1 Andrieu, Michel, ed., Les Ordines Romani du haut Moyen Age, 5 vols., III: Les Textes (Suite) (Ordines XIV–XXXIV) (Louvain, 1951)Google Scholar. (Henceforth, the abbreviation OR will be used, followed by ordo number in Roman numerals, and item number in Arabic numerals.) Regarding the dating of the Ordines Romani, see Vogel, Cyrille, Medieval Liturgy: An Introduction to the Sources, rev. and trans. Storey, William G. and Rasmussen, Niels Krogh (Washington, DC, 1986), 191–3Google Scholar. Certain ordines in documents reported as early as 700 ce were nurtured by Merovingian private liturgical interests in Roman liturgy which initiated the copying, compiling and propagating of Roman worship in areas ‘where the Gallican liturgy still flourished’ (Vogel, Medieval Liturgy, 146).

2 OR XXIV, 29 (p. 293); OR XXVII, 41 (p. 357). Ad vesperum vero, tam in ecclesia in qua pontifex dicit orationes quam in ceteris [XXVII: ecclesiis] presbiterorum … (OR XXIV, 26 (p. 293)). These orationes would be the Orationes sollemnes beginning Oremus dilectissimi nobis, in primis pro ecclesia sancta Dei … According to Vogel (Medieval Liturgy, 172), this part of OR XXVII, including this particular text, virtually mirrors OR XXIV (29–40), but not OR XXVI, the text of which has no prescription for Feria VI. Furthermore, OR XXVI evidences no direct ‘papal’ descent (ibid., 171). All three ordines date from the second half of the eighth century.

3 Post orationes preparatur crux ante altare, interposito [XXVII: interposite] spatio inter ipsam et altare, sustentata hinc inde a duobus acolitis.

4 OR XXIV, 30 (p. 293); OR XXVII, 42 (p. 357): Posito ante eam [crucem] oratorio, venit pontifex et adoratam deosculatur crucem, deinde episcopi, presbiteri, diaconi et ceteri per ordinem, deinde populus. After the cross has been hailed (salutata) and returned to its place, the pontiff descends before the altar and administers the presanctified Communion to all, maintaining silence. Thus the worship of Good Friday concludes according to OR XXIV, 36–9 (p. 249) and OR XXVII 48–50 (p. 358).

5 OR XXIV, 35 (p. 294); OR XXVII, 47 (p. 358): Nam, salutante pontifice vel populo crucem, canitur semper antiphona Ecce lignum crucis … Dicitur psalmus CXVIII. Cf. Cyrille Vogel and Reinhard Elze, eds., Le Pontifical Romano-Germanique du dixième siècle: Le texte, 2 vols., Studi e Testi 226–7 (Vatican City, 1963), 2:92 (ordo XCIX, item 334). This material concerning the Adoration does not touch upon early Roman liturgies that employed processional antiphons which I survey in ‘The Roman Processional Antiphon Repertory’, in Music, Dance, and Society: Medieval and Renaissance Studies in Memory of Ingrid G. Brainard (Kalamazoo, 2011), 19–36, at 20–2Google Scholar.

6 OR XXVII, 47 (p. 358); XXVIII, 44 (p. 400); XXIX, 40 (p. 443). These relate to one another closely in substance and in Andrieu's analyses. The Adoratio text of OR XXIX is identical to OR XXVII. Andrieu claimed that OR XXVII is transmitted in a manuscript of a ‘Gallicanised’ re-editing (Les Ordines Romani III, pp. 375, 381). OR XXVII, as its manuscript dux BAV, Palat. lat. 487 indicates, appears to have been intended for a monastery whose cenobite wrote the text between 870 and 890, after consultation with Pope Hadrian II (867–72) or Hadrian III (884–5), thereby conveying Roman actuality to this order (ibid., 430).

