No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Ars Antiqua motets in fourteenth-century Italy: liturgical priorities, style and notation in Bodleian, lat. liturg. e. 42
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 08 April 2024
Abstract
The motets in the fourteenth-century liturgical manuscript Oxford, Bodleian, lat. liturg. e. 42 have, despite some sidelong glances, not been the subject of any concentrated study since F. Alberto Gallo introduced them in 1970. This article proposes a date for the copying of these motets in the first few decades of the fourteenth century and demonstrates that they have much to add to ongoing debates about stylistic and notational change between the Ars Antiqua and Ars Nova styles. First, they underline the importance of considering polyphony within the context of the whole book that transmits it: e. 42's motets work together with its monophonic chant to emphasise a set of feasts which were particularly important for the compilers of this manuscript within their institutional context. Second, these motets act as an important reminder that narratives of fourteenth-century stylistic change must be heterogeneous: the wide-ranging mix of musical styles found in the motets of e. 42 add to an emerging picture of early fourteenth-century Ars Antiqua collections in which such stylistic eclecticism is a common feature. Third, e. 42's notation and its connections to that of other manuscripts enrich and complicate narratives of notational change in this period. Parallels for e. 42's ligature use can be found in a temporally and geographically diverse set of manuscripts. Its notation of semibreves, however, resembles that of a smaller group of manuscripts from the early fourteenth century and provides an important witness for the changes to semibreve rhythm at that time.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press
Footnotes
Grateful thanks go to all who read, engaged with and improved this work, including Catherine A. Bradley, Margaret Bent, Sean Curran, Karen Desmond, Mark Everist, Elizabeth Eva Leach, Joseph W. Mason and all the participants at the conference ‘Old and New: Musical Sources and Debates in the Decades around 1300’, at the Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters in May 2022. Thanks also to the anonymous reviewers, whose encouraging critiques did much to sharpen my argument. This work was completed with the support of a Government of Ireland Postdoctoral Fellowship from the Irish Research Council.
The following manuscript sigla are used:
Ba – Bamberg, Staatsbibliothek, Lit. 115
e. 42 – Oxford, Bodleian Library, lat. liturg. e. 42
F – Florence, Biblioteca Medicea-Laurenziana, Pluteus 29.1
Florence Laudario – Florence, Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale, II.I.122, olim Banco Rari 18
Hu – Burgos, Monasterio de las Huelgas, 11
LoD – London, British Library, Add. 27630
Mo – Montpellier, Bibliothèque interuniversitaire, section médecine, H. 196
Tu – Turin, Biblioteca Reale, Vari. 42
References
1 Gallo, F. Alberto, ‘Mottetti del primo trecento in un missale di Biella (Codice Lowe)’, L'Ars nova italiana, 3 (1970), 215–45Google Scholar. As here, e. 42 is often known in older literature as the ‘Lowe missal’, or similar, after its owner E.A. Lowe. See Eizenhöfer, Leo, ‘Missale Bugellense (Codex Lowe): Ein Votiv-Vollmissale des XIV./XV. Jahrhunderts aus Biella in Oberitalien’, Traditio, 17 (1961), 371–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar. A description is given in RISM B/IV/IV: Kurt von Fischer and Max Lütolf, Handschriften mit mehrstimmiger Musik des 14., 15. und 16. Jahrhunderts (Munich, 1972), 1170–2. Catalogue entries are also found at www.diamm.ac.uk/sources/732/#/ (accessed 14 December 2022) and https://medieval.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/catalog/manuscript_6506 (accessed 14 December 2022).
2 Gallo, ‘Mottetti del primo trecento’, 217.
3 An early example of the ‘whole book’ approach is Margaret Bent and Andrew Wathey, eds., Fauvel Studies: Allegory, Chronicle, Music, and Image in Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, MS français 146 (Oxford, 1997).
4 David Catalunya has traced this fourteenth-century life of the Ars Antiqua in Spain: see, for example, ‘Medieval Polyphony in the Cathedral of Sigüenza: A New Identification of a Musical Example Quoted in the Anonymous Treatise of St Emmeram (1279)’, Studi musicali, 5 (2014), 41–82.
