¹ Gertsman, E., ‘Introduction: the spectrum of performances’, in Gertsman, E. (ed.), Visualizing medieval performance: perspectives, histories, contexts, Aldershot-Burlington, Vt 2008, 1–13Google Scholar.

² McCall, R., Do this: liturgy as performance, Notre Dame 2007, 1–40Google Scholar at pp. 9–21.

³ Malone, C. L., ‘Architecture as evidence for liturgical performance’, in Gittos, H. and Hamilton, S. (eds), Understanding medieval liturgy: essays in interpretation, Aldershot-Burlington, Vt 2016, 207–37Google Scholar. See also Bonde, S. and Maines, C., ‘“Ne aliquis extraneus claustrum intret”: entry and access at the Augustinian abbey of Saint-Jean-des-Vignes, Soissons’, in Kinder, T. N. (ed.), Perspectives for an architecture of solitude: essays on Cistercians: art and architecture in honour of Peter Fergusson, Turnhout 2004, 173–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁴ de Blaauw, S., ‘Following the crosses: the processional cross and the typology of processions in medieval Rome’, in Post, P., Rouwhorst, G., van Tongeren, L. and Scheer, A. (eds), Christian feast and festival: the dynamic of Western liturgy and culture, Leuven 2001, 319–43Google Scholar. For Ottonian Germany see Fisher, A. E., ‘Cross altar and crucifix in Ottonian Cologne: past narrative, present ritual, future resurrection’, in Kaspersen, S. and Thunø, E. (eds), Decorating the Lord's table: on the dynamics between image and altar in the Middle Ages, Copenhagen 2006, 43–62Google Scholar. For the early Middle Ages see also Jensen, R. M., The cross: history, art and controversy, Cambridge, Ma 2017, 97–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁵ Saxon, E., ‘Carolingian, Ottonian and Romanesque art and the eucharist’, in Levy, I. C., Macy, G. and Ausdall, K. van (eds), A companion to the eucharist in the Middle Ages, Leiden-Boston 2012, 251–327Google Scholar.

⁶ K. van Ausdall, ‘Art and eucharist in the late Middle Ages’, ibid. 541–617.

⁷ For Abbot Theodore see St Theodore the Studite, On the holy icons, ed. and trans. C. P. Roth, Crestwood, NY 1981. For a specific use of his work see Pentcheva, B., ‘Rhetorical images of the Virgin: the icon of the Usual miracle at the Blachernai’, Res: Journal for Anthropology and Aesthetics xxxviii (2000), 34–55Google Scholar at p. 38. For Bishop Leo of Chalcedon see Carr, A. W., ‘Leo of Chalcedon and the icons’, in Moss, C. and Kiefer, K. (eds), Byzantine East, Latin West: art historical studies in honor of Kurt Weitzmann, Princeton 1995, 579–84Google Scholar. References to performativity in Byzantine visual culture also appear in Pentcheva, B., ‘The miraculous icon: medium, fantasy, and presence’, in Cunningham, M. and Brubaker, L. (eds), The cult of the Mother of God in Byzantium, Aldershot-Burlington, Vt 2011, 263–77Google Scholar.

⁸ Rudy, K. M., ‘The Trivulzio Hours, the Ghent Altarpiece, and the mass as devotional subject’, in Blockmans, W., Borchert, T.-H., Gabriëls, N., Oosterman, J. and van Oosterwijk, A. (eds), Staging the court of Burgundy, Turnhout 2013, 301–23Google Scholar.

⁹ Amalar of Metz, On the liturgy, ed. Knibbs, E., Cambridge, Ma 2014Google Scholar. See also Duckett, E. S., Carolingian portraits: a study in the ninth century, Ann Arbor, Mi 1988, 92–120Google Scholar.

¹⁰ See, for instance, the description of the Adoration of the Cross ceremony: Amalar, On the liturgy, ii.14, at vol. i. 167–83.