7 Andrieu, Les Ordines Romani, III:433.

8 Andrieu (Les Ordines Romani, pp. 482–5) reports some changes compared to previous OR directives, but is silent regarding the novelty of additions to OR XXXI (‘essentiellement une refonte de l'ordo XXVIII’). The difference between OR XXIV, XXVII and XXIX, which constitute the earliest development, and the subsequent OR XXXI (pp. 496–9) lies in the latter's two musical additions – Trisagion (OR XXXI, 45) and hymn verses Crux fidelis – Pange lingua (OR XXXI, 50). They introduce a liturgical–musical distinction in which Andrieu's comparative analyses of textual minutiae vest little interest. Still, Andrieu (ibid., 486) acknowledges an overflow of detail in OR XXXI that was not copied from the model (‘L'Ordo XXXI déborde parfois son modèle’), but paradoxically contains details omitted from OR XXVIII covering the same material. These include the Adoration détails inédits (Andrieu mentions neither Trisagion nor Improperia). The abridged OR XXXA and XXXB are not relevant since Ecce lignum does not appear in either. Although the Trisagion was omnipresent in the East, its transmission thence to Rome before OR XXXI might be doubted without an occurrence in any Roman ordo prior to this one, while a Gallican tradition in Carolingian liturgical documents might be reinforced with this Byzantine presence early in the ninth century. Concerning OR XXXII, Andrieu is again laconic, declining comment on the separation, incongruently in two columns of his edition (XXXII: 15 and 11) and, contextually, of the assignment to antiphon Ecce lignum of Ps. 66 (Deus misereatur) by BNF, lat. 14088 and Ps. 117 (Confitemini domino) by GB-Ccc lat. 192.

9 OR XXXI, 46–50 (p. 498). The genesis of ‘Crux fidelis’ is stanza eight of Fortunatus's hymn, which serves as refrain by using the hymn's basic melody. See Michel Huglo, ‘Les versus Salve Festa Dies: leur dissémination dans les manuscrits du processionnal’, in Papers read at the 12th conference of the IMS Study Group Cantus Planus, Lillefüred (Hungary), 2004 (Budapest, 2006), 597, 599. For the early matrix of Crux fidelis, see René-Jean Hesbert, Antiphonale Missarum Sextuplex (Rome, 1935) (henceforth abbreviated as AMS), rite 78b. Unmentioned by Hesbert is a technicality regarding the nomenclature of ‘Crux fidelis’ labelled ANT[IPHONA] in the manuscript. However, the terminology used initially, excerpting a verse from a psalm verse with a genre change, is extended here to a hymn. The nomenclature construed in OR XXXI: 50 is ‘antiphon’ Crux fidelis. Hesbert's only observations of anomalies (AMS, xiii) are the archaïsmes in the missing tract Eripe me and the customary Qui habitat, here replaced by the gradual/tract, Domine exaudi (AMS, rite 78a).

10 AMS, lix. Concerning these dates in particular, see AMS, xix, xxi and xxiii, respectively. Not outlined in Table 1 is the content of the Adoratio in the antiphonale missarum from Rheinau Abbey (CH-Zz Rh 30, end of the eighth century, AMS/R), the oldest transalpine example of Hesbert's group of six early graduals. This source indicates only AD COM to introduce Ecce lignum, complete. Entered at the end of the Adoratio (AMS, rite 78b), this rubric would signify a conventional Communio antiphon. Hesbert thus construed the rubric [ANTIPHONA] AD COM[MUNIONEM], since in the index of communions (p. 249) he observes: ‘Ecce lignum. Cf. ANT [Table]’.

11 QUANTUM NECESSE EST PSALM. ITEM. In front of Ecce lignum, BNF, lat. 12050 (ITEM ANTIPHONE AD CRUCEM ADORANDAM) and F-Psg 111 (GRECUM AD CRUCEM ADORANDAM) admit the Trisagion, with the Corbie version in Greek. Following Ecce lignum, two of these sources amplify the order with Pange lingua (BNF, lat. 17436) and Crux fidelis/Pange lingua, labelled respectively ‘antiphon’ and ‘verse’ (F-Psg 111).

12 AMS, lx. Ecce lignum appears in the Compiègne antiphonale missarum, BNF, lat. 17436 (AMS/C) with Crucem tuam … ecce (longer form). Ecce lignum: Beati follows the Trisagion in the Corbie antiphonale missarum (BNF, lat. 12050) AD CRUCEM ADORANDAM and in the Senlis antiphonale missarum (F-Psg 111) with the Trisagion VERSUS Popule meus … and ‘Crux fidelis’ shown in Table 1, column 3 (cf. note 9).

