. And here is his seal with 
 the extravagance of a silver chain. Has Hugues du Chataignier then 
 so much need of a seal that he must wear it continually about him ? 
 Let us pass on to the other coffers. Here are, and in profusion, pots 
 and plates and saucers and goblets, of silver, of all sorts of makes and 
 sizes, to say nothing of (unheard-of luxury in Rouen) silver forks. 
 Here too arc girdles of silk richly mounted with silver, such as are 
 worn by fair ladies and gay gallants, but curious items in the coffers 
 of a venerable canon. There are little labels on some of the articles
 
 MEDIAEVAL INVENTORIES 425 
 
 of plate and jewellery, inscribed 'put in pawn' by so and so. The 
 secret is out ; there is now no wonder to find bag after bag of coins of 
 many mints — mostly gold — florins, royals, muttons, franks, by the 
 hundred together. And one of the executors, who also bears the 
 name of Chataignier, a trusty man we may be sure, produces one bag 
 bigger than the rest, in deposit with him, containing 1,200 florins of 
 gold, French coinage. Hugucs du Chataignier is not merely a miser, 
 he is also a usurer. For in spite of the rigid laws of the Church, the 
 trade of usury was not confined to the Jews or their confederates ; 
 even churchmen joined discreetly in the traffic. In a dozen ingenious 
 ways means were found to elude the law ; for instance, a piece of plate 
 is sold at a price greatly below its value, with a power of redemption 
 reserved to the seller within a period so short that redemption is 
 impossible. This is how Sir John Fastolf, a thorough-paced usurer, 
 obtained possession of the famous jewel called ' The Rose of York ' ; 
 and it is by this or one of the many other means enumerated in the 
 casuists' books of the day (as casuistry then was) that Hugues du 
 Chataignier made (like Fastolf) his great hoard. 
 
 And now to Paris. Master Pierre Cardonnel, archdeacon of Auge 
 in the Church of Lisieux and canon of Notre-Dame of Paris, whose 
 ordinary residence is the capital, has just come to the point of time 
 when inventories, then as now, were most commonly taken ; he is 
 dead (1438). Cardonnel belonged to a gentilitial family of modest 
 pretensions. What a contrast in all respects to the canon of Rouen. 
 His house, of two stories, has ten rooms ; on the ground floor, a 
 kitchen, a pantry, and a small room near it, a hall or general dining- 
 room, and offices. Above, a large room looking out on the street with 
 a little room near it ; then the usual dwelling-room of the master of 
 the house looking apparently over the garden ; close by this the 
 chapel which was also the book room ; finally a study. The furniture 
 is of a modest kind, but everything is neat and good, nothing 
 affectedly old-fashioned, and there is plenty of it ; over all there is an 
 air of reasonable comfort though nothing of luxury ; everything is 
 ordered and in its place. Let us look into the salle basse, the rough 
 room of the house : instead of merely stools there are three or four 
 chairs — square chairs they are called — with high backs ; instead of 
 mere forms, settles cosily closed in to keep off the draughts, and with 
 foot-paces. The salle haute is for better company — carpeted, and 
 there are some attempts at more ornamental furniture. The room 
 of the deceased master of the house shews a novelty of the day — at 
 least in Paris — a round table supported on a centre pillar, the 
 occasional table of the time. The walls are covered with red 
 hangings, partly sprinkled with white roses. There is a single picture
 
 426 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 — the Annunciation — and there is a holy water stoup with sprinkler. 
 In the wardrobe are mantles and cloaks of the favourite red, and of 
 more sober violet, one or two only of which are lined with fur. 
 What a contrast is the chapel to Hugues du Chataignier's church 
 stuff, which consisted of only an undescribed chasuble, stole, &c., 
 and two pewter cruets. At Pierre Cardonnel's, the chapel is the 
 most furnished apartment in the house, with all sorts of odds and 
 ends, besides strictly ecclesiastical objects. The altar is of wood, 
 with a cupboard at either end ; there are two or three frontals and 
 dossals, the foot-pace covered with a dark blue carpet with red roses ; 
 a statuette of alabaster ; three Limoges candlesticks, and two more 
 with prickets ; an every-day chasuble of silk sprinkled with gold 
 roses, and three best chasubles of bawdkin with orphreys of Lucca 
 gold — one ash colour, one red with stripes of several colours, the 
 third red and green with many other colours ; there are two or 
 three chests, a dresser or desk, some kneelers, and cushions of silk 
 and of leather, a little bell, an inkstand, a pair of little scales, a 
 pair of chamois leather fingerless gloves, several surplices and rochets, 
 and one or two skull-caps well lined ; and finally the books, some 
 thirty volumes — a breviary and a psalter according to the use of 
 Lisieux, a missal, one or two other religious books ; all the rest relate 
 to medicine. The study was simple enough : five little desks or book- 
 rests, a couple of stools, and a broad writing desk. 
 
 From the sixth century up to the destruction of the ancient Chapter 
 at the Revolution, the clergy of the cathedral of Paris kept their 
 church in the highest reputation for regularity and perfect obser- 
 vance of their duties. The names of few of the canons have been heard 
 of by the world at large ; here and there one is known to the curious 
 enquirer ; they passed away blamelessly, men content to sink them- 
 selves in the good repute of the corporation to which they were 
 attached, and to hand on the good tradition as the best heritage to 
 those who should succeed them. Such a man in his day was Pierre 
 Cardonnel. 
 
 Just outside the walls of Paris at the close of the fourteenth century, 
 near the Porte St-Victor, and called significantly the Rue des Murs — 
 Wall Street — was a tall narrow house of three stories, with gable 
 ends ; at the back, between it and the city walls, was its garden and 
 greensward. The neighbourhood was poor, inhabited for the most 
 part by masons and other day-labourers. This house was the last 
 retreat of Pierre Bersuire, a Benedictine monk well known in his 
 day. He had been drawn out of his monastery, and greatly patronized 
 by John, King of France, from whom he had received many small 
 benefices — no object of ambition to him, but enough to keep the
 
 MEDIAEVAL INVENTORIES 4^7 
 
 student, wholly devoted to his books and sacred studies, from care 
 and solicitude for his daily bread. Peter's great work was a sort of 
 cyclopaedia of morals in many volumes, based on the Scriptures, 
 which were his constant companion ; but his book of books was his 
 translation of Livy, made by order of King John. Nothing could be 
 more in accordance with the taste of the time— the very heyday of 
 chivalry. Here was an opportunity for the limner to portray with all 
 the brilliancy of colour, on pages heightened with glory of golden 
 scrolls, battles and sieges, cities and castles, town and country, knights 
 and dames. And well did the limner take advantage of the oppor- 
 tunity, as witness the library catalogues of the sons of King John. 
 First, that of the Louvre, the royal library, contained a Titus Livius 
 of Bersuire, ' very perfectly well written, in double columns, and very 
 well storied and illuminated, and signed " Charles " ' — that is, King 
 Charles V, John's son and successor. The same library possessed 
 also Bersuire's original MS. It is one of the first items of the whole 
 list : ' the original of Titus Livius, in French, the first translation that 
 was made of it, written in a bad hand, with poor illuminations and no 
 pictures.' Bersuire was evidently no scribe ; but the king could easily 
 provide for that side of the work. The library of the Duke of Berry 
 has no less than four copies — two in three volumes, and two in one ; 
 two only ' finely written ', and two 'very richly historiated and illu- 
 minated '. The library of the Duke of Burgundy had three copies- 
 one in one volume richly illuminated ; another in two volumes illu- 
 minated in azure and gold, much thumbed ; and one in five volumes. 
 These all, except 'the original', had bindings of velvet and leather, 
 and clasps of silver, and enamels, and ' shirts ' of satin and silk. 
 Advancing in years, and his work done, Bersuire had bought this 
 house in the Rue des Murs, close to the little priory of St-Eloi, one 
 of his benefices, in order, as he states in the deed of purchase, to be 
 near the family of his relative, Jean Bersuire, who lived in the same 
 street. The house was bought in the midsummer of 136 1 ; in the 
 early months of the next year the old man was dead. The house 
 remained long shut up and neglected ; the key was to be had on 
 application to Jehan Hays, sexton to the church of St-Eloi hard by. 
 The furniture, thirty and more years after, remained as it was left by 
 the former occupier ; scanty always, it was now old and worm-eaten 
 and covered with dust. But it shews that the habits of the man 
 clung to him to the last ; the whole topmost story, a panelled 
 room high up and away from the sights and sounds of the street, 
 was Bersuire's 'study'; it contained a little bench, well made but 
 old ; a table with four legs ; a little standing desk ; a little wooden 
 bedstead and its mattress. The tall house in the Rue des Murs was
 
 428 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 indeed a retreat for declining years, but it was the retreat of a man 
 with whom work only ended with life. 
 
 It is a change from Pierre Bersuire to Marin Faliero ; from the 
 solitary old scholar in the house-top in Paris to the doge of Venice, 
 who at the age of eighty must needs aspire to sovereign power in 
 that mercilessly resolute republic, and not merely lose his own head 
 in the attempt, but entail a like loss on some four hundred of his 
 dupes or accomplices. This was in 1355. But it was in April 1351, 
 at the ripe age of seventy-six, that he called in as an expert John, the 
 priest of his parish church, to make a list of the treasures of 'The Red 
 Room ' in the big house by SS. Apostoli near the bridge ; though 
 not at all with the idea of a leave-taking and making his last will and 
 testament. Why the room was called * Red ' does not appear, unless 
 it were on account of a triclinium of red wood in the middle of it, 
 a somewhat hard specimen of ottoman or couch. At any rate the 
 ' Red Room ' at Marin Faliero's seems to have been as well known 
 in Venice in those days as the ' Peacock Room ' is, or was, in the 
 London of the present. And no wonder ; for the collection of curios, 
 though small, is one which only first-rate opportunities could have 
 rendered it possible, even in Venice, to bring together. There is a 
 picture-book in sheets {guaternum) with representations of all sorts of 
 outlandish peoples and races ; a box of fifty ancient coins ; the ring 
 given by the Great Khan of Tartary to Marco Polo, with the inscrip- 
 tion ' the gift of Ciuble Can ' ; a collar of Tartar workmanship, with 
 animals wrought in metal ; a marvellously ancient sword with inscrip- 
 tions ; a sword of brass dug up at Padua ; two heads of wild men, 
 from' Africa, brought by Jacobellus, the sailor ; garments of all sorts 
 of nations ; a crimson silk cap wrought with gold ; a book with 
 pictures of all sorts of animals ; another book of the Lives of the 
 Saints, full of pictures ; a gold statuette of S. Marina ; a wonderful 
 sword which has three swords in one, which had belonged to Marco 
 Polo ; a little white leather bag with all sorts of little gold and silver 
 objects given to Marco Polo by the Khan of Tartary ; three ancient 
 marble inscriptions found at Treviso ; hangings of Indian stuffs ; a 
 volume written by Marco Polo's own hand ; two candlesticks of 
 exquisite beauty, of alabaster and gold ; a brass sphere that had 
 belonged to Master Anthony the Astrologer ; finally many volumes 
 of Astrology and Physic. A strict moralist has condemned the 
 collector's weakness as infected by inherent vice. That question apart, 
 there is no difficulty from this inventory in discovering the special 
 weakness which brought the venerable age of the respected and 
 honoured Marin Faliero to so miserable an end. 
 
 But that the vice of collecting was certainly prevalent in Venice
 
 MEDIAEVAL INVENTORIES 4*9 
 
 at the time is clear from a ' Note of things to be done in Venice * 
 jotted down in the year 1335 by one Oliviero Forzetta, an inhabitant 
 of Treviso (a city some twenty miles to the north-west), from which 
 it may have been noticed Faliero had obtained some ancient in- 
 scriptions. 
 
 What I have to do at Venice (runs the record). First to pay the rent for 
 my house there, and bring my goods and chattels back to Treviso. Note : 
 then with the goldsmith, Ser Giovanni the German, as to various medals and 
 old coins of the Morosini, and a head of marble sculptured by Maestro 
 Ogniben. — And Master Simon has promised to give me fifty ancient coins. — ■ 
 From the convent of Friars Preachers a Seneca, complete. 
 
 From others, not precisely indicated, Ovid, Sallust, Livy and other 
 classics with the M or alia of St Gregory the Great. 
 
 And note : by wit or by pressure, to get hold of all the drawings of Master 
 Perenzolo, deceased ; they are in pawn with Masters P'rancis and Stephen at 
 S. Giovanni Nuovo ; also his book, in sheets, in which are paintings of all 
 kinds of animals, and they are all beautifully done and by the hand of the 
 aforesaid Perenzolo himself; and the work of his chisel too {taglos), and all 
 his drawings whatsoever, wherever they be, in pawn, or on deposit, ei cetera. — 
 And to seek for the four stone boys taken from San Vitale's at Ravenna. — 
 And note : as to that head, and the lions, and the ducks (anera), and the 
 horses, painted, which Anna, sister of Joachim, has ; and she has too a cameo 
 with a head and a garland of roses on it. — And that marble statue of a boy 
 which belonged to Guglielmo Zapparini, now dead ; with many drawings of 
 Perenzolo : the widow has them all. — And to remember, specially, that 
 Martino di Gallera has lions, and horses, and bulls, and men naked, and 
 birds, and anatomical drawings (?) of men and animals (cechaturas hominum 
 et besiiarum *) ; all the work of Perenzolo. 
 
 Then Forzetta meditates a descent on the Friars Minor for various 
 objects, hangings of Arras, and stained glass, as he had fixed on the 
 Preachers for books. But it is enough ; and we may pass over the 
 details of the way in which the man hunts down the original drawings 
 of Perenzolo which he means to get hold of by hook or by crook. 
 Could the dire spirit of a collector's greed betray itself more faithfully 
 than in this record ? Has not the noxious root produced a most rank 
 growth ? Could a Spitzer have gone to work in a more thorough, 
 a more business-like way ? How varied Forzetta's fancy is ; and yet 
 how his mind runs on securing the great haul of Perenzolo's handy- 
 work — the whole. The 'four boys' from Ravenna deserve a special 
 word. They are a fragment of an ancient bas-relief, attributed 
 once to Praxiteles and declared worthy of Phidias, a part of 
 
 ' There was a celebrated school of anatomy at Bologna in the first quarter of the 
 fourteenth century.
 
 430 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 which still remains at Ravenna : the ' four boys ' found a resting 
 place in the choir of the Church of Our Lady of Miracles at Venice, 
 at least up to the close of the last century. Did our Trevigian anti- 
 quary secure the prize, and did it come back to Venice after his death ; 
 or was it seized too soon by some amateur on the spot ? The history 
 of Forzetta's museum can never now be told. 
 
 Let the lawyers have their turn : an uninteresting race, judged, that 
 is to say, strictly from the point of view of inventories. As types there 
 is an old bachelor, Mr John Underwood, practising on the turn of the 
 fifteenth century in the Archbishop's Court at York ; a London 
 practitioner, Mr Serjeant Keble, about the same time ; and, of an 
 earlier date by a hundred years, a Genoese jurist. Mr Underwood 
 has made his hoard of money ; all else — and very little it is — is mean- 
 ness, discomfort and dowdiness ; ' an old keveryng in tapster werke ', 
 ' an old typett '/an old chyste ' represent the run of his effects. There 
 are two articles of choice and price : a spoon silver and gilt, and a pair 
 of beads of coral. His books, thirty-eight volumes, are legal, one or 
 two excepted, and bear titles, beginning with Mandugiid^ de Electio- 
 nibiiSy proper only to strike dullness and deadness into the soul. 
 Mr Serjeant Keble, on the other hand, is wealthy, prosperous, and a 
 generous liver ; his kitchen well set up ; plate to the amount of some 
 1,200 ounces of silver, besides two or three small pieces of gold ; a farm 
 amply stocked ; a chapel decent, so far as bare necessaries go, but not 
 an item of luxury. Books are very few ; the only one legal is entitled 
 (let us hope it was not a specimen of his special line of practice) 
 La Abuse in Court ; there are a printed Ludolphus of Saxony, a book 
 in French of the Chronicles, and another volume only described as 
 being of parchment. It is in his hangings and arras, and his ' rem- 
 nants ' of satin and stamyn, of velvet and ' bord-alexander ' that he 
 excels ; and especially in the profusion of his ' wearing gear ', only one 
 of two items of which can be set down to his wife ; and of wives he 
 seems to have survived two. Altogether Mr Keble's was an ample 
 household, given to good cheer. All with the Englishman is very 
 human; but with the Italian jurist more than a century earlier (1390) 
 we are already with the humanists. 
 
 Bartolomeo di Jacopo was the son of a notary of Genoa, and at 
 first a notary also. Feeling within himself something Tullian, he 
 ambitioned the bar, was a great success, and was considered by many 
 of his contemporaries as a Tully of his time, though his one speech 
 extant is said by a person who has read it to be poor stuff. He soon 
 was numbered among the Council of the ' Ancients ' of Genoa, was 
 successively ambassador of the Republic at Naples and at the Papal 
 Court of Avignon, was Consul of Caffa, the Genoese settlement on the
 
 MEDIAEVAL INVENTORIES 431 
 
 shores of the Black Sea ; later, ambassador of Pope Gregory XI to 
 Florence, and of Genoa to the kings of Castille and Portugal. Finally 
 he attached himself to the brilliant and lettered court of Gian Galeazzo 
 Visconti, and his last years were spent as councillor of that prince, at 
 the castle of Pavia, in which had been gathered the finest library in 
 Europe. Bartolomeo's career was a brilliant one ; but it is astonishing 
 to see how comparatively simple, though not unbecoming his station, 
 is the list of his effects. His books show extravagance ; a few are law 
 books ; there is a wonderful collection of the classics, many of the 
 Latin Fathers, the greatest only and best stylists ; of modem books, 
 Dante's great poem, glossed, and the De Monarchia. The 'stuff' of 
 his chapel, or oratory, at Genoa (which place, it is true, he has left 
 four or five years before) is represented by such articles as two or 
 three plates and as many basins of pewter, two or three of bronze, an 
 iron lantern, a brazier, an alembic, some bundles of wood, and so forth. 
 His 'animals' at Genoa are, ' first, one slave named George. Item, 
 one mule. Item, one horse.' ' Animals at Milan : first, one horse. 
 Item, one sumpter. Item, one woman slave, named Catherine.' The 
 deeper characteristics of the movement, which were only to be deve- 
 loped and brought into the full light of day in the high tide of the 
 Renaissance, are already clearly marked in the inventory of Bartolomeo 
 di Jacopo. 
 
 But one more presentment, and I have done. It is drawn from the 
 inventory (1497-1498) of Bernard of Beam, known in his day as the 
 Bastard of Comminges, an illegitimate offshoot of the powerful and 
 illustrious house of Foix. Though he had held public positions of 
 trust and importance, and lived in a style befitting his wealth and 
 station, Bernard had passed a solitary life. Not, be it understood, 
 that the stigma attaching to his birth was any social bar ; for in those 
 days, whatever be the explanation, the sins of the father were not thus 
 visited on the children. His position in his castle of Monteux was 
 one of more than usual isolation from the world, situated as it was 
 close up under the Pyrenees, in a wild, rocky district, on the less savage 
 outskirts of which is situated Lourdes. He had lived alone, but still 
 a life not unloved ; for he had secured the most alTectionate devotion 
 of his own household. There seem to have been no others but his 
 servants with him at the time of his death, and it was his servants 
 alone that were found in the house when, the next day, the notary 
 Elzear Grassi came, along with Bartholomew Pauli, the representative 
 of the Pope (for the heir was a bishop), to take the inventory. Grassi 
 is the great figure of the piece, ' me, a public notary, a common and 
 public person ', as he describes himself It was not every day that 
 Elzear was called to take such an inventory as this, and he rises to
 
 432 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 the occasion. With his pompousness, his ridiculous pedantry — a 
 mockery in the house of death — he is the master of the situation. The 
 proem of the act is long drawn out, and not an item of verbiage is 
 spared. When the papal representative reaches the house, the aged 
 major-domo ('the noble Johannes de Confita' Elzear calls him), whose 
 duty it is to certify his master's death, comes forward and, bursting 
 into tears, signifies in broken words how ' it had pleased our Lord 
 Jesus Christ to take to Himself the noble Bernard of Beam, who had 
 departed this life yesterday about the hour of tierce '. ' Then the 
 noble Johannes de Confita, major-domo of the said magnificent defunct, 
 applied with many requests, as aforesaid, to the above mentioned 
 noble Bartholomew Pauli, and begged him, and asked him, that he 
 would deign to cause an inventory to be made ', &c. Thereupon the 
 notary sets to his work, and gloriously he does it. He is of the super 
 grammaticam race, too ; concords, in his Latin, are flung to the 
 winds ; singulars and plurals, masculines, feminines and neuters are 
 thrown about at haphazard ; subjects are in the accusative, objects in 
 the nominative ; — ' all 's alike to Elzear '. But withal he proceeds at 
 a solemn, measured pace in describing each item of the belongings of 
 the ' magnificent defunct ' ; how, for instance, ' in a certain greater 
 coffer was found a certain smaller coffret, in which cofifret was found 
 a chain of gold {fuit repertum imam cathenani atiri) of about eight 
 crowns of value ; and on the said chain was hung a certain ring called 
 uno Ota, and it was of gold ; and one cross of gold ', &c. 
 
 ' And further in the said little cofifret was found a signet of gold, and 
 in the signet was set a " cameo ", and about the said signet were 
 written these words, or in effect like words, " Jhesus plus que tout ".* 
 And indeed the inventory tells plainly enough that the motto Bernard 
 had chosen, wherewith, too, he confirmed and sealed every act, was 
 the secret of his life. These are matters which do not fall within the 
 cognizance of a public person like Elzear Grassi, who still picks 
 up every item that he can by the way. The old major-domo, full of 
 affectionate recollections, mutters an ' Aye, and these goblets were 
 always on the buffet when my lord dined'. Down the remark goes 
 in the notary's own way, thus : ' which daily, and incessantly, the fore- 
 said magnificent lord, whilst he was alive, had at his table' {/tat 
 repertum sex taxeas argenti que et quas quotidie et incessanter, &c.). 
 The fellow cannot even keep his hands off the body of the dead man, 
 on which the loving hands of the old servant had placed a few gold 
 trinkets of his daily use and wear ; Elzear handles them, weighs them, 
 appraises them, and declares them ' circa totuin ponderis triginta 
 scutorum '. At the chapel his redundancies suddenly desert him ; he 
 throws everything together as ' a chalice and things proper for masses ',
 
 MEDIAEVAL INVENTORIES 433 
 
 and, unable to command his Latin further, breaks out into good 
 Proven9al, ' et hun bel retaule pint de cascuna part que se bara ab 
 clau ', which, I take it, means a triptych, with shutters painted within 
 and without, and fastening with a key. 
 
 Leaving the notary to go on with his work, let us take a last rapid 
 glance at the study. The simplicity is cenobitic : a little bed, a table 
 covered with a carpet that had seen long use, with one or two other 
 items, make up the furniture. There are heaps of papers, a small 
 chest or two, several swords, and a number of odds and ends, bric-a-brac, 
 which the notary did not describe, being ' of small value '. On a set 
 of shelves are some sixty or seventy books. On examination they 
 prove to be a collection, small as it now seems, fit to vie with the 
 more celebrated library of his contemporary, the lettered Charles of 
 Orleans, the father of Francis the First and of Margaret of Navarre. 
 This is all the more remarkable, too, in a district so wild, so entirely 
 cut off from cultured society and away from the high road of life as 
 the country of Comminges. Moreover, the books are, almost without 
 exception, printed ; and, a Roman Missal and ' Mode of Confession ' 
 apart, they are in the French language. It would seem as though the 
 owner were not familiar with Latin. Almost every subject is repre- 
 sented — history, belles-lettres, physic, but most largely theology, 
 philosophy, and morals. Here is a Froissart in three volumes, Ber- 
 suire's Livy, along with a few romances, and Boccaccio's Hundred 
 Tales. There is also a Bible, both Old and New Testaments. The 
 collection as a whole is evidently the reflection of the personal tastes 
 of the possessor, who has left the best proof that he had read well in 
 the shape of several commonplace books written with his own hand. 
 One is on medicine ; another comprises extracts from the Fathers and 
 theologians, verses, extracts from the psalms, the psalter of the Blessed 
 Virgin and other prayers ; a third consists entirely of prayers and 
 religious pieces, beginning ' Si tu veulx bien confesser '. In his solitude 
 Bernard de Beam had learned to penetrate the full meaning of the 
 motto he had chosen long ago — Jhesus phis que tout. 
 
 Ff
 
 XXIV 
 
 LEAVES FROM THE DIARY OF A PAPAL . 
 MASTER OF CEREMONIES ^ 
 
 From the later years of the fifteenth century the Masters of Cere- 
 monies of the Papal Court have been in the habit of keeping a diary 
 of events falling within the somewhat wide sphere of their functions. 
 From the year 1484 the series is complete. But the earliest of these 
 diarists, the German Burcardus, can hardly have introduced the 
 practice, for at least a fragment of a work of the same character, 
 relating to the acts of the antipope Benedict XIII for the years 
 1406 to 1408, is still extant. The diary of Burcardus, which includes 
 the pontificate of Alexander VI, is the only one as yet printed in 
 its entirety. That of his immediate successor, Paris de Grassis, is 
 to be included in the quarto series of publications of the Ecole Fran- 
 ^aise de Rome? Copies in manuscript of the whole, or nearly the 
 whole, of these diaries are to be found in London, Paris, in several 
 Roman libraries, and doubtless elsewhere. At the first glance the 
 volumes do not present a very attractive appearance ; the sameness 
 of the subject cannot fail in the long run to be tedious. The 
 liturgist Catalanus, who, in preparing his commentaries on the various 
 ritual books of the Roman Church, had made it his business to read 
 them all, summed up the character of the writers shortly enough : 
 ' An ignorant set ', he says, making an exception to this verdict in 
 favour of one or two only. But Catalanus, though possessing sound 
 judgement in the main, and good sense, had rather a rough tongue, 
 and a strong way of expressing himself. He demanded of them 
 that they should know the reasons of what they did, or prescribed 
 for others to do. But it would go hard with most of us to be called 
 to such an account. After all, even in these scientific days, a man 
 commonly cannot do much more than know his business in a prac- 
 tical, if somewhat rule-of-thumb, fashion. But did our diarists succeed 
 so far ? As Paris de Grassis has been mentioned, let us take a sample 
 from him. Though the highest personages occupy the foreground in 
 
 ' From i\ie^ DowJiside Review, December 1892. 
 
 ' [This project seems now to have been abandoned.]
 
 A PAPAL CEREMONIAR 435 
 
 his pages— Cardinals and Kings and Popes— yet, like a true diarist, 
 he looks at them all from his own point of view, and as Master of 
 Ceremonies he is apt to consider them as the puppets which he sets 
 in motion. It may not be without interest to see some familiar per- 
 sonages from this new standpoint. And it must be admitted that 
 Paris de Grassis was in a favourable position for throwing sidelights 
 on character, which now and then it is more precious to catch than any 
 that may be afforded by whole bundles of state papers.^ 
 
 In the month of December, 1515, Pope Leo X met at Bologna King 
 Francis the First of France. Francis, then about twenty-one years 
 old. had succeeded to the throne on the ist of January of that year. 
 Thirsting for glory, the youthful ' Caesar ', idolized at home, desired 
 to appear as hero in the eyes of all the world. Emulating the deeds 
 of his immediate predecessors, he at once formed the design of an 
 invasion of Italy ; the pretext was the recovery of the Duchy of 
 Milan. The position of the Pope in this conjuncture was a difficult 
 one ; on the one hand his alliance was solicited by Francis, on the 
 other by a league formed by Maximilian, the Emperor-Elect, Ferdinand 
 the Catholic, King of Aragon, Naples and Sicily, and the Swiss. Leo 
 desired to take up a neutral position ; but this was impossible, and he 
 declared for the league, supporting it only, however, in a measured 
 way. On the victory of Francis at Marignola in September, he veered 
 round, and, at the cost of heavy sacrifices, came to an agreement with 
 the victor, who now desired an inter\aew with the Pontiff. The 
 circumstances of the meeting, it will be seen, were sufficiently delicate. 
 
 Now Paris de Grassis enters on the scene. Fussy, and a flunkey 
 born, he was yet a faithful servant, was full of energy, of considerable 
 resources, never abashed, and, with all his activity, simply stolid in 
 his self-satisfaction. Besides, he had ever in hand a task worthy of 
 all his powers, for he felt that to him was entrusted the care of 
 maintaining intact the honour, the dignity, and the pre-eminence of 
 the Papal Court, of the Supreme Pontiff, and of the Roman Church. 
 The present occasion was one calculated to tax his capacities to the 
 
 utmost. 
 
 On Friday, the 7th of December, the Pope reached Bologna and 
 spent the night at the monastery of the Crutchcd Friars in the suburbs. 
 
 ' [It may be as well to explain that the following account is drawn from 
 pp. 86-96 of the incomplete and unpublished vol. ii of G. B. <^^attico's ^t/a 
 ceretnonialia Sanctae Romanae Ecclesiac (of course without title and date). 1 he 
 first volume was published in Rome in 1753. It was suppressed by Benedict Al V ; 
 probably in compliance with the clamour of jealous officials, ignorant and obscuran- 
 tist. See Zaccaria Bibliotheca ritualis i p. 177- The 20S pages of vol. 11, alter 
 which the printing must have been stopped, are to be counted among rartsnmes 
 books ; Zaccaria seems not to have known of their existence. The copy used is in 
 my own collection.] 
 