¹¹ Chazelle, C., The crucified God in the Carolingian era: theology and art of Christ's Passion, Cambridge 2001, 75–99Google Scholar.

¹² Caviness, M., ‘Reception of images by medieval viewers’, in Rudolph, C. (ed.), A companion to medieval art, London 2006, 65–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also N. A. Pawelchak, ‘Medieval art, audiences, embodied responses and cognitive theory’, unpubl. PhD diss. Florida State 2014.

¹³ Scherrer, G., Verzeichniss der Handschriften der Stiftsbibliothek von St. Gallen, Halle 1875, 136Google Scholar. The decoration was described for the first time in R. F. Lauer, ‘Studien zur ottonische Mainzer Buchmalerei’, unpubl. PhD diss. Bonn 1987, 183–5. The digitised manuscript can be found at <http://www.e-codices.unifr.ch/en/thumbs/csg/0398>.

¹⁴ Hughes, A., Medieval manuscripts for mass and office: a guide to their organization and terminology, Toronto 1982, 120Google Scholar; King, A. A., Liturgy of the Roman Church, London 1957, 388–90Google Scholar; Jungmann, J., The mass of the Roman rite, trans. Brunner, F. A., ii, New York 1951, 294–7Google Scholar; Möller, E., Corpus Benedictionum Pontificalium, i, CCSL clxii, Turnhout 1973, 6–115Google Scholar.

¹⁵ Prescott, A., ‘The structure of English pre-Conquest benedictionals’, British Library Journal xiii (1987), 118–58Google Scholar at p. 119.

¹⁶ Hehl, E.-D., ‘Willigis von Mainz: päpstlicher Vikar, Metropolit und Reichspolitiker’, in Hartman, W. (ed.), Bischof Burchard von Worms, 1000–1025, Mainz 2000, 51–77Google Scholar; Kellner, M. G., ‘Willigis’, in Bautz, F. W. (ed.), Biographisch-bibliographisches Kirchenlexikon, xiii, Herzberg 1998, 1336–8Google Scholar.

¹⁷ Henceforth, for Codex Sangallensis 398, standard Arabic pagination between brackets accompanies the recto-verso system. This respects the system used for the digitised version of the manuscript on e-Codices.

¹⁸ BL, ms Add 49598. See Karkov, C., The art of Anglo-Saxon England, Woodbridge 2011, 88–9Google Scholar, 221–28 (figs 64, 66; plates 8, 9). Deshman, R., The Benedictional of Æthelwold, Princeton 1995, 6–8Google Scholar. The latter is J. Paul Getty Museum, Malibu, ms Ludwig VII I. See Gatti, E. A., ‘Building the body of the Church: a bishop's blessing in the Benedictional of Engilmar of Parenzo’, in Jones, A. T. and Ott, J. S. (eds), The bishop reformed: studies of episcopal power and culture in the central Middle Ages, Aldershot-Burlington, Vt 2007, 92–121Google Scholar.

¹⁹ ‘Pariet autem filium et vocabis nomen eius Iesum ipse enim salvum faciet populum suum a peccatis eorum.’ See Brunner, F. D., Matthew: A commentary, i, Grand Rapids, Mi–Cambridge 2004, 45Google Scholar.

²⁰ Matthew xxv.31 reads ‘Cum autem venerit Filius hominis in maiestate sua et omnes angeli cum eo tunc sedebit super sedem maiestatis suae.’ Another reference to the Salus Mundi appears in the Passion prayer ‘Ecce lignum crucis’, but that evidently refers to the cross and Easter Friday. See White, D., The lost knowledge of Christ: contemporary spiritualities, Christian cosmology and the arts, Collegeville, Mn 2015, 62Google Scholar. White also remarks that the cross in mosaic that decorates the main apse of the church of Sant'Apollinare in Classe, near Ravenna, also displays such a message.