13 René-Jean Hesbert, Corpus Antiphonalium Officii, Rerum Ecclesticarum Documenta, Series Maior, Fontes IX, vol. III: Invitatoria et Antiphonae (Rome, 1968), hereafter abbreviated CAO. Antiphons 1952 and 1953 are both assigned to the Exaltatio crucis. Their melodies are similar and belong to the same mode, but are sufficiently distinct to be treated as individual antiphons in this study (see Tables 2, 3a–f).

14 See Michel Huglo, ed. Les manuscrits du processionnal, 2 vols., Répertoire International des Sources Musicales, B XIV^1–2 (München, 1999, 2004), abbreviated as RISM 1 and RISM 2; RISM 2, no. F-124/2. Jacques Chailley, ‘Anciens tropaires et séquentiaires de l'école de Saint-Martial de Limoges’, Études grégoriennes, 2 (1957), 163–88, at 165, posited the date of this portion of BNF, lat. 1240 (his MS B¹) as not later than the year 908. Gisèle Dumas, ‘Le Processionnal en Aquitaine’, Études grégoriennes, 29 (2001), 9–34, at 19–20, referring to these sources as processioners, outlines the content of this earliest exemplar representing ‘un cas particulier’ (ibid., 23). She reads the Good Friday introductory rubric as VENDREDI SAINT/XI [sic, instead of VI]. The last element is, on the contrary, to be read as V[ersus], difficult to identify due to the shape of the initial, the left arm of which slants radically outward and right arm is upright and short. But the cross-stroke cuts through this V, reshaping it to appear like Xi, thereby misleading Dumas. Compare the four ‘correct’ V and two ‘correct’ cross-stroked A on the immediately preceding folio, 24v, for the Improperia.

15 This antiphon is complete in the Adoratio antiphon cluster of the Chartres gradual, F-CHRm 47, which originated in Brittany (Paléographie Musicale, Ser. I, 11 [Solesmes, 1972], p. 121/fol. 63r), and in I-Ra 123 (Paléographie Musicale, Ser. I, 18 [Bern, 1969], fol. 101r, hereafter abbreviated PAL); see also Table 3, below. After its incipit, Adoramus [sic] crucis, the manuscript, damaged by fire, leaves enough of the remainder visible, including the explicit, to identify the lengthy antiphon. The repertory finishes with the Easter antiphona ad communicandum, Venite populi, suggesting a linkage in movement – processing – leading to the solemn conclusion of the veneration, the Communion of the Presanctified in silence.

16 The spelling of the first word of this antiphon, Cum or Dum, is unpredictable. The tendency in sources studied from Francia and the Aquitaine, as in BNF, lat. 1240, is towards Dum; Cum is preferred in sources from Frankish lands, Germanic regions, Italy and Benevento. In the text, I follow the sources' spellings, as available. The verse ‘O admirabile pretium’ with its own capitalised initial in manuscripts such as BNF, lat. 1240, 25r (A–B), and Bamberg D-BAs lit. 6, 97v, appears unspecified as either a verse or an antiphon, however, designated ‘verse’ in manuscripts such as BNF, lat. 909, 146v, or even ‘antiphon’ in BNF, lat. 903, I-Ra 123, E-VI 117 (fol. 62v; late twelfth to early thirteenth century). The bifurcation of a verse into two antiphons was common. The ambivalence as to genre is not uncommon among processional antiphons, as exemplified by Nos peccavimus/Terribile est Christe, a litanaic antiphon with verse also found as two antiphons.

17 Cf. Dumas, ‘Le Processionnal en Aquitaine’, 27. Concerning BNF, lat. 1240, the nomenclature ‘antienne’ appears confused by the presence of processional antiphons in the vicinity of the Trisagion, followed by sentences of the Improperia abbreviated A in that manuscript.

18 AMS, lxxxii, lxxiii. The Office of the Exaltation of the Cross was, from the beginning, associated with the Invention. Antiphons with these liturgical assignments appear in the Tonary of Metz only as later admissions to the Office (rite 91) or for supplements. Regino's tonary lists only one of the indicative O Crux group, O Crux splendidior (CAO 4019).