5 The notation of e. 42 therefore interacts with recent debates about the pace and nature of notational change in Karen Desmond, Music and the Moderni, 1300–1350: The ars nova in Theory and Practice (Cambridge, 2018); Zayaruznaya, Anna, ‘Old, New, and Newer Still in Book 7 of the Speculum musice’, Journal of the American Musicological Society, 73 (2020), 95–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Bent, Margaret, ‘Artes novae’, Music and Letters, 103 (2022), 729–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Desmond, Karen, ‘The Indicative Mood: A Response to Margaret Bent’, Music and Letters, 104 (2023), 114–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
6 The ex libris reads ‘Iste liber est capelle sancti Georgii site in ecclesia sancti Stephani de Bugella’. This appears twice on fol. 143r; once in what Eizenhöfer designates as a fourteenth-century hand (red ink) and once in a fifteenth-century hand (black ink). The modern whereabouts of this manuscript are difficult to trace securely beyond E.A. Lowe's purchase of it in Turin in 1939. See Eizenhöfer, ‘Missale Bugellense’, 371, 375.
7 Gallo, ‘Mottetti del primo trecento’, 216.
8 Harrison, Frank, ‘Benedicamus, Conductus, Carol: A Newly-Discovered Source’, Acta Musicologica, 37 (1965), 35–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 36 and 43, classifies this as a troped Benedicamus domino followed by a troped Deo gratias, a fitting and practical beginning to a Mass book at an institution dedicated to Stephen.
9 See Eizenhöfer, ‘Missale Bugellense’, 375.
10 This size makes e. 42 closely comparable to manuscripts including Tu (230mm × 162mm) and the Salzburg fragment (217 × 175; see n. 57), with Ba (263 × 186) and Mo (192 × 136) sitting either side of it. For marks of use, see fols. 24v–25r, 41v–42r, 111v–112r, 114r.
11 These columns are unequal, measuring approximately 69mm and 61mm. On recto pages, the wider column is on the right; on verso pages, it is on the left.
12 For possible dating implications of these six-line staves, see n. 67. As Bradley has shown, six-line staves are used exceptionally in Ba to accommodate a motet with unusually large melodic leaps: Bradley, Catherine A., ‘Perspectives for Lost Polyphony and Red Notation around 1300: Medieval Motet and Organum Fragments in Stockholm’, Early Music History, 41 (2022), 1–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 85.
13 Eizenhöfer, ‘Missale Bugellense’, 373–4. This main scribe, whose work Eizenhöfer dates very broadly to the fourteenth century, copied the material on fols. 1r–127v, then fol. 143r. A second hand, dated by Eizenhöfer to the end of the fourteenth or the beginning of the fifteenth century, copied fols. 128r–139r; this later layer of copying is not considered in the present article. Multiple hands filled in the space on fols. 139r–142v.
14 For a full analysis of the gathering structure, see ibid., 372–3.
15 The choices of feast and notational similarities are discussed in detail in the following text. In decorative terms, the second notated section and fols. 4–111 both use red and blue pen-flourished initials in similar styles to mark major divisions, while minor sections are signalled by letters filled in with yellow ink. Although there is some rubbing on the opening recto of the second notated section (fol. 112r), this seems to be an indication of heavy use, as found elsewhere in the middle of gatherings (fols. 24v–25r; 114r).
16 Gallo, ‘Mottetti del primo trecento’, 217.
17 Rubin, Miri, Corpus Christi: The Eucharist in Late Medieval Culture (Cambridge, 1991)Google Scholar, especially ch. 3; Walters, Barbara R., Corrigan, Vincent and Ricketts, Peter T., The Feast of Corpus Christi (University Park, PA, 2021)Google Scholar.
18 Mathiesen, Thomas J., ‘“The Office of the New Feast of Corpus Christi” in the Regimen Animarum at Brigham Young University’, Journal of Musicology, 2 (1983), 13–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
19 On the scholarship that led to these conclusions, see Walters et al., The Feast of Corpus Christi, 58–77.
20 Gy, Pierre-Marie, ‘L'office du corpus christi et s. Thomas d'Aquin: état d'une recherche’, Revue des sciences philosophiques et théologiques, 64 (1980), 491–507Google Scholar, at 498.
