^{page 294 note 1} H. Anz, Die lateinischen Magierspiele, Leipzig, 1905; E. K. Chambers, The Mediæval Stage, Oxford, 1903, Vol. ii, pp. 44–52; K. A. M. Hartmann, Über das altspanische Dreikönigspiel, Leipzig, 1879.

^{page 294 note 2} ms. 1708 (olim 1308).

^{page 294 note 3} La Tribune de Saint-Gervais, 9e Année (1903), pp. 155-156.

^{page 294 note 4} Id., p. 155.

^{page 295 note 1} A. Molinier, Catalogue des Manuscrits de la Bibliothèque Mazarine, Vol. ii, Paris, 1886, p. 175.

^{page 295 note 2} Cf. id., p. 176,—“ f. 75-109. Antiennes pour les fêtes de l'année, seulement le début de chaque antienne; au feuillet 81 verso, la Cérémonie de l'Adoration des Mages, avec le texte du dialogue entre l'évêque et les trois enfants figurant les trois rois.”

^{page 295 note 3} The last respond for Matins of Epiphany,—Responsorium: Rex magnus natus est. Versus: Reges Tharsis,—occurs at the very bottom of fol. 81r. The Officium Stellae begins at the very top of fol. 81v.

^{page 295 note 4} For example, Christmas (fol. 78v) certainly had nine Lessons.

^{page 295 note 5} I am not sure whether or not M. Gastoué, in the passage quoted above, means to associate the persent text definitely with the cathedral of Nevers. In any case, no evidence has been given. The saints mentioned in this part of our ms. are French. The words, “domnus presul,” in the opening rubric of our text, seem to indicate cathedral usage. The very close agreement of the text, script, and notation of the Officium Stellae below with the text, script and notation of the similar Officium Stellae in a well known Nevers Troparium of the eleventh century (Bibl. Nat. ms. lat. 9449, fol. 17v-18r, published by Delisle in Romania, iv, 3-4) certainly suggests that our text comes from Nevers.

^{page 296 note 1} For example, Delisle's text mentioned in the preceding note is lacking in rubrics.

^{page 297 note 1} The first letter of this word has been erased.

^{page 297 note 2} This is immediately followed by the rubric: In Matutinis Laudibus.

^{page 297 note 3} Munich, 1887.

^{page 297 note 4} Nos. 87, 88, 89, 91, 93, 94, 95, and 96. Lange assigns also his No. 31 to Paris and to the 17th century. This assignment is evidently wrong, for in the ms. (Bibl. Nat. lat. 9508, Supplément latin 184, saec. xvii) the text in question occurs (fol. 179r) in notes taken “Ex Missale Corbeiensi ms. num. 622, saeculi xi” (fol. 177v). One regrets that Lange's eight texts are presented in the form of incomplete critical notes appended to two very inaccurate texts (pp. 60-62).

^{page 298 note 1} All the Officia Sepulchri here presented occur immediately after the third respond of Easter Matins, and this respond in all these eases has the following form, which I take from Bibl. Nat. ms. lat. 1293, fol. 113r:—

Responsorium: Et ualde mane una sabbatorum ueniunt ad monumentimi, orto iam sole, alleluia. Versus: Et respicientes uiderunt reuolutum lapidem, erat quippe magnus ualde. Orto. Gloria patri. Alleluia. Reincipitur Responsorium: Et ualde.

It should be observed the third respond of Easter Matins was not always Dum transisset sabbatum. One might infer the contrary from Chambers, Mediæval Stage, ii, 25, note 4.

^{page 301 note 1} Text from Bibl. Nat., ms. lat. 978, fol. 24r. Ordo Parisiensis Divini Officii recitandi saec. xv.

^{page 301 note 2} The third respond of Easter Matins.

^{page 302 note 1} I have studied this ms. only through photographs from it in the library of the Community of Solesmes, Quarr Abbey, Isle of Wight. I owe my acquaintance with these photographs entirely to my friend, The Reverend Father Dom G. M. Beyssac, O. S. B., to whom my indebtedness in matters of liturgiology is immeasurable.

^{page 302 note 2} Apparently M. Sablayrolles (Rivista musica catalana, December, 1906, pp. 224-226) would assign this ms. to the 10th century. Without evidence this earlier date cannot be accepted (cf. Rassegna Gregoriana, vi, 110). See also Florez, España Sagrada, Vol. xliii, Madrid, 1819, pp. 507-8.