19 According to RISM, F-R 425 (olim A. 453) is a processionnal-responsorial. Numbers in the second column of Table 2 indicate the order of antiphons in the Rouen manuscript, fols. 1v–2r. This source is catalogued in RISM 2, F-162/2. Not listed in Table 2 is the antepenultimate antiphon in the F-R 425 repertory, Levabit dominus for Advent, making the total number of these antiphons eleven, rather than ‘twelve antiphons of the Office of the Holy Cross’, positioned as numbered in the second column, as are all series marked by numbers in succeeding tables. (I thank Mathilde Poulin in the Bibliothèque municipale François Villon for copying the pertinent folios from the Rouen manuscript during my visit.) The third column of Table 2 registers the Exaltatio content of evolving repertories, first, according to the antiphoner in BNF, lat. 17436 tabulated in the CANTUS database, indicated by an ‘x’ in the third, fourth and fifth columns of the table. The fourth column reports Office antiphons in the antiphoner of Albi F-AI 44; the fifth lists Office antiphons according to the antiphoner of Saint Martial, BNF, lat. 1085, tabulated in CANTUS. (Data repeated in the CANTUS file are omitted from the table.) CAO listings appear in the last column; CAO numbers of the eight antiphons absent from BNF, lat. 1085 appear in italics (there are no non-CAO antiphons in BNF, lat. 1085). The choice of Exaltatio over Inventio is predicated on the greater use and relationship of the former to the Adoratio. With incipit indicated only, there is no certainty as to which of the two Crucem tuam texts the short title represents – CAO 1952 or 1953 – since the two appear adjacently in the CANTUS four-digit designation 9999, preceded by code 90 for ambiguities. James Grier, ‘Roger de Chabannes, cantor of St. Martial, Limoges’, Early Music History 14 (1995), 53–119, at 117, dates BNF, lat. 1085, in a period between 1010 and 1025, reflected in Table 2.

20 The processional Adoremus crucis, with the explicit implevit, for the Adoratio is presumably the longer form drawn from sources of the Mass; the shorter Adoremus crucis, with the explicit sacramentum (CAO 1292), is given as an incipit in the Rouen list. This was usually done to direct the cantor to a widely recognised title that appeared in the document at hand (quo vide) pertaining to the Office.

21 Emerson, John, ed., Albi, Bibliothèque Rochegude, Manuscript 44: A Complete Ninth-Century Gradual and Antiphoner from Southern France, curtailed by Emerson's death but finished and edited by Lila Collamore (Ottawa, 2002), 104, antiphon no. 927, and F-CA 60, fol. 41vGoogle Scholar. Another Easter processional antiphon appears among ‘antiphonas ad crucem’ in the Albi gradual: the Easter Ad communicandum, Venite populi, well suited like Ecce lignum to serve for approaches of the laity to the cross, backtracks from its proper position ‘to the communicants’ into the Adoratio. See, 104, antiphon no. 930. The entire series of four ANTIPHONAS AD CRUCEM preceding this Venite, situated between the ANTIPHONAS DE VIRGINUM and ANTIPHONAS DE RESURRECTIONE, is particularly interesting because the latter do not conform to any of the Carolingian Easter processional pieces transmitted in AMS rite 214, yet issue as processional antiphons while their companions for the Pedilavium are entirely disregarded at Albi (and by the Roman graduals). Transfers are specific both to Easter, such as Cum rex, Nos autem and Ego sum alpha, antiphons transcribed by Charlotte Roederer, Festive Troped Masses for Christmas and Easter in the Aquitaine, Collegium Musicum: Yale University, Second Series, vol. 11 (Madison, WI, 1989), [9], [17], [20], and to Good Friday, such as Per signum sanctae and Ecce mirabile lignum, antiphons [18] and [19]. Other Aquitanian manuscripts besides F-AI 44 are especially engaged in mingling Easter processional music with the cross replica ceremony (see Table 3c). The interest in certain such antiphons spread beyond Holy Week rites. Cum rex (sung in the Holy Saturday Depositio crucis and forwarded into Easter pre-introit procession) traversed feasts from Palm Sunday to Pentecost; see my ‘Scenarios of the “Descent into Hell” in Two Processional Antiphons’, Comparative Drama, Special Issue in Memory of Audrey Ekdahl Davidson, 42/3 (2008), 301–14, at 305CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Another text, Crucem sanctam subiit, related to the Adoration thematically only, is found in the Easter series in graduals BNF, lat. 780 (Narbonne), I-MOd O.I.7 (Forlimpopoli-Ravenna) and BAV, lat. 5319 (Rome).