²¹ van der Meer, F., ‘Maiestas Domini’, in Kirschbaum, E. (ed.), Lexikon der christliche Ikonographie, Rome-Fribourg-Basel 1971, 135–42Google Scholar. The most comprehensive study of this iconography to date is Poilpré, A.-O., Maiestas Domini: une image de l’Église en Occident, Ve–IXe siècles, Paris 2005Google Scholar. For the origins of the iconography see Mathews, T. F., The clash of gods: a reinterpretation of early Christian art, Princeton, NJ 1999, 92–114Google Scholar. A revised opinion is found in Freeman, J. A., ‘The Good Shepherd and the enthroned ruler: a reconsideration of imperial iconography in the early Church’, in Jefferson, L. M. and Jensen, R. M. (eds), The art of empire: Christian art in its imperial context, Minneapolis, Mn 2016, 159–96Google Scholar.

²² Revelation v.1. In the Vulgate the passage runs: ‘Et vidi in dextera sedentis super thronum librum scriptum intus et foris signatum sigillis septem.’

²³ BnF, ms lat. 1, fo. 329v; Dutton, P. E. and Kessler, H. L., The poetry and paintings of the First Bible of Charles the Bald, Ann Arbor, Mi 1997, 64–6Google Scholar.

²⁴ BnF, ms lat. 8851, fo. 1v.

²⁵ Lauer, ‘Studien zur ottonische Mainzer Buchmalerei’, 184.

²⁶ Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Munich, ms Clm 30111, fo. 21r; Hamilton, S., ‘Most illustrious king of kings: evidence for Ottonian kingship in the Otto iii Prayerbook’, Journal of Medieval History xxvii (2001), 257–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar at pp. 272–3 (fig. 4); Saurma-Jeltsch, L. E., ‘Das Gebetbuch Ottos iii: dem Herrscher zur Ermahnung und Verheißung bis in die Ewigkeit’, Frühmittelalterliche Studien xxxviii (2004), 55–88Google Scholar.

²⁷ Alexander, J. J. G., ‘The Benedictional of St Æthelwold and Anglo-Saxon illumination of the Reform period’, in Parsons, D. (ed.), Tenth-century studies: essays in commemoration of the millennium of the Council of Winchester, London 1975, 169–83Google Scholar, 241–5.

²⁸ Hoffmann, H., Buchkunst und Königtum im ottonischen und frühsalischen Reich, i, Stuttgart 1986, 205Google Scholar; Bischoff, Bernard, Die Abtei Lorsch im Spiegel ihrer Handschriften, ii, Lorsch 1989, 114–15Google Scholar. For the difference between the two types see Prescott, A., ‘The text of the Benedictional of St Æthelwold’, in Yorke, B. (ed.), Bishop Æthelwold: his career and influence, Woodbridge 1997, 119–48Google Scholar at pp. 120–1. See also Klückener, M., ‘Das Pontifikale als liturgisches Buch: Geschichte, Aufbau und Inhalt: Bedeutung für die Gegenwart’, in Haunerland, W. and Kaczynski, R. (eds), Manifestatio ecclesiae: Studien zu Pontifikale und bischöflicher Liturgie, Regensburg 2004, 79–127Google Scholar.

²⁹ Wehlt, H.-P., Reichsabtei und König: Dargestellt am Beispiel der Abtei Lorsch mit Ausblicken auf Hersfeld, Stablo und Fulda, Göttingen 1970, 23Google Scholar.

³⁰ ‘He (Christ) kept watch, he was the watchman, he remained vigilant, insofar as he was able, over those in charge – and bishops also do this. For that reason, a higher position is granted to bishops, to oversee and, as it were, guard people’: Amalar, On the liturgy, iii.1, at vol. i. 66–9.

³¹ McCall, Do this, 91–3, 130–1.

³² E. Palazzo, ‘The image of the bishop in the High Middle Ages’, in Jones and Ott, The bishop reformed, 86–91.