^{page 302 note 3} See Wilmotte, in Annales Internationales d'Histoire. Congrès de Paris, 1900, 6me Section. Histoire comparée des Littératures, Paris, 1901, p. 68; Chambers, Mediæval Stage, ii, 33; L. Wirth, Die Oster- und Passionspiele bis zum xvi Jahrhundert, Halle, 1889, p. 5; W. Meyer, Fragmenta Burana, Berlin, 1901, pp. 58, 91, 106.

^{page 303 note 1} Possibly this word may be expanded Mariis.

^{page 303 note 2} In ms. looks very much like, dicx.

^{page 303 note 3} ms., poscet.

^{page 303 note 4} ms. putrescire.

^{page 303 note 5} ms. illegible.

^{page 304 note 1} ms., poscet, corrected to posset.

^{page 304 note 2} Several words are lost at the bottom of fol. 59r, through laceration of this leaf.

^{page 304 note 3} The musical notation of the text ceases at this point.

^{page 304 note 4} Over this word the ms. has, .a., for which I have no explanation.

^{page 305 note 1} Over this word the ms. has .a., for which I have no explanation.

^{page 305 note 2} ms. poscimus.

^{page 306 note 1} The words, Ubi est Xρistus meus Dominus, occur also at the very bottom of fol. 59v.

^{page 306 note 2} Margin cut away.

^{page 306 note 3} Idem.

^{page 306 note 4} Id.

^{page 306 note 5} Id.

^{page 307 note 1} Almost illegible.

^{page 307 note 2} Corrected (by a later hand?) from, Item responde Maria.

^{page 308 note 1} ms., quomodo.

^{page 308 note 2} These rubrics are added above the line in a later hand.

^{page 308 note 3} The rubric, Versus de Crismate in Ceni Domini, follows immediately.

^{page 308 note 4} Preceded immediately by the words, “Cristi hodierna,” which may be the incipit of the sequence, Christi hodierna pangimini (Analecta Hymnica, vii, 42).

^{page 308 note 5} Introit of Easter.

^{page 309 note 1} Introit of Easter.

^{page 309 note 2} Introit of Ascension.

^{page 309 note 3} Introit In Nativitate S. Joannis Baptistae.

^{page 310 note 1} See W. H. Frere, Bibliotheca Musico-Liturgica, Vol. i, London, 1901, p. 21.

^{page 310 note 2} The present paper is not the place for a discussion of the relations of the Breviarium Monasticum to the Breviarium Romanum. Concerning these relations, particularly in connection with Easter, I expect to say something elsewhere. I may say in passing that in examining more than two hundred breviaries ranging in date from the 11th century to the 15th, I have found only the following main distinction between the Roman and the monastic Easter cursus: the Roman Easter Matins has one single Nocturn of three Lessons, while the monastic Easter Matins has either a single Nocturn of three Lessons, (i. e., the Roman type) or three Nocturns of four Lessons each. I think that Chambers (Mediæval Stage, ii, 14) must be in error when he speaks of the Quern quaeritis office in the Concordia Regularis “as forming part … of the third Nocturn at Matins on Easter morning.” In the Concordia Regularis Easter Matins has only three Lessons, and therefore only one Nocturn.

^{page 310 note 3} Dom Albers (Revue Bénédictine, xx, 1903, p. 426), although he seems to have been acquainted only with the few Officia Sepulchri published by Martène (De antiquis Ecclesiae ritibus), infers rightly that this Officium was sung more especially in the monasteries that adopted the Roman Easter cursus.

^{page 311 note 1} I give the complete text of Easter Matins.

^{page 311 note 2} ms., Antiphona, clearly in error.

^{page 312 note 1} ms., hunc.

^{page 312 note 2} ms. has antiphonam, twice.

^{page 312 note 3} The rubric, In Matutinis Laudibus, follows immediately.

^{page 313 note 1} H. Ehrensberger, Libri Liturgici Bibliothecae Apostolicae Vaticanae, Friburgi Brisgoviae, 1897, pp. 266-267.

^{page 313 note 2} See Lange, Nos. 174, 175, 176, 178, 187, 188, 189, 190.

^{page 313 note 3} Bibl. Vaticana ms. lat. 9210, fol. 100v-103r.

^{page 313 note 4} Before Matins of Easter morning.

^{page 314 note 1} I omit Matins, which is of the usual Roman type,—one Nocturn of three Lessons.

^{page 314 note 2} Third respond of Matins.