22 On the technique of illustration, see Emerson-Collamore, Albi, xxiii; on Albi's Adoremus crucis, see 104, antiphon no. 926. Regarding its pre-Aquitanian notation, see M[arie] N[oel] Colette, ‘Le Graduel-Antiphonaire, Albi, Bibliothèque Muncipale 44: une notation protoaquitaine rythmique’, Cantus Planus Papers Read at the Sixth Meeting, Eger, Hungary 1993, 2 vols. ed. Laszlo Dobszay (Budapest, 1995), vol. 1, 117–39, at 118–19. Colette cites groundbreaking studies by Kenneth Levy and Pierre-Marie Gy and correspondence with Emerson. Following Fr. Gy, Colette reveals ‘observations of a Carolingian repertory spreading into the Aquitaine’, particularly in the identity in F-AI 44 of certain responsories originating in the North (‘Le Graduel-Antiphonaire’, 121).

23 A scant total of five Adoration antiphons can be found among the inventories of the modern Solesmes editions of the Liber usualis. The Variae preces has only Crucem tuam. The Graduale Romanum authorises Ecce lignum, the Improperia with intercalated Trisagion, and Crucem tuam … ecce enim with the psalm Deus misereatur.

24 F-SO Réserve 28, see Huglo, Michel ‘The Cluniac Processional of Solesmes (Solesmes: Bibliothèque de l'Abbaye, Réserve 28)’, in The Divine Office in the Latin Middle Ages, ed. Fassler, Margot and Baltzer, Rebecca (Oxford, 2000), 205–12, at 210CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For a splendidly documented study on the monastic adoring ceremony, see Boynton, Susan, ‘Prayer as Liturgical Performance in Eleventh- and Twelfth-Century Monastic Psalters’, Speculum, 82 (2007), 895–931, at 911–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar; cf. CAO II, Manuscripti ‘cursus monasticus’, vi, and RISM 2, no. F-135/3. Cf. CAO II/F, rite 147c; and the description of processioners à antiennes in RISM 1, 46* (TABLEAU III).

25 Huglo, ‘The Cluniac Processional’, 208.

26 Dumas, ‘Le Processionnal’, 15.

27 CH-SGs 18, pp. 39–40, AD SALUTANDUM CRUCEM. The manuscript is described as a ‘Libellus mit Prozessionsgesängen’ in Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, Sachteil 8 (1998), cols. 952–4, and a ‘Libellus processionalis’ in RISM 2, No. CH-27* (‘après CH-15’ [RISM-1]). This manuscript, like descendants such as A-Wn 1888, is a ‘distant ancestor of the processioner portatif, thus of the troper-proser-processioner’. I draw the dates for CH-SGs 18 and CH-SGs 339 from a project at the University of Erlangen to catalogue all St Gall sources in numerical order by date and type. I gratefully acknowledge Andreas Haug for providing the typescript list, then in process of publication as ‘Sankt Gallen’ in Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart (1994). The chant repertory in SGs 359 does not appear in Table 3b since this cantatorium lacks antiphons for the Adoration.

28 Additions possibly Germanic in usage appear in A-Wn Cpv. 1888 (copied at St Alban's of Mainz and dated between 936 and 962) where two antiphons taken from the Office find a place within its Rogations collection, in a DE SANCTA CRUCE duo: O crux splendidior and Sanctifica nos Domine. We note the first of these in Table 3b from a German gradual, D-W 1008. In the ritual-processioner A-Wn 1888, with its multifaceted liturgical content circulating newly derived chants, austerity is not as evident as in the Germanic sources discussed above. For further data on the contents, dating and references to this source, see RISM 2, A-43. For the texts and translations of its antiphons see my ‘A Repertory of Processional Antiphons in Vienna Nationalbibliothek 1888’, Études grégoriennes, 32 (2001), 124–45, at 127 and 143 (nos. 24, 25).