21 Ibid., 498.
22 Dondaine, Antoine and Peters, J., ‘Jacques de Tonengo et Giffredus d'Anagni, auditeurs de Saint Thomas’, Archivum Fratrum Praedicatorum, 29 (1959), 52–72Google Scholar.
23 For Italian manuscripts which added Corpus Christi at a comparable date, see Rubin, Corpus Christi, 196–7.
24 Fol. 7r was first replaced by prayers in a miniscule hand, then fol. 6v by a cursive hand. See Eizenhöfer, ‘Missale Bugellense’, 384–6.
25 On scribal hands, see n. 13 and ibid., 374.
26 Friedrich Ludwig, Repertorium organorum recentioris et motetorum vetustissimi stili., ed. Luther A. Dittmer, 2 vols. in 3 (Brooklyn, NY, 1964–78); Friedrich Gennrich, Bibliographie der ältesten französischen und lateinischen Motetten, Summa musicae Medii Aevi 2 (Darmstadt, 1957); Hendrik van der Werf, Integrated Directory of Organa, Clausulae and Motets of the Thirteenth Century (Rochester, NY, 1989). The first two motets were, however, edited in Kurt von Fischer and F. Alberto Gallo, eds., Italian Sacred Music, Polyphonic Music of the Fourteenth Century 12 (Monaco, 1976), 123–8.
27 For a similar ‘whole book’ approach, see Sean Curran, ‘Writing, Performance, and Devotion in the Thirteenth-Century Motet: The “La Clayette” Manuscript’, in Manuscripts and Medieval Song: Inscription, Performance, Context, ed. Elizabeth Eva Leach and Helen Deeming, Music in Context (Cambridge, 2015), 193–220.
28 The upper voices of monotextual motets are typically notated in score as, for example, in F and Hu.
29 Schlager, Karlheinz, ‘Ave vivens hostia – Von der Meditatio zum Prozessionsgesang’, Kirchenmusikalisches Jahrburch, 85 (2001), 127–34Google Scholar, at 128.
30 Fischer and Gallo, Italian Sacred Music, 201, also interpret this ‘organum’ label as suggesting a pre-existing melody. Alternatively, it could recall the meaning of organum as polyphony more generally, ensuring that the reader understands all three voice parts as belonging together. If this voice, with its song-like, tight tonal organisation, is a quotation, I have been unable to find a match in a wide selection of trouvère songs and laudas or in the liturgical melodies edited in Walters et al., The Feast of Corpus Christi. Neither does it match the melody for Ave vivens hostia that became popular in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries; see Schlager, ‘Ave vivens hostia’, 129.
31 The scribe clearly had to adapt the layout of this folio, using black ink to fill in the gap between the lowest staves (in red) of the two columns so that the tenor could be written across the width of the page. On Deus in adiutorium as an opening piece for motet collections, see Maschke, Eva M., ‘Deus in adiutorium Revisited: Sources and Contexts’, in The Montpellier Codex: The Final Fascicle: Contents, Contexts, Chronologies, ed. Bradley, Catherine A. and Desmond, Karen (Woodbridge, 2018), 100–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Opening conductus-style Deus in adiutorium settings are found in fascicles 1 (fol. 1r) and 8 (fol. 350r) of Mo, probably originating in the 1290s and 1310s, respectively, as well as in the motet collection of Tu (fols. Dv and Er). On datings for these sources, see Catherine A. Bradley and Karen Desmond, ‘Introduction’, in The Montpellier Codex, ed. Bradley and Desmond, 1–10.
32 Florence, Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale, II.I.122, olim Banco Rari 18. Blake Wilson and Nello Barbieri, The Florence Laudario: An Edition of Florence, Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale, Banco Rari 18, Recent Researches in the Music of the Middle Ages and Early Renaissance 29 (Madison, WI, 1995), xiv (on date of collection), 124–5 (for edition).
33 Helen Deeming, ‘Music and Contemplation in the Twelfth-Century Dulcis Jesu memoria’, Journal of the Royal Musical Association, 139 (2014), 1–39, at 5–6. This text was later split up to form the hymns for the Holy Name of Jesus; ibid., 2. In e. 42, the beginning of the text is spelled ‘Dulcis Jh[es]u memoria’. This manuscript spelling is reflected in Ex. 7, but elsewhere the incipit of the triplum is regularised to ‘Dulcis Jesu memoria’.