 F f 2
 
 436 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 The next day he made his entry into the city, where he was received, 
 says Paris de Grassis, who may be allowed henceforward to speak for 
 himself, in a very rough and indecorous fashion, ' and that, after I had 
 been busy for two or three days previously, and had arranged every- 
 thing for a reception worthy of the Pontiff; there was no order, no 
 preparation, no sign of public joy or festivity '. It should be explained 
 that the Bolognese were at that moment simply sulky ; the Pontifical 
 rule had lately superseded that of the Bentivoli in the city. Leo's 
 determination to allow them at least to return to Bologna displeased 
 the one faction, their enemies, whilst the delay in permitting that return 
 displeased their friends. So both factions agreed in pouting in the 
 presence of their actual Sovereign, the Pope. ' The clergy did not 
 come to meet him at the gate of the city, though the cardinal was 
 there to offer him the cross to kiss ; but no cross had been brought, 
 and a simple rude one was fetched from a parish church close by, 
 which the Pope kissed, though with a smile on his face. Two canopies 
 were brought by \hefacchi71i, or public carriers, things at the sight of 
 which the cardinals (there were twenty in Leo's train) laughed 
 outright. The one for the Blessed Sacrament was of serge, the 
 one for the Pope was of a common stuff, old and worn, and covered 
 with stains. To offer such a thing to the Pope was not only 
 ridiculous but most infamous. I said to the Pope that it was nothing 
 less than criminal, and all the cardinals were most indignant. But 
 the Pope took it very quietly, and only ordered an equerry to give 
 a canopy of silk and gold for the Blessed Sacrament, and said as 
 for himself he had no need of one.^ In which occurrence he acted 
 right well and with perfect propriety. But there was more : of the 
 hundred young men who had been appointed by me to meet the 
 Pope, hardly twenty appeared, and these were in unseemly dress. 
 On which I remarked to the Pope that the citizens of Bologna really 
 shewed little respect for his dignity. But the Pope did not seem 
 to mind in the least, and smiled ever and anon at it all.' Needless 
 to say that the master of ceremonies is precise as to the papal attire, 
 and the changes in it during the progress ; hardly any acclamations 
 were to be heard. ' And afterwards I spoke to the Pope aside, and 
 urged him to animadvert to the magistrates and the people on their 
 ignorant churlishness ; but he would not shew his mind on the subject, 
 except to order the payment of thirty ducats for the canopy, which 
 the officers divided among themselves.' Altogether, in the opinion 
 
 ^ It was the practice, until the time of Benedict XIII, to carry the Blessed 
 Sacrament before the Pope when he was journeying. The last example occurs in 
 1727. See Barbier de Montault Le Transport solennel du Saint-Sacrevient qiiand 
 le Pape voyage, in the Bulletin Monumental for 1879, and in a separate pamphlet.
 
 A PAPAL CEREMONIAR 437 
 
 of Paris, the Bolognese conducted themselves shamefully on this occa- 
 sion, ' but the Pope would not utter a syllable of comment on the 
 subject '. 
 
 The next day was the second Sunday of Advent ; twenty cardinals 
 and some forty prelates of the Pope's train were present at High 
 Mass at San Pctronio. The people now recovering their temper, 
 which they had no intention of really allowing to interfere with their 
 enjoyment of the coming festivities, flocked in crowds, ' and ', says 
 Paris, ' I proclaimed an indulgence of five years at the end of the 
 Mass'. With the Monday he felt himself to enter into the fullness, 
 though not as yet into the height, of his functions ; for with this 
 day he began the immediate preparations for the great events now 
 at hand. ' The Pope held a Consistory in the morning, and asked 
 me again what arrangement I would make for the King on his 
 coming this day. I replied, as I had already done in the Consistory 
 at Florence, that it seemed to me proper that I should present myself 
 to the King at an early stage, and inform him of our ceremonies 
 usual in such a case as the present, and, if it pleased His Holiness, 
 a cardinal also, who should in His Holiness 's name exhort him to 
 allow himself to be honoured by the Apostolic ceremonies. The 
 Pope asked me on what points should the King be advertised. And 
 I said that the King should be informed of the order of our cere- 
 monies, which I would explain to him at length, in regard to his 
 entry into the city as far as the palace ; and then in regard to his 
 ascending to the hall of the Consistory' — and a series of points of 
 detail which may here be spared. * And so I would explain all 
 these points to him, and then take his pleasure whether he would 
 observe them ; and that he was not to be surprised that no proces- 
 sions went to meet him, and that the clergy did not come to receive 
 him, all which was only done when a king entered the city of Rome 
 itself, in pilgrimage ; and then I would ask the king whether there 
 were any special points which he wished to be observed ; if he 
 would explain, I would take care to satisfy him ; and whatever it 
 might be, I would take care that all should be meetly done for 'his 
 satisfaction. Also, whether he would be pleased to name any of his 
 confidential officers to arrange everything with me according to his 
 pleasure. Also ' . . . a whole litany of matters he thought proper 
 to be impressed on His Majesty, the last of which runs that he 
 would instruct the King to take off his cap and be bareheaded on the 
 appearance of the Sacred College of Cardinals at the city gate ; 
 ' and to answer aptly and courteously, and listen patiently, et similia, 
 and so on '. 
 
 ' And when I had opened my ideas to the Pope and to the College
 
 438 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 in the Consistory, they were approved of, and he ordered that I should 
 act accordingly, and that I should diligently inform myself from the 
 King as to the foregoing, so that there might be no mistake, or risk of 
 offence.' And now Paris de Grassis had a catalogue of enquiries just 
 as long to make of the Pope, in which are oddly jumbled matters 
 most delicate and full of offence like the ' form of obedience' to be 
 pronounced on behalf of the King, down to the letting off of guns, 
 bombardae^ which the Pope forbade as wanting in religiousness. The 
 Master of Ceremonies at last (and the mere summary list of his doubts 
 and suggestions runs a good way beyond the limits of a folio page) 
 winds up with reminding the Pope as to the words in which he should 
 answer the King's first salutation : ' And the Pope replied that he 
 would say whatever came to his mind and tongue at the time ' {quid- 
 quid in buccam et in mentem veniet). 
 
 ' My enquiries having come to an end, the Pope told Cardinal 
 Sanseverino to meet the King outside the gate of the city, and I was 
 to go with him, and we were to conclude our consultations with the 
 King himself to-day, so that to-morrow we might have the Consistory 
 and receive him solemnly. So we found the King coming between 
 our two Cardinal Legates, talking with them gaily. And I also went 
 up to him and said that I was the Master of the Ceremonies, and the 
 King, smiling, said that he would be in great need of my help, as being 
 himself raw {rudis) and inexperienced, and that we had better confer 
 at once at his lodgings ', a hostelry about a mile from the town. ' So 
 we entered, and there were six Cardinals present, of whom one, San- 
 severino, talked much with the King upon the proposals which I had 
 made at the Consistory, and how the Pope and all the Most Reverend 
 Lords the Cardinals had remitted everything to his pleasure. And 
 the King indeed replied affably on all points and singular, although 
 in his own French tongue, so that I did not understand the conversa- 
 tion ; and hence, at the end of the conference, when the King along 
 with the Cardinals present asked me whether I perfectly comprehended 
 what had been settled, I openly declared that I had not understood 
 a word of it ; at which the King and the Cardinals laughed, and then 
 gave me the heads of the business in Italian. 
 
 ' And first, as to the processions, he said that he had understood all 
 that before, and did not care about it at all ; that he wanted nothing 
 special on his own account, only that none of the observances due 
 to a King should be omitted, but that all should be done in a way 
 befitting his kingly dignity ; and he at once named one of his cham- 
 berlains who should be always with me to arrange matters for the 
 King — a man well versed in his business ; and indeed well versed he 
 was, and one who took upon him, may be, more than became him.'
 
 A PAPAL CEREMONIAR 439 
 
 The King now insisted on some particulars relating to his dignity 
 which had not entered into the calculations of Paris de Grassis, who, 
 however, stood firm on one point. Francis wished for two Con- 
 sistories, one for a formal salutation of the Pope, the second for making 
 his obedience. ' This proposal pleased me not, for the Pope had 
 strictly commanded me that all must be concluded at one and the 
 same meeting ; on account of the expense, as I think,' says Paris, * and 
 a thousand inconveniences which time and delay can bring with them. 
 On this we laboured long,' but the Master of Ceremonies carried the 
 day at last. When finally he came to his instructions how the King 
 was to take off his cap on meeting the College of Cardinals, Francis 
 turned round on poor Paris with the remark that there was no need to 
 remind him of that, for he was not sic rudis as not to know what to do 
 in such a case. And the Master of Ceremonies, a diligent reader of 
 the diary of his forerunner, Burcardus, essayed to mend the matter by 
 informing Francis that his majesty's predecessor, Charles VIII, had 
 not known how to comport himself so civilly in the same circumstances. 
 And, with this incident, the present conference, so far as Paris de 
 Grassis is concerned, closed, for the King gave him his conge ; but 
 Cardinal Sanseverino remained behind to conclude the affair. 
 
 The Master of Ceremonies returned, to give an account of his mission, 
 to the Pope, ' who was satisfied, and remained content '. ' And as the 
 King wished, on reaching the palace, to dine before going up to the 
 Consistory, I suggested that dinner should also be prepared for the 
 Cardinals who would go to meet him. But the Pope said, no ; and 
 that the Cardinals could very well wait, as he himself would have to 
 do. But it did not turn out so in the event ; for early next morning 
 they sent one of their number to him to beg, in the name of all, that 
 he would be pleased to have dinner arranged for the whole Sacred 
 College, whilst the King was dining ; and so it was done, as I shall 
 tell. And whilst awaiting Sanseverino's return, the Pope heard from 
 me the whole series of my proposals. Whilst we were talking he said 
 to me he would gladly be spared the singing of the mass, which he 
 understood the King wished to see and hear ; or at least that he would 
 gladly not have to wait until Sunday.' Leo had indeed many and 
 weighty reasons for dreading the ' inconveniences that time can bring 
 with it '. To bar the path of a young monarch, flushed with success 
 and eager for another expedition of Naples, there was none but the 
 Pope ; a chance street brawl between elated Frenchmen and surly 
 Bolognese might conceivably have consequences that neither Pope nor 
 King could control. No wonder that Leo was anxious to see the 
 return of the Frenchman northwards without delay. Paris de Grassis 
 was equal to the occasion : ' and I said that next Thursday, that is
 
 440 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 feria quinta, was the feast of Saint Lucy, and that he might celebrate 
 on that day, as Pope Alexander had celebrated in the presence of King 
 Charles on Saint Andrew's Day ; and that he might say one prayer in 
 the mass without commemoration of the feria, for we could have the 
 mass of the feria said earlier by someone else ; and that pleased the 
 Pope, especially when I said that all things were observed at this mass 
 as on Christmas day, with a Cardinal Bishop assistant, and two 
 epistles (Greek and Latin), and two gospels, and the other solemnities ; 
 and it pleased the Pope so to do, and he immediately ordered me to 
 begin at once to make preparations ; and at once I ' — had a whole army 
 of carpenters and workmen busy transforming the interior of San 
 Petronio and providing for the crush. 
 
 Tuesday, the nth of December, was the great day of the royal entry 
 and the Consistory. It would be more than tedious to narrate the details 
 which Paris (or for him Cardinal Sanseverino or the French King's cham- 
 . berlain) had arranged. The Cardinals bareheaded, the King bareheaded, 
 the speeches and compliments, the dresses and processions, the crowds, 
 the banners, the bells, the trumpets, the clamour and confusion. But 
 Paris never loses his aplomb, has an eye for every item, and is ever 
 master of himself and everybody else. Whilst Francis was dining 
 before the Consistory, ' by the Pope's command I went to the King 
 and forbad him to ascend to the hall of the Consistory until I knew 
 that the Pope was already seated.' All at last was ready, and then 
 came the crush towards the hall ; ' we could hardly move for the 
 crowd, and it was half an hour before a way could be cleared and we 
 could get to the top of the stairs, the king laughing ' and keeping 
 a good countenance ' all the time '. Now came new difficulties ; there 
 was hardly a gangway in the hall, so that even then it was a whole 
 business to make any advance. But they worked on, and succeeded. 
 ' Sanseverino went in front ; then came I simul coaequalis cum Rege, 
 whom I never let go, leading him always by the hand ; so he would 
 have it, nor would he lose hold of me. So thrice we genuflected, the 
 King and I, and then the King went up to the osculum pedis . . . 
 The words of compliment over, I called to the Most Reverend Lords 
 the Cardinals to come up to the throne, if they could ; et vix pauci 
 venire potuerimt.' Then followed the offering the obedience in an 
 address delivered by the Chancellor. With the Pope and the King 
 now brought face to face, and free themselves to act and speak as 
 they would, the native graciousness and courtesy of these chief actors 
 in the scene is perceptible, even through the narrative of Paris de 
 Grassis, who, however, kept his severest eye on the Pontiff lest in 
 familiar converse he should so far forget himself as by an unguarded 
 movement of the hand to seem to touch his cap, a fault which
 
 A PAPAL CEREMONIAR 44i 
 
 Paris's predecessor Burcardus had noted in Pope Alexander VI on 
 a like occasion. Leo X was better schooled ; he did nothing of the 
 sort ; * at least as far as we could see ', guardedly adds the Master. 
 
 But a still greater day was in reserve for Paris de Grassis — the 
 mass on Thursday. It is impossible not to feel a certain respect for 
 him in reading his description. What a head, to think of and provide 
 for all these details ! What a mind, to write them all down afterwards 
 when the day was over ! He was in his glory too in the act. He was 
 always by the King's side ; he had the King's footstool placed on 
 the broad steps of the papal throne, ' for as often as the Pope 
 moved from place to place, the King always followed, so that he 
 might see everything, as well because he was devout, as that he took 
 great pleasure in seeing everything and understanding our mysteries. 
 And indeed I assigned to him one of our prelates, the Most Reverend 
 Lord Scaramuccia Trivulzio, bishop of Como, to explain to him 
 each and all of our mysteries, and what each was and signified and 
 imported. I deputed him for this reason, that he knew the French 
 language very well, and was moreover known to the King ; and I 
 deputed two of the King's pages, who, as often as the King should 
 go with the Pope to the throne or to the altar, should carry the 
 King's footstool for him to sit down upon '. ' And the footstool was 
 covered with purple falling down to the ground on all sides, and 
 there was a cushion upon it with gold cord all around like a sort 
 of fringe, with the arms of the King in the middle of the seat. And 
 when the King went first to sit down on it, viiriirn quod casti cecidit ; 
 but the King did not fall ; indeed he laughed, and the footstool was 
 set up again, and he sat firmly down upon it until the end. I in- 
 structed him that as often as the Pope rose from his chair during 
 the mass, he himself should rise also ; a behest which he always 
 graciously obeyed.' And Paris brooked no unauthorized interference. 
 'The King had kneeling at his feet his confessor, as they call him, 
 who was shewing all our mysteries in a picture ; and in the King's 
 hearing I turned to him and said that there was no need for him 
 to take so much trouble, for if the King so pleased I would after- 
 wards give an explanation of all at length in writing. And the King 
 expressed his approval, and at the end of the mass he enquired of 
 me about everything, and expressed himself as highly delighted.' 'At 
 the elevation of the Sacrament, when all, especially the prelates, rose 
 (and stood), the King would not rise, but kneeling devoutly on both 
 knees, he remained with hands joined before his face.' Also when the 
 
 ^ The particular object of the introduction of the elevation was that the faithful 
 might expressly 'gaze on ' the Blessed Sacrament in adoration. Indeed Jubes and 
 choir-screens were not infrequently ordered to be removed by the bishops in their
 
 442 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Sacrament was carried to the Pope's throne, and so long as It was 
 there, the King always remained devoutly kneeling.' 
 
 On more than one occasion during the mass Francis again shewed 
 that he was not sic rudis but that he could, at times, better the 
 instruction of his new tutor. When at the beginning of the mass ' the 
 Pope went from the steps of the altar to the throne^ the King, on my 
 handing it to him, took the Pope's train ; whereupon I immediately 
 called the Pope's attention to this, and the Pope turning to the King 
 begged him to desist ; but the King graciously persevered, saying that 
 he was glad to serve the Vicar of our Lord even in the lesser things, 
 and so he continued carrying it to the throne, when the Pope gave 
 him a blessing '. And again at the end of the mass, the King stood 
 ministering water after the purification, ' and I asked the Pope whether 
 such was His Holiness's pleasure ; but the King, catching what 
 I would say, would not suffer me to put the question, so we laid the 
 towel on the King's shoulders ', and so on, and so on. 
 
 The mass over, the King thanked the pontiff de laboribiis passis ; 
 ' and, as he was unvesting, the Pope said that he did not think that 
 there were so many people at this moment in any one town as now in 
 Bologna ' — the only casual remark of Leo's which Paris has thought 
 worth recording during this memorable visit. The diarist's comment 
 may explain its importance : ' and so it was in truth ; for if I had not 
 caused the doors of San Petronio to be closed so that no more of the 
 townspeople could enter, it is to be feared that many would have been 
 crushed to death, and, as it was, the press was intolerable, so that 
 everyone was crying out '. 
 
 On the following day, Friday, the 14th, there was a secret Con- 
 sistory in which, at the prayer of Francis, Adrien de Gouffier, bishop 
 of Coutances, was created cardinal ; an act which draws from the 
 Master of Ceremonies remarks as to the dangers of such creations of 
 court minions. On Saturday the King took his formal farewell of the 
 Pope and cardinals ; of the former in his palace, of the latter outside 
 the gates of the city. ' But I followed him a few paces further, and 
 begged his pardon if I had not served His Majesty satisfactorily; 
 and he said kind words to me, busy meantime arranging the strings 
 of his cap. I wondered what it meant, and suddenly he got off his 
 horse and mounted another, for he was in a hurry, as he said ; and 
 turning round he said that he would give me the horse from which 
 
 visitations, on the express ground of their preventing the people gazing on the 
 Blessed Sacrament at the elevation. ' Ce qui prouve une fois de plus qu'au lieu de 
 s'incliner pour ne pas voir, ainsi qu'on pratique de nos jours. Ton se tenait droit 
 pour regarder la sainte hostie ' (Barbier de M.on\.2L\i\i VAppareil de lumiere de la 
 cathddrale de Tours p. 156}.
 
 A PAPAL CEREMONIAR 443 
 
 he had dismounted, only it was not fit for long clothes, but he would 
 send me a good one from Milan. And so he departed between the 
 two legates who had brought him to the city of Bologna, and they 
 accompanied him to the place where they had met him on his 
 arrival. But the four prelates, who had gone thither to meet him 
 on that occasion, did not now go back with him ; for the Pope had 
 ordered this ' — and Paris de Grassis remains himself to the last — 
 ' I so arranging '.
 
 XXV 
 
 PASTOR DREYGERWOLT'S NOTE-BOOK 
 
 1521-15251 
 
 Notwithstanding the publication of churchwardens' accounts 
 and inventories, and episcopal visitations, very little that is definite 
 is really known as to the actual working of a parish priest and 
 a parish church before the change of religion. There are records 
 abundant enough and sad enough of the state of things in the days 
 of Good Queen Bess ; and comparing with this picture the condition 
 of the material fabric and the accessories of Divine worship as they 
 are known to have existed on the eve of the Religious Revolution, 
 it is possible to gain some general notion of the change that must 
 have taken place in regard to what is called ' cure of souls '. But it 
 isj after all, the imagination which is left to supply a descriptive 
 notion of the church life as it actually existed in the last days of 
 Catholicity in England. What would we not give for a diary — 
 a good humdrum, professional, daily-life diary — and note-book of 
 a London or a country parson in the early years of the sixteenth 
 century. No such document has, so far as I know, hitherto come 
 to light. In default of an English example I purpose to call the 
 attention of the Guild for a few minutes this evening to a paper 
 containing some few details of the kind we are in search of, written by 
 a parish priest of Munster in Westphalia, just before the Anabaptist 
 outbreak. It is a short and scanty record at best ; and what 
 prevailed there by no means necessarily existed with us. Still there 
 are in Catholic life sufficient common features, there is enough unius 
 moris iii domo, to help us to realize, from whatever quarter the 
 information may come, what must have taken place year by year 
 in any one of the little ordinary parish churches in England, or even 
 in this our London town. 
 
 Pastor Dreygerwolt (' pastor ' is the name for the parish priest 
 still in those parts) made his notes some time between the 
 year 1521 and his death in 1525; the Anabaptist outbreak, which 
 ravaged Church and land in its mad fury, dates its beginnings, it 
 
 ^ A paper read at a meeting of the Guild of SS. Gregory and Luke, January 
 1893.— Reprinted from the Downside Review, March 1893. — The tract on which 
 this paper is based is Fibus (A.) Die Jakobipfarre in Miinster von 1^08-1^23 
 (Munster, Regensberg, 1885, pp. xxx, 141).
 
 PASTOR DREYGERVVOLT 445 
 
 will be remembered, from 1532. The object of the writer was to 
 put his successors in possession of accurate information as to their 
 income and dues, the foundations, obits, obh'gations, and, in general, 
 the ritual use and wont of their own particular parish church of 
 St James in Miinster. Now St James's was a little parish, of some 
 three hundred souls apparently, lying just under the shadow of the 
 cathedral, and altogether under the patronage of ' the venerable 
 lords of the Chapter '. But even so it is characteristic of the time, 
 and of Catholic life too, that the parish has a ' use ' of its own for 
 Divine service ; in regard to minutiae only, it is true, but still there 
 is enough proper to it to induce Dreygerwolt to construct a sort 
 of diary of the year for the instruction of his successors ; an Ordi- 
 narius he calls it of what was done hie, ' HERE,' that is emphatically, 
 lacobi, * AT James's '. For it is to be observed that in this docu- 
 ment the patron saint is mentioned in a familiar, not a ceremonious, 
 sanctified fashion, just as in so many Wells wills the patron saint 
 of the cathedral is designated ' Andrew ' simply. So it is ' Andrew ' 
 in Wells and 'James ' in MUnster. 
 
 The church had three altars, and, besides the pastor, two vicars ; 
 these appear to have been stipendiary or chantry priests, each 
 attached to a minor altar ; but these vicars make very small figure 
 in the Or dinar ins, the pastor being persona indeed, a veritable 
 corporation sole. It would take too much time, and would be more- 
 over measurelessly dull, to follow him through his yearly course, even 
 in its main features ; it will be sufficient to observe what he has to 
 say for the single season of Christmastide. The first note (Advent 
 apart) is sounded pretty early, viz. on the feast of the Conception of 
 the glorious Virgin Mary, when (as on all other feasts of the Blessed 
 Virgin) there was sermon at James's at half-past four. In this nine- 
 teenth century in London it may be necessary to observe that this 
 means half-past four in the morning, not the afternoon. After the 
 sermon the first notices were given out of the indulgences of the 
 coming great feast of the Nativity. Thereafter, at 5 of the clock, 
 the mass of the day was sung. In this way all was over by 6 a.m., 
 at which hour on Sundays and feast days there was sermon in the 
 cathedral. James's always made a point of not clashing with the 
 hours and times of its great neighbour, and that not merely out of 
 compliment, but in order to give the parishioners an opportunity 
 of attending also the more solemn offices and occasions in the great 
 church. 
 
 * About this date ', Dreygerwolt writes, ' we (that is, the parish 
 priests of the city) agree amongst ourselves as to the fast to be 
 observed by the Christmas communicants, settling it according to
 
 446 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 the exigencies of the time. They should abstain from flesh meat at 
 least six days before Christmas, and from milk, eggs, and so forth 
 at least three days. Though it used to be always the practice 
 in Miinster for them to abstain from meat from St Lucy's day ' 
 (13th December). 
 
 ' Note (he continues) : few people come to confession before St 
 Thomas's day (aist December) ; but about this time the pastor 
 must be in church at five o'clock for hearing confessions. Note, too, 
 on Sunday before Christmas-day give careful notice of the coming 
 feasts, and warn the communicants to keep sober on Christmas-eve, 
 ne graventur ac indispositi ftant ; also that all who have come to 
 years of discretion offer the customary dues to the pastor. Also on 
 that day he is to read the register of excommunicated persons.' The 
 fact was the pastor of James's had a special difficulty to contend with 
 at this season of the year in a certain ' St Paul's cup ', a well-known 
 and highly appreciated Miinster institution. Some four centuries 
 earlier a bishop of Miinster had given to the chapter a silver cup, 
 and had left funds to keep up a stock of wine to supply all, high 
 and low, rich and poor, with a generous draught from St Paul's cup 
 every Christmas-eve in the cathedral close. The intention was good ; 
 but it is easy to see that the foundation could degenerate into an 
 abuse. The pastor, for his share, came in for as much as a quart 
 of good wine, delivered at his door ; and it was his habit to set this 
 aside for the communicants on the feast day.^ But it is certain 
 that not all the wine from Paul's cup was put to so pious a use ; 
 and it is no wonder that there was need of the warning to his flock 
 — sobrii estoie. Yet it must not be supposed that Dreygerwolt was 
 altogether a Puritan, and a mere foe to wassail and good cheer in 
 due time, place, and measure. The fact was that the contents of 
 St Paul's cup was not the only wine that found its way on Christmas- 
 eve to his house. On this day it was the dean's turn to sing as the 
 antiphon of Magnificat the last of the great series of Christmas 
 antiphons designated from the initial word ' The antiphons O '. At 
 Miinster this was O virgo virginum : and as the pastor of St James's 
 took part in the festal song, he received for his perquisite from the 
 Chapter's cellarer a flask of wine, ' and this is for the pastor's table '. 
 
 Another notice to be given out on the Sunday before Christmas 
 deserves attention : * Bid those communicants who do not come to 
 confession here (at James's) to give notice of their intention to com- 
 municate, on account of the (number of) hosts (to be consecrated).' 
 It would be interesting to know whether any such practice prevailed 
 
 * That is, for their 'confirmation ' with (unconsecrated) wine after holy communion.
 
 PASTOR DREYGERWOLT 447 
 
 in England. Parish rights and parish duties, of course, were much 
 more strict then than now. As in this case, so elsewhere, many- 
 persons would go to confession to the friars, but communicate in their 
 parish church. Of course, as the Blessed Sacrament was reserved 
 for the sick, there was no need to be scrupulously exact in conse- 
 crating just the number of hosts required for the communicants. As 
 Dreygerwolt says elsewhere : ' Better consecrate more than is neces- 
 sary, so that some may remain.' 
 
 Christmas-eve was a busy day, what with confessions and other 
 preparations ; everything was late, so late to-day in the little church 
 that the pastor has to say his vespers in the evening, as he tells his 
 successors. 
 
 But on Christmas night by twelve he is up and on foot again ' at 
 the first peal of the bells ' ; and he says privately the office of the 
 Blessed Virgin and his preparation for mass. James's and the 
 cathedral ring, and have the offices at the same hour this night, 
 viz. matins begin in both at a quarter to one. The matins were said 
 at a pretty smart pace ; the reason being this, that the people — that 
 is, the parishioners of James's — liked to get matins and mass in their 
 own church first, and finish them in time to get to the cathedral for 
 the first mass there. But for all this they still found time to indulge in 
 a little solemnity of local use : it was the practice at James's to sing the 
 Grates nunc omnes with special gravity and manifold and alternate repe- 
 titions by pastor and by choir, especially of the words Gloria in excelsis 
 Deo with which it concludes. All was over by four o'clock, and those 
 who would went over to the cathedral, where matins were just con- 
 cluded. At James's one of the vicars proceeded at once to say the 
 second, a low mass ; the pastor sat hearing confessions of any chance 
 late comers, and at five he began his Christmas-day sermon ; ' let 
 it be very short, and just a simple account of the story of the day ; 
 and the pastor should say that at twelve o'clock noon to-day vespers 
 will be sung, and should earnestly exhort all to flock hither and 
 hear them with all fervour of spirit.' Then there came, amidst the 
 ringing of the bells and with extinguishing of candles, the excom- 
 munication of non-communicant witches, and all the godless ones 
 of the parish, those whose names had been read out the Sunday 
 before and still remained impenitent. At half-past five began the 
 third or high mass, sung by the pastor, after which, putting off his 
 chasuble, he gave holy communion. The practice of James's was 
 to sing the Veni Sancte Spiritus as a preparation. ' I have had at 
 Christmas sometimes a hundred communicants (says Dreygerwolt), 
 sometimes eighty, more or less. At twelve we sing vespers. Domini 
 ecclesiae maioris habent pro grato (the big-wigs of the cathedral take
 
 448 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 it kindly) if we get our vespers over before theirs begin. There is 
 censing before the Venerabile, and the three altars are censed, and 
 there are two Magnificats' Great doings indeed at James's on such 
 feasts as these, for there was a cope at vespers ; the church did not 
 possess one, so the kiister, or sexton, used to go and borrow one from 
 the cathedral, which was always ready to lend ' when we need one ' ; 
 as on Christmas-day, or at Easter, St James's day, or the feast of the 
 Dedication, or such like very high days. The two Magnificats were on 
 account of the censing of the altars, and the origin of the practice 
 of repeating the canticle was doubtless to give time for performing 
 such ceremony with dignity and decency. Many members of the 
 Guild may have had occasion to notice the mean effect of the 
 ceremony of censing the altars on a feast of dedication, where they 
 are many. It is true, however, we have no time to lose over mere 
 ceremonial majesty nowadays, even the most leisured amongst us ; 
 if, indeed, for many the idea still retains any meaning. 
 
 It will have been observed in passing that the pastor of St James's 
 was content to say two masses on Christmas-day, not three. 
 
 As the feast of St Paul the Hermit (loth January) was the anni- 
 versary of the Dedication, it may be considered as closing, in this 
 little parish, the great festivities of Christmastide. ' On the Sunday 
 before, we announce the Dedication of our church (says Dreygerwolt) 
 and it is a feast like one of the highest ; for there we hear and 
 receive things Divine, and there too we shall be buried.' * And note 
 that on this Sunday the pastor sends a missive to all the parish 
 churches of the town, in this wise : *• Honourable Sir, — For the love of 
 God, I earnestly beg you to give notice to your parishioners that the 
 dedication of St James's Church will be kept on the day of St Paul 
 the hermit (that is on Tuesday or Wednesday, &c., as the case may 
 be), and that there will be a sermon in the cathedral hard by after 
 matins." And I send a tip in the shape of coin to every one who is 
 to give out this notice, so that they may not fail herein.' 
 
 On this day of the Dedication the masses were celebrated before 
 the Blessed Sacrament exposed in a monstrance placed above the 
 altar. The first mass at St James's was begun a little before 
 five, so as to be over at the same time as matins in the cathe- 
 dral. ' After matins I always preach in the cathedral up to 
 seven o'clock or nearly, and I tell my kiister to bring a candle 
 for me to read out the register of the dead ; and I wind up by 
 telling the assembled congregation that they should now go to 
 James's for divine service there.' The second mass in that church 
 immediately followed. ' And if you can secure discantatores, those 
 who can sing in harmony, good : but if not, it docs not matter, and
 
 PASTOR DREYGERWOLT 449 
 
 it is no harm ' — nihil impedit ant nocct — which is a sufficient expres- 
 sion of Pastor Dreygervvolt's opinion on a question at times rather 
 burning among us in these days. At half-past eight a low mass, 
 and at half-past nine high mass — sumnia missa — ' which I have 
 always been in the habit of singing myself ; and it is over by half-past 
 ten, or about eleven, for they sing it very slowly and solemnly. At 
 one time I used to have deacon and sub-deacon for this last mass, 
 but I have now given that up.' 
 