³³ Parisse, M., ‘The bishop: prince and prelate’, in Gilsdorf, S. (ed.), The bishop: power and piety at the first millennium, Münster 2004, 1–22Google Scholar.

³⁴ Maxwell, J., ‘Education, humility and choosing ideal bishops in late antiquity’, in Leemans, J., Nuffelen, P. van, Keough, S. W. J. and Nicolaye, C. (eds), Episcopal elections in late antiquity, Berlin-Boston 2011, 449–62Google Scholar at pp. 449–52.

³⁵ J. Eldevik, ‘Driving the chariot of the Lord: Siegfried i of Mainz (1060–84) and episcopal identity in an age of transition’, in Jones and Ott, The bishop reformed, 161–88 at pp. 168–74; Hehl, E.-D., ‘Bedrängte und belohnte Bischöfe: Recht und Politik als Parameter bischöflichen Handelns bei Willigis von Mainz und anderen’, in Körntgen, L. and Wassenhoven, D. (eds), Patterns of episcopal power: bishops in tenth- and eleventh-century Western Europe, Berlin-Boston 2011, 63–86Google Scholar at pp. 81–6. The lasting quarrel between St Gall and the archbishopric of Constanz is well known: Steiger, K., ‘Die jurisdiktionsrechtliche Stellung des Klosters St. Gallen im Bistumsverbande von Konstanz: geschichtlich dargestellt auf Grund des kanonischen Prozesses der Jahre 1596–1607’, Zeitschrift für schweizerische Kirchengeschichte/Revue d'histoire ecclésiastique Suisse xvi (1922), 33–52Google Scholar (at pp. 35–40 for the Carolingian and Ottonian periods).

³⁶ Wormald, P., ‘Archbishop Wulfstan: eleventh-century state-builder’, in Townend, M. (ed.), Wulfstan, archbishop of York (Proceedings of the 2nd Alcuin Conference), Turnhout 2004, 9–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

³⁷ Richards, M. P., ‘I–II Cnut: Wulfstan's Summa?’, in Jurasinski, S., Oliver, L. and Rabin, A. (eds), English law before Magna Carta, Leiden 2010, 137–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar at pp. 141–3. See also J. T. Lionarons, The homiletic writings of Archbishop Wulfstan, Woodbridge 2010, 114–15.

³⁸ Tertullian, De praescriptione haereticorum, in Tertulliani opera, ed. E. Kroymann, CSEL lxx, pt 2b, Vienna–Leipzig 1942, 28.

³⁹ R. Trilling, ‘Sovereignty and social order: Archbishop Wulfstan and the Institutes of polity’, in Jones and Ott, The bishop reformed, 58–85 at pp. 68–71. For the ninth century see Garipzanov, I. H., The symbolic language of royal authority in the Carolingian world (751–877), Leiden-Boston 2008, 43–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁴⁰ Blumenthal, U.-R., The investiture controversy: Church and monarchy from the ninth to the twelfth century, Philadelphia 1995, 113–26Google Scholar.

⁴¹ Mayr-Harting, H., Ottonian book illumination: an historical study, pt ii, London 1999, 91–7Google Scholar.

⁴² Wulfstan, II Cnut (BL, ms Cotton Nero A.i), 69. See Stafford, P., ‘The laws of Cnut and the history of Anglo-Saxon royal promises’, Anglo-Saxon England x (1981), 173–90Google Scholar at pp. 178–82.

⁴³ Flanigan, C., ‘The moving subject: medieval liturgical processions in semiotics and cultural perspective’, in Ashley, K. M. and Hüsken, W. N. M. (eds), Moving subjects: processional performance in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, Amsterdam 2001, 35–52Google Scholar. For the role of the bishop in particular see Gaillard, M., ‘La Présence épiscopale dans la ville du haut moyen âge: sanctuaires et processions’, Histoire urbane x/2 (2004), 123–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁴⁴ Fisher, ‘Cross altar and crucifix’, 50–3; Parker, E. C. and Little, C. T., The Cloisters Cross: its art and meaning, New York 1994, 149–66Google Scholar.