34 Worcester, Cathedral Library, Additional 68, frag. xix, fol. a1r–v. The beginning of the cantilena is lost and the first extant piece of text is ‘merenti modo scicienti’. For images, see William John Summers and Peter Lefferts, English Thirteenth-Century Polyphony: A Facsimile Edition, Early English Church Music 57 (London, 2016), plates 302–3. It is edited (as ‘…merenti, modo furienti’, O 47) in Gordon Anderson, ed., Notre-Dame and Related Conductus, 9. Three-Part Conductus in Related Sources (Henryville, PA, 1986), 111–12.
35 Matthias Standke, ‘Die deutschen Übertragungen des Hymnus Jesu dulcis memoria: Überlegungen zu Umfang und Strophenfolge im Spannungsfeld von Liturgie und Volkssprache’, in Hymnus, Sequenz, Antiphon: Fallstudien zur volkssprachlichen Aneignung liturgischer Lieder im deutschen Mittelalter, ed. Andreas Kraß and Christina Ostermann (Berlin, 2019), 37–64, at 39.
36 Deeming, ‘Music and Contemplation’, 7–9.
37 On Jesu nostra redemptio and eucharistic adoration, see Maurey, Yossi, ‘Heresy, Devotion and Memory: The Meaning of Corpus Christi in Saint-Martin of Tours’, Acta musicologica, 78 (2006), 159–196Google Scholar, at 183–5; Roe, Charles, ‘An Anglo-Norman Treatise on the Mass: An Edition’, Leeds Medieval Studies, 1 (2021), 31–48Google Scholar, at 42–3.
38 In e. 42's notation of the chant Alleluia. Dulce lignum dulces clavos, the melisma is texted as sustinere, which is usual for this version of the alleluia in liturgical chant manuscripts, whereas portare is more often found in Marian contrafact texts. Sustinere is very uncommon as a label for this melisma in motet manuscripts. See Dolores Pesce, ‘Beyond Glossing: The Old Made New in Mout me fu grief/Robin m'aime/Portare’, in Hearing the Motet: Essays on the Motet of the Middle Ages and Renaissance, ed. Dolores Pesce (New York, 1997), 28–51, at 38–40, 46–8.
39 In the treatise, the incipit reads ‘Cruci cruci domini’. The incipit as found in e. 42 (‘cruci truci’) seems to offer more sense: ‘Let praise be given to the harsh cross of the Lord’. See ‘Ars musicae mensurabilis secundum Franconem’, in Petrus Picardus, Ars motettorum compilata breviter, Anonymous, Ars musicae mensurabilis secundum Franconem, and Anonymous, Ars musicae mensurabilis artis Antiquae, ed. Gilbert Reaney and Andre Gilles, Corpus scriptorum de musica 15 ([n.p.], 1971), 33–60, at 40. On the possible attribution of the treatise to Petrus de Cruce, see Margaret Bent, Magister Jacobus de Ispania, Author of the Speculum musicae, Royal Musical Association Monographs 28 (Farnham, 2015), 36–8. A condensed version of the treatise, without musical examples, is found in Uppsala, Univeritetsbiblioteket C. 55 (fol. 22r–v).
40 On these so-called ‘hairy longs’, see Desmond, Karen, ‘Did Vitry Write an Ars vetus et nova?’, Journal of Musicology, 32 (2015), 441–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 449–55.
41 The texts of this motet are found, with different music, in a motet in Oxford, New College, 362, fol. 83r. See Peter Lefferts, The Motet in England in the Fourteenth Century, Studies in Musicology 94 (Ann Arbor, MI, 1986), 294–5. For the dating of Hu, see David Catalunya, ‘Medieval Polyphony’, 51. On LoD, see Wolfgang Dömling, Die Handschrift London, British Museum, Add. 27630 (LoD), 2 vols., Erbe deutscher Musik 52–3 (Kassel, 1972). On Trier 322/1994, see Rudolf Ewerhart, Die Handschrift 322/1994 der Stadtbibliothek Trier als musikalische Quelle, Kölner Beiträge zur Musikforschung (Regensburg, 1955).
42 The tenor melisma is taken from a responsory for the Nativity of Mary, Solem justitiae regem V. Cernere divinum (O19).