 After six hours of almost continuous religious exercise come the 
 secular festivities at home, which Dreygerwolt shall give account of 
 for himself: 'It has been my custom to invite to dine with me this 
 day the three priests helping me, and some of the singers who have 
 shewn themselves most ready with their services. And I give them 
 beer. Also I have sometimes had in the evening some of the maid 
 servants (that is, of the dignitaries of the cathedral close) and the 
 singers ; a mixed company ; but I find it does not do — sed nequa- 
 quavt placet. Some of these maids say : " He invites me for the 
 sake of a present ; " others say, " And why has he not invited me ? " 
 And the doinini think that perhaps their servants give me things. 
 Therefore invite none of whom you are not quite sure. For 
 long experience has taught me something, and a good deal more 
 will become clear to those who come after.' The fact is the new 
 doctrines of Luther had already made their way into the cathedral 
 close of Munster, and stately as seemed the edifice of ecclesiastical 
 greatness in the ancient episcopal city, it was just on the eve of 
 a crash and ruin, and the pastor of James's already saw the dangers 
 ahead. 
 
 This may suffice to give an idea of the nature of Dreygerwolt's 
 Ordinarius, half technical, half gossiping, with a fair admixture of 
 practical business sense in both elements. It is interesting in par- 
 ticular as giving a glimpse of what may be called clerical low life 
 at a much-abused period. What can be more simple than the 
 simplicity and poverty of this little town church? Yet what life 
 there is in all ; a robust religious life of its own that maintains itself 
 independently of its great neighbour. And with the poverty there is 
 no carelessness ; for the personal religious sense asserts itself in the 
 most artless and unconscious manner. Witness what the writer has 
 to say in regard to the Host destined for exposition on the Dedication 
 feast : ' I consecrate this Host the day before, as perhaps the priest 
 who comes for the occasion to say the first Mass may not have much 
 experience in the way of placing It' (in the monstrance)— ^«/Vz forte 
 primissarius no)i pcritiis in imponendo ; he might very possibly be 
 one but recently ordained. 
 
 1668 G g
 
 450 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 It may be well before closing this paper to touch on this matter 
 of exposition of the Blessed Sacrament and on a few other points 
 illustrated by the Ordinaj-itis, which often excite our unsatisfied 
 curiosity — as to communion, confession, and so on — about the time 
 of the Reformation. At the council of Cologne of 1452 the papal 
 legate, Cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, forbad exposition of the Blessed 
 Sacrament on more than a single day in the year besides Corpus 
 Christi — that is, on the occasion of some need. But this does not 
 necessarily imply an exposition on the altar in our modern sense ; 
 it might mean only a procession, for instance. But the text of 
 Dreygerwolt is quite explicit : the host consecrated the day before 
 was exposed {tenetur) on the altar during the masses of the feast, 
 and reserved until the next day at least. The same practice was 
 observed by him on the feast of Corpus Christi : ' A Host (he 
 says) is consecrated the day before, so that on the feast Ecce panis 
 angelorum may be sung, and that it may be exposed ' {apponatur). 
 That this exposition in our modern sense during mass was, at 
 least as early as the beginning of the sixteenth century, an estab- 
 lished practice in northern Germany is fairly certain. I recall a 
 description of the ancient Catholic services written by the burgo- 
 master or head-borough of a town on the Baltic just before the 
 change of religion, which opens with a description of the way 
 in which before high mass on the first Sunday of Advent (if I 
 remember rightly) the Blessed Sacrament was placed in a monstrance 
 held in the hand of a silver statue of the Blessed Virgin which was 
 placed over the high altar; and an inventory dated 1540 of the parish 
 church of Greifenberg, a town of Pomerania, contains a description 
 of just such another statue — a product, all this, it must be allowed, of 
 a somewhat curiously refined devout fancy.^ With a little trouble 
 
 ^ [As the tract from which these details are derived can be in the hands of only 
 a very few persons in this country, I give a translation here of the passage in 
 question ; not only is it interesting in itself, but it will give the reader a specimen, 
 just a momentary glimpse, of that type of late mediaeval piety and devotionalism 
 which I have in more than one place insisted on as specifically German. 
 
 The town on the Baltic was Stralsund. Our informant writes thus ; it is the 
 opening of the tract : 
 
 * Of Advent. — First, in Advent, before Christmas, a mass was sung every morning 
 at the stroke of half-past six at the altar in the middle of the choir ; a silver Mary 
 image was brought there, about three feet high, with a monstrance in her hand, 
 and therein was a Host. The chaplain who said the mass brought it to the altar 
 from the ciborium [i. e. from the reposiiorium, whether Sacrament-house or what not, 
 from which the Host had been taken to be placed in the monstrance described]. 
 Two " monstranten " [evidently a special name ; these " monstranten " were in fact 
 the deacon and subdeacon of the mass] went before, each with a burning torch in his 
 hand, and meanwhile the bells were rung. These three wore costly mass vestments 
 of silk shot with gold [or embroidered ? : " van siden, golde undt sus thogerichtet "]. 
 Before them went twenty or thirty boys, each with a burning wax candle in his hand, 
 and these lights were placed before the altar which was decked out (" besettet ")
 
 PASTOR DREYGERWOLT 45^ 
 
 doubtless a whole history might be recovered ; but it is to Germany, 
 and not to Italy, I think, that we must look for the origins of these 
 particular forms of modern Eucharistic devotion called * Exposition ' 
 and ' Benediction '. 
 
 As regards communions at St James's, Munster, the regular com- 
 munion days during the year were : Christmas ; Maundy Thursday, 
 Easter-eve, and Easter-day ; Pentecost, the Assumption, and All Saints. 
 As we have seen, the communicants at Christmas were from 80 to 100, 
 more or less ; on Holy Thursday, 80 or 90 — the young people of the 
 parish especially communicated on that day; on Easter-eve, about 
 50 ; on Easter-day, 150 ; Pentecost and the Assumption, 30 to 40 ; on 
 All Saints, aliqui, some. The absence of communicants on Corpus 
 Christi day seems more singular to us than it would have done to 
 people of that day. Communion was invariably given after the Mass 
 was finished ; on Maundy Thursday, after the Blessed Sacrament had 
 been carried to the place of repose and the whole office was over 
 {et deinde commimicajit, postqtiam omnia rite peractd) ; in a passage 
 already quoted it is stated that the celebrant divested himself of the 
 chasuble before giving communion. Vejii Sanctc SpiriUis was sung 
 immediately before ; and, generally, an antiphon of the Blessed 
 Virgin afterwards. As regards confessions, the Easter confessions 
 began regularly on Wednesday : ' The Pastor must be in the church 
 the whole day (says Dreygerwolt) for a great many come to con- 
 fession ; on Thursday, too, a good many come, so it will be well for 
 you to say matins overnight, or at least to get up early in the 
 morning ; ' and again : ' On Easter Eve read all your office up to 
 vespers in the morning very early, for you will be occupied all the day 
 long in hearing confessions.' But the preparation for Communion 
 days was not only a serious business for the pastor ; the communi- 
 cants addressed themselves to this holy duty with a seriousness which 
 would certainly be dispensed with in the present age. We have 
 already seen the fasting imposed at Christmas ; for the Easter com- 
 munion, the fast of Lent was taken to suffice ; on the week before 
 
 with two or three hundred lights and [there were lights] also (? " sus ") all about in 
 the church. This mass lasted an hour with singing and figuring and playing on the 
 organ and with such a sounding noise (" brasse ") as ever you can imagine. . . . 
 The above-described Advent-mass was celebrated up to Christmas Eve ; that was 
 the last.' 
 
 So our narrator. How many churches in London, except three or four perhaps 
 of the richer sort, could celebrate their Quarant' ore with greater bravery to-day? 
 The foregoing passage is drawn from p. 3 of Franz IVesse/s, weiland Biirger- 
 meisters der Stadt Stralsund, Schilderung des katholischen Gottesdienstes in Stral- 
 sund kurz vor der Kirchenverbesseritng, hrsg. v. D. Ernst Heinrich Zober 
 (Stralsund, C. Loffler, 1837, pp. 28 in 410). Wessel was bom in 1487 and died in 
 1570. He was a prominent burgher and active in introducing the religious changes 
 in his native town; the tract was written by him in 1550.] 
 
 Gg 2
 
 452 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Pentecost communicants ate meat on Sunday and Monday, abstained 
 on Tuesday and Wednesday, and fasted on Thursday, Friday, and 
 Saturday. At the Assumption they abstained six days from meat 
 and three days from eggs, milk, &c. ' The pastor, however, may 
 reduce this (he writes) according to the requirements of the time ; 
 but this is the ancient custom.' For All Saints the pastor settled the 
 fast according to discretion. 
 
 A few words of more general import before closing. When there 
 is no polemical end in view, where there are no Protestant objectors 
 in sight. Catholic writers are apt, at least some of them, to vie with 
 Protestants in the loudness of their lamentations over the terrible 
 state to which the Church was reduced at the period just before the 
 great revival of religious zeal in the sixteenth century. I am inclined 
 to think that we overdo this abasement of soul, and that we have 
 not need to be so greatly ashamed — of our forefathers. True, there 
 were abuses, there were scandals ; and if we wish to be sincere and 
 true, Rome, too, in the fifteenth century was both a seat and a source 
 of them. But after the most has been made of unpleasant facts, 
 I think that in Rome and elsewhere there is an amount of good 
 existing in the century before the Protestant revolt which it would 
 in many ways profit us to realize more than we do. The piety then 
 existing, and the devotion, was different in its manifestation from that 
 of our own day. But I doubt whether even in our strong points the 
 advantage lies all with us. 
 
 There is another matter I should like just to touch on. We are 
 very fond of attributing the origins of the modern ways of devotion 
 to Italy — 'Italian' they are called. But just as so much of the 
 Roman rite in its most imposing and significant manifestations is 
 now recognized as not Roman at all but really Galilean, so I will 
 venture to suggest that much of what is called nowadays Italian in 
 devotion is really German.^ 
 
 ' [Since this paper was written two or three other documents of the same 
 kind as Dreygerwolt's have been printed. It is useless to attempt any detailed 
 account of them here, and only necessar>' to say that they all go to confirm, and 
 even to develope, on the same modern lines, the sort of Eucharistic practice and 
 devotion of which Dreygerwolt gives us an idea. I should like to direct attention 
 also to four articles by the Rev. H. Thurston, S.J., entitled ' Benediction of the 
 Blessed Sacrament', in T/te Month for June, July, August, September, 1901. As 
 regards the modem rites of ' Exposition ' and ' Benediction ', he comes to the same 
 conclusion as that suggested in the text above.]
 
 XXVI 
 
 ABBAT STENGEL^ 
 
 It is difficult to see why, after the lapse of two centuries and a half, 
 the Laiides S. P. N. Benedicti of abbat Charles Stengel should have 
 been reprinted.^ It cannot be viewed as a contribution to learning ; 
 indeed the title-page declares it to be a skimming of Haeften ; whilst 
 the Benedictine Order cannot need any panegyric or apology that 
 Stengel, working at his very best, could possibly supply. I intend 
 to use it therefore here for quite another purpose, and to make it the 
 text of quite a different discourse ; and nothing, or next to nothing, 
 more need be said by me about it. As abbat Stengel viewed as 
 a monk and writer is a more than usually favourable specimen of 
 a class of Benedictine scholars before the Maurists set another pattern, 
 I propose to give an account of him, and thus make him serv^e to 
 indicate the character of the German Benedictinism of his time ; and 
 when Stengel has been considered, I intend to add a few words on the 
 contrast afforded by the dominant character and spirit of the German 
 Benedictines for the century and a half after the close of the Thirty 
 Years War to the character and spirit of the French. Charles Stengel 
 was the son of a man who held office in the household of the Fuggers 
 of Augsburg at a time when these ennobled merchant princes passed as 
 equals of the most ancient and powerful subject houses, and were the 
 friends and confidants of ruling sovereigns. The father died young, 
 leaving two boys, of the ages of seven and four. Both boys received 
 their early education with the Jesuits, the younger (George) becoming 
 a member of the Society. The elder (Charles), at the age of twelve, 
 removed in 1593 to the great Benedictine house of SS. Ulrich and 
 Afra, in Augsburg, where he was professed some three years later, 
 
 ^ From the Downside Review, March 1900. 
 
 - Laudes S. P. N. Benedicti, eiusque sanctissimae Regulae et Ordinis, ex Dis- 
 quisitionibus monasticis R. P. Benedicti Haeffteni, Praepositi Affligemensts con- 
 cinnatae et in tres libros distribtttae, per R. P. D. Carolum Stengelitwi. Aug. 
 Vindel. MDCXL VI J. Curis Monasterii S. Benedicti dc Urbe iterum editae. [The 
 present paper, I may explain, arose out of a request by the editor of the Downside 
 Re-c'iew that I should ' review ' this reprinted book. Such a task was for me, from 
 the very character and, as I thought, present worthlessness of the Laudes, impossible 
 of accomplishment. But I tried to meet the editor's wish in another \yay, namely 
 by using it as an occasion, or excuse, for the brief paper now reprinted. The 
 beginning and the end have been rewritten.]
 
 454 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 soon after completing his fifteenth year. His great desire was to 
 pursue higher studies at a university ; but he was prevented by the 
 consensus of the older monks of the day, as he himself tells us when 
 writing down his reminiscences at the age of over seventy ; for they 
 held learning in suspicion, he says, and thought that solid studies 
 were not meant for monks. This was in part an interesting result of 
 the Protestant Reformation ; but only in part. For in the later 
 Middle Ages there had been a strong current in the German monas- 
 teries against learning ; the objection was taken for practical reasons. 
 A long and interesting letter on the subject is extant, dated 1473, 
 written by Henry Luer, a secular, parish priest of Dillingen, to the 
 abbat of St Afra's, strongly urging the foundation of a college for 
 Benedictines in some university. He was an intimate friend of the 
 abbat, he could speak plainly, and he does so. ' Sound learning and 
 the knowledge of the Scriptures ', he writes, ' require sound teachers. 
 You prelates and your like hate this learning and detest this know- 
 ledge ; for you fear that if the ark threatens to tumble, some Oza may 
 put forth his hand to keep it steady and set it right. Change your 
 tone, I entreat you, and join no more in the clamour of those who in 
 their scholastic contests cry down studies and the means of pursuing 
 them. Your cry is the cry of fear, but you fear where no fear is. 
 See that whilst you are fearing the frost you are not buried in the 
 snow. I quite admit that prelates can send their subjects to the 
 university and lose them there. But before you advance that objec- 
 tion, look around and see how many you have ruined and lost at home 
 in your monasteries. Be prudent by all means ; but do what it is 
 useful to do, and have a little more trust in Almighty God.' The 
 project of a college at a university urged by Luer never came to any- 
 thing. Still, his exhortations were probably not quite without effect. 
 Perhaps the secularization of Ellwangen not long before, which touched 
 them close at Augsburg, may have helped to make some people alive 
 to the dangers of the policy of laisser-aller. At any rate there are 
 some signs of the existence of a different spirit at St Afra's in the 
 next generation, which counted men like W. Wittwer, Clement Sender, 
 and the omniscient Veit Bild, the friend of Peutinger and Pirkheimer. 
 But by Stengel's time things had all crusted over again, old style. 
 
 Stengel had no fair chance ; but being an able young man he was 
 smartly utilized. Though he did not get his wish, he still continued 
 to say the Magnificat and the four psalms he had vowed daily to recite 
 should he get it. Two of his young companions took the step of 
 a transfer to another order ; he remained behind to make the best 
 of things. At the age of twenty-one he was made cantor and master of 
 the school, which took up six full hours of his day ; at the same time
 
 ABBAT STENGEL 455 
 
 he had no exemption from choir duty except prime. And so he went 
 on for the next thirteen years, teaching, as he says, Syntax and 
 Prosody, Cicero and Virgil, Rhetoric and sometimes the elements of 
 Grammar, the Dialectics of Eonseca, and sometimes cases of con- 
 science : ' and I dictated two whole treatises (he adds), one on the 
 sacrifice of the Mass, and the other de variorum stattiiun peccatis' 
 Between 1603 and 16 15 he also wrote seven comedies, theatricals 
 being always much cherished in religious schools. These were in 
 Latin ; the subjects were all the life of a saint, except one which was 
 called ' Nemesis : a Satirical Poem ', at the representation of which the 
 Most Serene Maximilian Ernest, Archduke of Austria, assisted. From 
 1607 he had some help in the school, but to make up for it was 
 appointed master of novices, a post he held for four years. He was 
 made sub-prior in 1615, and seven years later, by order of the Bishop 
 of Augsburg after mature deliberation with the Visitors, he was ap- 
 pointed Oeconomus of the house. ' Eor twenty years ', he says, ' I had 
 been occupied only with spiritual things and kept temporal administra- 
 tion at arm's length, and now had to give all those up for this.' 
 
 He records three letters which he received from three friends on the 
 occasion. They are characteristic and interesting for their points of 
 view. One was from a private monk of Weingarten on behalf of his 
 brethren there : ' We wish you every success — omnia felicia et fausta 
 — and we are all truly sorry for your Reverence.' The next was from 
 an abbat : ' It is a very good thing — bene factum — that the bishop 
 has appointed you Oeconomus. Your life, your merits, your doctrine, 
 your diligence, all mark you out for this responsible post. I will call 
 you happy when you shall have found by experience that honours are 
 no burden, nay, anything but trouble and turmoil.' The third was 
 from the well-known Jesuit father, Matthew Rader, the author of 
 Bavaria Sancta, and an old friend : ' I see you are on the high road 
 to getting a mitre — grassari ad infulam. What else can we expect 
 from your appointment to such a post as Oeconomus ? I congratulate 
 your Reverence ; and hope by and by, perhaps, to congratulate you 
 still more ' ; which shews too, by the way, what was this father's view 
 of the use of an abbat. 
 
 But the bishop knew very well what he was about in appointing 
 a man engaged so long in purely spiritual concerns to the temporal 
 administration of a great establishment which was the head and heart 
 of something like a feudal princedom. Stengel, it is true, was baulked 
 of the life he had evidently desired ; and, distracted by a dozen cares, 
 had been disabled from securing a kind of excellence which of its 
 nature demands concentration of mind and labour. Those whose 
 influence was dominant in the low-lying pool of settled self-complacency
 
 456 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 which St Afra's then presented might mar the man's career, but could 
 not quench the zeal of his soul or reduce the activity of his mind to 
 that of their own. Stengel was, in a word, the man of the occasion in 
 his house, the man who 'kept things going', as the saying is, whilst 
 others lost themselves in themselves or simply went to sleep. It is 
 only when we come to look over the correspondence of this monk, of 
 which, happily, some considerable portion for about the years 1606- 
 162a is still extant, that it is possible to gain an idea of his all- 
 devouring activity. It is almost wholly concerned with literary under- 
 takings, the promotion of sound studies and of that educational 
 formation in which he had not been permitted to share. One is simply 
 amazed to see the extent of his relations and his interests. The fact 
 that the correspondence fails on his appointment as CEconomus is 
 hardly less honourable to him than his previous activity. Of the eight 
 years 162% to 1630, no record remains. Then comes the realization 
 of Rader's prophecy — a mitre. It was in this wise. 
 
 In the ebb and flow of fortune in the Thirty Years War, the Imperial 
 troops recovered both in the north and in the south of Germany the 
 territories of Benedictine monasteries which had been long occupied 
 by Lutherans. In this way Lambspring afterwards came to the 
 English Congregation. Among the monasteries thus recovered was 
 that of Anhausen, about three miles from Ulm. For between seventy 
 and eighty years it had been presided over by a Lutheran abbat, and 
 occupied by a school ; and people even at one time talked of ' con- 
 ventuals ' and ' novices ' quite in the old way, and choir sei-vices were 
 still kept up. It is a mistake to suppose that it was reserved for the 
 aliveness of the nineteenth century and the genius of our own people 
 to discover the virtues and advantages of ecclesiastical ' continuity '. 
 Stengel was postulated by the bishop of Augsburg for the abbey of 
 Anhausen in August, 1629, and again in June, 1630. The Lutheran 
 abbat, a very old man, saw what was coming and left Anhausen on 
 August 20 with his wife and all his household goods ; on December 14 
 Stengel, with five monks for a community, took possession of the bare 
 walls and nothing else ; everything — furniture, stock, store, had been 
 utterly cleared out ; on the 29th he was blessed in the Jesuit church 
 at Dillingen. Stengel's abbacy extended over the next sixteen years, 
 and is distributed as follows. In the midst of our modern comforts, 
 in our snuggeries sheltered from stress of storm and the blasts that 
 blow rudely abroad, when we are so ready to cry aloud over the fate 
 of us innocent Catholics in this hard, profane and wicked world that 
 will not take us always at our own valuation, it is well to see what 
 those who went before had sometimes to go through, keeping their 
 temper sweet after it all, as Stengel did. He had his first pontifical
 
 ABBAT STENGEL 457 
 
 function at Anhausen, on January 2H, 163 1 ; on February 26, 1632, was 
 turned out of the monastery by the Protestant troops, after making it 
 just habitable ; then he became a wanderer, housed by compassionate 
 archbishops, bishops, and abbats, whom in turn, as he notes, he relieved 
 of some of their burdens by pontificating for them : he specifies 
 some two hundred such occasions then and later. After an exile of 
 three years and a half he returns to Anhausen (August 14, 1635) to find 
 everything laid waste and ruined ; after nearly three years spent in 
 putting the house in order, the monastery is sacked by the Protestant 
 troops; he is obliged to turn out again May 14, 1638, and is stripped 
 on the road in his flight by a company of soldiers. He is back again 
 at Anhausen August i, 1640, but turned out again by the fortune of 
 war on February 27 following. Then come six years in which he 
 found a temporary resting place where he could, going back to 
 Anhausen just to assert rights of possession whenever the military 
 situation allowed it. At length peace was in sight — the Peace of 
 Westphalia ; and in this prospect he made his final retirement to his 
 old home of St Afra's on February 20, 1647, the now abbat of which 
 was one of his oldest and best friends, Bernard Hertfelder. It was 
 now, in 1647, that Stengel published the Latides S. P. N. Benedicti\ 
 and it is in the light thrown on the author by his fortunes and expe- 
 riences that this book must be viewed. It was a sort of expression 
 of thankfulness and of a ' renewal of spirit ' when at last the weary 
 wanderer, safe again in the old home of his youth, might in peace of 
 soul look forward to the inevitable hour. 
 
 Stengel's life was prolonged for a further sixteen years, and these 
 must have been among his happiest days. He was more busy in 
 scribbling than ever, though his books came more and more rarely to 
 the ' honours ' of print. Among the rest he then wrote his memoirs ; 
 from which we may glean many curiosities and appreciations : ' Ten 
 times', he says, for instance, 'I took part, by invitation, in the General 
 Corpus Christi Procession in Augsburg, 1645 to 1655, ""• mitre. 
 
 His last work was to exhibit a 'Crown of Light' {Corona lucida) for 
 the glory of St Benedict, in the shape of a list of Benedictine writers. 
 This book was duly approved on November 16, 1661, and he left it 
 ready for the press. His preface begins (at the age of eighty, ever 
 faithful to the first ideals, it is the boy of eighteen who speaks still) : 
 ' Via ad Deum est scientia, quae ad institutionem recte et honeste 
 Vivendi pertinet. Per scientiam itur ad disciplinam, per disciplinam 
 itur ad bonitatem, per bonitatem ad beatitudinem. Nam scientia est 
 Deum noscere, virtus colere ; in illo sapientia, in hoc iustitia continetur. 
 Est igitureruditioamplissima supellex et haereditas principatu maior.' 
 In nineteen chapters Stengel gives his list of Benedictine writers, which
 
 458 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 comprises in the first age, among others, Comgall, abbat of Bangor, 
 and Dionysius Exiguus, and Gregory of Tours, and Martin of Braga. 
 The presentment of the second age is wide-reaching and comprehensive 
 as the first, and all is fish that comes to Stengel's net. It was not 
 vainglory in the old man ; he could only know and do as he had 
 been taught, or had found means to teach himself 
 
 He passed to a better life little more than twelve months later, on 
 January 26, 1663, just at the time when a true ' Crown of Light' for 
 St Benedict was beginning to attract the attention of the world in the 
 literary labours of the Congregation of St-Maur. What Stengel would 
 well have desired to do they accomplished. It was within a few 
 months of Stengel's death, in July, 1663, that Mabillon was called up 
 to the monastery of St-Denis, and was soon engaged on the Acts of 
 the Benedictine Saints, a monument of piety, which, if it seemed to 
 rob St Benedict of many whom the Wions, the Bucelins, and the 
 Stengels had, in their zeal, enrolled in the Benedictine ranks, yet by 
 its sincerity, simplicity, and truth, and its very rejection of false and 
 legendary fancies, was to give new lustre to the fame of the holy 
 patriarch, as shewing forth that his own spirit of sincerity, simplicity, 
 and truth animated his sons still. 
 
 The name and fame of the Maurists are nowadays taken as a matter 
 of course ; as though they were a sort of inevitable offshoot from that 
 venerable primaeval tree which, thanks to the powers of repetition of 
 the conventional scribes, we have all learnt to know and recognize : 
 ' Benedictine learning '. It is, as it were, assumed that the Maurist 
 school came into existence like some wild and happy product of 
 nature, nobody knows quite how, and nobody cared ; and that it only 
 awaited the advent of the discoverer who should find it, all fresh and 
 blooming, like a modest dew-berry in a dry ditch under the hedge. 
 Few persons realize that the Maurists and their work are a deliberate 
 conception of one of the greatest of Frenchmen, and one of the greatest 
 of statesmen, Cardinal Richelieu. With that power of seeing into the 
 very heart's core of men which differentiates the real ruler from the 
 pinchbeck variety, he recognized in the unpretentious Dom Tarisse 
 the fitting instrument. To this forgotten first general of the Maurists 
 it may be said that all they have done and the spirit in which they 
 did their work are due. The Maurists are no accident ; they are the 
 outcome of minds that had the power to conceive a design, the wit to 
 recognize the agents and the means proper for carrying it out, and the 
 patience to bring it to maturity. 
 
 Stengel's preface bears witness to a trait of his character none too 
 common among men who have led so busy and chequered a life as 
 his — a kind, unselfish, and grateful heart. The two brothers, Charles
 
 ABBAT STENGEL 459 
 
 and George, had chosen, or been led into, different paths ; but the 
 elder ever followed the younger with a sincere affection and a certain 
 brotherly pride. In one respect they were a pair ; each wrote close 
 on a hundred books ; most of these were actually printed, and, it is to 
 be hoped, had their day — though few indeed can have come to the 
 honours of a reprint. In the formal dedication of the Laudcs to two 
 abbats, the ordinarily ' most dear brother George' is this time squeezed 
 in between the prelates under the guise of clarissimus Dominus frater 
 mens P. Georgius Stengelius, S.J.' These two abbats, by the way, 
 had both had compassion on Charles, and had taken him in and lodged 
 him in the days of his wanderings. In recounting their titles to his 
 gratitude, he says of one of them, in a style that pictures the simplicity 
 of the man : ' When I was bereft of everything, and meditating a 
 journey home on foot, you pressed upon me three by no means sorry 
 steeds {tribus non conienmendis eqicis), by which notable benefaction 
 you greatly obliged me. For I not merely thus made my journey in 
 comfort, but you were the cause, too, that I was able, when I reached 
 home, by means of these beasts to furnish my house and feed my 
 household.' 
 
 It has been mentioned that Stengel's correspondence shews how 
 extended and manifold were his interests. As may be naturally 
 expected, he was deeply concerned in Constantine Cajetan's project of 
 a Benedictine College in Rome, and in the establishment of the Bene- 
 dictine University of Salzburg. There is evidence of a certain spirit of 
 rivalry between these two institutions, and a certain unpleasantness in 
 their relations, at least from the side of Cajetan and Rome. 
 
 It is characteristic of the man that he was able to embrace the 
 interests of both with equal care, and to wish them both well. As a 
 fact the Roman project came to nothing. The Benedictine University 
 of Salzburg was for about a century and a half the one great common 
 contribution of the German Benedictines to the Advancement of 
 Learning. Its writers set themselves to cultivate their distinctively 
 professional pursuits, Theology, Philosophy, Canon Law. How 
 many of the volumes coming from the pens of its professors and 
 alumni are worth the trouble of opening at the present day ? The 
 work of the Maurists is still fundamental in branch after branch of 
 learning, sacred and secular. These Maurists found in Germany in 
 the course of the eighteenth century isolated and sporadic imitators : 
 the two brothers Pez and Philibert Hueber at Melk ; and there was 
 an abortive attempt at Gottweih ; there was prince-abbat Froben 
 Forster at Ratisbon. The solitary case of a sustained effort during 
 the whole century was the abbey of St Blasien in the Black Forest. 
 But it may be truly said of the German Benedictines as a body, with
 
 46o LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 their numerous and immensely wealthy monasteries, all the revenues 
 of which were in their own hands (for few, I think none, of them fell 
 into commendam), some of them ruling veritable principalities, that the 
 spirit stigmatized by the priest Henry Luer in 1473 but too faithfully 
 represents the spirit prevailing in the dominant circles of the order 
 until all went under in the storms consequent on the French Revolu- 
 tion. That this was so, the bootless efforts of Legipontius to excite 
 the abbats to some common effort for the advancement at all events 
 of sacred learning, in branches other than those purely professional, 
 are sufficient evidence. 
 
 It must not be supposed that in these great houses the communities 
 simply went to sleep, or were allowed to fall into laxity and non- 
 observance, or that in spirit they were secularized. Their output in 
 ascetical books, all consistently mediocre, is indeed remarkable. They 
 rebuilt their houses and churches on a princely scale ; as witness the 
 monasteries still existing in Austria, or so many stupendous palaces 
 in Northern and Southern Germany now in the hands of the greatest 
 nobles ; or in Swabia such churches as those of Weingarten,Wiblingen 
 and Zwiefalten.^ It is not that they were not in possession of exten- 
 sive libraries^ housed in some cases in much splendour, and supple- 
 mented by cabinets of minerals, &c., &c., very complete. But what 
 came out of it all ? ^ The modern and secular mind is apt to ask itself 
 whether this literary department was not just part and parcel of the 
 ' greatness ' befitting * our house ' : in a word, an item of the vanitas 
 vanitatiim. Everywhere there is sign and token of a real appreciation 
 or even love of pontificality,^ of the abbatical show on the Pralaten- 
 bank in the assembly of secular magnates in the various circles of the 
 
 ^ An interesting account of a journey through the great Swabian monasteries in 
 the latest decades of the eighteenth century was written by Fr Nepomuk Haun- 
 tinger, librarian of St Gallen. It is printed by Dom G. Meier, librarian of Ein- 
 siedeln, in the tract entitled Siiddeittsche Kloster vor htctidert Jahren, Koln, 1889. 
 