29 See Vogel, Medieval Liturgy, 192, ‘late X century or late XI century?’ This caeremoniale, which treats the Triduum Sacrum, originated in a Chapel ad Sanctum Gregorium in Francia; its sole source, Parisin. 1248, dates from the end of the tenth century and came from Saint Martial (ibid., 174).

30 Ecce crucem (CAO 2500) appears in Office antiphoners for the feasts of Easter, the Invention, and the Exaltation (e.g. BNF, lat. 17436) but not for the Good Friday Adoration. The comma for semicolon after benedicta and misspelling of cedrorum are editorial errata.

31 The antiphon Crux fidelis was also confused in some sources with the hymn verse. For his labour, and in his defence, Adémar had to yield for emendation to BNF, lat. 1121 to the principal scribe's decisions regarding selection and order of such antiphons. See Grier, James, The Musical World of a Medieval Monk: Adémar de Chabannes in Eleventh-Century Aquitaine (Cambridge, 2006), 2CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

32 Grier, The Musical World, 11, 12, 15. Grier holds that the remnants of this processioner, which he dates to around 1000, found at the back of BNF, lat. 1085, spurred activity towards completion of an elaborate, though unfinished, project some time after that year.

33 Grier, The Musical World, 20, 25, 38; cf. ‘Roger de Chabannes’, 117.

34 Dumas, ‘Le Processionnal’, 13–26, categorises Aquitanian sources with processional content as to typology and organisation; she compares and tabulates (32–3) forty-two manuscripts. In categorising BNF lat. 1240 a Tropaire-Prosaire-Hymnaire, Huglo (RISM 2, No. F-124/2) disclaims this manuscript and others (and their antiphons) as processioners, not functioning as such in a strict sense.

35 Dumas (‘Le Processionnal’, 17–22) has classified these single-purpose collections in a comprehensive study of the fifteen Aquitanian manuscripts up to 1200 into ‘gradual’ and ‘processional’ categories by surveying their organisation.

36 BNF, lat. 903, 72v: Postquam adorata fuerit crux ab omnibus sublevent eam ministri honorifice, et in loco suo ponent eam ita canendo: A[ntiphona] Super omnia ligna [etc.]. In the order of the (pictured) Gradual of Toulouse (BL, Harl. 4951), all three closing elements appear neatly (211v), as if their format were devised as a unit for the same verso: A[ntiphona] Super omnia ligna [complete, neumed] – Rubric: ‘Next, let two priests … and next let [the priest] himself take Communion and the rest after him. Let Vespers secretly and individually be said.’ – Rubric: ‘Holy Saturday’, followed by a lengthy direction up to ‘TRACT. Cantemus Domino [etc.]’. The order for the Mass of the Presanctified for Toulouse and St Yrieix is strikingly similar according to the lengthy rubric in both graduals especially in their parallel tendency to insert rubrics in the midst of their chants (PAL 13, p. 48). Equally as iconic as the image of Fig. 2 is the familiar representation in the monastic gradual from near Bologna (I-Ra 123) of this antiphon on a stepped pedestal that forms a stairway under the beveled base of the Crucifix, cf. PAL 18. In BNF, lat. 776, two ruled lines devoid of script precede Ecce, indicating a clear break in the order that starts with the Trisagion: TROPOS ANTE CRUCEM. The corollary gradual, BNF, lat. 903 introduces Ecce, without such a break by an informative rubric: TUNC MINISTRI CRUCEM NUDANTES ET ANTE ALTARE DEFERENTES EXCLAMENT CANENDO HANC ANTIPH[ONAM].