43 The tenor only takes up a small space due to e. 42's normal practice of only writing out one of the four cursus.
44 On layout in motet manuscripts, see John Haines and Stefan Udell, ‘Motets, Manuscript Culture, Mise-en-page’, in A Critical Companion to Medieval Motets, ed. Jared Hartt (Woodbridge, 2018), 175–92; Oliver Huck, ‘Double Motet Layouts in the Montpellier Codex and Contemporaneous Libri motetorum’, in The Montpellier Codex, ed. Bradley and Desmond, 90–9.
45 In both solutions, one note from the upper-voice transcription as given in Example 3 has been changed, as marked by asterisks in Examples 4 and 5. Given the difficulty of reading the stave lines, the transcription in Example 3 and the altered versions in Examples 4 and 5 all represent plausible readings of the visible notes.
46 In Example 6, semibreves are edited in a duple rhythm, matching the theory developed below. The texts in all examples use the light textual emendations suggested in Gallo, ‘Mottetti del primo trecento’, 223–5.
47 Catherine A. Bradley, Authorship and Identity in Late Thirteenth-Century Motets, Royal Musical Association Monographs 39 (London, 2022), 79–81. Bradley also emphasises (76–7, 81) that Jacobus reports having heard an earlier motet by Franco of Cologne which contained groups of more than three semibreves. See also Bradley, ‘Perspectives for Lost Polyphony’, 20–6.
48 Margaret Dobby, ‘Repetitions, Rhythmical Evolution, and Rhetoric in the Montpellier Codex’, in The Montpellier Codex, ed. Bradley and Desmond, 254–68, at 255–61. As Iam / Iam is not extant in full in e. 42, no edition is provided here.
49 For a discussion of this group in the context of Mo 8, see Mark Everist, ‘Montpellier 8: Anatomy of …’, in The Montpellier Codex, ed. Bradley and Desmond, 13–31, at 21–4.
50 For the Worcester setting of Dulcis Jesu, see Summers and Lefferts, English Thirteenth-Century Polyphony, plates 261–2. Dulcis Jesu has a third setting, found in the Florence Laudario (fol. 150r) and in a late addition to Ba (fol. 80v). On the likelihood of this addition being made in Italy, see Michael Scott Cuthbert, ‘Trecento Fragments and Polyphony beyond the Codex’, Ph.D. diss., Harvard University (2006), 354.
51 Dulcis Jesu / Jesu nostra is edited here in the third rhythmic mode: when two breves fill up a perfect long, the second is twice as long as the first. Some early fourteenth-century musicians may have used what Marchettus of Padua calls the second imperfect mode, in which a long splits into two equal breves: Marchettus de Padua, Pomerium, ed. Joseph Vecchi, Corpus scriptorium de musica 6 ([Rome], 1961), 205.
52 Fuller, Sarah, ‘Discant and the Theory of Fifthing’, Acta Musicologica, 50 (1978), 241–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The motetus-tenor discant in Dulcis Jesu / Jesu nostra makes larger use of unisons than the principles outlined by Fuller. Some of the few notated examples of fifthing appear in Paris, BnF lat. 15129, which also contains the treatise that cites the motetus of O crux / Cruci by the incipit only found in e. 42. See n. 39.
53 In Example 8, semibreves are edited in a triple rhythm. For differing interpretations of some passages (especially perfs. 18–22), see Gallo, ‘Mottetti del primo trecento’, 227–9.
54 Sanders, Ernest, ‘Peripheral Polyphony of the 13th Century’, Journal of the American Musicological Society, 17 (1964), 261–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 271, sees pre-existent liturgical texts as characteristic of ‘peripheral’ continental polyphony. His case is undermined by Pesce, Dolores, ‘A Revised View of the Thirteenth-Century Latin Double Motet’, Journal of the American Musicological Society, 40 (1987), 405–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 421–3. The use of such texts is slightly more common in English sources: Lefferts, The Motet in England, 193–4.
55 In the following lists, voice parts that use pre-existent texts are underlined. Mo 4: Ave beatissima civitas/ Ave maria gratia plena/ [Ave maris stella] (fols. 93v–94r), Salve mater misericordie/ Salve regina/ Flos filius [eius] (fols. 109v–110v).