^{page 314 note 3} ms., tegeret.

^{page 315 note 1} ms., sequentem.

^{page 315 note 2} ms., uenientes.

^{page 316 note 1} The Versus Sacerdotales and Lauds follow immediately.

^{page 316 note 2} See Catalogus codicum manuscriptorum Bibliothecae Regiae, Vol. iii, Paris, 1744, p. 102.

^{page 316 note 3} With this text should be compared that published by Lange (Zeitschrift für deutsches Alterthum, xli, 82), from British Museum Additional ms. 19415, Breviarium ad usum ecclesiae Wormatensis, fol. 327r.

^{page 316 note 4} From Bibl. Nat., ms. lat. 1310, Breviarium ad usum ecclesiae Saneti Martini Wormatiensis, fol. 198v-199r.

^{page 316 note 5} Third respond of Easter Matins.

^{page 317 note 1} Lauds follow immediately.

^{page 317 note 2} See Ehrensberger, pp. 214-215.

^{page 317 note 3} See above, No. iv.

^{page 318 note 1} Rome, Bibl. Vatic., ms. Palatino 525, fol. 208v-209r,—Breviarium Benedictinum Fuldense saec. xv.

^{page 318 note 2} Third respond of Easter Matins.

^{page 318 note 3} ms., transsisset.

^{page 318 note 4} The rubric, Laudes, follows immediately.

^{page 319 note 1} See G. Scherer, Verzeichniss der Handschriften der Stiftsbibliothek von St. Gallen, Halle, 1875, p. 147.

^{page 319 note 2} ms. 448, p. 50.

^{page 319 note 3} I should prefer to call this section of the ms. an Ordinarium Monasticum.

^{page 319 note 4} In another place I propose to add certain St. Gall, texts to those printed by Lange (p. 22). The five texts from St. Gall. mss. given by Lange are hardly reliable as they stand, for the reader has no hint that in four cases,—ms. 374, 387, 388, 391,—the Quem quaeritis formula occurs in the midst of a regular Procession, of which it becomes an integral part, and that the fifth text,—from ms. 384,—is in the ms. very uncertain both as to its composition and as to its position in the proper liturgical text.

^{page 319 note 5} St. Gall ms. 448, p. 102.

^{page 319 note 6} Vespers of Good Friday.

^{page 320 note 1} ms., dextram.

^{page 320 note 2} St. Gall. ms. 448, pp. 105-106.

^{page 323 note 1} ms., surrect.

^{page 325 note 1} I know this ms. only through photographs from it at Quarr abbey, Isle of Wight, to which The Reverend Father Dom Beyssac called my attention. I am very happy to announce that in the near future Dom Beyssac will publish the dramatic offices from this ms. with their musical notation. Since the medium of publication employed by Dom Beyssac will not be generally accessible to American scholars, he very generously suggests that I publish these texts independently. Dom Beyssac is not responsible for my readings.

^{page 325 note 2} J. F. Riaño (Critical and Bibliographical Notes on Early Spanish Music, London, 1887, p. 59) says that this ms. is written “in characters of the xivth century,”—a date that is palæographically impossible. I assign the ms. to the use of Sicily upon the authority of Dom Beyssac, who finds in the Sanctorale evidence for this assignment.

^{page 325 note 3} Madrid ms. 289 (olim C. 153), fol. 107v-110r.

^{page 325 note 4} Preceded in the ms. by the Te Deum, which follows the Liber Generationis at the end of Matins on Epiphany.

^{page 329 note 1} Followed immediately by the Farced Epistle for Epiphany, beginning,—Deus ante tempora gentibus.

^{page 329 note 2} Madrid ms. 289 (olim C. 153), fol. 115v-116r. In the ms. the office is preceded by the Benedictio Cedei of Holy Saturday. The office has no introductory rubric.

^{page 329 note 3} Followed immediately by the Farced Epistle for Easter, beginning, Regis perhennis glorie pangit.

^{page 329 note 4} Madrid ms. 289 (olim C. 153), fol. 117r-118v.

^{page 330 note 1} In the ms. there is a blank space between eis and Discipuli.

^{page 330 note 2} — ² has no musical notation. This passage may possibly belong before the rubric, Discipuli, of the preceding speech. In the ms. there is a blank space (erasure?) between this rubric, Discipuli, and the preceding word, eis.

^{page 331 note 1} Followed immediately by the rubric, In Ascensione Domini.