 ^ The literary journeys of tb^e Protestant G. W. Zapf chiefly through the monas- 
 teries of Southern Germany and Switzerland shew that an interest in historical 
 matters and activity in researches among the local archives existed in most houses ; 
 but it was the case of the interest of individuals employing their leisure hours ; and 
 all formed no element of the life or interests of the communities. Nothing sub- 
 stantial could come from this sort of work. How dififerent the case of the Maurists ! 
 in the very last years of the Congregation, in accordance with the request of the 
 Civil Power, they undertook and added to all their other labours to bear a great 
 share in the managing and executing the vast scheme of a real Trcsor des Chartes, 
 in which copies of every important ancient document, scattered in local repositories 
 throughout France, should be copied or preserved in the truly National Archives in 
 Paris. See a brief notice towards the end of the Introduction to Chateaubriand's 
 Etudes historiques. He doubtless knew of the details of the matter from con- 
 temporary officials connected with the scheme. The ministerial circulars and 
 the correspondence, &c., relating to the project are now printed in vol. ii of Le 
 Cofnite des travaux historiques et scientijiques, Paris, Imprimerie Nationale, 1886. 
 
 ^ This tendency, or rather settled state of mind, is ingenuously betrayed by 
 Stengel, p. 459 above.
 
 ABBAT STENGEL 461 
 
 Empire ; combined pontification and piety, that seems to sum up the 
 situation. 
 
 When shall we get some sketch of the general history of the Bene- 
 dictines up to the present day in the manageable space of two or 
 three octavo volumes ? But then it would have to be a sketch giving 
 a rational appreciation of what they have done, what also they 
 attempted but failed to do. Not merely so, but a modest account 
 would have also to be taken of those who, busy with their own 
 satisfaction, neither succeeded nor failed, being in the spirit of what 
 Newman calls a * meritorious innocence, resolute cheerfulness and 
 strenuous tranquillity ', secure of a safe provision for life. Such an 
 account of the long history and manifold work of the Benedictines in 
 the world can be written only by one, or by those, possessing a keen 
 sense not merely of the contrast afforded by the Benedictines of 
 different ages, but also of the contemporaneous contrasts afforded, as 
 well in mediaeval as in modern times, by differing kinds of Benedic- 
 tine work or ideal as developed among the different races and peoples 
 of Western Europe. It would be a chequered picture, but it would be 
 an instructive, and on the whole a really encouraging one — I mean 
 to ordinary people living out in the work-a-day world — if not always 
 satisfying self-esteem and self-complacency. Still I am apt to think 
 the Benedictine Order can well bear such make-weights— much better 
 indeed than any of the other great Religious Orders. The reason 
 doubtless lies in the fact that the Benedictines have never been wedded 
 to 'one good custom ', which, we have been told, is in human societies, 
 ' corrupting ' ; and in their readiness to make ' new beginnings ', as 
 Cardinal Newman says.^ This passage of Cardinal Newman's appre- 
 ciation of the Benedictines has become classical ; there is no need to 
 repeat it here, only to emphasize its importance as a key to the due 
 understanding of their history. 
 
 ^ Historical Sketches vol. ill p. 388 (London, Pickering, 1873) ; compare also ibid, 
 p. 426 sqq.
 
 xxvu 
 
 RICHELIEU AND THE BENEDICTINES^ 
 
 The volume of Dom Audebert's Memoirs,^ from whatever point of 
 view it be regarded, is by far the most important of those which have 
 yet appeared in the series entitled Archives de la France monastique ; 
 if indeed, from the questions which it raises no less than the informa- 
 tion it supplies, it be not the most notable publication on the subject 
 of specifically Benedictine history that has appeared for many a long 
 day. A brief notice of the author's life, explaining the circumstances 
 in which these MSmoires had their origin, will perhaps best convey an 
 idea of their particular value to those who would wish to understand 
 the history and fortunes of Benedictine monachism in the period subse- 
 quent to the Council of Trent. 
 
 Dom Audebert's career may be summed up as follows : He was 
 born in 1600, at Bellac, in the Haute-Marche — 'contree aux paysages 
 austeres, nourriciere de natures positives et fortement tremp^es ' 
 (preface, p. vi). ' The future Maurist ', continues his editor, ' ever 
 preserved ' (his Memoirs give us assurance of it) ' traces of these 
 influences of the natal soil' (pp. vi-vii). He was educated by the 
 Jesuits, the only good teachers in France at that time. At the age of 
 twenty he was professed in the Order of St Benedict ; the discipline 
 and observance of his time of novitiate were those of the Lorraine 
 Congregation of Saint- Vannes, founded by Dom Didier de la Cour : 
 his obedience, however, was vowed to the superiors of the then very 
 restricted and still obscure group of men out of which was eventually 
 to develope the Maurist Congregation. Already in the year 1628 he 
 began with St-Laumer at Blois a series of priorships ; this position, in 
 those days of commendatory abbats, meant real and independent 
 headship in the house. In 1642 he became Prior of St-Denis, an 
 appointment which, as the editor says, brought him near ' the centre 
 of government of the Congregation' ; — that is Saint-Germain-des-Prds 
 
 ^ From the Downside Review, December 191 1. 
 
 ' Les Mhnoires du R. P. Dom Bernard Audebert estant Prietir de St-Denis et 
 depuis Assistant du R. P. Gene'ral, publics par le R. P. Dom L^on Guilloreau. Paris, 
 Jouve et Cie, 191 1 {Archives de la France monastique, Vol. X). The foot-notes as 
 to the various French lienedictine Congregations in the sixteenth and seventeenth 
 centuries are added by a friend.
 
 RICHELIEU AND THE MAURISTS 463 
 
 (united to the Congregation in 1631), which the Superior-General, 
 Dom Tarisse, took as his place of residence. ' In 1648 he makes 
 another step ahead, and becomes, at the general chapter held in May, 
 second assistant of the Rev. Father General ; he remains at this post 
 from 1648 to 1654, and vacates it only to take in hand the govern- 
 ment of the abbey of Saint-Germain-des-Pres ' (i.e. to become prior 
 of that house). 'At last, in 1660, he was called to the generalate in 
 place of the Rev. Father Jean Harel ' (p. viii) ; he resigned on account 
 of infirmities in 1672, and died three years later. 
 
 The AUmoires cover the years 1642-1654. The years 1642-1644 
 are dismissed in sixteen pages ; the next three years and a half, up to 
 the general chapter held in the summer of [648, in eighty. In this 
 chapter the aged Superior-General Dom Tarisse, who was too ill 
 to attend it, carried through his demand for release from office. 
 From this point the record seems, in many respects, as if intended for 
 the writer's own private use and memory of the current business 
 brought before the Regime of the Congregation (that is, the Superior- 
 General and his assistants) and of the determinations taken ; with 
 explanations and details of a wholly private character bearing on 
 persons or probable motives in concerns of the most private adminis- 
 trative nature. It was evidently never intended for publication, and 
 there are indications that when written it was never reviewed even for 
 perusal within the circles immediately concerned. So far as the 
 present paper is concerned, it is not proposed to enter on any of these 
 details of the main record. What I wish to say arises out of the very 
 brief notice of the years 1642-1644, sixteen pages in all, dealing with 
 events previous to Dom Audebert's real entree en matikre. 
 
 Dom Audebert, as the editor says (p. vi), begins to draw up the 
 record now published on the very morrow of the death of Richelieu. 
 Indeed this is the seemingly rather curious beginning : ' Ad Dei gloriavi 
 1642. M^ Le Card^ Due de Richelieu mourut a Paris en son palays 
 royal sur le midy, le 4"^ decembre 1642.' The second sentence is 
 hardly less significant: ' Par sa mort plusieurs abbayes vacquerent, at 
 surtout trois qui sont chefs-d'ordre, a scavoir : celles de Cluny, de 
 Cisteaux et de Premonstre ' (p. i). The editor in his first note to the 
 book enumerates the sixteen other abbeys— most, if not all, Bene- 
 dictine — which the Cardinal held in commendani ; adding ' cctte 
 enumeration est assez ^loquente par elle-meme et dispense de tout 
 commentaire ' (p. i, n. i). This summary judgement raises in me 
 doubts : and first of all whether this accumulation of abbeys— great 
 abbeys with three chefs d'ordrc—\n the hands of the all-powerful 
 minister does not demand a serious and well-considered ' commentary ', 
 in which the various and quite different sides of the subject should be
 
 464 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 brought into prominence and set in a clear light. This is a task 
 altogether beyond me ; what I desire to do is something much more 
 simple. In this brief and sketchy paper I propose to do no more 
 than attempt to bring out clearly — and, if I can, prominently — before 
 the minds of those who feel any interest in the history of modern 
 monachism a simple question. It is this : What does that Congre- 
 gation of Saint-Maur, which since his day has made a great name in the 
 world of religion and learning, and what, through the Congregation of 
 Saint-Maur, does the whole monastic order, owe to Richelieu ? does it 
 owe something or nothing ? and if something, what precisely is that 
 something ? There is another, at once a more cumbersome and more 
 restricted, way of putting the question, which I will not pretermit. 
 Thus : What, if anything, do we owe to Richelieu as the agent in 
 bringing about that condition of things which rendered both possible 
 and likely the fruitful activity of the Maurists in the departments of 
 patristics and history, to which the modern schools are so greatly 
 indebted, without which indeed they might perhaps never have been ? 
 
 It may be proper first of all to explain that the question put above was 
 one which I put to myself some fourteen or fifteen years ago. I then took 
 for a start in the enquiry G. Ya.gmQzs Histoire dii P^re Joseph, but kept 
 always in mind ideas and notions to be found in the little book that 
 passes under the name of Richelieu's Testament politique. Starting 
 thus I tried with the materials then at disposal to answer the question 
 as nearly as I could to my own satisfaction. Since that date the 
 matter has been dismissed from my mind ; but Dom Guilloreau's 
 publication has brought back to me again a sense of its primary 
 importance for the due appreciation of modern monastic history. 
 
 It is sometimes convenient to approach a larger subject from a very 
 narrow side of it. This I think may very well be so in the present 
 case. I begin, then, as years ago, by asking how it came about, when 
 there was question of reforming the ancient, and it may be almost said 
 regal, order of Fontevrault, that Pere Joseph in 1612 or 1613 turned 
 to English monks as the most suitable instruments for the purpose. 
 The question of this reform was indeed one with which Richelieu also 
 had been concerned ; and so far as my imperfect knowledge goes, it 
 was the first occasion on which he found himself engaged (so early as 
 1610, when he had been three years a bishop) in the thorny path of 
 the reform of ancient and well established religious orders. Fonte- 
 vrault, it is to be remembered, was a foundation of a special character ; 
 the whole body, monks as well as nuns, was under the obedience and 
 jurisdiction of the abbess of the head house; its abbesses were, quite 
 commonly, sisters and cousins and aunts of kings. From the fifteenth 
 century a sort of intermittent process of what is called ' reform ' had
 
 RICHELIEU AND THE MAURISTS 465 
 
 been going on in this order. A further reform according to the most 
 modern ideas had been before the mind of the venerable abbess, 
 Eleonore de Bourbon, aunt of Henry IV ; she had during her long 
 rule brought the house to a state of temporal prosperity and to good 
 repute for piety and observance. She saw there was more, much 
 more, to be done, especially in regard to the monks; but the task 
 must fall to younger hands. She was content to prepare the way ; 
 first by obtaining as coadjutrix with right of succession her niece, 
 Antoinette d'Orleans; next by appointing in 1609 Louise de Bourbon 
 de Lavedan to the office of grand prioress, and future right hand of 
 her designated successor. Moreover, whether with the same future in 
 view we need not inquire, by her influence she carried through, against 
 all opposition, the establishment of a Capuchin convent at Saumur, 
 within a few miles of Fontevrault, thus obtaining the possibility of 
 a discreet and efficient counsellor close at hand in Pere Joseph, a man 
 certainly likely not to make the least of his opportunities. No sooner 
 was the aged abbess dead than Antoinette d'Orleans declared a 
 long-cherished intention, namely, to refuse succession to the abbacy 
 and to retire to an obscure and remote priory of the order and live in 
 peace. It is in these circumstances that Richelieu comes on the scene. 
 The abbess Eleonore died on March 26, 161 1 ; within a month the 
 bishop of Lu9on was on his way to Fontevrault with a letter from 
 Mary de Medicis, widow of the murdered Henry IV, now Queen 
 Mother and Regent, which in effect informed the community that they 
 were to do what the Court wished, and that this bishop Richelieu of 
 Lu9on was to be understood as master of the situation. He presided 
 at the election, and Louise de Bourbon de Lavedan left the chapter- 
 room as abbess. Richelieu left the monastery at once to give an 
 account of the acquittance of his charge. The formalities in the case 
 of such a personage as an abbess of Fontevrault took time, for many 
 documents that cost much money had to be obtained. Louise de 
 Bourbon took formal possession of her abbey on January 24, 16 12, and 
 on July 29 following she was blessed— as practically she had been 
 elected — by Richelieu. 
 
 Was Pere Joseph (a man always busy in many concerns) all this 
 time forgetting Fontevrault ? Had he no mind for, had he no hand 
 in, all that was going on there? I do not know, and those may 
 believe in his indifference who can. At any rate, things clear at once 
 as soon as Madame de Lavedan is abbess in title and fact, and it is 
 Pere Joseph who appears as her right-hand man in promoting the 
 object first to be compassed, the reform of the monks of Fontevrault. 
 As for Pere Joseph, he had his hand already upon the man, the monk, 
 to initiate the work, Augustine White, or Bradshaw, who, relieved of 
 
 1658 II h
 
 466 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 his vicarship of the EngHsh monks of Spanish profession, was 
 now free.^ 
 
 And again the question arises, Why was a foreigner, and that 
 foreigner an Enghshman of Spanish connexions above all, chosen for 
 so delicate a work in a community, an order, so eminently national 
 and French ? There must have been those who thought in their 
 heart the thought expressed of old : ' Are not Abana and Pharpar, 
 rivers of Damascus, better than all the waters of Israel, that we may 
 wash in them and be made clean ? ' Dom Guilloreau's volume — that is, 
 the first sixteen pages of it — gives extraordinary point to such a 
 question, so many are the ' reformed ' and other Benedictine congre- 
 gations that pass before our eyes in confusing variety. To say 
 nothing of Cluny, was there not Dom Didier de la Cour's Congregation 
 of Saint- Vannes,^ of Lorraine, of quite recent institution, it is true, but 
 already of repute ? Was there not also, across the northern frontier of 
 France and in the territories of the King of Spain, the older Congre- 
 gation of the Exempts,^ few as regards the number of houses, but 
 mighty abbeys all, and one certainly — St-Vedast, the mightiest of 
 them — of high reputation for regularity, piety and observance? Then 
 in France itself the newer Congregation of the Exempts,'* which Dom 
 Audebert calls, as \{ par excellence, the ' Congregation Gallicane' (p. 8), 
 with its general, its general chapter, and its several provinces. There 
 was the reform of Chezal-Benoit,^ the most ancient in date, still 
 
 ^ See Downside Review vol. v (1886) pp. 51-57, 'Archbishop Gififard and the 
 Reform of Fontevrault.' 
 
 * This congregation was canonically erected in 1604, though the first professions 
 took place four years earlier ; it numbered about fifty monasteries, of which all but 
 one were aggregated by 1672, and lasted till the French Revolution. Dom Besse, 
 Introductory volume to the re-edition of Dom Beaunier, pp. 80-89. 
 
 ^ The abbats of St-Vedast, St-Bertin, and St- Peter at Ghent projected this union 
 in 1504; the statutes were approved by Gregory XIII in 1575. The few abbeys 
 which formed the congregation were themselves so great that it passed almost 
 unperceived. The union was dissolved during the reign of Louis XV ; and the 
 abbeys of St-Vedast and St-Bertin were aggregated to Cluny in 1778. Op. cit. 
 
 PP- 50-53- 
 
 * In 1 5 79 the Estates General ordered that all exempt monasteries of the kingdom 
 should unite to form a congregation, under penalty of submitting to episcopal juris- 
 diction. There were fifty-five monasteries divided into five Provinces belonging to 
 the Exempts of France, but their union was artificial and lifeless, and a great 
 number were gradually absorbed by the Maurists. In 1770 the eleven monasteries 
 remaining in this congregation, with their sixty-eight religious and a united income 
 of 66,204 livres, were suppressed by the Commission of Regulars. Op. cit. 
 pp. 53-57, and Lecestre Abbayes . . . cVhoinmes en Frafice\ Liste generate (fapres 
 les papiers de la Co?nmission des Rcguliers en i']68 (Paris, 1902). 
 
 ^ A reform begun somewhat on the model of that of Saint-Justina of Padua by the 
 abbat of Chezal-Benoit, in the diocese of Bourges, in 1488 ; the congregation was 
 formed in 1505, and 'might have been able to undertake, with every chance of 
 success, the reform of the Benedictine monasteries of the Kingdom, if the application 
 of the concordat of Francis I and Leo X had not raised insurmountable obstacles.' 
 Besse, op. cit. p. 63. The five principal abbeys retained their exemption from 
 commendam and their triennial abbats even after the absorption of the congregation
 
 RICHELIEU AND THE MAURISTS 4^7 
 
 struggling on. There was the quite recent but already widely extend- 
 ing Congregation of Saint-Denis,^ begun in 1607 only, counting among 
 its members ancient and famous houses, like Corbie near Amiens in 
 the north, St-Laumer of Blois in the west, and Moutier-en-Der in the 
 east. And, lastly, there was the Congregation of Brittany.^ 
 
 Why, I repeat, did P^re Joseph turn to the Spanish-English monks ? 
 I should, with due submission to better judgement, be disposed to see 
 the explanation of Pcre Joseph's choice of the Englishman in this, 
 that at this time, 1610-1615, whilst the lustre of the Italian Congre- 
 gation of Saint-Justina of Padua (or ' Cassinese ' Congregation) was 
 dimmed, it was the Spanish Benedictine Congregation which enjoyed 
 the best repute for solid observance and for the good training, both 
 mental and monastic, of its members, and which could, on the whole, 
 best be relied on both for discretion and thoroughness, whilst (dilfer- 
 ing herein from some French Congregations) they applied themselves 
 in some measure to various kinds of public religious work useful to 
 their neighbours. All this, be it said by the way, is evidenced, I think, 
 by the general story of the Spanish-English monks at large, who, by 
 and by constituting the bulk of the restored English Congregation, had 
 received their early training and formation in Spain. In none of the 
 reformed congregations of France did the keen eye of Pere Joseph 
 discern — and this I conceive to be the explanation of his action at 
 Fontevrault — the kind of spirit required for a new attempt at reform. 
 And this notion seems to me confirmed by the consideration that, 
 although evidently gifted and certainly zealous, Fr Augustine Brad- 
 shaw was not endowed in any marked degree (as was Fr Gabriel 
 Gififard, an English monk of Spanish profession also, who as ' Grand 
 Visitor ' appeared on the scene at Fontevrault a few years later) with 
 those special qualities which give decisive weight in action. Therefore 
 it was not Father Augustine's distinctively personal qualifications 
 which induced Pere Joseph to select him. 
 
 And now we may pass to the larger question : Richelieu's deserts 
 in regard to the Benedictines. As a fact, in none of the existing 
 'reformed' congregations of France and the conterminous regions 
 mentioned above did Richelieu and his alter ego, Pere Joseph, even- 
 by that of Saint-Maur brought about by Richelieu, who became abbat of Chezal- 
 Benoit in 1634. Besse, op. cit. pp. 62-71. 
 
 ' 'This congregation had an ephemeral existence, and has no history.' It was 
 not a serious reform, but originated with the dislike of the monks of St-Denis to 
 having their famous house an ordinaiy member of the Exempts of France. Besse, 
 op. cit. pp. 60-61. 
 
 - The first Superior of the Societe de Bretagne was Dom Noel Mars (t 1611), 
 who with the earliest monks of this reform was a monk of Marmoutier, dissatisfied 
 with the observance of the Exempts. Their first house was the priory of Lehon in 
 Brittany. The Society was united to the Maurists in 1628. 
 
 H h 2
 
 468 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 tually find a proper instrument or nucleus for effecting the object he 
 aimed at, namely the grouping together of the whole body of French 
 Benedictines in one reformed congregation which should be the 
 Benedictine congregation of France. 
 
 Before coming to Richelieu and the Benedictines it will be useful to 
 o-lance just for a moment at Richelieu as abbat of Citeaux, and as 
 abbat of Premontre, those other great chefs-d'ordre of which, in his 
 later years, he made himself master along with his old possession, the 
 still greater Cluny. First for Citeaux. The worthy abbat, Pierre 
 Nivelle, resigned in 1635 to become bishop of Lu9on, in place of 
 Richelieu's immediate successor there, Aimeri de Braguelonne, who 
 now resigned the see. According to his own wish Richelieu was, on 
 November 19, 1635, elected abbat of Citeaux. He took possession on 
 January 15, 1636. All that really concerns us and matters here in 
 regard to his abbacy is expressed in two or three lines of the very 
 brief account in the Gallia Christiana. There are two items : {a) he 
 was never confirmed by the Apostolic See owing to the opposition of 
 the abbats of foreign countries ; {b) on his accession Citeaux was put 
 under the control of the fathers of the Strict Observance and so 
 remained during the time of his rule, but after his death it reverted at 
 once to its former ' Mitigated Observance '. This settled for good and 
 all the further fate of the Cistercian order with Citeaux as its head. 
 
 As regards Premontre, abbat Pierre Cosset died on August 12, 
 1635, at the age of eighty. Already, on February 28 of the same 
 year, a communication had been sent from the king forbidding, on 
 the near occasion of the abbat's death, any precipitate election of 
 a successor; leave to elect was issued on December 21 ; the election 
 was held on December 23, and Richelieu was abbat. Some four- or 
 five-and-twenty canons of the house had, however, been beforehand 
 that day and astutely chosen Pierre Desbans, Vicar-General of the 
 Reformed Fathers of Pont-a-Mousson, who, however, by a letter 
 from Reims dated December 25, begged these canons to desist from 
 their enterprise, and refused, as far as he himself was concerned, to 
 have anything to do with it. His electors abused him for his pains, 
 but proceeded with their scheme and appealed to Cardinal Spada, the 
 protector of the order, in Rome ; but he too declined to have 
 anything to do with such a dangerous business. And here again the 
 Pope refused the Bulls, and the foreign abbats refused to acknowledge 
 the new abbat's jurisdiction ; accordingly, as the Premontre annalist 
 says, ' the imperious vice-king ' reduced only the French ones to his 
 obedience. It remains to add that Richelieu's chief supporter, and 
 perhaps the actual manager in the business of his election, was Nicholas 
 Le Saige, abbat of St-Martin at Laon, a man successful in restoring
 
 RICHELIEU AND THE MAURISTS 469 
 
 the temporal affairs of his house and maintaining it in a state of order 
 and discipline. 
 
 I submit that it was not greed, covetousness, or the love of money 
 that determined Richelieu, now in an advanced period of life, when he 
 knew that his time could not be long, to make himself master of these 
 two great houses, heads of orders ; but that the reasons for his action 
 are to be found elsewhere. They are not hard, I think, to discover, 
 but it is no business of mine to discourse on that subject. One point 
 more alone concerns us here, namely that he did not mix himself 
 up with the affairs of Premontre and Citeaux until some five-and- 
 twenty years after he had come personally into contact with the 
 question of Benedictine ' reform ', and several years after he had 
 personally and actively interested himself in that matter. 
 
 If any one were to suggest that a great and united Benedictine 
 congregation appeared to his mind, appealed to him, as an item, 
 a worthy item, in that great conception of his, the creation of a 
 compact, self-contained, powerful France, I at least should not know, 
 in view of the circumstances of the case, how to say nay to the 
 proposition. 
 
 And what line had Richelieu taken in regard to the Benedictines up 
 to the time when he laid hands on Citeaux and Premontre ? We may 
 start from the fact that, as early as the year 1622, he had had himself 
 nominated coadjutor to the then regular abbat of Cluny ; and subse- 
 quent events are, I think, calculated strongly to persuade us that the 
 line he intended to pursue, the object he had in view, and the general 
 scheme he intended to bring into effect, were already clear in his mind. 
 Experience had shewn (for evidence of this he had only to look around) 
 that the existing ' reforms ' and new congregations, when put to the 
 test, were no more than ineffectual essays, though all were valuable, 
 doubtless, as a manifestation of abounding good-will of sorts in many 
 quarters. Among all these, Cluny, though as a spiritual force but 
 a shadow of its old self, was still a name to conjure with ; and even 
 for its present glory of magnificence, its incomparable buildings, its 
 unrivalled church, its treasury, its great revenues and special dignity, 
 it suggested itself naturally as a chef-d'ordre around which the Bene- 
 dictines of France of any and every existing congregation might easily, 
 and even naturally, group themselves. That this was his mind is 
 a simple inference from the fact that after he became actual abbat of 
 Cluny in 1629 by the cession of the regular abbat, Dom Jacques 
 d'Arbouze, and had already undertaken its reform, Richelieu in 1634 
 made provision, confirmed by royal letters, that the next election to 
 the abbacy of Cluny should be by the monks, and that in their choice 
 of an abbat they should be restricted to a person already professed of
 
 470 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 Cluny or of the Congregation of Saint-Maur. In other words, the 
 provision of Cluny for himself was designed with a higher and better 
 intention than self-endowment with its great abbatial revenues. In 
 prosecuting the work of Benedictine reform Richelieu, as abbat of 
 Cluny, made, at all events, two mistakes. The first was that he did 
 not resign during his lifetime and thus himself see a monk duly 
 elected as his successor. But as we look at the Congregation of 
 Saint-Maur and its development, so unpretentious in its spirit, yet so 
 fruitful in good work, so solid and steady in its undertakings, and 
 withal, as shewn even by its buildings up to the time of the Revo- 
 lution, impressing on its works the mark of simplicity, nobility, and 
 greatness, we are inclined to say to ourselves ' O felix culpa ! ' 
 
 Richelieu's second mistake was due to his quality as a statesman 
 sole, supreme in affairs, and accustomed to have his orders, as it were, 
 mechanically obeyed. At Cluny, become abbat, he at once abolished 
 old customs and traditions; ' breviary, ceremonies, constitutions, habit, 
 all was reduced to the fashion of the Congregation of Saint-Vannes ' 
 (Dom Guilloreau, p. 2, note). Later on, with the wisdom that allows 
 itself to be taught by experience, he confessed to himself his very 
 natural blunders : ' It would be better ', he said, ' to establish moderate 
 reforms, in the observation of which both body and mind may rest in 
 some measure at ease, rather than to undertake austere ones, the rigour 
 of which even minds that are strong, and bodies that are robust, find 
 difficulty in supporting.' There was another fact he came to learn, 
 a feature of the case he had not duly reckoned with. Cluny, as it 
 came to his hands, was indeed a stupendous relic of a great and once 
 glorious past ; but now it was no more than a solid, stolid monument of 
 that past ; it was an institution irreformable, that must go its own way 
 unhindered. Turning from the Congregation of Saint-Vannes, Riche- 
 lieu made a second essay in giving life to Cluny by uniting it (1634) 
 to the Congregation of Saint-Maur, still a small body, but growing 
 and zealous ; but this measure, too, had little success, whilst it proved 
 the cause of much and continual trouble. Richelieu was a man of too 
 much experience of men and things and the ways of the world to 
 hope that what he as the all-powerful minister could not effect, others 
 could accomplish, and perhaps that is why he died abbat of Cluny, 
 thinking that it and its revenues were as well and conveniently placed 
 in his own hands as in those of any one else. He could not be 
 mistaken as to the meaning of what was taking place, as regards his 
 cherished plan of a Galilean congregation of Benedictines ; the order 
 of Cluny practically refused reform, and it must have been clear in his 
 eyes that the future possibility of a great Benedictine congregation of 
 France rested with the now growing Congregation of Saint-Maur alone,
 
 RICHELIEU AND THE MAURISTS 471 
 
 which from the humblest beginnings was, piecemeal but rapidly, 
 incorporating into itself the earlier reformed congregations that had 
 hitherto proved so impotent. Measures — so experience in monastic 
 affairs of all sorts must have taught him but too well — prove little 
 more than the expression of ineffective desires without the proper men ; 
 or, in a case like the present, the man of the situation. It was in the 
 ranks of the Maurists, and of the Maurists only, that he found and 
 recognized the monk, the man, who embodied in himself, and could 
 impress on others, directly or indirectly, the religious and specifically 
 the Benedictine spirit demanded by the occasion. All that Richelieu 
 could do was to bring about, or at least facilitate, the conditions in 
 which the monastic life could be renewed, in a form suited to the 
 requirements of his time and country as he, the great statesman, 
 conceived them ; in a word, to help the monks, and the ancient religious 
 orders in general, effectively to help themselves. What he seems to 
 have had specially at heart in this department of his general policy 
 was the welfare and utility of the Benedictines. His share, I may say 
 his merit, was to conceive a great idea in their regard, and use his 
 power and influence, and engage his interest, in minor matters ^ as well 
 as in weightier affairs, to bring it into effect. To others must be left 
 the actual work of carrying out and realizing this idea in the monastic 
 life itself; and in a way and form (for this was an essential part of his 
 conception) which might profit the State also, so that these monks, 
 living in the peace of the cloister, and remote from the great currents 
 alike of public life and ecclesiastical activities, should still contribute 
 to the greatness, the honour, the name, and the fame of France. 
 
 With Richelieu, so far as the Benedictines were concerned, every- 
 thing depended on finding his man, the man of the occasion. In this 
 he was more than fortunate, he was happy ; for the providential man 
 was there ready at his hand in Dom Gregoire Tarisse. At present 
 I know no book, no place, where we can find an adequate and 
 competent account of this monk. If we are to understand what he 
 was, and duly appreciate what he could do,and what he actually effected, 
 we must attentively follow him in all the varied phases of his career — 
 in the well-nigh fifty years he spent in the world, when every recorded 
 detail seems of significance for the future, as well as in the twenty-five 
 he spent in the cloister as monk, and nearly all the time Superior- 
 General of the Congregation of Saint-Maur. In those first two-thirds of 
 his life we can see how he came to be the sort of man whom a Richelieu 
 could deal with in practical affairs of * reform ', and on whom he could 
 rely competently to deal with others. We must (so I venture to think) 
 view Tarisse personally as a psychological study if we are to under- 
 * See an instance in Dom Audebert, pp. 216-217.
 