37 Tu[m] deincebs adoretur crux et post orationem obsculetur ab omnibus. Sed dum sacerdos et priores adoraverint decantent ceteri antiphonam cum psalmo Beati inmaculati in via repetentes Ecce lignum crucis cananturque interim aliis similiter adorantibus aliae antiphonae vel versuum melodiae quae subter tenentur insertae dum omnes populus adoratam deobsculaverit crucem. I deeply appreciate the assistance of Joseph Dyer, who here interpreted the sense of the problematic verb tenentur as possibly continentur. On the next folio (209r) of this manuscript, the abundant twenty-one-antiphon continuation of the series unfolds, starting with Crucem tuam … ecce.

38 The Adoration antiphon texts in manuscripts BNF, lat. 776, 903, 909, 1120, 1121 and 1136 (the last four catalogued in RISM 2) are edited by Charlotte Roederer, ‘Eleventh-century Aquitanian Chant: Studies relating to a Local Repertory of Processional Antiphons’, 2 vols., Ph.D. diss. (Yale University, 1971), vol. 2, Appendix G (Catalog of Processional Antiphons).

39 GB-Ob Douce 222 (191r, 192r) is classified by Baroffio, Giacomo, Iter Liturgicum Italicum (Padua, 1999), 181Google Scholar; origin: Novalesa? [to?] more recent provenance: Torino? As a hymn, Crux benedicta nitet is well known. Huglo, Michel traces its origin in ‘Mélodie hispanique pour une ancienne hymne à la Croix’, Révue grégorienne, 28 (1949), 191–6, at 192–3Google Scholar.

40 I-Ra 123 is classified by Baroffio, Iter, 223; for a facsimile edition, see PAL 18.

41 I-Rc 1741, a manuscript classified by Baroffio, Iter, 226, Nonantola [to] Modena. See Borders, James, ed., Early Medieval Chants from Nonantola, Part III: Processional Chants, Recent Researches in the Music of the Middle Ages and Early Renaissance 32 (Madison, 1996)Google Scholar, text and melody transcriptions, Antiphons 39, 41–3. The text Adoramus crucem tuam with explicit est virtute exists in three melodies, all antiphons: the melody in I-Rc 1741 and a parallel source, I-Rn Sessoriana 62 (olim 1343, see next note), is mostly syllabic and partially neumatic. The text from the area of Ravenna (I-MOd O.I.7) is preceded by its Greek form, Proskynumen ton stauron su; its melody is sufficiently similar (almost constantly syllabic with only four podati, vis-à-vis nine podati or clives in the Nonantolan versions), for classification as the same basic antiphon. Its text, however, inserts est in before the final virtute, and adds (or invents) ac [three illegible syllables] Christe et hym- (97v/98r) -num dicimus tibi quia per crucem tuam redimisti mundum. Last, the Beneventan melody is entirely divergent. For a transcription, see Thomas Forrest Kelly, The Beneventan Chant (Cambridge, 1989), 196. It has a neumatic setting in the first half, melismatic in the second, without corresponding pitches – definitely an old Beneventan chant. It also has a different explicit, virtutum (Kelly, Benevantan Chant, 212). For manuscript concordances, see ibid., 261.

42 I-Rn MS. Sessoriana 62 (olim 1343), classified by Baroffio, Iter, 228, as Nonantola [to] Modena. This Greek chant and its Latin companion constitute a penultimate antiphon pair. O quando (80v–81r) lacks neumes, but is entered (without Ote) in BV 40, 9v (see Table 3d). The aforementioned antiphon, O Crux gloriosa … victus, incomplete, is the last text in the Nonantola manuscript (81r). See Borders, Early Medieval Chants, vol. 3, Antiphons 124–5.

43 I-MOd O.1.7 is a gradual-troper-sequentiary-kyriale from Forlimpopoli(?) as classified by Baroffio, Iter, 143.

44 Kelly, The Beneventan Chant, 88, simplifies the entire Old Beneventan liturgical program for Good Friday in three steps. The first comprises two functions, Terce and None, and the first of these functions – at both hours – is the Adoration ‘for which three bilingual antiphons are provided’. For the repertory of Greek antiphons interspersed in Latin manuscripts, see ibid., 208, Table 5.4.