56 Mo 7: Anima mea liquefacta est/ Descendi in hortum meum/ Alma (fol. 321r–v), Salve virgo nobilis/ Verbum caro factus est/ Et veritate (fols. 322v–323v), Ave regina celorum/ Alma redemptoris/ Alma (fols. 323v–324v). Mo 8: Virginale decus/ Descendi in hortum meum/ Alma (fols. 379v–381r). On two examples in the Stockholm fragments, see Bradley, ‘Perspectives for Lost Polyphony’, 57–8 and 69–71.
57 Jeffery, Peter, ‘A Four-Part In seculum Hocket and a Mensural Sequence in an Unknown Fragment’, Journal of the American Musicological Society, 37 (1984), 1–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Since Jeffery's article, the fragment has been lifted from its host volume, Salzburg, Universitätsbibliothek, M II 345: Catalunya, ‘Medieval Polyphony’, 66.
58 For editions, see Wilson and Barbieri, The Florence Laudario, 120–7.
59 Jeffery, ‘A Four-Part In seculum Hocket’; Catalunya, ‘Medieval Polyphony’, 65–7.
60 Jeffery, ‘A Four-Part In seculum Hocket’, 35–6; Catalunya, ‘Medieval Polyphony’, 51.
61 Gallo, ‘Mottetti del primo trecento’, 219.
62 See, for example, fols. 112r and 114r.
63 This characteristic of Salzburg's notation was noted, but not connected to e. 42, in Jeffery, ‘A Four-Part In seculum Hocket’, 8–9. On the Dijon hockets, see Wolinski, Mary and Haggh, Barbara, ‘Two 13th-Century Hockets on Manere Recovered’, Early Music, 38 (2010), 43–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Images are available at www.diamm.ac.uk/sources/205/#/ (accessed 19 July 2022).
64 The Dijon version of this motet uses a notation broadly consistent with Ars Antiqua practice, chiefly using longs and breves. It is also found in St Maurice, Abbey of St Maurice, 4 (fol. 123v), in an updated notation utilising mostly breves and semibreves. See Elizabeth Eva Leach, ‘A Concordance for an Early Fourteenth-Century Motet: Exaudi melodiam/Alme Deus/TENOR Revisited’, Musicology, Medieval to Modern, 23 August 2011, https://eeleach.blog/2011/08/23/a-concordance-for-an-early-fourteenth-century-motet/ (accessed 2 November 2022). Dijon 35 was in use at Cîteaux in the thirteenth century and has a fifteenth-century binding, see Barbara Haggh, ‘Motets on Flyleaves Binding Manuscripts from Citeaux and Other Medieval Music in Dijon’, in Musikalische Quellen – Quellen zur Musikgeschichte: Festschrift für Martin Staehelin zum 65. Geburtstag, ed. Ulrich Konrad (Göttingen, 2002), 9–23, at 14.
65 On LoD, see Dömling, Die Handschrift London.
66 Jeffery, ‘A Four-Part In seculum Hocket’, 39–45. Catalunya, ‘Medieval Polyphony’, 66 argues for similar instituational origins for the Salzburg fragment and the Dijon 447 fragments. In Wolinski and Haggh, ‘Two Thirteenth-Century Hockets’, Haagh suggests Parisian links for the Dijon fragment (at 53), while Wolinski doubts that the decoration of the leaves is Parisian (at 52).
67 Other notational indicators of dating do not speak against this theory. The six-line staves that e. 42 uses for its polyphony are very common in Italian manuscripts of the later fourteenth-century, but their early history is uncertain. The manuscript Reggio Emilia, Biblioteca Municipale, C 408, for example, has polyphony on six-line staves on an inserted bifolio. Paola Casoli has suggested that the main corpus of this manuscript originated in the early thirteenth century, but there is no consensus over the dating of these later additions. See Paola Casoli, ‘L'Innario del codice C. 408 della Biblioteca Municipale di Reggio Emilia’, Ph.D. diss., University of Bologna (1985), 59–60; Scott Cuthbert, ‘Trecento Fragments’, 418–28. The custodes used in e. 42, meanwhile, are generally in the shape of a rhombus with an ascender emerging from the bottom right diagonal; this shape is also found in the notation (on five-line staves) of Marchettus of Padua's Ave regina caelorum/ Mater innocentie/ Ite missa est in Oxford, Bodleian Library, Canon. Class. Lat. 112, an Italian manuscript which bears the date 1325. For images, see www.diamm.ac.uk/sources/501/#/ (accessed 18 July 2022). Scott Cuthbert, ‘Trecento Fragments’, 121, n. 36, has suggested that this music was a later addition.