 472 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 stand how and why, among, as it were, the seething possibilities of 
 Benedictine ' reform ' in France during the early decades of the seven- 
 teenth century, the net result — at all events the only result which 
 really corresponded to Richelieu's ideas and design — was the Congre- 
 gation of Saint-Maur. And here, for a due estimation of realities, the 
 comparative method must also come into play. What is the reason, 
 the secret, of the difference, the striking contrast, shewn during all the 
 seventeenth century between the Congregation of Saint-Maur and the 
 Congregation of Saint-Vannes, of which Saint-Maur is the offspring, 
 the special daughter, to which it owes the very breath of its life, its 
 intimate religious spirit ? The Congregation of Saint-Vannes existed, 
 and doubtless flourished, much to the profit of its members ; but is it 
 too much to say that in the seventeenth century it remains historically 
 and, so far as the world at large is concerned, a respectable nullity ? 
 Nothing can be more imperfect and unsatisfactory at present than the 
 materials available — to the common world of inquirers at all events — 
 for the life and activities of Dom Tarisse. Yet, so it seems to me, 
 enough exists to shew, every detail goes to evince, that the explana- 
 tion of this sharp distinction, this crying contrast, between Saint-Vannes 
 and Saint-Maur, resides in the presence, the activity, the character 
 specially of this one man. During the eighteen years (1630-1648) of 
 his government, the whole work of constituting the Maurist Congre- 
 gation, of forming its spirit, of settling the line and determining the 
 character of its future activities, was achieved. If the Congregation 
 of Saint-Maur has won for itself an undying name and secures still 
 to-day from even adversaries, religious and non-religious alike, respect 
 and even admiration, if it is still the brightest chapter in modern 
 monastic history, this, so I venture to think, is because it remained in 
 the nearly two centuries of its existence, often in the most trying and 
 most difficult circumstances, substantially what Dom Tarisse, as 
 Superior-General, meant it to be, and made it. 
 
 There is one point which I must endeavour to drive home. The 
 Congregation of Saint-Maur, if its history is to be really understood, 
 needs to be looked at — there are some passages in Dom Guilloreau's 
 preface and notes which bring this home to me afresh and with 
 force — from the point of view of the Commonwealth, not as a gties- 
 tion de clocher ; not as an institution of concern merely for monks 
 and their cloisters, but one in regard to which ' the world ' and the 
 man of the world have something to say. Richelieu's relations 
 with the Order of St Benedict when fairly looked into, and with 
 full knowledge of details, will prove, if I mistake not, perhaps the 
 highest tribute paid to the genius of the Benedictine order in modern 
 times ; and the history of the Maurists a speaking and indubitable
 
 RICHELIEU AND THE MAURISTS 473 
 
 testimony to the sureness of instinct and correctness of judgement of 
 the great statesman who stands in history as the maker of modern 
 France.^ 
 
 It is easy enough, I know, to ask others to perform lengthy and 
 laborious and thankless tasks ; and yet I cannot forbear, before 
 closing this paper, from making such a suggestion. It is true that the 
 directors of the Archives de la France monastiqtie have, in works begun, 
 a weighty programme already marked out. Even the new Dotn 
 Beaimier^ in which we have for the first time a Notitia vwnastica 
 Galliae that seems likely to prove a model for this type of work, of 
 itself is calculated to absorb in great measure the activities available. 
 It is recent monastic history, the story of the Benedictines in the 
 seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, that remains almost neglected, 
 whilst in interest and instruction it is second only to that period, 
 closing with the eleventh, which Newman has called ' the Benedictine 
 Centuries '. Of precise and authentic information and accurate know- 
 
 ' [Some twelve months after this paper was printed, there appeared, with a preface 
 by M, Gabriel Hanotaux embodying a plaidoyer that has nothing to do with the 
 matter in hand, a volume entitled Le Cardinal de Richelieu et la R^forme des 
 Monasteres Benedictins by Dom Paul Denis (Paris, Champion, 1913). It was, I 
 must own, a subject of lively satisfaction to me to see that, from the scanty and 
 scattered items of information then available, I had justly divined the true story 
 which has been so long ignored, or rather so steadily misrepresented. To put 
 the matter in the words of Dom Denis — an entire stranger to me— in the letter, 
 dated 12 July 1912, which he wrote me on the comrnunication to him by a common 
 friend of this paper : ' Vous me permettrez de vous f^liciter sur la merveilleuse in- 
 tuition avec laquelle vous avez signale I'importance du probl^me pour I'histoire 
 monastique des temps modernes. Et je me flatte de I'espoir que vous trouverez 
 des reponses satisfaisantes dans I'ouvrage que je publie en ce moment.' Dom 
 Denis's book is to my mind an entirely satisfactory answer. It is greatly to be 
 desired that Dom Denis will be able to execute the projected series of monographs 
 {Mazarin et les BenMiciins, &c., &c.) which is so well inaugurated by his volume 
 on Richelieu. If any reader should feel interested in knowing a little further what 
 sort of man was Dom Tarisse, I would suggest his reading Dom Tassin's short 
 account of the fifty years before Tarisse became a monk {Hist, litteraire de la 
 Co7igr. de Saint-Maiir pp. 37-47), and for some idea how and why, though a 
 person of but very moderate literary education and training, he is the true and 
 real founder of the literary glory of the Congregation of Saint-Maur, pp. 59-62 of 
 vol. ii of the late M. Leopold Delisle's Cabinet des Manuscrits. It is significant 
 that when the two men met, Richelieu felt at once that he now had the man he 
 wanted (see Dom Denis, p. 104).] 
 
 ' Recueil historique des Archevechh, Evec/u's, Abbayes et Prieures de France par 
 Dom Beaunier. Nouvelle edition, revue et complete far les Bhiedictins de Ligug^, 
 Paris, 1906-191 1. An introductory volume and four others have appeared so far. 
 Since vol. ii, Dom Besse's name appears on the title-page, for, as he himself says, 
 * The Recueil of Dom Beaunier forms but a very small part of the present work'. 
 The original Recueil published in Paris in 1726 is in two volumes, quarto ; the four 
 volumes of the new edition (excluding the Introductory volume, which is entirely 
 new) represent less than the first volume of the old. The introductory volume gives 
 a series of most useful historical sketches, with extended bibliographies of the 
 various Congregations of the Benedictine and Augustinian orders in France together 
 with the derivatory orders, Grammont and the Carthusians.
 
 474 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 ledge we have excessively little. The present volume, so competently- 
 edited, gives us, as it were, a view into a new — because a true — world ; 
 it is, of course, a * dull book ' also, but a source of real knowledge is 
 offered to us here, and out of its bare statements of often-reiterated 
 matter of fact we can get real insight into a story of the past which 
 in itself is certainly not ' dull ', whatever else it be, and of which 
 hitherto we have hardly been able to get so much as a glimpse. It 
 may be said to be all new vision. 
 
 As the matter stands there is an imperative call for yet further 
 information and more light. Is it not possible — will it not be possible 
 at a not-too-distant date — for the directors of the Archives to give to 
 the world a complete body of materials for the history of the Maurist 
 Congregation during the period of Dom Tarisse's superiority ; embody- 
 ing not only a full collection of documents, some printed in extenso, 
 others in summary form, but also the relative portions of the works of 
 Dom Mege and Dom Martene, and any biographical material extant ; 
 in a word a corpus such as would present an exhaustive record of the 
 administration of the first Superior-General and of the historic Con- 
 gregation of Saint-Maur in the days that were emphatically those of 
 its foundation and definitive constitution ?
 
 XXVIII 
 
 HISTORICAL CRITICS ON THE CRITICAL 
 
 ARTi 
 
 Never was there an age when people were so ready to instruct 
 their neighbours * how to do it ' as the present ; and perhaps it is for 
 the public advantage that the tricks of every trade should thus become 
 public property. Two very competent persons have lately taken the 
 world into their confidence in regard to the method whereby history 
 is written ; and as their book contains many curious and interesting 
 and some useful observations, and as there is abroad in some quarters 
 an undue idea of the benefits or the evils likely to ensue from the 
 present pursuit of matter of fact in the ages past, I propose to give 
 here a short account of the ' Introduction to Historical Studies ' 
 recently published by MM. Ch.-V. Langlois and Ch. Seignobos, both 
 well-known teachers at the Sorbonne. The book has a merit not 
 common in this class — it is written by Frenchmen ; we may therefore 
 expect some clearness in dealing with a subject which (as we may 
 judge, sometimes by plain expression of opinion, and sometimes by a 
 practice which is plain enough to the initiated) is viewed by some 
 persons with distrust or positive aversion. 
 
 This little treatise really might be better entitled to the more German- 
 sounding name of a 'Treatise of Historical Method'. Some adven- 
 turous person who writes in the English tongue has proposed to dub 
 the subject ' Historic ' ; if the word be admitted, analogy seems to 
 suggest a slight correction, and as ' Physik ' becomes in English 
 ' physics ', so ' Historik ' should become to us ' histories '. There is 
 another fine name in prospect in the near future — ' Historical Metho- 
 dology ', the native soil of which production there is no need further 
 to indicate. Practically in English the subject is new ground ; it is 
 true that the late Professor Freeman has discoursed on ' the methods 
 of historical study ' ; but in this, as in so much else that he has 
 written, that author has not secured the suffrages of all the public 
 
 ' From the Downside Review^ July 1899.
 
 476 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 concerned. This tractate, for instance, has been described as common- 
 place and empty, dwelling on a few truths so self-evident as to be best 
 taken for granted, without loss of words or time about them. On 
 the other hand, the subject should be of interest to educated men who 
 are not historians ; for in these days of what is called scientific pro- 
 gress it becomes increasingly necessary that the common as distinct 
 from the specialist public should have easy means of becoming 
 informed as to its instructors ; since that common public has judged, 
 and always will judge, of all things in the final resort. This rule of 
 the final judgement of the world at large, whether it be for good or for 
 evil, is, and in the nature of things in the long run must be, all along 
 the line, in practice absolute and without appeal. And so long as men 
 will read ' history books ' it is desirable that they should be, as far as 
 possible, in a position to recognize, by their method, whether such 
 books are the productions of men of sense, care, conscientiousness, 
 diligence, truthfulness, and candour ; or whether they are the produc- 
 tions of artful special pleaders or pretentious quacks. 
 
 The work of MM. Langlois and Seignobos is divided into three 
 books dealing with (i) preliminary knowledge — that is, of the informa- 
 tion which exists, and the way to find it ; (2) analysis, or the treatment 
 to which this information must be subjected before it can be safely 
 used; (3) synthesis, or how to use the information thus prepared. 
 It is of the first two books that I propose to speak here. The 
 writers begin by emphasizing in the strongest manner a truth which 
 must be perfectly obvious to all, but which seems but dimly perceived 
 by only too many writers — the truth, namely, that it is utterly im- 
 possible for us ever to know more than the extant documents tell us. 
 Whatever airs or graces historians may give themselves, whatever 
 their allures of mastery or freedom, it is by this inexorable necessity 
 that they are cabined, cribbed, confined. Any past, or any part of 
 the past, not witnessed to by documents is for us as though it had 
 never existed. From an increasing recognition of the all-importance 
 of the ' document ' results that almost crazy activity in search of what 
 has been hitherto unknown, that inquisitiveness as to the inedited, 
 which characterizes our time, and not infrequently is the cause of 
 amusement or disdain according to the disposition of the onlooker. 
 But both amusement and disdain are out of place, and indeed are not 
 unlikely to bring on themselves their own penalty. With the recogni- 
 tion that knowledge — at least the only knowledge which the historical 
 inquirer can recognize — is conditioned by record, the importance of 
 as full a presentment as possible of record is a necessary security 
 against error ; and in proportion as knowledge is full, a document 
 insignificant at first sight, that tells nothing to most men, may yield
 
 HISTORICAL CRITICS 477 
 
 up to the practised and informed mind the key to some hitherto 
 insoluble problem or enigma. 
 
 It is not altogether a pleasant prospect that is held out to the 
 beginner, of the first steps to be taken in acquiring a knowledge of 
 indexes to sources, bibliographies, inventories, repertories, catalogues 
 of manuscripts, and finally ' bibliographies of bibliographies ', for to 
 such a pass have things come at last. The commencement of this 
 review (p. u) is pitched in a rather doleful key, and the authors raise 
 a lament over the extreme deficiencies of the present ' instruments of 
 work '. This is unreasonable ; the memories of the state of things 
 two hundred years ago, the cheerfulness with which difficulties were 
 then met if they were not surmounted, and the amount of good work 
 done by the giants of those days, might usefully be invoked to check 
 present grumbling. Indeed the authors soon settle into a brighter 
 and more contented mind as they recall the rapid progress of many 
 great undertakings in late years, such as the Corpus Inscriptio7ium 
 Latinarum. Among others mention is made of the work of the new 
 BoUandists, who now add to their monumental Acta what is more 
 valuable still, their Analecta, with its general review of hagiological 
 publications, and (a yet more recent undertaking) their catalogues of 
 hagiological manuscripts throughout Europe. The work of these 
 BoUandists is particularly noteworthy and instructive, as it shews how 
 in the field of learning there is no need of an army of workers to 
 achieve great things, and what can be done by half a dozen well- 
 trained men, thoroughly devoted to their work, themselves appreciating 
 its value whatever be the opinion of others, inheriting and developing 
 good traditions, along with the advantages accompanying what is 
 generally understood to be a privileged position that practically 
 secures them from open or secret opposition. 
 
 The first chapter of the second book, on the ' General Conditions of 
 Historical Knowledge ', is due to the collaboration of the two authors, 
 and is a mixture of excellent observations and (as is the case where- 
 ever M. Seignobos appears on the scene) remarks that throw the 
 reader into a condition anything but consonant with that ready 
 credulity which is again and again affirmed in this work to be the 
 * normal tendency ' of the human mind. The following observations, 
 however, are good, though not altogether free from exaggeration.' 
 After explaining that it is of the very nature of ' historical facts ' that 
 they cannot be known directly but only by the traces left of them (i. e. 
 by means of the ' document '), and that documents are of an almost 
 mfinite variety of value, ranging from an exact representation of the 
 facts to an absurd or intentional travesty of them, the authors continue: 
 ' From what precedes two conclusions impose themselves— namely
 
 478 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 the extreme complexity, but also the absolute necessity, of historical 
 criticism. Compared with other savants the historian is in a very evil 
 case. Not only is he, unlike the chymist, never in a position to 
 observe the facts directly, but it is also very rarely the case that the 
 documents which he is obliged to use reproduce exact observations. . . . 
 He is in the position of a chymist who could know a series of experi- 
 ments only on the report of the laboratory boy. The historian is 
 obliged to turn to account rough-and-ready reports such as no other 
 savants would put up with. So much the more necessary, therefore, 
 are the precautions that have to be taken before making use of the 
 documents which are the only materials of historical learning. Clearly, 
 therefore, it is most important to eliminate those which are valueless, 
 and to distinguish in the rest what has been from what has not been 
 correctly observed. Words of caution here are all the more necessary 
 inasmuch as it is a natural tendency of the human mind to take no 
 precautions, but to proceed in these matters, where the most exact 
 precision is indispensable, confusedly. Every one, it is true, admits in 
 principle the usefulness of the art of criticism ; but it is one of those 
 uncontested postulates which are found to pass only with very great 
 difficulty into practice ' (pp. 47-48). 
 
 The authors have in these two words ' proceeding confusedly ' put 
 their finger exactly on the difficulty which is so often the obstacle to 
 bringing people into accord on subjects where agreement not only 
 is but obviously should be possible. This I think to be in some 
 measure the case among Catholics at the present day, especially 
 where the treatment of the past — in a word, history — is concerned. 
 However clearly we may see the case external to ourselves, even 
 a moderate acquaintance with our own current literature for the 
 past generation or so must convince the attentive reader that it is 
 not uncommon amongst us to ' proceed confusedly ' in historical 
 matters. 
 
 The next three chapters are devoted to what the authors call 
 ' external criticism ' — the art, that is, of turning a ' document ' inside 
 out and making it tell the truth in spite of any mind or intention of 
 its first deviser. There is no need to touch on these technicalities 
 here ; it is sufficient to say that in some respects these processes have 
 become almost mechanical, so thoroughly have they been perfected in 
 skilful hands, and so surely has practice verified the certainty of the 
 prescriptions that govern them. Possessed now with the due sense of 
 the imperfectness of his materials and his inferiority in this respect, 
 the historian has been forced back on himself and compelled to 
 utilize, to the full, the marvellous and all but infinite capacity of 
 the human mind, with which man has been endowed by the Creator,
 
 HISTORICAL CRITICS 479 
 
 to find out all things. And so it has come to pass that no juge 
 dinstrtictiott or cross-examining counsel has a firmer grip on his 
 victim than the historical critic on his ' document ' (i. e. its author). 
 Naturally historical criticism does not universally enjoy a good 
 repute. 
 
 At this point it is useful to recall that, however good the rules, 
 however well-tried the methods, very much — sometimes everything — 
 still depends on the operator. Some people seem to imagine that 
 a knowledge of the rules of the game is enough to ensure success in 
 the play. This is not so : skill, natural aptitude, and the power that 
 comes from long and careful experience, have as much scope here as 
 in other delicate operations — in surgery, for instance. It is to the 
 operator himself, therefore, that attention is next given, in a chapter 
 which is perhaps the most interesting and instructive of the book. 
 This chapter, entitled ' La critique d'erudition et les erudits ', is 
 entirely due to the pen of M. Langlois. I do not scruple to make 
 large extracts, sometimes in free rendering, for the remarks are (if it 
 be allowed to employ the adjective in this simple and absolute way) 
 so applicable. 
 
 The whole criticism of erudition, or ' external criticism ' (says 
 M. Langlois), inspires only disdain in the commonplace public, which 
 is generally superficial. On the other hand, some who devote them- 
 selves to it are disposed to magnify its value unduly. But there is a 
 juste milieu fixed by good sense. The opinion of those who deride 
 the minute analysis proper to the work of * external criticism ' does 
 not call for refutation ; for the simple reason that these obscure labours 
 are simply indispensable — if, that is to say, the truth is to be ascer- 
 tained. The professionals, on their side, seeking reasons to be proud 
 of the labours they undertake, are not content to put them forward as 
 merely necessary. These processes of theirs, they will have it, have 
 raised history to the dignity of an * exact science ' ; and they have 
 tacitly persuaded themselves that their department of work embraces 
 the whole sum of historical criticism. Let us never be tired of 
 repeating that external criticism is wholly preparatory ; it is a means, 
 not an end ; the ideal state would be, that it had been already so 
 generally applied to the documents that are the source of history, that 
 we could dispense with it for the future. If a necessity, it is after all 
 but a provisional necessity. 
 
 If in the old days it was possible that the historian could under- 
 take all the operations his work involved, that was only because the 
 competent public was not very exacting. But to-day the most minute 
 care, and something approaching a real perfection, is demanded of 
 those who undertake the ' external criticism ' of documents. And it is
 
 48o LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 not a business that can be taken up by anybody or everybody at will. 
 Certain natural aptitudes are the necessary conditions of success in 
 the pursuit of modern technical erudition. There are two divisions of 
 this particular labour : one may be described as the work of strictly 
 accurate and reliable cataloguing ; the other, minute and conscientious 
 examination of the individual 'document', which often enough does 
 not tell all its story, or even its true story, on the face of it. The first 
 condition of success is a natural liking for the work that has to be 
 done. Now, except men of superior capacity (and that infinitely 
 larger number of persons who think themselves to be such), nearly 
 everybody finds, in the long run, a real sweetness in the minutiae of 
 preparatory criticism. For the practice of it gratifies tastes that are 
 very general indeed, a taste for collecting and a taste for decipher- 
 ment of riddles. To ' collect ' affords a sensible delight, not only to 
 children but to grown-up persons — les grandes personnes — whether 
 the subject of the collection be variant readings or postage stamps. 
 To guess at riddles, to clear up problems that are both little and well 
 defined, is for many excellent spirits quite an attractive occupation. 
 Every ' find ' affords a real enjoyment : and in the domain of erudition 
 so many ' finds ' are to be made. These are to be secured, either on 
 the surface and almost for the looking, or else by dint of much pains 
 and trouble ; so that the tastes of two classes of persons may be easily 
 suited — those who like, and those who dislike, the pleasures of a 
 difficulty. 
 
 But then taste and a liking is not all ; for ' business is business ', and, 
 strange as it may sound, the minutiae of 'external criticism' are in 
 these days a ' business ' which, by the way, has already had very un- 
 pleasant consequences for what remains on the earth of many persons 
 dead and gone — their memory — and is likely to have results at the 
 least as sadly unpleasant for many more before it is all over. M. Lang- 
 lois has it thus : that the condition of ' taste ' may be present in men, 
 and yet such promising subjects may still be totally incapable of the 
 work to be done. This would not be the troublesome case that it is 
 in fact, if these persons were intellectually feeble ; it would be only 
 one aspect of their general condition. But these incapables are often 
 men of education, knowledge, and intelligence, often more intelligent 
 men than others who have not the special defect which is in view 
 here. And that defect is the ' disease of inexactitude '. The English 
 historian, J, A. Froude, presents a very celebrated case, quite a typical 
 one, of the kind. Of course every one makes mistakes ; but what is 
 now in question is the tendency to commit them commonly, con- 
 stantly, sometimes in spite even of the effort to be exact. This 
 particular disease seems never to have been studied by the psycho-
 
 HISTORICAL CRITICS 481 
 
 legists. It seems to hold to an excessive activity of an involuntary 
 and sub-conscious imagination which intrudes itself into, and falsifies, 
 intellectual operations. Most children distort facts in this way ; it is 
 the a pen prh — the 'near enough ' — method ; many men never cease 
 in this respect to be children. 
 
 In the next place, hurry is fatal in all such work as is here contem- 
 plated. It has been rightly said that the cardinal virtue of the enidit 
 is patience. Nervous folks, agitated, always in a hurry to get at the 
 end of everything they do, always turning from one undertaking to 
 another, anxious to appear in the forefront, to dazzle, to make a 
 sensation, may find honourable employment in other careers, but not 
 in that of erudition. The true iriidit does not lose his temper over 
 his subject, is circumspect and has his reserves ; in the midst of the 
 rush of modern life he does not rush over his work. Why hurry? 
 What is important is to do something solid, definitive, that will bear 
 scrutiny, that will hold, that will stand. He must be prudent, must 
 have a great power of attention and will, disinterestedness, and little 
 relish for the life of action ; for he must first of all have taken it as 
 his part in life to work in view of results that are distant and pro- 
 blematical, the full fruit of which will be almost always gathered by 
 others. He must be ready, as the saying is in rough but graphic 
 English, to ' take a back seat '. I would add for his encouragement, 
 however, that he may (if disposed to be peevish with things at times) 
 take consolation in the thought that the whirligig of time has strange 
 compensations or revenges. The Bollandists and the Maurists are 
 instructive in this regard. 
 
 So much for the theory. M. Langlois has entered too thoroughly 
 into the spirit of his metier, the truth qiiand mane, not to recognize 
 all the weaknesses and the dangers attendant on it, and not to under- 
 stand that the best way to avoid or correct them is to bring them out 
 into the light. For this purpose M. Langlois utilizes his neighbours 
 on the other side of the Rhine. As the labours of erudition, the 
 cataloguing and the scrutinizing and the rest, wonderfully suit a very 
 large number of Germans, the volume of German learning has been 
 considerable, and it is in Germany, he thinks, that we can see the 
 defects which the habitual exercise of the work of external criticism 
 produces in specialists. In 1890 Dr Philippi, Rector of the University 
 of Giessen, declared that its excessive cultivation issued in producing 
 a condition of mind which attaches more importance to the materials 
 than to the intellectual results of study. Men lose themselves in 
 insignificant minutiae. He recognizes in the diffuseness of German 
 scholars, and in the bitterness of their polemics, an effect of the 
 excessive preoccupation about small things in which they have allowed 
 
 1658 I i
 
 482 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 themselves to indulge. But this touches on the ethics of the question, 
 and is delicate ground. 
 
 Apart from this general danger, M. Langlois finds the professional 
 irudit, whose sphere of work is external criticism, exposed chiefly to 
 three great risks : dilettantism, hypercriticism, and impotence. To 
 take the last first. The habit of critical analysis (and, be it added, 
 the increasing perfection and refinement of methods) exercises on some 
 minds a perfectly paralysing effect. They become, in a word, the 
 subject of scruples. They arrive at the point of doing nothing for fear 
 of possible imperfections. The continual exanien rigorosmn to which 
 they have habituated themselves makes them afraid to move ; not 
 content with this, they afflict their neighbours with their own weak- 
 ness, and end by being able to see in historical works only the pieces 
 justificatives and the notes, whilst in these they perceive only what is 
 faulty and ought to be corrected. 
 
 Hypercriticism is to criticism what finasserie is to finesse. Some 
 people find riddles where all is straight and plain ; on pretext of 
 purging texts from imaginary corruptions, they refine on them until 
 they have made them appear suspicious ; and perceive traces of roguery 
 in documents that are perfectly authentic and honest. It is a curious 
 state of mind ; by dint of being on guard against credulity, these 
 people come to suspect everything. The more perfect the methods 
 become, the greater the danger of hypercriticism ; when criticism has 
 done its work, good sense will dictate a halt ; but to that these men 
 will not resign themselves. Here, be it said, the English mind can do 
 good work. The processes of ' external criticism ' when traced back 
 to their origin are found to be really based on common sense, a quality 
 which is the note of the best genuinely English scholarship. It seems 
 a pity that many persons who are distinctly not the ' superior ' men 
 excepted above, do not, instead of writing ' historical works ', turn their 
 attention to the humbler labours of external criticism, to the profit of 
 learning, and sense, generally. Germans and Frenchmen do not 
 possess all the gifts. 
 
 On the vice of dilettantism M, Langlois dwells at much length, but 
 not, I think, with the same force and point that characterize his other 
 criticisms. The French love of administrative co-ordination and control 
 does not blind him to the difficulties that attend the question ; but he 
 cannot give up the ideal. It is not the French workman only who, as 
 has been lately said, seems to have adopted the motto : ' Reclamez 
 toujours I'impossible et ne vous rdsignez jamais a I'inevitable'. M. Lang- 
 lois cannot quite resign himself to suffering the dilettante as an inevi- 
 table nuisance. ' " Ne vous inquietez jamais de ce que vous ne pouvez 
 atteindre, et ne vous troublez pas de ce que vous ne pouvez eviter."
 
 HISTORICAL CRITICS 4«3 
 
 Voila qui est anglais,' says the authority I have just quoted, drawing 
 
 his contrast. Or as one has said to whom every Englishman is ready 
 
 to listen : 
 
 Things without remedy 
 
 Should be without regard. 
 With our more individualist notions such questions as those attaching 
 to ' dilettantism ' do not trouble even the most touchy English folk : 
 our way is rather to leave the evil to correct itself, so far as is possible ; 
 and we only bestow a shrug of the shoulders meantime on the man 
 foolish enough to exercise dilettantism on worthless old parchments, 
 deeds, and dust, which surely belong to the special department of ' the 
 Lord Chancellor ' alias Krook. 
 
 The mind of M. Langlois once more reverts uneasily to ' the pride 
 and excessive bitterness ' evidenced by so much modern criticism, and 
 he recalls very happily the learned men of France of two centuries 
 ago (and notably Ducange), whose centre and meeting-place was the 
 abbey of St-Germain-des-Pres. It is a pity that as new editions 
 appear the volumes issued by these men are falling more and more 
 into neglect. They have a great deal to teach us still. 
 
 It will be seen that M. Langlois is perfectly candid, and has no 
 mind merely to theorize or to idealize in regard to his fellow labourers. 
 That this is the part of wisdom must come home to those — and they 
 are not a few — who see in how many departments of work and thought 
 well-intentioned labour fails of its effect through an excessive insis- 
 tence on the perfect, the theoretical, or the ideal, thus forcing the hearer 
 or the observer to compare theory and actualities for himself, only to 
 find, too often, that the relation between the two is represented by a 
 gap or even a plain contradiction. Such an evil case is often obviated 
 by plain speaking in time, though what has to be said may sound 
 somewhat unpleasant or cause some discomfort. It would be an entire 
 mistake, however, to draw the conclusion that, because the humbler 
 workers in the field of history are often full of defects, their work can 
 be safely derided or contemned or disregarded. Granted that the 
 army — for it is hardly less — engaged in the work called by the 
 authors ' external criticism ' are mere burrowing earth-worms, it is 
 well to remember that by their quiet, steady, persevering, and in the 
 long run unerring labour, they have undermined more than one stately- 
 looking edifice which there can now be no question of shoring up or 
 buttressing any more. Down it has, or inevitably must, come. Well 
 will it be for us, all and sundry, whom this may concern, if we are 
 careful to see that we happen to stand, or can take our stand, on a 
 firm rock of truth that will defy their efforts. 
 
 At this point M. Seignobos takes up the parable and discourses on 
 
 I 2
 
 484 LITURGICA HISTORICA 
 
 the much more difficult and important operation, that of 'internal 
 criticism ' — a sort of moral work — the basis of which seems to lie in 
 a discreet knowledge of human nature. But ' synthesis ' is a work yet 
 more moral. To enter on these matters would be to exercise myself 
 in things too high for me ; and so I leave them, my business being 
 concerned only with the art of ' cinder-sifting ', as an old friend used 
 aptly to call it.
 
 ADDENDA 
 
 p. 65, note 2. ' Sacramentorium.' — This is the spelling in the ' Sacramen- 
 tary letter of Hadrian I, Jaffd Bibl. rer. Germ, iv p. 274 (no. 92), and 
 Diimmler M. G. Epp. iii p. 626 ('Cod. Carolin.' no. 89) ' De sacramen- 
 torio vero a sancto disposito praedecessori nostro deifluo Gregorio papa '. 
 
 P. 105. Note A. See further an article by Dom Morin (written before the 
 article of Dom Manser) in Revue Be'nedidine vol. xxvii (1910) pp. 5i3-5i5. 
 
 P. 138. Mone's masses have two 'Apologies'. See Dom A. Wilmart's 
 article ' L'age et I'ordre des messes de Mone ', in Rev. Be'ne'd. vol. xxviii p. 382. 
 
 P. 154. The Murbach MS of the monastic Ordo Romanus used by Martene 
 has been recovered by R. Ehwald. See Traube Palaeographische Forschungen 
 iii P- 357- 
 
 P. 156. A double washing of hands is found in the Sacramentary of 
 Ratoldus (Martene De ant. eccl. rit. i p. 204 col. i (top)). 
 
 P. 163. As to the Irish obtaining script, &c., from Spain, compare Traube 
 Pal. Forsch. iv p. 29. 
 
 P. 179. See Dom Morin's paper in Rev. Be'ne'd. vol. xxxi (1914), ' D'oia 
 provient le Missel de Bobbio?', in which (p. 332) he refers the origin of 
 ' Bobbio ' to the Narbonne region (Mabillon's idea). 
 