⁴⁵ Prescott, ‘The text of the Benedictional’, 120–1; Ross, L., Medieval art: a topical dictionary, Westport, Ct 1996, 34Google Scholar; Rivard, D. A., Blessing the world: ritual and lay piety in medieval religion, Washington, DC 2009, 7–10Google Scholar.

⁴⁶ Hughes, Medieval manuscripts for mass, 10–12, 138–9; Snoek, G. J. C., Medieval piety from relics to the eucharist: a process of mutual interaction, Leiden 1995, 300–2Google Scholar.

⁴⁷ Prescott, ‘The structure of English pre-Conquest benedictionals’, 119.

⁴⁸ Idem, ‘The text of the Benedictional’, 121–5.

⁴⁹ Ibid. 126.

⁵⁰ Rivard, Blessing the world, 34–5.

⁵¹ Prescott, ‘The text of the Benedictional’, 130.

⁵² Stiftsbibliothek, St Gallen, Cod. Sang. 398, fos 61v–78r, 94v–105v. The codex also includes an initial pair of blessings only for the eve of Pentecost and Pentecost Day that appear on fos 17r–18v.

⁵³ Ibid. fos 51r–56r.

⁵⁴ Lapidge, M., Deshman, R. and Rankin, S., The cult of St Swithun, Oxford 2003, 87–9Google Scholar.

⁵⁵ Popp, C., Der Schatz der Kanonissen: Heilige und Reliquien im Frauenstift Gandersheim, Regensburg 2010, 23–34Google Scholar.

⁵⁶ Clayton, M., The cult of the Virgin in Anglo-Saxon England, Cambridge 2003, 23–51Google Scholar.

⁵⁷ , Mayr-Harting, Ottonian book illustration, pt ii, 91–3Google Scholar (plate viii); Pierce, J. M., ‘Sigebert “the Beloved”: a liturgical perspective on episcopal image from eleventh-century Minden’, in Danielson, S. and Gatti, E. (eds), Envisioning the bishop: images and the episcopacy in the Middle Ages, Turnhout 2014, 249–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁵⁸ Jungmann, The mass of the Roman rite, 198–202 at p. 201.

⁵⁹ Hiley, D., Western plainchant: a handbook, Oxford 1993, 109–16Google Scholar.

⁶⁰ Fassler, M. A., ‘Liturgy and sacred history in the twelfth century tympana at Chartres’, The Art Bulletin lxxv/3 (1993), 499–520CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁶¹ Ibid. 507–10.

⁶² Parkes, H., The making of liturgy in the Ottonian Church: books, music and ritual in Mainz, 950–1050, Cambridge 2015, 31–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁶³ ‘Hodie salvator mundi per virginem nasci dignatus est’ / ‘Deus de caelo dedit nobis unicum filium suum’. See Parkes, The making of liturgy, 36.

⁶⁴ Hughes, Medieval manuscripts for mass, 87–8; Kingsley, J. P., ‘To touch the image: embodying Christ in the Bernward Gospels’, Peregrinations iii/1 (2010), 138–73Google Scholar at pp. 168–9.

⁶⁵ Vogel, C., Le Pontifical Romano-germanique du dixième siècle: le texte, i, Vatican 1963, 351Google Scholar.

⁶⁶ Parkes, The making of liturgy, 160.

⁶⁷ van Tongeren, L., Exaltation of the Cross: towards the origins of the feast of the cross and the meaning of the cross in early medieval liturgy, Leuven 2001, 41–73Google Scholar; Chazelle, The crucified God, 36–7.

⁶⁸ Fisher, ‘Cross altar and crucifix’, 51–2.