45 Note the comparison of the Beneventan ordo (BAV, lat. 10673), to the Ambrosian ‘Beroldus’ ordinal of Milan in Kelly, The Beneventan Chant, 185, note 48. Although the former source mentions ‘antiphons with psalms’ at Sext (same as Terce), neither recognises Ecce lignum. Crucem tuam, in its Beneventan form with neither ecce nor quia, makes the principal change on its third line, where its non-Gregorian text, adoremus, reflects the Adoration.

46 See the order in BAV Vat. lat. 10673 in PAL 14, 296–7 with a chart on which I-BV 33 (X-XIc.), BAV, lat. 10673 (saec. XI), I-BV 40 (saec. XI) and I-BV 39 (saec. XI ex.) are compared. See also the facsimile editions of BAV Vat. lat. 10673 in PAL 14, I-BV 33 in PAL 20, and I-BV 40 in Albarosa, Nino and Turco, Alberto, eds., Benevento Biblioteca Capitolare 40: Graduale (Padua, 1991) fols. 9v, 10r, 10v and 11vGoogle Scholar. Whatever the consequence of such a Beneventan-Gregorian interchange, the bilingual antiphon Panta ta etni/Omnes gentes, rendered when recessing from the cross replica to the choir at the end of the day, is not only ‘processional’ but decidedly Beneventan (Kelly, The Beneventan Chant, 89) and thus not entered among Gregorian-‘neo-Beneventan’ antiphons studied here.

47 I-Nn VI.G.34, classified by Baroffio, Iter, 158, a processioner-troper(?) [to] Troia. Janka Szendrei, in a paper ‘“O crux viride” – ein seltenes Proprium für die Heilig-Kreuz-Messe’ presented at the 12th Meeting of Cantus Planus, Lillafüred, Hungary, 2004, transcribed a version of this antiphon found in a eleventh/twelfth-century source from Bologna. I am grateful to her for a copy of her handout with this example.

48 CH-CO Bodmer 74, fascimile edition, Max Lütolf, ed., Das Graduale von Santa Cecilia in Trastevere, 2 vols. (Cologny – Genève, 1987), vol. 2, fols. lxxvi–lxxvii, and BAV Vat. lat. 5319, transcription Margareta Landwehr-Melnicki, ed., Die Gesänge des altrömischen Graduale: Vat, lat, 5319, Einführung von Bruno Stäblein, Monumenta Monodica Medii Aevi 2 (Kassel, 1970), antiphons 515–16; Trisagion and Improperia, 517–21.

49 The third Roman gradual, BAV San Pietro F. 22, dating from the thirteenth century, contains only the incipit of this antiphon; the two Roman antiphoners, BAV San Pietro B. 79, and BL, Add. 29988, do include the other two Roman Adoration antiphons, Crucem tuam … ecce and Salva nos Christe. See the inventory published by Edward Nowacki, ‘Studies on the Office Antiphons of the Old Roman Manuscripts’, Ph.D. diss. (Brandeis University 1980), Appendix III, 605–50.

50 For Ex. 1, I transcribe the manuscript I-Rc 1741 (Nonantola), 151r, from the facsimile. See Vecchi, Giuseppe, ed., Troparium Sequentiarium Nonantulanum (Monumenta Lyrica Medii AEvi Italica, I. Latina), (Modena, 1955)Google Scholar, the melody of which is identical at the upper fifth (avoiding the B flat). Cf. Borders, Early Medieval Chants, Antiphon 39. The Neo-Beneventan version comes from I-BV 40, facsimile (see note 46); it compares favourably to I-BV 34 (PAL 15). The Roman version from the Bodmer manuscript facsimile (76r) compares favourably to BAV, Vat. lat. 5319 (transcribed by Landwehr-Melnicki, Die Gesänge des altrömischen Graduale, 516). Other versions, such as in the Gregorian manuscript I-MOd O.I.7, unsuitable for this comparison owing to an anomaly at its finalis (E, appearing to clash with a psalmody in mode VI, F), are variants of the melodies shown. Crucem tuam … quia apportions fifty notes Gregorian, against forty-seven in the Roman, revealing very little contrast. Salva nos, however, transmits a reversed proportion: thirty-one in the Gregorian against forty-one in the Roman.

51 Kelly, The Beneventan Chant, 181.