 P. 247. The Winchester Missal at Havre has a mass containing a proper 
 Preface of the Conception. See Ch. Fierville ' Les prefaces du Missel de 
 Winchester, xii® sibcle' in Recueil des Publications de la Socie'te Havraise 
 d^ Etudes diverses, annees 1 880-1, p. 451. 
 
 P. 252. It has struck me that it is as well expressly to state that I do not 
 mention the feasts of 2 February (Purification) and 28 March (Annunciation), 
 because in Oengus these are treated as feasts of our Lord ; nor that at 15 Sept., 
 because it is merely 'Consecration of the Basilica of Mary'. I wished to 
 restrict myself to the facts really pertinent to the case under discussion and 
 to disencumber it of distracting superfluities. For the same reason I have 
 not mentioned in the text (but add here for information only) that in the 
 Calendar of Willibrord, written (so Duchesne) 702-736, the feasts of Mary in 
 the original hand are : 
 
 1 8 Jan. : adsump scae mariae. 
 
 16 Aug. : erasure of a 7i'ord, then, scae mariae {another hand has added 
 
 nativi above the erasure and in the line of i^ Aug.). 
 9 Sept. : nativi scae mariae hierosoL
 
 GENERAL INDEX^ 
 
 Aachen, see Aix-la-Chapelle 
 Abibus (Habib), see Guria 
 Abingdon, monastery 274, 356, 393 
 Ablutio vianutnn 156 
 Abraham bp. of Frisingen 273 
 Abund(i)us, feast of St 255 n. 
 Acciisatio sacerdotis 138 ; see also Apolo- 
 gia, Praeparatio 
 Acolytes at papal mass 9 
 Ada nun of Faremoutier 363, 368 
 Adalard abbat of Corbie 65 n., 320, 341, 
 
 343 
 Adela daughter of William the Conqueror 
 
 356 
 Adhemar de Chabannes, Chronicle of 
 
 342 n. 
 ' Administratrix^ as epithet of B. V. M. 
 
 174 n. 
 Admont in Styria, abbey of 350 n. 
 Adoptionism in church and liturgy of 
 
 Toledo 171,203-6 
 Adrian, see Hadrian 
 Adrien de Goufifier bp. of Coutances 442 
 Advent, supposed testimony of St Hilary 
 
 to origins of 209-10 
 Aed, feast of St 255-6 
 Aedeluald bp. of Lichfield 192-7 
 Aedeluald bp. of Lindisfarne 192-7 
 Aedelwulf 195 
 Aegelfleda, St 239 
 
 Aelfric abbat of Eynsham 226 n., 386 
 Aelfvvin abbat of Newminster 239 
 Aelwin bp. of Winchester 393 
 Aethelwold, see Aedeluald, Edilwald, 
 
 Ethelwold 
 Agapetus, Pope 371 n. 
 Agde, Council of (506) 127 
 Agenda mortiiorum 168 
 Agios (or Aius), see Trisagion 
 Agnellus, antiquary of Ravenna 59 n., 
 
 370-83 
 Agnus Dei in Roman mass 7, 9, 145 
 Agobard 343 
 Aix-la-Chapelle (Aachen) 212; imperial 
 
 chapel at 335, 336 ; Council of (816) 
 
 341, 346 ; Council of (817) 213, 216 n., 
 
 218,219,341; Capitula of 261, 272 
 Alb 262 ; see also Camisia 
 Albegundis, wife of Heccard 363, 368 
 
 Alberic bp. of Cambrai 65 n. 
 
 Alcuin 195 andr\. ; author of Carolingian 
 Supplement to Gregorianum and its 
 Preface 41 n., 47, 49» 54-7, 333-4 n., 
 347-8 ; burial service compiled by 
 167-9, 182-92; \\\sAdversus Elipan- 
 dum 171 and n. ; see also Comes 
 
 Alcuin, Pseudo- 98 n., 262 
 
 Aldhelm, St 169-70, 195 ; on the Gre- 
 gorian Canon 42, 89 n., 104-5, 172 n. 
 
 Alexander de Stavenby bp. of Coventry 
 and Lichfield 234 n. 
 
 Alexander VI, Pope 434, 441 
 
 Alexander, relics of St 26 
 
 Alfred the Great 256, 388, 392 
 
 All Saints, see Office 
 
 All Souls Day, collects for 2-3 
 
 Alnoth abbat of Newminster 239 n. 
 
 Altaich, Lower, abbey of 29 \M. G. SS. 
 xvii pp. 379-80] 
 
 Altar, history of the Christian 20-38 
 
 Amalar 96, 159, 262, 334 
 
 Amandus, feast of St 255 ; see also tinder 
 Ordo 
 
 Ambrosian, see Canon, Missal, Rite 
 
 Amelii, Cardinal 176 n., 305, 307 
 
 Amiens, high altar at 32-3 
 
 Anastasia, mass of St 43 
 
 Anastasius, reputed author of the Liber 
 Pontificalis 373 
 
 Angelbert, his verses on the battle of 
 Fontenay 382 n. 
 
 Angilbert abbat of St-Riquier 47, 49 n., 
 65 n., 190, 216 n., 272, 314-32 
 
 Anhausen, abbey of 456, 457 
 
 Anjou, Duke of, his plate 423 and n. 
 
 Anne Duchess of Buckingham, a con- 
 soror of Canterbury 359 n. 
 
 Anne Duchess of Exeter, a consoror of 
 Canterbury 359 n. 
 
 Anne, feast of St 248 and n. 
 
 Ansegisus abbat of Fontenelle 272 
 
 Ansegisus abp. of Sens 364 
 
 Anselm abbat of St Edmundsbury, pro- 
 motor of feast of Conception 243-7 
 passim, 249 
 
 Anselm, St 238, 245, 246, 249, 270, 
 
 394 
 Antiphonar ; of Hereford 233 n. ; of 
 
 ^ In this Index, saints are given under their names ; bnt churches, &c., bearing saints' 
 names are grouped under ' S(ain)t '. A few bibliographical references, taken from the 
 margins of Mr. Bishop's proofs, are added in square brackets.
 
 488 
 
 GENERAL INDEX 
 
 Mont-Renaud 149 n. ; Roman 335 ; 
 
 see Bangor 
 Antiphons, dimidiation of 335-6 
 Antoinette d'Orleans 465 
 Apologia sacerdotis 1 38 and n . ; see also 
 
 Accusatio, Praeparatio 
 Apostles, order of names of 139-40, 163-4 
 Apostolic Constitutions 120-1 
 A r dens, Atitel des 33 and n. 
 Ardo, biographer of Benedict of Aniane 
 
 212, 213, 216 n., 343 
 Amobius Junior 200 
 Arras cathedral, altar of 27 
 Arrian, as to Kyrie eleison 117 
 Aschafifenburg, church of 273 n. 
 Ash Wednesday, collects for 2, 3, 4 
 Ashbumham Pentateuch 22 n. 
 Asperges 7 
 Asser 256 
 Assumption of B.V.M., feast of the 252, 
 
 253 
 Athanasius, see Creed 
 Athelstan, King 355, 385, 392 ; see 
 
 Psalter. 
 Athelstan Psalter (Galba Axviii) 141 n. ; 
 
 see Index of MSS 
 Attigny, Council of (760-762) 216 n. 
 Audebert, Dom Bernard, prior of St- 
 
 Denis 462-4 
 Audomarus, feast of St 255 
 Augustine of Canterbury, St, in English 
 
 litanies 147 
 Aurelian, St, bp. of Ravenna 379 
 Aurelian, St 126 
 Austroberta, feast of St 255 
 Auxerre, cathedral of 273 
 Avignon, coronation of Popes at 307 
 Avitus, St, bp. of Vienne, on Rogations 
 
 129 
 
 Bachiarius 199-200 
 Baldaquin 21-2, 24 ; see Ciborium 
 Bangor Antiphonary 127, 194 
 Bardo, St, abp. of Mainz 406 
 Bartolomeo di Jacopo, inventory of 430- 
 
 31 
 BatifiFol, Mgr P. 60, 133, 190 
 Baumer, Dom S. 39 n., 46, 47, 49, 61, 
 
 63 n., 64 n., 314 
 Baumstark, A. 108, 137 
 Bavarian Councils \c. 770, and 805 ) 2 1 6 n. 
 Bayeux Ordinariufn, the 300 n. 
 Beaufort, Cardinal 359 n. 
 Bee Customs, the 269-70, 300 
 Bede, the Venerable 42, 195 ; breviate 
 
 psalter of 195 and n., 196 
 Bedford, Duke of, art collections of 423 
 Bedingfeld, the family of 403-4 
 Benedict of Aniane, St 211-13, 214, 216, 
 
 217, 2i8, 219, 231, 315, 333 n., 334, 
 
 340, 342-3 
 Benedict XIII (Peter de Luna), antipope 
 
 304, 305, 434 
 
 Benedict of Nursia, Rule of St 212 ; its 
 relation to the Roman Office 133-4 ; 
 as to Kyrie eleison 127 ; as to 'litany' 
 130; on monastic dress 261; com- 
 mentaries on 214-15 
 
 Benedictine, first provincial chapter 
 229 n. ; university at Salzburg 459 ; see 
 also Congregation 
 
 Benedictines ; English, form of habit of 
 in fifteenth cent. 352 n. ; German 453- 
 61 ; Richelieu and the 462-74 
 
 Benedictio lucernae, the Mozarabic, by 
 St Isidore 205-6 n. 
 
 Benediction of Blessed Sacrament 45 1-2 
 
 Bercta, daughter of Charlemagne 318, 
 319, 320 
 
 Berctvi^ald abp. of Canterbury 146 
 
 Berengerius bp. of Verdun 225 
 
 Berinwald, see Byrnwold 
 
 Bernard of B^arn, inventory of 431-3 
 
 Bernard bp. of St David's 243, 245 
 
 Bernard of Cluny 269 
 
 Bernard Duke of Septimania 344 
 
 Bernard brother of Count Heccard 363, 
 366 
 
 Bernard, St 228, 238, 259, 395 
 
 Bernerius provost of Verdun 225 
 
 Bemo of Reichenau 209-10 
 
 Bernold of Constance 98 n., 262 ; see 
 Micrologus 
 
 Bernowinus, bp. 321 n. 
 
 Bersuire, Pierre, inventory of 426-7 
 
 Bertin, feast of St 255 
 
 Bertrada abbess of Faremoutier 364, 366, 
 368 
 
 Besse, Dom M. 466 n., 473 n. 
 
 Bidding prayers loi, 388 
 
 Birinus, St, feast of 241 ; shrine of 393 
 
 Blessing before Gospel in Roman mass 7 
 
 Bobbio, monastery of, an Irish founda- 
 tion 92 ; Verona MSS from 198 ; see 
 Missal 
 
 Bollandists 477, 481 
 
 Boniface VIII, Pope 307 
 
 Boniface, St 195 
 
 Bonnechose, Cardinal de 287 
 
 Borromeo, St Charles 17 
 
 Brackets over altar 28 
 
 Bradshaw {or White) Dom Augustine 
 465-7 
 
 Braga, Council of (572), on Rogations 
 129 
 
 Braulio bp. of Saragossa 175 and n. 
 
 Breviarium of Monte Cassino 191 
 
 Breviary ; of Hereford 233 n. ; of St 
 Oswald 241 n. ; Roman 336 ; of York 
 233 n. 
 
 Brigid, feast of St 255 n. 
 
 Brokesby, W. de 358 n. 
 
 Buchwald, R. 108 
 
 Bullae of Popes, leaden 407 
 
 Burchard, Diary of 304, 434 
 
 Burgundian Code of Gundobald 364
 
 GENERAL INDEX 
 
 489 
 
 Burial services in eighth cent. 167-9, 
 
 182-92 
 Burnellus 232 n. 
 Burocco, Vincenzo 411, 412 
 Byrnstan, St 387 
 Byrnwold, St 387-8 andx\. 
 Byssus, denoting alb 262 n. 
 
 Caecilia, see Cecily 
 
 Caesarius of Aries, St 223 n. ; as to Kyrie 
 eleison 126-7; o" Rogations 129 
 
 Cajetan, Constantine 459 
 
 Calendars; 'Irish' 251-7; of Leofric 
 Psalter 406 ; of Old Llanthony 299 ; 
 the Metrical 252, 253-6 ; Marble c. of 
 Naples 249 n., 250, 257 and n. ; of 
 Newminster 239, 254, 257 ; of Norwich 
 403 ; of Old Minster 239, 254, 257 ; of 
 St Albans Breviary 247 n. ; early 
 Syriac 257 n. ; of St Willibrord 485 ; 
 of Winchcombe 247 n. ; of Worcester 
 241 n. ; see Martyrology 
 
 Cambrai, see Index of MSS 
 
 Caniisia 262 and n., 266 ; see also Alb 
 
 Cancelli 23 
 
 Candles on altar at mass 28, 33, 38, 
 301-13, 400 
 
 Canon of the mass ; Ambrosian 79, 86 n. ; 
 early texts of the Roman 77-115 ; 
 critical text of Gregorian 81-91 ; two 
 recensions of Roman 90-94, 105-9 ; 
 Aldhelm on Roman 104 ; silent recital 
 of II ; order of apostles in 140 
 
 Canons 341-2 ; Black, of St Augustine 
 228-30, 232 ; White, of Premontr^ 228 
 
 Canopy {celatura) used in diocese of 
 York 30 
 
 Canterbury; Benedictional of 240-41, 
 257 ; confraternity lists of 354, 359-60 ; 
 Honorius of Autun at 263 n. ; Provincial 
 Council of (1328) 238 ; detached shrine 
 at 30 ; see also St Augustine's 
 
 Cantors 74, 154-5, 263, 267 
 
 Canute 258, 393 
 
 Capitellum, meaning of the term 126-8 
 
 Cappa, see Cope 
 
 Cardonnel, Pierre, inventory of 425-6 
 
 Cart nostri applied to the dead loo, 
 187 n. 
 
 Carolingian Renaissance 317 
 
 Cassiodorus 198 
 
 Casula, see Chasuble 
 
 Catalanus, liturgist 304 n., 434 
 
 Cecily, mother of Edward IV, a consoror 
 of Evesham 359 n. 
 
 Cecily, sister-in-law of Henry VII, a 
 consoror of Canterbury 359 n. 
 
 Cecily, feast of St 257 
 
 Celatura, see Canopy 
 
 Celchyth, Council of (816) ; as to Scotti 
 172 ; as to Office of the Dead 216 n. 
 
 Cencio Savelli, Cardinal, Roman Ordo 
 of 309-11 
 
 Censing 9, 448 
 
 Cefisiiunt, Liber 310 
 
 Ceremoniale Episcoporutn oiVxhanWW 
 
 17 
 
 Ceremoniars, diaries of papal 16, 304-5, 
 434-43 
 
 Ceriani, Mgr A. M. 217 n., 233 n. 
 
 Ceme, Book ^/ 165-70, 173-4, 192-7 
 
 Chalon-sur-Saone, Council of (814); as 
 to Memento of Dead no, 115 ; as to 
 Scotti 172 
 
 Chapel, papal 16, 1 7 
 
 Chapels, domestic, of ninth cent. 366-7 
 
 Charlemagne ; ecclesiastical policy of 
 45-6, 260-61, 315, 320; coronation of 
 321 ; plunders Italian churches 26, 
 372-3 ; Roman mass book adopted by 
 15-17 ; see Sacramentary, the Gre- 
 gorian 
 
 Charles the Bald 15, 344 
 
 Charles V of France 423, 427 
 
 Chasuble 9, 260-75 passitn 
 
 Chezal-Benoit, congregation of 466 
 and n. 
 
 Chiaravalle, Cistercian abbey of 415 
 
 Christmas ; Pope's masses on C. Day 
 305-6 ; ceremonies observed at Miin- 
 ster during 445-52 
 
 Christopher Marcellus, Ceremonial of 
 
 305 
 Christopher, prayer to St 390 
 Ciborium 21, 22, 27, 28, 29, 30, 399, 
 
 400 n., 450 n. 
 Cistercians 228-30, 468-9 
 Citeaux ; White Monks of 228-30 ; 
 
 Richelieu abbat of 468-9 
 Cixilanus, Life of St Hildefonsus by 208 
 Clarembaldus, canon of Exeter 408, 409 
 Clarence, Duchess of, a consoror of 
 
 St Albans 359 n. 
 Classis, church of at Ravenna 376 
 Clement VI, Pope 305, 307 
 Clermont-Ferrand, cathedral of 273 
 Cloveshoe, Council of (747) ; as to litany 
 
 147 ; as to Requiem aeternam 189 
 Clovis 364 
 Cluny 396 ; Customs 223 ; accretions to 
 
 daily Office at 219-20,228 ; infirmary 
 
 chapel at 223, 228 ; use of cope at 
 
 268-9 ; Richelieu abbat of 469-70 
 Coemgen, feast of St 255 n. 
 Collectio ad panis fractionem, in Miss, 
 
 Goth. 84 n., 95 
 Collects of Roman mass 7 
 Cologne, Council of (1452) 450 
 Columba, feast of St 255 n. 
 Columban, Rule of St 127-8 
 Comes of Alcuin 333 and n., 344, 345, 
 
 346 
 Comgall abbat of Bangor 458 
 Comgan, feast of St 255 n. 
 Comminges, the Bastard of, see Bernard 
 
 of Bdarn
 
 490 
 
 GENERAL INDEX 
 
 Communicantes prayer, saints' names in 
 8 1 n., 83 and n. 
 
 Communion ; chant at 7 ; three prayers 
 before 7 ; fasting for several days be- 
 fore 445-6, 451-2 
 
 Compostella, pilgrimage of 396 
 
 Concelebration 157 
 
 Conception of B. V. M., feast of 227-8, 
 238-59, 445 
 
 Conception of St John Baptist, feast of 
 250 
 
 Concordia Regularis (English) 217 n., 
 218 n., 220, 226 n., 241-2, 268, 274; 
 scheme of daily Offices in 221-2 
 
 Concordia Regtilartim of Benedict of 
 Aniane 333, 344, 345, 346 
 
 Confession at St James's, Miinster, 451 
 
 Confraternity books 349-61 
 
 Confratres, Benedictine 352-61, 362-9 
 
 Congregation, Benedictine ; of Brittany 
 467 atid n. ; ' Gallican ' 466 ; English 
 467 ; of Exempts 466 and n. ; of 
 Chezal-Benoit 466 andn. ; of St-Denis 
 467 andn. ; of St-Justina 249 n., 466n., 
 467; of St-Maur 458, 462-74; of 
 St-Vannes 466 and n., 470, 472 ; 
 Spanish 467 
 
 Conrad II, coronation of 258 
 
 Contestatio of Assumption massin Afm. 
 Goth. 177-8 
 
 Cope, origins of the 260-75 
 
 Corbie, abbey of 65 n., 353, 467 
 
 Comelimiinster, see Inde 
 
 Corona oblatiottis 1 56 and n. 
 
 Coronation ; of Popes at Avignon 307 ; 
 of Charlemagne 321 ; of Conrad II 
 258 
 
 Corporal, spreading of the 10 
 
 Corfis-Saint procession on Palm Sunday 
 277-94 
 
 Corpus Christi procession at Augsburg 
 
 457 
 
 Corvey, abbey of 26 
 
 Cosset, Pierre, abbat of Premontre 468 
 
 Council, see Agde, Aix-la-Chapelle, At- 
 tigny. Bavarian, Braga, Canterbury, 
 Celchyth, Chalon-sur-Saone, Cloves- 
 hoe, Cologne, Frankfort, London, 
 Lyons, Mainz, Narbonne, Orleans, 
 Reims, Seville, Toledo, Tours, Trent, 
 Vaison, Westminster 
 
 Coutances, ' Use ' of 277 
 
 Creed ; introduced into Roman mass 7; 
 the Athanasian 198-202, 325, 331 ; 
 the Constantinopolitan 325, 331 ; the 
 old Roman in English MSS 141-2, 
 144 atid n. 
 
 Cremona cathedral 273 
 
 Cross, Holy ; feast of Exaltation of 43, 
 144-5 ; Office of 225-6 ; prayer of 
 390 ; relic of 367 
 
 Cross ; on altar 28 ; an enamelled, in 
 Lateran ' Sancta Sanctorum ' 145 n. ; 
 
 a golden, given to Winchester by 
 Edred, 392 ; see also under Stigand 
 Croyland abbey, royal confratres of 
 
 359 n-. 
 Crucifix; on altar 33, 38; substituted 
 
 for cross at Narbonne 162 
 Crutched Friars, monastery at Bologna 
 
 435 
 Cuculla 261 
 Cyriacus of Nisibis, liturgy of 161 
 
 Dackombe {or Dakomb), Thomas, MSS 
 
 possessed by 141 n., 398 n. 
 d'Arbouze, Jacques, abbat of Cluny 469 
 Deacons at papal mass 9 
 Dead, see Memento, Office 
 Decretals, pseudo-Isidorean 364-5 
 Dedication of church, rites for the 12 
 d'Estouteviile, Cardinal 307 n., 309 
 
 and n. 
 de la Cour, Dom Didier 462, 466 
 de Lavergne de Tressan abp. of Rouen 
 
 298 
 Denis, Dom Paul 473 n. 
 Denys, St, prayer to 390 
 Deprecatio Gelasii 124 n. 
 De Sacramentis, pseudo-Ambrosian 
 
 treatise 84 n., 85 n., 93. 
 De Togni, Aristide 412 
 de Vert, Dom Claude 117, 316 n. 
 Diaries of papal ceremoniars 16 ; diary 
 
 of Paris de Grassis 434-43 ; diary of 
 
 Burchard 304, 434 
 Didascalia, Bobbio origin of Verona 
 
 fragments 198 
 ' Dimidiation' of antiphons 335-6 
 Diptychs 100-102 ; of Mozarabic mass 
 
 166; of Stowe Missal 92, 100, 139, 
 
 140, 161, 166 
 Dominic, St, feast of at Norwich 403 
 Domnana, mother of Heccard, 363 
 Dossals 28, 30, 401 andn. 
 Dracontius, recension of by Eugenius II 
 
 of Toledo 207 n. 
 Drews, P. 193 
 Dreygerwolt, Note-Book of Pastor 444- 
 
 52 
 Duchesne, Mgr L. 310; on Gelasian 
 
 Sacramentary 43-60 /am;«, 135 n. ; 
 
 on Gregorian Sacramentary 44-6 ; 
 
 on the Preface Hucusque 50, 347-8 
 Dungal the Irishman 65 
 Dunstan, St 271, 274, 387, 388 ; prayer 
 
 to 390 ; Pontifical of 149 
 Durham ; Letter-book of 358 n. ; Liber 
 
 Vitae of 351 and n., 352, 354, 355-6 
 
 Eadmer, Tractattis de Conceptione S. 
 
 Mariae 246 n. 
 Ealhswith, queen of Alfred the Great 
 
 256, 388 
 Eanbald abp. of York 55 n. 
 Ebner, A. t^-J^passitn, 1 1 1-12,362 [Die
 
 GENERAL INDEX 
 
 491 
 
 klosterlichen Gebets- Verbrilderungen, 
 
 Ratisbon, 1890] 
 Edburga, prayer to St 390 
 Edessa, martyrs of 257 n. 
 Edgar, King 390 
 Edgiva, mother of Edward the Elder 
 
 355 
 Edilwald, Hymnar of 193-6 ; see Aedel- 
 
 uald 
 Edmund of Canterbury, St, and the 
 
 Sarum Missal 300 n. 
 Edmund the Elder 355 
 Edmund the Martyr, St 390, 403, 404 
 Edoc, see Judoc 
 Edred, King 392 
 Edward the Confessor 258, 393 
 Edward the Elder 256, 388, 392 
 Edward the Martyr, prayer to St 390 
 Egbert of York 42 ; Pontifical of 149 n. 
 Eginhard 26 ; breviate Psalter of 195 
 Einsiedeln Customs 225-6, 270-71 
 Ekkehart 354 n. 
 El^onore de Bourbon abbess of Fonte- 
 
 vrault 465 
 Elevation of the Host 9, 441 atuin. 
 Elfstan bp. of Elmham 274 
 Elgiva, prayer to St 390 
 Eliensis, Liber 274 
 Eligii, Codex S. ill, 138 n. 
 Elipandus bp. of Toledo, cites the Tole- 
 
 dan Missal 84 n., 166, 171, 203 
 Elizabeth, queen of Edward IV, a con- 
 
 soror of Canterbury 359 n. 
 Ellwangen, monastery of 454 
 Elphege, St, abp. of Canterbury 240, 
 
 241, 386, 393 
 Elphege, St, bp. of Winchester 387 
 Ely 30, 274, 356 
 Emma, widow of Canute ; her gifts to 
 
 Winchester 393 
 Ephrem, St 161-2, 257 n. 
 Epiklesis in Roman Canon, supposed 
 
 108 
 Epistle, at mass 7, 10 
 Epitome, the Spanish 197 
 Ermoldus Nigellus 341 
 Ethelnoth, abp. 259 
 
 Ethelred the Unready, a prayer for 388-9 
 Ethelwerd, chronicler 256 
 Ethelwold bp. of Lichfield, see Aedel- 
 
 uald 
 Ethelwold of Winchester, St 241-2, 
 
 250, 271, 274, 352 n., 387, 389, 393> 
 
 394 ; IVolstani Vita S. Ethelwoldi 
 
 392, 393 
 Eugenius bp. of Toledo 170, 171, 
 
 175; adoptionist prayer ascribed to 
 
 204-6 ; corrects Toledan service 
 
 books 207 
 Eugenius III, Pope 395 
 Eugenius IV, Pope 305 
 Europe, feast of the Saints of 255 n. 
 Eutropius, rhyming office of St 408 
 
 Evesham, noble confratres of 359 
 Evrard Count of Friuli 365 ; domestic 
 
 chapel of 366-7 ; see under Psalter 
 Excommunicated persons, reading of a 
 
 list of 446 
 Exeter cathedral 274 
 Exposition of Blessed Sacrament 312, 
 
 448, 450-51 
 Exultet of Holy Saturday 297-8 
 Eynsham Customs 226 n., 268 
 
 Faliero, Marin, Doge of Venice, inven- 
 tory of 428 
 
 Faremoutier, nunnery of 353, 363, 364, 
 366, 368 
 
 Farfa, abbey of 223 n. ; Customs of 
 217 n., 223 n., 269 
 
 Faricius abbat of Abingdon 274 
 
 Fasting for several days before Com- 
 munion 445-6, 451-2 
 
 Fastolf, Sir John 425 
 
 Felicitas and Perpetua, SS., in Roman 
 Canon 104-5 
 
 Felix IV, Pope, on duties of Roman 
 Notaries 375 n. 
 
 Felix bp. of Toledo, prayer ascribed to 
 208 
 
 Felix, St, apostle of East Anglia 403 
 
 Fibula (clasp of cope) 263 
 
 Fintan, feast of St 255 n. 
 
 Flacci lllyrici Missa 103 n., 138 n. 
 
 Flavigny, monastery of 353 
 
 Fleury, abbey of 219-20 n., 363, 365, 
 368 
 
 Florence, Duomo of 411 
 
 Florus of Lyons 383 n. ; on Memento 
 of Dead 98-9 
 
 Fontenay, battle of 382 a7id n. 
 
 Fontenelle, Norman monastery of 272 
 
 Fontevrault, Benedictine Order of 464-7 
 
 Forbes, G. H. 163 
 
 Forzetta, Oliviero, Venetian art collector 
 429-30 
 
 ' Four boys ' of Ravenna 429-30 
 
 Fraction of the Host 9, 11, 156 
 
 Francis, St, feast of at Norwich 403 
 
 Francis I of France 435-43) 466 n. 
 
 Franco abbat of Lobbes 224 n. 
 
 Frankfort, Council of (794) ; as to recital 
 of names and kiss of peace at mass 
 loi n. ; ascribes Mozarabic prayer to 
 St Hildefonsus 204 n. 
 
 Freising in Bavaria, altar at 32 \M. G. 
 SS. xxiv 328] 
 
 Fridegisus abbat of St Martin's, Tours 
 
 340 
 Frisingen, cathedral of 273 
 Frontals of altars 28, 399 atid n. 
 Froude, J. A. 480 
 Fuggers of Augsburg, the 453 
 Fulda 26, 194-5 ; Office of Dead at 
 
 216 
 Fulgent ius, St 171
 
 492 
 
 GENERAL INDEX 
 
 Fulrad abbat of St-Denis 97 
 Fursey, feast of St 255 n. 
 
 Gasquet, Cardinal 385, 402 n. 
 
 Gattico, G. B. 267 n. ; his Acta cereino- 
 
 nialia 435 n. 
 Gavin, T. 301-2 
 Gelasianuvi, see Sacramentary 
 Gelasii, Deprecatio 124 n. 
 Geofifrey abbat of St Albans 247 
 George abp. of Ravenna, misdeeds of 
 
 381-2 
 Georgi, Domenico 267 n. 
 Gerbaldus, friend of Heccard 364 
 Germanus of Paris, letters ascribed to 
 
 St 130-33 
 Getha, wife of Earl Godwin 393 
 Ghent customs in Concordia Regularis 
 
 274 
 Ghiberti bp. of Verona 34-5 
 Giffard, Dom G. 466 n., 467 
 Gilbert ' the Universal ' bp. of London 
 
 243-5 
 
 Giles, feast of St 247 n. 
 
 Gisla, wife of Evrard of Friuli 367 
 
 Glastonbury ; under Henry of Blois 
 392, 394, 397 ; saints of 407, 409-10. 
 
 Gloria in excelsis, in Roman mass 7, 9, 
 126 
 
 Gloucester, feast of Conception intro- 
 duced at 247 and n. 
 
 Gloucester, Duke of (brother of Henry V) 
 
 423 
 
 Godelgaudus 69 ; see Sacramentary 
 
 Godeman, William, abbat of Gloucester 
 247 
 
 Godfrey of Cambrai prior of Winches- 
 ter 394 
 
 Godwin, Earl 393 
 
 Goffridus bp. of Auxerre 273 
 
 Good Friday rites'i2, 122-3, 295-6, 322 
 
 Gorze, abbey of 314 n., 353 
 
 Gospel, reading of the 9, 10, 306, 307 
 
 Gospel books at Deutz 263 
 
 Goths at the Frankish Court 217 n., 
 339-44 
 
 Gotiscalc bp. of Aquitaine 176 and n. 
 
 Gottweih, monastery of 459 
 
 Gougaud, Dom L. 180-82 
 
 Gradale Wasconicum 364 n. 
 