⁶⁹ Flanigan, ‘The moving subject’, 36–7; Carlson, M., Places of performance: the semiotics of theatre architecture, Ithaca 1989, 115Google Scholar.

⁷⁰ Wright, C., ‘The Palm Sunday procession in medieval Chartres’, in Fassler, M. A. and Baltzer, R. A. (eds), The divine office in the Latin Middle Ages: methodology and sources studies, regional developments, hagiography, Oxford 2000, 344–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar at pp. 345–6; Snoek, Medieval piety from relics, 275–6.

⁷¹ Wright, ‘The Palm Sunday procession’, 346.

⁷² Similar uses and visual perception are attested in Byzantium: Pentcheva, B., The sensual icon: space, ritual and the senses in Byzantium, University Park, Pa 2010, 185Google Scholar.

⁷³ Bibliothèque royale de la Belgique, Brussels, ms 9428.

⁷⁴ Snoek, Medieval piety from relics, 250–9; Smith, J. M. H., ‘Portable Christianity: relics in the medieval West (c. 700–1200)’, Proceedings of the British Academy clxxxi (2012), 143–67Google Scholar.

⁷⁵ Voyer, C., ‘Le Sacramentaire de Marmoutier (Autun, Bibliothèque municipale, 19bis) et l'abbé Rainaud’, in Poilpré, A.-O. and Brodbeck, S. (eds), La Culture des commanditaires: l’œuvre et l'empreinte, Paris 2015, 158–73Google Scholar at fig. 4.

⁷⁶ Ibid. 171.

⁷⁷ Bibliothèque municipale, Rouen, ms 27; Méhu, D., ‘The colours of the ritual: description and inscription of church dedication in liturgical manuscripts (10th–11th centuries)’, in Bedos-Rezak, B. M. and Hamburger, J. F. (eds), Sign and design: script as image in cross-cultural perspective (300–1600 CE), Washington, DC 2016, 259–77Google Scholar. See also Conner, P. W., Anglo-Saxon Exeter: a tenth-century cultural history, Woodbridge 1993, 43–4Google Scholar.

⁷⁸ Méhu, ‘The colours of the ritual’, 265 (fig. 13.2).

⁷⁹ Thiery, D. E., Polluting the sacred: violence, faith and the ‘civilizing’ of parishioners in late medieval England, Leiden 2009, 41–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The seminal work on the rituals performed remains Muncey, R. W., A history of consecration of churches and churchyards, Cambridge 1930Google Scholar. For the use of relics in these rituals see Snoek, Medieval piety from relics, 179–81.

⁸⁰ Aufgebauer, P., ‘Der Mainzer Erzbischof Willigis (975–1011) und seine Wirken auf dem Eichsfeld’, in Müller, T. T., Pinkert, M. and Seeboth, A. (eds), Bischof Burchard I. in seiner Zeit, Heiligenstadt 2001, 51–77Google Scholar. See also n. 3 above.

⁸¹ Ottonian Germany: the Chronicon of Thietmar of Merseburg, ed. and trans. D. A. Warner, Manchester 2001, 130.

⁸² Metz, W., ‘Willigis in Rahmen der Beziehungen des Erzstifts Mainz zum deutschen Königtum in ottonischer und salischer Zeit’, in Brück, A. Ph. (ed.), Willigis und sein Dom: Festschrift zur Jahrtausendfeier des Mainzer Domes, 975–1975, Mainz 1975, 1–30Google Scholar; Althoff, G., Otto III, trans. Jestice, P. G., University Park, Pa 2003, 35Google Scholar; Fleckenstein, J., Die Hofkapelle der deutsche Könige, ii, Stuttgart 1996, 204–5Google Scholar.

⁸³ Heinzelmann, J., ‘Mainz zwischen Rom und Aachen: Erzbischof Willigis und der Bau des Mainzer Doms’, Jahrbuch für westdeutsche Landesgeschichte xxx (2004), 7–34Google Scholar.

