1 These comparisons were of Ambrosian and Franco-Roman counterparts. I will mention only a few: ‘Introits and Ingressae – Milan and Rome: The Elaboration of Chant Melodies, the Operation of Musical Memory’, Plainsong & Medieval Music, 19 (2010), 89–122; ‘The Adoption of the Roman Respond Gradual in Milan’, in ‘Quod ore cantas corde credas’: Studi in onore di Giacomo Baroffio Dahnk, ed. Leandra Scappaticci (Città del Vaticano, 2013), 239–55; Offertorium and Offerenda: Kinship and Structure (Ottawa, 2012); ‘Rome, Milan, and the Confractoria’, Papers Read at the 15th Meeting of the IMS Study Group Cantus Planus, Dobogókö, Hungary, 2009, August 23–29, ed. Barbara Haggh-Huglo and Debra Lacoste, 3 vols. (Lions Bay, 2013), 1: 51–76.

2 Octaves are differentiated with lower- and upper-case letters and added signs (G, A, c, d, c', d', etc.).

3 By Gregorian I mean Roman melodies and practices as adapted and expanded by the Franks.

4 In some earlier publications, a letter that indicated where successive syllables were sung on the same pitch was given in italic. My thinking was that when so written it might identify an underlying reciting-tone. But such ‘recitation’ in a chant is almost never limited to a single pitch, and the complication of italic letters proved pointless.

5 McKinnon, James, The Advent Project: The Later Seventh-Century Creation of the Roman Mass Proper (Berkely and Los Angeles, 2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 I goes without saying that some melodies exhibit irregularities. These can be reasonably explained, but perhaps it needs to be said that the melodies have not been, nor can be, forced into a Procrustean melodic framework.

7 In antiphons such as Deus judex iustus for Tuesdays at Prime, and in responsories such as Exsurge domine for Wednesdays (these are the complete texts), the texts are too short to require repetitions of pitch-series. Antiphonale monasticum, Vatican Edition 1934 (available online), 12, 14.

8 In the Dies irae, for example, the three melodies for stanzas 1–6 are repeated for 7–12 and 13–17 (the last line is not paired).

9 I have used the terms schema and schemata to emphasise that these arrangements of the pitch-letters are artificial constructs and not to be seen as transcriptions of the melodies.

10 Déri, Balázs, ‘The Coptic Psalmos’, Papers Read at the 15th Meeting of the IMS Study Group Cantus Planus Dobogókö/Hungary, 2009, Institute of Mediaeval Music, Musicological Studies 100/101 (Ottawa, 2013), 163–92Google Scholar.

11 This way of marking the major divisions in the text is ideal, and no doubt the normal practice, but failures in the rote transmission of the melodies have sometimes obscured the governance of the finalis. Examples can even be found; for example, the antiphons A bimatu et infra and Ambulabunt mecum in albi, which were discussed (c.900) in the Commemoratio brevis – antiphons that have the same melody, but end on different pitches.

12 Offertory verses were dropped centuries before the age of printed books, but they have been edited and published by Karl Ott, Offertoriale sive versus offertoriorum (Paris, 1935).

13 The same chants are also available in earlier Vatican editions, beginning in 1908.