 Gradual chant at mass 7 
 
 Gradual psalms, see Psalms 
 
 Grandison bp. of Exeter, Legendarititn 
 and Ordinale of 407-8 
 
 Grates nunc omnes, Christmas hymn 
 
 447 
 Greek litanies, &c., in English MSB 
 
 140-4 
 Gregorianum, see Sacramentary 
 Gregory abbat of Einsiedeln 355 
 Gregory of Elvira 200 
 Gregory the Great, Pope 14, 171, 172 n.; 
 
 and the Pater noster 11 ; his Canon 
 of the mass 81-91, 104 ; on Kyrie 
 eleison 123-5 ; his use of ' litany * 
 130 ; MSS of his Cura Past oralis 364 
 n. ; his name in English litanies 146-7 ; 
 prayer ascribed to 387 n. 
 
 Gregory H, Pope 42 
 
 Gregory HI, Pope 42, 223 n. 
 
 Gregory IV, Pope 381 
 
 Gregory XIII, Pope 466 n. ; Pontifical 
 of 17 
 
 Gregory of Tours as to Kyrie eleison 
 127 ; M S S of his Historia Francorum 
 364 and n. 
 
 Grimbald, St 256, 351, 387, 392 
 
 Grimoldus abbat of St-Gall, supposed 
 author of Preface Hucusque 50 andn. ; 
 Sacramentary of 347 
 
 Guarrazar Treasure 22 n. 
 
 Gu^ranger, Dom P. 60, 120 
 
 Guibert of Nogent 314 n. 
 
 Guilloreau, Dom L. 462 n., 466 
 
 Gundobald, MS of the Code of 364 
 
 Guria, Shamona and Habib, Edessene 
 martyrs ; early cult of 257 n. ; church 
 at Naples dedicated to 257 n. 
 
 Guthlac, St, Life of by Felix 148 
 
 Habib, see Guria 
 
 Hadrian I, Pope 37 1 ; sends copy of 
 
 Gregorianiim to Charlemagne 16, 
 41, 62 ; Roman Missal reformed 
 
 by(?)63n. 
 Hadrian II, Pope ; his name in Regina 
 
 MS of Gregorianum 64 n. 
 Hadrian IV, Pope 357, 396 
 Haedda, St 387 
 Haeften, Benedict 453 
 Halitgar bp. of Cambrai 66 
 Hanc igitur, texts of the prayer 82-4, 
 
 93-4 and n. 
 Hardecanute 393 
 Hariulfus, chronicler of St-Riquier 
 
 314-15 n. 
 Harnack, Theodor 120, 121 
 Heccard, Count 362-9 ; his library 
 
 364-5 andxi. ; household effects 365-6 ; 
 
 domestic chapel 366-7 
 Heccard, namesake of Count H. 364,365 
 Helfferich, Mozarabic prayers first 
 
 printed by 203-4 n., 205 
 Helisachar, 333-48; a canon 340, 
 
 chancellor of Aquitaine 340; his letter 
 
 to Nibridius printed 337-9 
 Helsin [or Elsi, or Aethelsige) abbat of 
 
 Ramsey ; his supposed vision as to 
 
 feast of Conception 238, 248-9 and n. 
 Hemming, compiler of Worcester Car- 
 tulary 356 
 Henry of Blois bp. of Winchester ; his 
 
 gifts to Winchester 392-401 
 Henry I of England 245, 247 n.
 
 GENERAL INDEX 
 
 493 
 
 Henry II of England 396, a confrater 
 of St Albans 357 
 
 Henry IV of England 423 
 
 Henry V of England, art collections of 
 423 : his chantry at Westminster 33 
 
 Henry VI of England, a confrater of 
 Croyland 359 n. 
 
 Henry IV of France 465 
 
 Herbert of Boseham,a confrater of Dur- 
 ham 356 
 
 Hereford ; Holy Week rites of 276- 
 300 ; ' Use' of 277 
 
 Heriold king of the Danes, baptism of 
 341 n. 
 
 Hermes, relics of St 26 
 
 Hertfelder abbat of St Afra's, Augsburg 
 
 457 
 
 Hilary of Poitiers, St, a Liber Officiorum 
 ascribed to 209-10 
 
 Hildebert bp. of Le Mans, a letter of 
 408-9 
 
 Hildefonsus, St 161 ; composed masses 
 171, 207-8 ; adoptionist prayer 
 ascribed to 204-6 ; his de Virginitate 
 161, 175-8 ; sermons on B. Virgin 
 ascribed to 176-7, 200-201 ; said to 
 have instituted Advent commemora- 
 tion of B. Virgin 247 n. 
 
 Hildemar, commentator on Rule of St 
 Benedict 214-15 
 
 Hildoard bp. of Cambrai 63, 65 n., 66, 
 100 n. ; see Sacramentary. 
 
 Hippolytus, St, mass of in Toledan 
 Missal 207 andn. 
 
 Historical criticism 475-84 
 
 Holy Saturday, rites of 296-8, 323 
 
 Holy Week rites of Sarum, Hereford and 
 Rouen 276-300 
 
 Honorius of Autun 263 n. ; on vestments 
 263-7 ; his Gemma Animae 264-6 ; 
 his Sacrament ariuni 265 and n. 
 
 Honorius III (Cencio Savelli q.v.), Pope 
 
 309 
 Host, chalice touched with 11; see 
 
 Fraction, Oblatae 
 Hrabanus Maurus, see Rhaban 
 Hiicusque, Preface to Carolingian Sup- 
 plement to Cregorianu?n 49-55, 75 n.; 
 
 'a State Paper of the time' 53, 346 ; 
 
 Alcuin its author 41, 47, 49, 54-5, 
 
 333-4, 347-8; modern opinions as 
 
 to 346-8 
 Hueber P. 459 
 Hugh abbat of Cluny, introduced Office 
 
 of B. Virgin there 228 
 Hugh abbat of Farfa 269 n. 
 Hugh of Flavigny 225 
 Hugh abbat of Reading, later abp. of 
 
 Rouen, 243-4 
 Hugh of St Victor {or Robert PuUen ?), 
 
 on vestments 263 n., 265 
 Hugues du Chataignier, art collections 
 
 of 423-5 
 
 Humfrey the Good Duke of Gloucester, 
 a confrater of St Albans 359 
 
 Hyde = St Grimbald's house of New- 
 minster removed to the other side of 
 Winchester 351, 395 ami n. ; Hyde 
 Cartulary (= Confraternity Book of 
 St Grimbald's, Newminster) 351, 
 355-6 ; Liber de Hyda 395 n. 
 
 Hygbald, prayer of abbat 386 
 
 Iconostasis 23 
 
 Idalius bp. of Barcelona 186 
 
 Ildephonsus, see Hildefonsus 
 
 Inde {or Cornelimiinster), abbey of 
 
 212-13, 214, 219, 340 n. 
 Indulgences, proclamation of Christmas 
 
 445 
 
 Infirmary chapel at Cluny 223, 228 
 
 Innocent I, Pope 11 
 
 Innocent II, Pope 395 
 
 Innocent III, Pope 234, 265, 267, 309 
 
 Intercession, the Great 113-14 
 
 Introit 7 
 
 Inventories, mediaeval 422-33, 363-7, 
 450 
 
 Irish ; piety 138-9, 148, 161-3 ; scholar- 
 ship 256; Latinity 176 andn. ; versi- 
 fication 195 ; influence in facilitating 
 changes of religious practice 102 ; 
 influence in continental monasteries 
 65 n. ; at Luxeuil 91 n. ; Irish church 
 influenced by Spanish 163; manipu- 
 lation of liturgical texts 82 n., 84 n. ; 
 Irish strain in Missaie Gothicum 91 n. ; 
 calendars 251-7; expression sanctus 
 sanguis 84, 91 n. ; see Scotti. 
 
 Isidore of Seville, St 170 n., 171, 175, 
 200; sMihor oi Benediciio iucernae'xn 
 Mozarabic Missal 205-6 n. ; on the 
 chasuble 263 n. 
 
 Lie missa est of Roman mass 7 
 
 hidica psalm at mass 7 
 
 Ivo of Chartres 262 
 
 John of Avranches 231 n., 271, 277, 278, 
 
 299-300 
 John Baptist, St ; feast of Conception of 
 
 250 ; feast of Finding of the Head of 
 
 255 n. ; relics of at Edessa 257 n. 
 John Duke of Bedford, a confrater of 
 
 Evesham 359 n. 
 John of Crema, papal legate 247 n. 
 John of Gorze, Life of St 224 n. 
 John XXII, Pope 307 
 John bp. of Syracuse 123 
 John de Warenne Earl of Surrey 358 n. 
 John of Worcester, Chronicle of 245 n., 
 
 247 n. 
 Joseph, Pere, assists Richelieu to reform 
 
 French monasteries 464-7 
 Judith, Empress 195 
 Judoc, St 388 n.
 
 494 
 
 GENERAL INDEX 
 
 Julian, bp. of Toledo 175; Ars Gram- 
 matica of 169 ; Prognosticon of 17011., 
 172 n., 187 n., 364 mid n.; adop- 
 tionist prayer ascribed to 204-6 ; a 
 book of masses composed by 208 
 
 Jumieges, see Ritual 
 
 Justus, St, relic of at Winchester 392, 
 
 399 
 
 Keble, inventory of Serjeant 430 
 Kenulf king of Mercia 172 
 Kenwald bp. of Worcester 354 
 Kiss of peace il, loi n. 
 Kuypers, Dom A. 138, 196, 391 
 Kyrie eleison 7, 9 n., 14, 116-36, 325 
 
 Lambspring, monastery of 456 
 Lanfranc 386 ; Statuta of 227, 269-70 
 
 and n., 300 
 Langlois, Ch.-V., and Ch. Seignobos, 
 
 Iniroduciion aux etudes historiques : 
 
 Paris, 1898 475-84 
 Lathcen filius Baith, Irish prince 65 n. 
 Laudes; of the Psalter Bibl. Nat. MS 
 
 lat. 13159, 159 n. ; sung in procession 
 
 at St-Riquier 325, 331 
 Laudes S.P.N. Benedicttoi Stengel 453, 
 
 457 
 
 Lauds and vespers said in separate ora- 
 tory 222-3 "• 
 
 Laurence, relics of St 399 
 
 Lavabo psalm at mass 7 
 
 Le Blant, E. 191 
 
 Le Brun, P. 33, 301 
 
 Le Brun Desmarettes 277 
 
 Le Saige, Nicholas, abbat of St-Mar- 
 tin's at Laon 468 
 
 Legendarmin of bp. Grandison 407 
 
 Legg, J. Wickham 278 
 
 Legipontius 460 
 
 Lehon in Brittany, priory of 467 n. 
 
 Leidradus 171 n. 
 
 Lejay, P. 198 n., 211 n., 219 n. 
 
 Leo Marsicanus, Cassinese Chronicle of 
 380 
 
 Leo IV, Pope 25 
 
 Leo IX, Pope, St ; cult of at Exeter 
 406-7 
 
 Leo X, Pope 466 n. ; his meeting vi^ith 
 Francis I of France at Bologna 
 
 435-43 
 Leofric bp. of Exeter 240 ; Psalter of 
 
 389, 406-7 
 Leofwine abbat of Ely 259 
 Leucadia, St ; canticum and mass in her 
 
 honour composed by St Hildefonsus 
 
 207 
 Lewis Duke of Bavaria-Ingolstadt 32 
 Lewis the Pious 15, 212, 262, 334, 337, 
 
 339-42, 362, 382 
 Lewis VII, king 396 
 Lewis XIV 33, 35 
 
 Liber Censuum 310 
 
 Liber Hymnorum, breviate Psalter in 
 
 the Irish 195 
 Liber Officiorum of Treves 98 n. 
 Liber Pontificalis 42, 373 
 Liber Vitae of Durham 248 n., 351 and 
 
 n., 352, 355 ; Worcester names in 
 
 356 n. 
 Liber Vitae of St-Gallen 351 
 Libera invocations in burial service 191 
 Liborius, relics of St 26 
 L'lle Barbe, monastery of 353 
 Lincoln Customs 233 ; ' Use ' of 277 
 Lindisfarne 355 
 Lingua (or Linguld) 263 n. 
 Lisieux, the ' Use ' of 277. 
 Litany 14, 43, 128-30, \2n-Q^ passim, 
 
 207 
 Litany of Saints, 124 ; on Holy Saturday 
 
 296 ; Greek, in English MSS 142-64 ; 
 
 a Melchite 137; in Stowe Missal 
 
 137-64 ; in St-Amand Ordo 1 59-60 ; 
 
 at St-Riquier 324, 329-32 ; ' General ', 
 
 ' Galhc ', ' Italic ', ' Roman ' 325, 331 ; 
 
 in MS Galba A xiv 387, 389; in 
 
 Leofric Psalter 389, 406 ; in MS 
 
 Addit. 28188, 239 ; as addition to daily 
 
 Office 222, 224, 235 
 Livy, Bersuire's translation of 427 
 Llanthony abbey 232 n. {M. G. SS. xxi 
 
 P- 394], 299 
 London, Council of (1129) 242, 245, 
 
 246, 247 n. 
 Lorenzana, Cardinal 170 n., 176 and n., 
 
 186 n. 
 Lorsch abbey 27, 48, 170 n. 
 Lot, F. 314-15 n. 
 Lothar, Emperor 364, 381-2 
 Louis, see Lewis 
 Louise de Bourbon de Lavedan abbess 
 
 of Fontevrault 465 
 Luxeuil, an Irish centre 91 n. ; Customs 
 
 of 270-71 
 Lyons; Council of (c. 516-523), as to 
 
 oratio plebis 133 ; feast of Conception 
 
 kept at 246 
 
 Mabillon, Dom J. 458 
 
 MacCarthy, B., his edition of the Stowe 
 Missal 78-103 passim, 139 n. 
 
 MacDurnain Gospels 141 n. 
 
 Machutus, St (= St Malo) 387, 390 
 
 Mactail, feast of St 255 n. 
 
 Maelruen {or Maile Ruen) 92 n., 255 n. 
 
 Magnificat, sung twice on Christmas 
 Day 448 
 
 Mainz, Council of (813), as to Scotti 
 172 n. 
 
 Malo, St ; see Machutus 
 
 Mamertus bp. of Vienne, institutes Ro- 
 gations 129 
 
 Manegold of Lautenbach, his Constitu- 
 tions for Black Canons 230
 
 GENERAL INDEX 
 
 495 
 
 Manser, Dom A., on the Gregorian 
 Canon 104 
 
 Manuscripts, see below ' Index of MSS 
 referred to ' 
 
 Mapes, Walter, a confrater of Durham 
 356 
 
 Marbach in Alsace, monastery of Black 
 Canons 230, 265 
 
 Marcellinus, St, bp. of Ravenna 377 
 
 Marcellus of Ancyra, Roman Creed of 
 141 n. 
 
 Marco Polo 428 
 
 Margaret Countess of Richmond, a con- 
 soror of Croyland 359 n. 
 
 Margaret Duchess of Somerset, a con- 
 soror of Croyland 359 n. 
 
 Margaret, prayer to St 390 
 
 Marianus Scotus, Chronicle of 356 
 
 Mars, Dom N. 467 n. 
 
 Martin of Braga 262 n. 
 
 Martin abp. of Ravenna 372, 380 
 
 Martin, feast of St 257 
 
 Marty7-ologiu)n Cambrense 252-3 n. 
 
 Martyrologium Hieronymianum 137, 
 252-3 
 
 Martyrology ; of Norwich 239 ; of Oen- 
 gus 251-7, 485 ; of the Celestines of 
 Sens298;ofTallaght252-3; ofUsuard 
 397 n. ; the Philocalian 105 
 
 Mary, the Blessed Virgin ; devotional 
 cult of 165, 175-6, 202 n. ; Advent 
 commemoration of 247 n. ; feasts of 
 in Martyrology of Oengus 252, 485 ; 
 prayers to 174-8; see Assumption, 
 Conception, Nativity, Presentation 
 
 Mary of Egypt, St, ' A little book of ' 364 
 
 Mass, the Roman ; native elements of 7 ; 
 foreign elements in 7 ; description of 
 an early papal 9-12 ; see Mass Book, 
 Rite, &c. 
 
 Mass Book, the earliest Roman 39-61 
 
 Mass books, Gallican 14, 58 ; see Missal, 
 Sacramentary 
 
 Master of ceremonies, diary of a papal 
 434-43 
 
 Matilda, queen of William the Con- 
 queror 274 
 
 Matthew, cardinal bp. of Albano 229 n. 
 
 Matthew, feast of St 255 
 
 Mattus, a monastic garment 261 
 
 Maundy Thursday, rites of 294 
 
 Maurice, feast of St 329 
 
 Maurists 38 n., 453, 458, 463-74 
 
 Maurus abp. of Ravenna, his tomb- 
 stone carried off by Lothar 381 
 
 Maximian abp. of Ravenna 373, 374; 
 elevation of his relics yjj n. ; missal 
 compiled by 59 n. 
 
 Melchite litany of all saints 137 
 
 Melk, abbey of 459 
 
 Mellicensis, Anonymus 272 n. 
 
 Memento of Dead in Roman Canon 80, 
 81 n., 96-103, 109-15 
 
 Menard, Dom H.. on the Gregorianum 
 
 50,62, 112, 347 
 Mercati, Mgr G. 78, 83 ; ' More Spanish 
 
 Symptoms ' 203-10 
 Michael, St; feast of 255; a patron of 
 
 Newminster 388; prayer to 390 
 Micrologus (Bemold of Constance); on 
 things ' superfluous ' in the Canon 95 ; 
 on Memento of the Dead 98 n. 
 Milan cathedral, the building of 411-21 
 Missii; Flacci lllyrici 1 03 n., 138 n. ; 
 omnimoda, in Mozarabic Missal 207 n. ; 
 saccrdotis pro seipso 169 and x\. ; Ro- 
 mensis in Bobbio and Stowe Missals 92 
 Missal [see also Rite, Sacramentary) : 
 ,, Ambrosian 12 n. 
 ,, of Auxerre 62 
 ,, of Beauvais 62 
 „ of Bobbio "JT, 102 and n., 162; 
 'of Irish compilation' 58 and 
 n. ; character, date and pro- 
 venance of 90-92, 178-9; 
 later corrections in text of its 
 Canon 90 n. ; apologia sacev' 
 dotis in 138 ; burial service in 
 183, 190-91 ; mass of priest 
 pro se in 169 n. ; ' Reproaches' 
 in 132 afid n.; as to Trisagiott 
 and Agios 132-3; Dom Mo- 
 rin on 485 
 „ a later Bobbio 102 n., 112 
 „ of Hereford 278-300 
 „ Leofric 240 
 
 ,, of Maximian of Ravenna 59 n. 
 „ Mozarabic 1 66-82/</jjz>«, 203-9 
 „ of Paris 62 
 „ of Pius V 17 
 ,, of Rodradus 64 
 „ Roman ; Gallican modification of 
 2, 4, 6 ; genesis of the present 
 96, 152-3 n. 
 „ Sarum, a thirteenth-century com- 
 pilation 277, 300 n. 
 „ of Sens 62 
 
 „ the Stowe 5-8 n., "Ji^ 78 ; a Fulda 
 MS of 77 n. ; date of MS of 
 86 n. ; diptychs in 92 and n. 
 (their date), 161, 166; Moza- 
 rabic prayer utilized in 203-4 i 
 litany of saints in 137-64 
 „ of Toledo 84 n., 166-82, 203-9 
 „ of Winchester at Havre, a 485 
 Missale Francorum 58, jj-ioq passim 
 Missale Gallicanui/i vetics 58, 97 n. 
 Missale Gothicum 58, 84 n., 88 n., 91 n.. 
 102, 175, 197; mass for Assumption 
 in 177-8 
 Missale Mixtum, see Missal (Mozarabic) 
 Moelcaich, interpolator of Stowe Missal 
 
 86 n., 88 n., 138, 139, 160 
 Molinier, A. {Obituaires frangais au 
 
 moy en-age, Paris, 1890] 362 
 Monaster ium, ' chapel ' 376 n.
 
 496 
 
 GENERAL INDEX 
 
 Mone, F, J. 59 ; Gallican masses ed. by 
 
 5811. 
 Monstrance 448 ; held in the hand of a 
 
 statue of the B. Virgin 450 and n. 
 Montanus, feast of St 255 n. 
 Monte Cassino ; Offices of B. V. M. and 
 
 St Benedict at 226; monastic dress 
 
 at 260-61 ; a breviary of 230 n. 
 Monte Cassino palimpsest of the Grego- 
 
 riammi 11-^, 79, 80-81, 83-7,92, 102 
 More, Sir Thomas, a confrater of Can- 
 terbury 360 
 Morin, Dom G. ; on Athanasian Creed 
 
 198-202 ; on Preface Hucusque 348 
 Mosaics of Ravenna 373, 374 
 Moschus, John 151 n. 
 Moutier-en-Der, abbey of 467 
 Mozarabic, see Missal, Rite 
 Muratori, his edition of the Gregorianum 
 
 41 n., 63 n., 64 n., 75 and n., 134, 135 
 
 and n. 
 Murbach, abbey of 353 
 Mysteritcm cruets, Mozarabic prayer 
 
 167 and n., 389 
 
 Names, recital of; see Memento 
 Naples ; church of Edessene martyrs at 
 
 257 n. ; lives of bishops of 373 ; see 
 
 under Calendar 
 Narbonne, Council of (589) 262 n. 
 Nativity of B. V. M., feast of 252-3, 
 
 327 
 Neisse in Silesia, method of reservation 
 
 in the parish church of 36-7 
 Neot, St 239 
 Nestorius ; on the origin of the Trisa- 
 
 gion 132 n. ; feast of 255 n. 
 Netzer, H., on the Preface Hucusque 
 
 347-8 
 
 Newman, Cardinal 12, 14, 461 
 
 Nevvminster ; beginnings of 392 ; Con- 
 fraternity Book of 351-2, 355-6; 
 patron saints of 388 and n. ; Prayer 
 Book of 388 ; see Hyde 
 
 Nibridius abp. of Narbonne, letter of 
 Helisachar to 333-48 
 
 Nicholas 1, Pope ; his name in MS Vat. 
 Regin. 337 of the Gregorianum 64 n., 
 
 135 n- 
 Nicholas monk of St Albans 228, 259 
 Nigel 'Wireker' monk of Canterbury 
 
 232 n. 
 Nigellus, Ermoldus 341 
 Nithard, historian 3i4n., 318, 320, 382 
 Nivelle, Pierre, abbat of Citeaux 468 
 Nobis quoque peccatoribus, saints' names 
 
 in the prayer 88, 104-5 
 Nonantola, abbey of 63, 353 
 Norwich, service books of 402, 403 
 Notaries, Roman, duties of 375 n. 
 Notre-Dame, Paris, high altar of 27 
 Nouaill^, monastery at 340 
 
 Noyon, Aug., on feast of Conception 250 
 Nunnaminster Book, hymns in the 194 
 
 Oblatae (Hosts) at papal mass, number 
 of 155-8 
 
 Odelricus bp. of Cremona 273 
 
 Oderisius abbot of Monte Cassino 191 
 
 Odo abp. of Canterbury 355 
 
 Odoacer, palace of at Ravenna 375 
 
 Oe^elwald, see Aedeluald 
 
 Oengus, see Martyrology 
 
 Ofifa, King 172 
 
 Offerings, collection of 8, 10 
 
 Offertory chant and prayers 7 
 
 Office, the Divine ; in St Benedict's 
 
 Rule 133; accretions to, resulting 
 
 in the Prymer 211-37 
 
 „ of the Dead ; the present 189-90, 
 
 216; origins of 215-16; as an 
 
 addition to daily cursus 215, 
 
 231-5; at Inde 217 sqq. ; at 
 
 Citeaux 229; at St-Riquier 216 
 
 n., 327-8 
 
 „ of B. V. M. 230-37 ; in England 
 
 before the Conquest 227 andn. ; 
 
 at Premontre 229 ; as addition 
 
 to daily cursus 224-9, 235 
 
 „ of All Saints, as addition to daily 
 
 cursus 220, 222, 224 andn., 230- 
 
 31 
 „ of Holy Cross, in addition to daily 
 
 cursus 224-6 
 „ of St Benedict, said at Monte 
 
 Cassino before Office of the day 
 
 226 
 „ of St Eutropius, rhyming 408 
 Offices, scheme of daily ; in English 
 Concordia Regularis -zii-i ; at Salis- 
 bury 235 
 Old Minister of Winchester, the 389, 
 
 392 
 Orate fratres of Roman mass 7 
 Orationale Hispano-Gothicum 179 
 Ordinale of bp. Grandison 407-8 ; of 
 
 Hereford 278, 282 n., of St Mary's, 
 
 York 293 and n. 
 Ordines Romani 8, 153-8, 305-11 
 Ordo entitled Capitulare ecclesiastici 
 
 or dints 154 
 Ordo of St-Amand 65 n., 142 n., 151-60 
 Ordo ad SynodumoiKomdin Pontifical 25 
 Orleans, Council of (511), on Rogations 
 
 and litanies 128-9 
 Orsini, Cardinal Napoleon 307 
 Osbert de Clare prior of Winchester 
 
 243-8 
 Osmund, St 300 n. 
 Oswald, St, abp. 387 
 Oswin, St, his shrine at Tynemouth 30 
 
 [Gesia Abbaiuin of St Albans ii, pp. 
 
 379-80] 
 Otto Duke of Swabia 273 n. 
 Owen, St, church of at Hereford 299
 
 GENERAL INDEX 
 
 497 
 
 Palimpsest of a Gallican Missal from 
 
 Reichenau 58 n. 
 Palimpsest of the Gregorianum, the 
 Monte Cassino 63 n., 77-8, 79, 80-81, 
 83-7, 92 
 Palm Sunday Rites 5, 12, 277-94, 321-2 
 Palms, blessing of 279-82 
 Pamelius on the Hucusque Preface 50, 
 
 347 
 Paoli, Sebastian 35 
 Papal chapel, rite of the 31 1- 12 
 Paris de Grassis, a papal ceremoniar 
 
 434-43 
 Paschal II, Pope 230 
 Paschase Radbert 176 
 Pas-de-Calais, saints of the 255 
 Pater nosier, the, its present position 
 
 in Roman mass 1 1 
 Patrick, St; feast of 255 n. ; prayer to 390 
 Paul, feast of Finding of the Head of 
 
 St 255 n. 
 Paul V, Ritual of Pope 17 
 Paul Warnefrid (Paul the Deacon) 54, 
 
 215 n., 364, },yi 
 Pavia, the Certosa of 412 
 Penitential of Theodore 109-10 
 Pentecost at St-Riquier 327 
 Pdronne, Irish spirit in monastery of 65 n. 
 Perpetua, see under Felicitas 
 Perrecy near Autun, priory founded by 
 Heccard 362-3, 368 ; library of 364 n. 
 Pershore, series of abbats of 248 
 Peter the Apostle, St, a patron of New- 
 minster 388 and n. 
 Peter Damian, St, on Office of B, Virgin 
 226 ; condemns use of table-forks 366 
 Peter the Deacon 380; on Office of 
 
 B. Virgin 226-7 
 Peter de Honestis of Ravenna; his 
 
 Regula Portuensis 230, 231 
 Peter de Luna, see Benedict XIII 
 Peter Quivil bp. of Exeter 234 n, 
 Peter abp. of Ravenna, tomb of 376-7 
 Peter the Venerable abbat of Cluny 
 
 223 n., 228, 396 
 Petershausen, altar at 29 {M. G. SS. xx 
 
 p. 669] 
 Petrtana Ecclesia at Ravenna 376 
 Petrock, St 239 
 
 Petronax abp, of Ravenna 380-81 
 Fez, the brothers 459 
 Pfaffers, Confraternity Book of 349, 351, 
 
 355 
 Philocalus, calligrapher of Pope Dama- 
 
 sus 105 
 Piccolomini, A. P., bp. of Pienza 305 
 Pietro Barbo, art collections of 423 
 Pilgrimage books, French 405 
 Piper, P. 351 
 
 Pippm, father of Charlemagne 371 ; 
 'the Sacramentary of King' 152 n.. 
 
 Pippin king of Aquitaine 362 
 
 Kk 
 
 Pippin, son of Charlemagne 317 
 Pius V, Pope, the Missal of 17, 18 
 Pius IX, Pope 250 
 Pont-k-Mousson, monastery of 468 
 Pontifical; of St Dunstan 149 n. ; of Eg- 
 bert 149 n.; of Gregory XIII 17; of 
 Poitiers 149 n.; of Prudentius of 
 Troyes, the lost iii, 131, 132 n., 
 138 n. ; Roman, genesis of the 153 n.; 
 of Winchester 239 
 Popes ; colour of dress yj ; successional 
 
 numbers 407 
 Post-communion 7 
 
 Praeparatio sacerdoti's 169 n. ; in Stowe 
 Missal 137-8, 147; see Aausalio, 
 Apologia 
 Prayer Book of Newminster (= MS 
 
 Titus D xxvi) 388 
 Prayers of the Faithful 122, 133; cp. 113 
 
 sq. 
 Preface^ to Carolingian Supplement of 
 
 the Gregorianuin, see Hucusque 
 Prdmontre ; White Canons of 228-30 ; 
 
 Richelieu abbat of 468-9 
 Presentation of B. V. M., feast of the 
 
 257, 258 
 Probst, F. 120 
 
 Procession ; Corpus Christi 457 ; of the 
 
 Rogations 324 ; of B. Sacrament on 
 
 Palm Sunday 277-94 ; pro quacum- 
 
 que tribulatiojie 326 
 
 Processional of Rouen 278-300; of Sa- 
 
 rum 278-96 
 Proficiscere, prayer in burial service 183, 
 
 191 
 Protasius, Spanish bp. 207 
 Prudentius of Troyes, breviate Psalter 
 
 of 195 ; see Pontifical 
 Priim, abbey of 26, 353 
 Prymer, origin of the 211-37 
 P salmi familiares 2 20-30 passim 
 Psalms ; Gradual, added to daily cursus 
 214, 220, 224, 235; Penitential, added 
 to daily cursus 222-4, 235 
 Psalter, breviate, of ' Oe¥elwald the 
 
 bishop ' 193, 195 
 Psalter, the Athelstan 140-41 n,, 252 
 
 andn. 
 Psalter, the Leofric 389, 406 
 Psalters, breviate 195-6 
 Psalters in chapel of Evrard of Friuli 
 367 [cp. DomWilmart in Revue Bin^d. 
 xxviii pp. 341-77 ; esp. pp. 365-6] 
 Pullen, Robert {or Hugh of St Victor.') 
 
 263, 265 
 Purification of B. V. M., feast of the 268 
 
 Quivil, Peter, bp. of Exeter 234 n. 
 