⁸⁴ Ibid. 8–13; Conant, K. J., Carolingian and Romanesque architecture, 800–1200, New Haven 1993, 123–4Google Scholar (fig. 78).

⁸⁵ Parkes, The making of liturgy, 23. See also Schmidt, R., Die Abtei St. Alban vor Mainz im hohen und späten Mittelalter: Geschichte, Verfassung und Besitz eines Klosters im Spannungsfeld zwischen Erzbischof, Stadt, Kurie und Reich, Mainz 1996, 25–41Google Scholar.

⁸⁶ F. Arens, ‘Die Raumaufteilung des Mainzer Domes und seiner Stiftsgebäude bis zum 13. Jahrhundert’, in Brück, Willigis und sein Dom, 185–249 at pp. 232–6.

⁸⁷ Belting, H., Likeness and presence: a history of the image before the era of art, trans. Jephcott, E., Chicago 1994, 227–9Google Scholar.

⁸⁸ Heinzelmann, J., ‘Spuren der frühgeschichte von St. Stephan in Mainz: ein Beitrag zur einer noch nicht geführte Diskussion’, Archiv für mittelrheinische Kirchengeschichte lvi (2004), 89–100Google Scholar. See also Hinkel, H. (ed.), 1000 Jahre St. Stephan in Mainz, Mainz 1990Google Scholar.

⁸⁹ For the ninth century see Heinz, C., Recherches sur les rapports entre l'architecture et la liturgie à l’époque carolingienne, Paris 1963, 140Google Scholar.

⁹⁰ See n. 52 above.

⁹¹ Ehbrecht, W., ‘Überall ist Jerusalem’, in Brauer, H. and Schlenkrich, E. (eds), Die Stadt als Kommunikationsraum: Beiträge zur Stadtgeschichte vom Mittelalter bis ins 20. Jahrhundert, Leipzig 2001, 129–86Google Scholar at pp. 132–3. Palm Sunday processions in Ottonian Germany were certainly moments of communal pride, as well as a great display of logistics. They often witnessed the attendance of illustrious guests, such as the royal couple Otto i and Adelaide of Italy who attended the ceremonies at Marburg a number of times. See Althoff, G., ‘Gandersheim und Quedlinburg. Ottonische Frauenklöster als Herrschafts- und Überlieferungszentrem’, Frühmittelalterliche Studien xxv (1991), 123–44Google Scholar at p. 129.

⁹² Falck, L., ‘Mainz vom frühen Mittelalter bis zum Anfang des 17. Jahrhunderts’, in Schwind, F. (ed.), Geschichtlicher Atlas von Hessen, Marburg 1984, 247–57Google Scholar at pp. 247–8.

⁹³ Heinzelmann, ‘Mainz zwischen Rome und Aachen’, 8–10 at fig. 2.

⁹⁴ Wolter, H., Die Synoden im Reichsgebiet und in Reichsitalien von 916 bis 1056, Paderborn 1988, 58–61Google Scholar.

⁹⁵ Ibid. 62–4.

⁹⁶ Bernhardt, J. W., Itinerant kingship and royal monasteries in early medieval Germany, c. 935–1075, Cambridge 1996, 4Google Scholar; Reuter, T., Germany in the early Middle Ages, London 1991, 148Google Scholar.

⁹⁷ Reuter, Germany, 159, 170.

⁹⁸ Garrison, E., ‘Otto iii at Aachen’, Peregrinations iii/1 (2010), 83–137Google Scholar at pp. 91–7.

⁹⁹ Parkes, The making of liturgy, 158.

¹⁰⁰ Mayr-Harting, Ottonian book illustration, pt ii, 57–68.

* For practical purposes, this list uses the pagination system of the Stiftsbibliothek, St Gall, and, therefore, of the digitised copy on e-Codices (rather than the standard folio recto/verso numeration for manuscripts).