68 A dot is also used in the triplum of Ave vivens to define a long unit (triplum perf. 21).
69 As noted by Jeffery, ‘A Four-Part In seculum Hocket’, 30–2.
70 On Vitry's authorship of the lost treatise from which extant versions derived, see Desmond, ‘Did Vitry write an Ars vetus et nova?’.
71 Alternatively, someone may have erased the body of a ligature with opposite propriety while keeping its upstem, which then became the stem on the first semibreve.
72 I therefore understand this notation not as a mistake, but as ‘pragmatic notation’: see Nicolas Bell, El Códice musical de Las Huelgas Reales de Burgos, Colección scriptorium 7 (Madrid, 1997), 76.
73 Ibid., 93, 104.
74 Jeffery, ‘A Four-Part In seculum Hocket’, 32.
75 This ligature has been erased and rewritten to fix a third-based pitch error, but appears to have had the same shape in the original notation.
76 Jeremy Yudkin, ed. and trans., De musica mensurata: The Anonymous of St. Emmeram (Bloomington, IN, 1990), 166–7.
77 The only one-breve reading of the ligature of which I am aware (in the fragment from Troyes, Médiathèque Jacques-Chirac, 1949) is treated as a scribal error in David Catalunya, ‘Nuns, Polyphony, and a Liégeois Cantor: New Light on the Las Huelgas “Solmization Song”’, Journal of the Alamire Foundation, 9 (2017), 89–133, at 96–7.
78 For the date of Pomerium, see Jan Herlinger, ‘Music Theory of the Fourteenth and Early Fifteenth Centuries’, in Music as Concept and Practice in the Late Middle Ages, ed. Reinhard Strohm and Bonnie J. Blackburn, New Oxford History of Music 3 (Oxford, 2001), 244–300, at 279 n. 80. Herlinger prefers Oliver Strunk's c.1318–19 date over Vecchi's 1321–6 (Marchettus, Pomerium, ed. Vecchi, 25–7).
79 Marchettus, Pomerium, ed. Vecchi, 168–9.
80 Alternatively, the reviser may have disliked the use of a three-note ligature with opposite propriety as filling only one breve, choosing to replace them. If so, this was relatively unsuccessful, as numerous such ligatures remain.
81 While the first of these passages is difficult to read in such a rhythm, the second (triplum perf. 43) can be read as such.
82 Along with the possible ‘hairy longs’ in the tenor of Iam/ Iam (see n. 40), this might suggest that the notational world of e. 42 was more connected with developments reported in theory than its somewhat informal impression would initially suggest.
83 See, for example, the essays in Deeming and Leach, eds, Manuscripts and Medieval Song.
84 This focus on small collections, especially libelli, is also suggested by Bradley, ‘Perspectives for Lost Polyphony’, 86–90.
85 On the extent of the Latin motet repertoire in England, see Bent, Margaret, Hartt, Jared C. and Lefferts, Peter, The Dorset Rotulus: Contextualizing and Reconstructing the Early English Motet (Woodbridge, 2021), ch. 2Google Scholar.
86 Catalunya, ‘Medieval Polyphony’; Catalunya, ‘Nuns, Polyphony, and a Liégeois Cantor’.
87 On these motets (Psallat chorus/ Eximie pater and Si nichil/ In precio), see Bent, Margaret, ‘The Motet Collection of San Lorenzo 2211 (SL) and the Composer Hubertus de Salinis’, in The End of the Ars Nova in Italy: The San Lorenzo Palimpsest and Related Repertories, ed. Calvia, Antonio et al., Tradizione musicale (Florence, 2020), 43–70Google Scholar. A comparable case is found in the motet O Maria virgo davitica/ O Maria maris stella, on which see Bent, Margaret, Bologna Q15: The Making and Remaking of a Musical Manuscript (Lucca, 2008), 1: 217Google Scholar, no. 227.