 Rabanus, see Rhaban 
 Rader, Matthew 455, 456 
 Radulphus de Rivo 234 n. 
 Raganfrid bp. of Meaux 364
 
 498 
 
 GENERAL INDEX 
 
 Ralph of Tongres 312 
 
 Ramsey abbey 238, 249 
 
 Ranke, E. 50, 347 
 
 Ranulf de Glanville 356 
 
 Ravenna 370-83 
 
 Reading Abbey, feast of Conception at 
 
 243' 247 
 
 Regiila Porhietisis 230, 231 
 
 Reichenau, abbey of 26, 48, 353 ; Con- 
 fraternity Book of 349-50. 353. 355; 
 Office of the Dead at 217-18 
 
 Reichenau palimpsest of a Gallican 
 Missal 58 n, 
 
 Reichenau liturgical fragment (Irish) 
 82 n., 204-5 "• 
 
 Reims, Council of (1148), 395 
 
 Relics of saints ; on altar 25-6 ; under 
 altar 27 ; brought from Italy to 
 Frankish churches 26 ; brought from 
 the East 32 
 
 Relics ; of St Alexander at Fulda 26 ; of 
 St Birinus at Winchester 393 ; of St 
 Ethelwold at Winchester 394; of St 
 Hermes at Salzburg 26 ; of St John 
 Baptist at Edessa 257 n. ; of St Justus 
 at Winchester 392, 399 ; of St Liborius 
 at Paderborn 26 ; of St Maximian at 
 Ravenna 377 n. ; of SS. Marcellinus 
 and Peter at Seligenstadt 26; of SS. 
 Peter and Paul at Winchester 399 ; 
 of St Severus at Mentz 26 
 
 Remigius bp. of Lincoln 277 
 
 Remiremont, see Ritual 
 
 Reproaches of Good Friday 12, 132 
 
 Requiem aeterfiam, in Burial Service 
 189, 216 
 
 Reredos 28, 30,31 
 
 Reservation of Blessed Sacrament 25-6, 
 
 33. 34-7. 38, 447, 449-5° 
 Responsale, Roman 335 
 Responsories, ' dimidiation ' of 334-6 
 Resta, Count Giuseppe 411 
 Retables 30 
 
 Rhaban Maur 26, 262-3 n, 
 Rheims, see Reims 
 Rheinau, monastery of 350; see ' Index 
 
 of MSS ', Zurich 
 Ricemarch, Martyrology of 252-3 n. 
 Richard III, a confrater of Canterbury 
 
 359 n- 
 Richard Marsh bp. of Durham 233 n. 
 Richard de Poore bp. of Salisbury 
 
 233-4 n. 
 Richard, godson of Count Heccard 365 
 Richarius, St, founder of St-Riquier 317, 
 
 327 
 Richelieu and the Benedictines 462-74 
 Richildis, wife of Heccard 363, 365, 
 
 366, 368 
 Rite [see also Missal, Sacramentary) : 
 
 „ Ambrosian 2, 17 ; MSS of 79 
 
 „ Gallican, extant missals of 58 
 
 „ ' Lyons-Roman ' 16 
 
 Rite, Mozarabic 4 
 ,, Roman, its genius 1-19 
 ,, •' Romano-French ' 16 
 „ Sarum 402, 403 
 
 ,, of Toledo ; its developement 203-9 
 Rites ; of Papal Chapel 31 1-12 ; of Salis- 
 bury, Hereford, and Rouen for Holy 
 Week 276-300 
 Rites of Durham 352 
 Ritual, The Durham 388 
 Ritual ; of St Ambrogio 191 ; of Jumi^ges 
 191 ; of Remiremont 191 ; Order of 
 St-Riquier 314-32; of Paul V 17; 
 Roman, genesis of the 153 n. 
 Robert de Monte, Chronicle of 396, 397 
 Robert Betun bp. of Hereford 299-300 
 Robinson, J. A., Dean of W^ells 242 n., 
 
 248 n., 269-70 n. 
 Rodradus ; Sacramentary of 64, 67 ; 
 Hucusque Preface assigned to 50 n., 
 
 347 
 
 Rogations ; institution of 128-30 ; pro- 
 cession of 324, 329-32 
 
 Roger bp. of Salisbury 243. 245 
 
 Rome, parish churches of 17 
 
 Romsey, abbey of 239, 356 
 
 Rood erected at Winchester by Stigand 
 
 393 
 Rood screens 23, 25 
 ' Rose of York ', jewel so called 425 
 Rotruda daughter of Lothar, baptism of 
 
 381 
 Rouen Consuetudinary at Llanthony 
 
 300 
 Rouen rites for Holy Week 276-300 
 Rupert abbat of Deutz 263, 267, 271 
 
 Sacrament, the Blessed ; public worship 
 of 293 ; placed in the Sepulchre in 
 (iood Friday rite of Salisbury 295-6 ; 
 carried before the Pope when travel- 
 ling 436 and n. ; see Elevation, Ex- 
 position, Reservation 
 Sacramentary [see also Missal, Rite) : 
 ,, the Angouleme 48, 77-103 passim, 
 
 138 n. 
 „ the Corbie in; see Eligii, Codex 
 
 S. 
 ,, the Gallican {Sacramentarium 
 Gallicaninn), see Missal, the 
 Bobbio 
 „ the Gelasian 39-61, 77-107 pas- 
 sim ; as to Kyrie eleison and the 
 litany 134; burial service in 
 182-92; Mozarabic elements in 
 203-4 
 ,, the * Gelasianum of the eighth cen- 
 tury '43 n., 48-9,61 n., 62, 77-97 
 passim, 254 ; called ' the Roman 
 Sacramentarj' of king Pippin ' 
 152 n., 183; burial service in 
 182-92
 
 GENERAL INDEX 
 
 499 
 
 Sacramentary : theGellone48 n., 77-103 
 passim, 1 38 n. ; litany of saints in 
 148-9; burial service in 182-92 
 
 „ of Godelgaudus 69; burial service 
 in 182-92 
 
 „ the Gregorian 14, 15, 16, 39-61 
 passim, 40-5, 49, 254 ; dis- 
 covery of its true order 61 n., 
 134-5; early MSS of 62-76; 
 the Roman Mass Book of Gre- 
 gory the Great 81 ; the Canon 
 of 77-115 ; burial service in 183 ; 
 Carolingian Supplement to 15, 
 41, 49-55, 188-9, 333-4,347-8 
 (see also under Hucusque) ; 
 burial service in Supplement 
 167-9, 182-92 
 
 „ of Grimoldus 347 
 
 „ of Hildoard 63, 65, 66, 99 n. 
 
 „ the Leonine 23, 40, 56, 77, 84 n,, 
 93-4 n., 197-8 
 
 „ of Kodradus 64, 67, 347 
 
 „ the Senlis 64 n. 
 
 ,, of Serapion 24, 113 
 
 „ the Worms 1 1 1 
 St Afra, see SS. Ulrich and Afra 
 St Agnes, church of at Ravenna 375 
 St Albans, abbey of 30, 31, 247, 352, 354, 
 
 357, 359 
 St-Amand, see Ordo 
 St Anastasia, Pope's mass at church of 
 
 30s 
 St-Andoche, church of at Autun 368 
 St Apollinaris, church of at Ravenna 
 
 381 
 St Augustine's, Canterbury 238, 357-8 
 St Babilas. school of at Milan 419 
 St Bartholomew, monastery of at Ra- 
 venna 372, 380, 382 
 St-Bavo, monastery of at Ghent 272 
 St Benedict, monastery of at Fleur>'363, 
 
 365, 369 
 St-Bertin, abbey of 466 n. 
 St Blasien, abbey of 260 n., 459 
 St Catherine, school of at Milan 41S 
 St Cuthbert, cathedral church of at 
 
 Durham 359 ; see Durham 
 St-Denis, abbey of 27, 58, 97, 273, 353, 
 
 458, 462 ; see also Congregation 
 St Edmundsbury, abbey of 247 ; feast 
 
 of Conception at 360 
 St-Eloi, priory of 427 
 St-Evre-l^s-Toul, monastery of 273 n. 
 St Gallen, Confraternity Book of 349-55 
 St-Germain-des-Pr^s, abbey of 38 n., 
 
 353, 462, 483 
 SS. Giulia and Faustina, monastery of 
 
 at Brescia 353 
 St-Godard, church of at Rouen 279, 
 
 282-4 
 St Hilary at Poitiers, monastery of 
 
 canons 340 
 St James, church of at Miinster 445-52 
 
 Kk 
 
 St James, chapel of at Ravenna 376 
 
 and n. 
 St-Josse-sur-Mer, abbey of 49 
 St-Juste, church of at Lyons 353 
 St Justina of Padua, reform of 466-7 n. 
 St-Laumer, monastery of at Blois 462 
 St-Martial, abbey of at Limoges 29 
 
 [Bouquet xviii 236], 342 n. 
 St-Martin, abbey of at Laon 468 
 St-Martin, abbey of at Tours 340 
 St Mary, abbey of at York 293 andn. 
 St Mary, nunnery of at Winchester 389, 
 
 390 : sec also Nunnaminster 
 St Mary ad Hlachernas, monastery of at 
 
 Ravenna 372, 376 
 St Mary de Portu, monastery of near 
 
 Ravenna 230, 231 
 St Mary Major, Rome 305 
 St-Maur, Congregation of 458, 462-74 
 St-Maximin, abbey of at Treves 340 
 St-Medard, abbey of at Soissons 353 
 St-Ouen, abbey of at Rouen 353, 394 
 St Owen, church of at Hereford 299 
 St Paul's cup at Miinster 446 
 St Paul's, London, Statutes of 233 
 St Paul's, Rome, basilica of 374 
 St Peter, abbey of at Ghent 274, 466 n. 
 St-Pierre d'Abbeville, Cluniac Priory of 
 
 316 
 St-Pierre-le-Puellier, nunnery of 353 
 St Probus, church of at Ravenna 377 
 St Radegund, nunnery of at Milan 41 5 n. 
 St-Riquier, abbey of 47, 49, 65 n., 2 16 n., 
 
 272, 314-32 
 St Sabas, Greek monastery of 259 
 St-Seine, monastery of near Dijon 212 
 St Severus, church of at Ravenna 376 
 St Stephen, church of at Ravenna 374 
 St Swithin, Cathedral priory of at Win- 
 chester 392 
 St-Trond, abbey of 272 
 SS. Ulrich and Afra, abbey of at Augs- 
 burg 453-7 
 St-Vaast {^or Vedast), abbey of at Arras 
 
 353, 466 
 St-Vannes, abbey of at Verdun 225 ; 
 
 Congregation of 462, 470 ; Customs 
 
 of 218 n., 224 n., 270 and n. 
 St Vitalis, church of at Ravenna 375 
 Salisbury, scheme of daily Offices at 
 
 234-5; ^ee Missal, the Sarum 
 Salvatrix, as epithet of B. Virgin 1 74 n. 
 Salzburg, Benedictine university at 459 
 Samona (Shamona), see under Guria 
 Samson bp. of Worcester 356 
 Samson's Book of Miracles 404 n. 
 Sancta Sanctorum, Lateran treasure of 
 
 the 145 n. 
 Sanctiet elect i, an Irish expression 187 n. 
 Saftctus ; singing of the 8, 1 1 ; Greek 
 
 text in English MSS 144 
 Sanctus sanguis, an Irish expression 
 
 84, 91 and n.
 
 500 
 
 GENERAL INDEX 
 
 Sanseverino, Cardinal 438 
 Sarum, see Missal, Salisbury 
 Sativola {or Sidwellj, St 239 
 Scapulare, monastic garment 261 
 Schermann, Th. 137, 163-4 
 Scheyem in Bavaria, abbey of 29 {M. G. 
 
 SS. xvii p. 632] 
 Scotti 256 ; synodal statutes against 172 
 
 and n. ; see Irish 
 ' Scots ' monastery at Ratisbon 263 n. 
 Seligenstadt, abbey of 26 
 Senones, abbey of 353 
 Sequences, liturgical 404-7 
 Serapion, Prayer Book of 24, 113 
 Sergius deacon of Ravenna 372 
 Sergius, Pope, possibly introduced the 
 
 Agnus Dei and the cult of Holy Cross 
 
 144-6 
 Severus, relics of St 26 
 Seville, Council of (618) 178 n. 
 Shamona, see under Guria 
 Shrine; of St Birinus at Winchester 393 ; 
 
 of St Oswin at Tynemouth 30 ; of St 
 
 Swithin 393 
 Shrines for relics 27, 30 
 Sicardus of Cremona, on vestments 
 
 263 n., 265-7 
 Sidonius Apollinaris, on 'litany' 128, 
 
 129 
 Sidw^ell, see Sativola 
 Sigy near Macon 363, 365 
 Simeon of Rouen prior of Winchester 
 
 394 
 Simon bp. of Worcester 248 
 Sisebut, Visigothic king 170 andn. 
 Smaragdus, on St Benedict's Rule 
 
 214-15 
 Spada, Cardinal 468 
 Spain, Visigothic church of ; its influence 
 
 on insular churches 165-202, 180-2 ; 
 
 its spirit 171 
 ' Spanish Symptoms ' 165-202 ; More 
 
 ' S. S.' 203-10 
 Stanley, Dean 2il 
 Statuta Ecclesiae antiqua 262 n. 
 Stefaneschi, Cardinal, Roman Ordo of 
 
 307-9 
 Stengel, abbat 453-61 
 Stengel, George 453, 459 
 Stephen of Grandmont, St 224 n., 227 n. 
 Stephen, king 299, 394, 395 
 Stephen of Obazine, St 231 n. 
 Stephen, St, a prayer to 390 
 Stigand, abp., his gifts to Winchester 
 
 141, 393 ; gift to Ely 274 
 Stowe's Chronicle 242 
 Stralsund, exposition of B. Sacrament 
 
 at 450-1 and n. 
 Sturm abbat of Fulda, Oflices for 216 
 Sub-deacons at papal mass 9 
 Suger, abbat, altar of at St-Denis 27 
 Super sindnnem prayer of Ambrosian 
 
 Missal 12 n. 
 
 Suscipe Sancta Trinifas, prayer of 
 
 Roman mass 7 
 Swabian monasteries 460 
 Syrians in Western Europe 161-3, 178 n. 
 Sweyn, King 404 and n. 
 Swithin, St 393 
 
 Taius bp. of Saragossa 175 
 
 Tarisse, Dom G. 458, 4:63-'J4: passim 
 
 Te Deum 126, 325, 331 
 
 Tenebrae, extinction of lights at 158-9 
 
 Testamentum Domini, the 125 
 
 Teutberga, wife of Lothar 364 
 
 Tewkesbury Annals 242, 246 
 
 Theobald abp. of Canterbury 395 n., 
 
 397 
 Theobald Count of Champagne and 
 
 Blois 395 
 Theodemar abbat of Monte Cassino26i 
 Theodore, Penitential of 109-10 
 Theodore, Roman archdeacon, on 
 
 Roman Holy Week rites 159 
 Theodoric, brother of Count Heccard 
 
 363 
 Theodosian Code, as to ' litany ' 128 
 Theodulph bp. of Orleans 55, 339 
 Theotrochus deacon of Lorsch, letter of 
 
 153, 154 
 Thirty Years' War, fortunes of monastery 
 
 of Anhausen during 456-7 
 Thomas Beaufort, Duke of Exeter, a 
 
 confrater of Canterbury 359 n. 
 Thomas of Canterbury, St 299, 394, 397 
 Thomas de la Mare prior of Tynemouth 
 
 30 
 Thompson, Sir E. M., 141, 351 n., 355 
 Three Children, feast of the 255 n. 
 Thurstan abbat of Glaston 386 
 Thurstan abp. of York 408 
 Thurston, H., 250-1, 253, 302, 303, 
 
 452 n. 
 Timothy, feast of St 255 n. 
 Toga alba 266 
 
 Toledo ; as a school of learning 175 ; 
 Council of (633) 262 n., (638) 197, 
 (656) 207 n. ; see Missal 
 Tommasi, Blessed G. M. 117 
 Tougard, A. 298 and n. 
 Tours, Council of (813), as to Scotti 
 
 172 n. 
 Translation of relics 26 
 Traube, L. 173, 179 n., 193 
 Trent, Council of 17 
 Trina oratio 220-22 
 Trinity, earliest dedication of a church 
 
 to 212 
 Trioditim of Sophronius of Jerusalem 
 
 175 n. 
 Trisagion, the 131-3 
 Trokelowe 352 n. 
 Tunica lanca 266 and n. 
 Tunica talaris (= alb) 264, 266 
 Typica, Greek, feasts of B. V. M. in 258
 
 GENERAL INDEX 
 
 501 
 
 Udalric (Ulrich), St, bp. of Augsburg 
 
 225 
 Udalric of Cluny 223, 269-70, 272 n. 
 Underwood, John, inventory of 430 
 Urban \'^I 1 1, Pope, Cacremoniale Episco- 
 
 poruvi of 17 
 
 Vacandard, E. 250-1, 253 
 
 Vaison. Council of (529), as to Kyrie 
 
 eleison 1 16-27 passim 
 Vedast, feast of St 255 ; see St Vaast 
 Veils about altar 22-4 
 Venantius Fortunatus, on ' litany' 128 
 Veni Sancte Spirittis, sung before Com- 
 munion 447 
 Verona cathedral, method of reservation 
 
 at 34-5 
 Verona MSS -Ji, 197-202 
 Vespers and lauds, sung in separate 
 
 oratory 222-3 
 Vestments 260-75,399-401 ; see Casula, 
 
 &c. 
 Victor abp. of Ravenna 374 
 Victor Vitensis, quotes liturgical Sanctus 
 
 144 n. 
 'Vienna Genesis', painting of a ciborium 
 
 in the 22 n. 
 Virtii, G. G. Visconti, Conte di 412,413, 
 
 414 
 Vivarium, Cassiodorus's library at 198 
 
 Wala, Carolingian statesman 341, 343, 
 
 344 
 Walahfrid Strabo 262 
 Walkelin bp. of Winchester 394 
 Walter de Cantilupe bp. of Worcester 
 
 234 n. 
 Walter of Coutances bp. of Lincoln 
 
 357 
 Walter bp. of Orleans 364 
 Walter abbat of Ramsey 249 
 Warinus dean of Worcester 248 
 Weingarten, monastery of 455, 460 
 Wells, Office of B. Virgin at 233 n. 
 
 Westminster; Council of (1162) 397; 
 
 feast of Conception at 245, 247 
 White, Augustine, see Bradshaw 
 White Monks of Citeaux 228-30 
 Whiting, Richard, abbat of Glaston 
 
 331 n. 
 Wiblingen, monastery of 460 
 Wido ex-abbat of Pershore 248 n. 
 William of Dijon, St, Consuetiidines 
 
 Fructuaftenses of 191 -2 
 William of Gellone, St 339 
 William Godeman abbat of Gloucester 
 
 247 
 William of Hirschau 270, 272 n. ; Con- 
 stitutions of 223 n. 
 William Longchamp bp. of Ely 232 n. 
 William Rufus despoils Winchester 394 
 William de Tanfield prior of Durham 
 
 358 
 Willibrord, St 146; Calendar of 485 
 Wilmart, Dom A. 43 n., 58 n., 78, 1 52 n., 
 
 197, 485 
 Winchcombe, feast of Conception at 
 
 247 ; Annals of 247 n. 
 Winchester 241-2, 250, 256, 392-401 ; 
 
 Calendars of 254-5 
 Winton, Annals of 392-4, 396, 397 
 Witzel, G. 77 n., 100, 140-3 
 Worcester ; Annals of 247 n. ; feast of 
 
 Conception at 241 n., 247-9 ; names 
 
 of community of in Durham Liber 
 Vitae 356 
 Worthsee in Carinthia, church of 273 
 Wulfhelm, abp. 355 
 Wulmar, feast of St 255 
 
 York ; canopies in diocese of 30 ; the 
 ' Use ' of 277 ; Corps-Saint procession 
 at 293-4 
 
 Zacharias, Pope 226, 227 n. 
 
 Zapf, G. W., his literary journeys through 
 
 German and Swiss monasteries 460 
 Zwiefalten in Swabia, abbey of 28 [Af.Cr. 
 
 SS. X p. 89], 460
 
 INDEX OF MSS REFERRED TO^ 
 
 AUTUN 
 
 Seminary Library MS ig bis : p. 64 n. 
 
 Berne 
 MS 207 : pp. 169-70 
 
 Bologna 
 
 University Libr. MS 1084: p. 112 
 „ „ „ 2565 : p. 291 n. 
 
 Cambrai 
 
 MS 162-163 {olim 158) : pp. 65, 66 n. 
 „ 164 {olitn 159) (= Ca) : pp. 63, 65-8, 77-103, esp. 99 n., HI 
 
 Cambridge 
 
 C.C.C. Libr. MS 391 (Breviary of St Oswald) : p. 241 n. 
 University Libr. MS LI. l. 10 {see General Index s.v. Cerne) 
 
 Cologne 
 Cathedral Libr. MS 137 : p. 64 n. 
 
 Dijon 
 Fonds Baudot MS 167 : p. 364 n. 
 
 DONAUESCHINGEN 
 
 MS 191 : p. 64 n. 
 
 Dublin 
 
 Libr. of Royal Irish Academy MS D ii 3 (Stowe Missal = .^7) : pp. 58 n.. 77-108, 
 137-64 
 
 Florence 
 Bibl. Laurenziana 
 
 MS Aedil. 121 : p. 64 n. 
 „ „ 123: p. Ill 
 Bibl. Nazionale MS BA 2 : p. 112 
 Bibl. Riccardi MS 228: pp. 310-11 
 
 Karlsruhe 
 MS 253: p. 58 n. 
 
 Le Mans 
 Town Libr. MS yy : pp. 64 n., iii 
 
 Leyden 
 MS Voss 4° 33 : p. 170 n. 
 
 ^ The more important references are indicated by numerals in thick type. In cases where 
 a symbol has been used in the text in referring to a MS, this symbol is added in brackets 
 after the number of the MS.
 
 504 INDEX OF MSS REFERRED TO 
 
 London 
 British Museum 
 
 Addit. MS 10028 : p. 298 
 „ „ 10048 : p. 282 n. 
 „ „ 15222: p. 153 
 „ „ 15350 •• P- 398 n. 
 „ „ 1701 1 : p. 39811. 
 „ „ 17942: ^. 2()?> and n. 
 „ „ 281 88: pp. 239-40 
 „ „ 29276 : p. 48 n. 
 
 „ 29436 : pp. 397-8 
 „ MSS 36598-36602 : p. 402 n, 
 „ MS 37518 : p. 48 n. 
 Arundel MS 155 : p. 387 n. 
 Cotton MS Claudius B v : p. 141 n. 
 
 „ „ Domitian vii (Durham Liber Vtiae) : pp. 351, 355 sqq. 
 „ „ Faustina A vi : p. 358 n. 
 
 „ „ B i : p. 247 n. 
 
 „ „ „ C xii : p. 357 n. 
 
 „ „ Galba A xiv : pp. 384 sqq. 
 
 „ „ „ A xviii (Athelstan Psalter) : pp. 140-51, 252, 255 n. 
 „ „ Julius A vi : p. 255 n, 
 „ „ Nero D vii : p. 352 n. 
 „ „ Otho B ix: p. 141 n. 
 „ „ „ C xi : p. 357 n. 
 „ ,, Tiberius A ii : p. 141 n. 
 „ „ „ B v: p. 255 n. 
 
 „ „ „ E iv : p. 247 n. 
 
 „ „ Titus D xviii : pp. 142-3 
 „ „ „ D xxvi : pp. 242 n., 388 
 „ „ ,, D xxvii : pp. 239, 242 andn., 254 
 „ „ Vitellius A xvii : pp. 244 n., 248 n. 
 
 „ „ D xvi : p. 357 n. 
 
 „ „ „ E xviii : pp. 239, 254 
 
 Harley MS 863 (Leofric Psalter) : pp. 389, 406 
 „ „ 1005 : p. 247 n. 
 „ „ 2637 : pp. 337-9 
 „ „ 2892 : pp. 240, 257 
 » „ 2945 : p. 291 
 „ „ 2958: p. 232n. 
 „ „ 2965 : p. 194 
 „ » 2983 : pp. 278, 282 n. 
 „ „ 3060 : p. 169 
 „ „ 3866 : pp. 402 sqq. 
 Royal MS i A xviii : p. 141 n. 
 „ „ 2 A X : p. 247 n. 
 „ „ 2 A XX : pp. 139 sqq., 247, 380 
 „ „ 8 D viii : pp. 299-300 
 „ „ II B xiii : p. 232 n. 
 „ „ 15 C vii: p. 398 n. 
 Stowe MS 960: pp. 351-2 
 Lambeth MS of MacDurnain Gospels : p. 141 n. 
 
 Milan 
 
 Bibl. Ambros. MS D 84 : pp. 102 n., 1 12 
 „ „ ,,0212: pp. 199 sqq. 
 
 MODENA 
 
 Chapter Libr. MS ii 7 : pp. 74, in 
 
 Monte Cassino 
 MS 271 {al. 348) (= Cass) : pp. 77-8, 80-81.
 
 INDEX OF MSS REFERRED TO 505 
 
 MONZA 
 
 Chapter Libr. MS : p. 64 n. 
 
 100 
 
 F. I 
 
 : p. 73 n. 
 
 Munich 
 
 Royal Libr. MS 10077 (o/i'm Pal. 774) : p. 112 
 
 „ ,, J, 14780 (o/im Em. e. 2) : p. 109 and n. 
 
 MS Ixxxiv (54) : p. 197 
 
 NOVARA 
 
 Oxford 
 
 Bodleian Libr. MS Auct. D i. 20: p. 72 n. 
 
 „ „ „ „ D 4. 18 {olim NE C 4- II) : P- 259 
 
 „ „ „ Junius 27 : pp. 254-5 
 
 Padua 
 Chapter Libr. MS D 47 : pp. 71, 73 n. 
 
 Paris 
 
 Bibl. de I'Arsenal MS 135 : p. 278 
 
 „ „ „ „ 610: p. Ill 
 
 Bibl. de Ste-Genevieve MS lat. BB 20 : p. 64 n. 
 Bibl. Mazarine MS 364 : p. 191 
 Bibl. Nationale MS lat. 816 (= Ang) : pp. 48, 65 n., 68 sqq., 77 sqq., 138 n. 
 
 „ „ „ „ 2123 : p. 109 n. 
 
 „ „ „ „ 2292 (= Non) : pp. 63-4, 70-1, 74 n. 
 
 „ „ „ 2296 : pp. 68, 69, 74, 77 sqq. 
 
 „ „ „ „ 2812 (=^r^/): pp. 64 sqq. 
 
 „ „ „ „ 9376 : p. 242 n. 
 
 „ „ „ „ 9429 (= Be/v) : pp. 64, 70 
 
 „ „ „ „ 12048 (= G^//) : pp. 48, 77 sqq. 
 
 „ „ „ „ 120S0 (= Nodr) : pp. 64, 67-9 
 
 „ „ „ „ 12051 {Cod. S. Eligii) : pp. 73, ill, 112, 138 n, 
 
 >, » „ „ 131 59: P- 159"- 
 
 „ „ „ „ 13246 (Bobbie Missal = ^(?) : pp. 58, 77 sqq. (see General 
 
 Index s. v. Missal) 
 
 MS F i 7 : p. 65 n. 
 MS Q ii 5 : p. 65 n. 
 
 Chapter Libr. MS O 83 : p. 79 
 
 Petrograd 
 
 Prague 
 Reims 
 
 MS 8 (C. 142) : p. 43 n. 
 
 MS 213 (E 320) : p. 64 n. 
 
 Lost Sacramentary of Godelgaudus [cf. Delisle No xii] : pp. 69, 182 sqq. 
 
 Rome 
 
 Bibl. Vallicellana MS B viii : pp. 79, 336 n. 
 
 „ ,, „ C xxxii : p. 102 n. 
 Bibl. Vaticana MS 8486 : p. 310 
 
 „ „ MS Ottobon. 313 (= O//) : pp. 64, 68 sqq., 77 sqq. 
 
 „ „ MS Pal. 487 : p. 153 
 
 „ „ „ „ 493 (Missale Gallicanum) : pp. 58, 97 n. 
 
 » y, „ „ 494: P- "2
 
 5o6 INDEX OF MSS REFERRED TO 
 
 Bibl.Vaticana MS Pal, 574: p. 154 
 
 MS Regin. 235 : p. 31411. 
 ,, „ „ 257 [Missale Francorum = Fr) : pp. 58, 77 sqq. 
 
 „ „ „ 316 {Gelasiamim = GV): pp. 43 and n., 77 sqq., 191 
 
 „ „ „ 317 {Missale Gothiacm) : pp. 58, 91 n., 177 
 
 ., 337 (= Reg) : pp. 64 and n., 68 sqq., 77 sqq., 134-5 
 
 Public Libr. MS H 33 : p. 298 n. 
 „ „ H 459 : p. 298 n. 
 „ „ Y 50 : p. 298 
 
 MS. 150 : p. no 
 
 MS 342 : p. Ill 
 „ 348 (=6-): pp. 77 sqq. 
 „ 1394 : PP- 88, 89 n., 90 
 „ 1395: PP- III. 167 
 
 Cathedral MS 150 : p. 388 n. 
 MS 35. 7 : p. 187 
 
 Rouen 
 
 St-Gall 
 
 Salisbury 
 Toledo 
 Verona 
 
 Chapter Libr. MS xxxviii (36) : p. 198 
 
 „ „ „ xxxix (37) : p. 198 
 
 „ „ „ xl (38) : p. 198 
 
 „ Iv (53) : p. 198 
 
 » Ixi (59) : p. 197 
 
 ,, „ „ Ixxxv (Leomanuffi) : pp. 197-8 
 
 „ „ kxxvi : pp. 64 n., 73, 75 n., in 
 
 „ „ „ xci : pp. 64 n., 73, 75 n. 
 
 WOLFENBiJTTEL 
 
 Ducal Libr. MS Helmstad. 115 : p. 138 n. 
 
 Zurich 
 Rheinau MS 30 (= /?) ; pp. 77 sqq., 182 
 „ „ 71: p. Ill 
 For remarks on other MSS not now traceable, or for which reference is made 
 to other works, the following pages may be consulted : pp. 64, 74, 77, 82, 131, 132, 
 153-4, 170, 176, 191, 257-
 
 PRINTED IN ENGLAND 
 AT THE OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS
 
 University of California 
 
 SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 405 Hilgard Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90024-1388 
 
 Return this material to the library 
 
 from vyfhich it was borrowed. 
 
 ft^e^l^'t 
 
 9l OCT 1 OZOOS 
 
 APRUTOOe
 
 \ 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 III 1 
 
 D 
 
 000 463 329 3