unmoioAL
299
LITUBOiaU.
of Nicholas Menard (P&ris, 1642). Probst maintains
that this is rather to be considered a Gelasian book,
reformed according to the Gregorian (Die <es. Sakr.,
pp. 165-0). In any case the elements are here com-
pfetely fused. The original book sent by Adrian to
Charlemagne is easily distinguished from the addi-
tions. The first who began to supplement Adrian's
book from other sources (Pamelius sa3r8 it was a cer-
tain Prankish Abbot named Grimold) was a conscien-
tious person and carefully noted where his additions
b^in. At the end of the original book he adds a
note, a frefatiuncula beginning with the word Huo-
usque: S6 far (Hucusaue) uie preceding book of
Sacraments is certainly tnat edited by the noly Pope
Gregory." Then come (in Pamelius's edition) two
supplements, one (according to Pamelius) by Abbot
Gnmold and the other by Alcuin. The supplements
vary considerably in the codices. Eventually their
matter became incorporated in the original book. But
in ^e earlier versions we may take the first p>art, down
to the prefatiunculaf as being the book sent by Ad-
rian. How far it is that of Gregory I is another Ques-
tion. This book then has three parts: (1) The Ordi-
narv of the Mass ; (2) the Propers for the year beginning
with Christmas Eve. They follow the ecclesiastical
year; the feasts of saints (days of the month in the
civil year) are incorporated in their approximate
places in this. The Roman Stations are noted. There
are still no Masses for the Simdays after Epiphany
and Pentecost; (3) the prayers for ordinations. There
are no votive Biases or requiems. For these reasons
Mgr Duchesne considers that the ** Sacramentary is
the "pope's book", that is the book used by the pope
himself tor the public papal services (Origines du Culte
Chretien, p. 117). Is its attribution to St. Gregory I
(690-604) correct? That Gregory did much to reform
ihe lituigy is certain. A constant tradition ascribes
such a work to him, as to Gelasius. John the Deacon
(ei^th century) in his life of Grc^ry expresses this
tradition: " He collected the Sacramentary of Gelasius
in one book" (we have seen that the two sets of
Propers in the Gelasianum are fused together in the
Gregorianum), leaving out much (this too is veri-
fied by comparing the books; numbers of Gelasian
Prefaces ana ritual elaborations are omitted in the
Gregorian book), "changing little, adding some-
thing " (II, xvii) . Pope Adrian himself, in sending the
book to Charlemagne, says that it is composed "by
our holy predecessor, the divinely speaking Pope
Gregory" (letter in Jafif6, "Cod. Carol.", p. 274).
That the essential foundation of this " Sacramentar\'^ "
goes back to St. Gregory, indeed to long before his
time, is certain. Nor need we doubt tlmt he made
such changes as are claimed for him by his biographer,
and that Uiese changes stand in this book. But it is
not his work untouched. It has additions made since
his time, for instance his own feast (12 March, in
Migne's edition, P. L., LXXVIII, 61) and other
feasts not kept at Rome before the seventh century
(Duchesne, op. cit., 118). Evidently then the book
sent by Pope Adrian has gone through the inevitable
development; succeeding centiu*ies since Gregory have
added to it. It represents the Roman Rite of the time
when it was sent — the eighth century. For this rea-
son Duchesne prefers to ciQl it the "Sacramentary" of
Adrian (op. cit., p. 119). We have said that, when it
arrived in the Prankish kingdom, it began to receive
suppleanents. It must be remembered of course that
the writers who copied it had not in view the future
needs o^ students. The books they made were in-
tended for practical use at the altar. So they added at
the end of Adrian's "Sacramentary" whatever other
ICasses and prayers were wanted by the churches for
which they wrote. These supplements are taken
partly from the (jelasian book, partly from Gallican
sources. We have also noted that the additions were
at first carefully distinguished from the original book.
eventuallv incorporated in it. Dom Bfiumer sees in
these additions a compromise made in carrying out
Charlemagne's orders that only the book he had re-
ceived from Rome should be used (see Litxtrgies;
and B&umer, "Ueber das sogen. Sacram. Gelasi-
animi", 295-301). He also thinks that the first
additions and the prefatiuncula were made by Alcuin
(d. 804). Between the ninth and eleventh centuries
the book so composed returned to Rome, took the place
of the original pure Roman Rite, and so became the
foundation of oiu* present Roman Missal. Besides
these three most important Sacramentaries there are
other fragments, the " Missale Francorum," written in
the seventh or eighth centur>', the " Ravenna Roll "
of doubtful date (sixth to eleventh century?), ete.
(see Duchesne, "Origines", pp. 128-9, 137-8).
At the same time as the Sacramentaries, books for the readers and choir were being arranged. GraduiJly the "Comes" or "Liber Comicus" that indicated the texts of the Bible to be read developed into the " Evan-
felarium" and "Lectionarium" (see Gospel in thb iiTCRGT and Lessons in the Liturgy). The hom- ilies of Fathers to be read were collected in "Homil- aria", the Acts of the martyrs, read on their feasts, in "Martyrologia". The book of psalms was written separately for singing, then arranged in order, as the psalms were sung through the week, in the "Psal- terium " that now forms the first part of our Breviary. The parts of the Mass sim^ by the choir (Introit, Gradual, Offertory, Commimion) were arranged in the " Liber Antiphonarius" (or Gradualis), the Antiphons and Responsories in the Office formed the 'uJber Responsaiis", or "Antiphonarius Officii", as distinct from the "Antiphonarius Missse". Two early collec- tions of this kind, ascribed to St. Gregory I, are in P. L., LXXVIII, 641-724, and 725-850. The same tradition that attributes to him the Sacramentary at- taches his name to these (e. g., John the Deacon, "Vita S. Gregorii", II, vi). Throughout the early Middle Ages such collections were copied with local modifications all over Western Europe. Hymns (in our sense) were introduced into the Roman Rite about the fifth or sixth century. Those of the Mass were written in the Gradual, those of the Divine Office at first in the Psalter or Antiphonarj'. But there were also separate collections of hymns, called " Hymnaria", and " Libri Seouentiales " (or troponarii) , containing the se(]^uences ana additions (farcing) to the Kvrie and Gloria, ete. Other services, the Sacraments (Baptism, Confirma- tion, Penance, Marriage, Extreme Unction), the Visi- tation of the Sick, the Burial Service, all manner of blessings, were written in a very loose collection of little lx)oks called by such names as "Liber Agen- dorum", "Agenda", "Manuale", "Benedictioruue", "Pastorale", "Sacerdotale", "Rituale", the prede- cessors of our Ritual. As examples of such books we may quote the " Manuale Curatorum" for the Diocese of Roeskilde in Denmark (ed. by J. Freisen, Pader- bom, 1898) and the "Liber Agendorum" of Schlcs- wig (ed. J. Freising, Paderbom, 1898). Their num- ber and variety is enormous.
Finally there remained the rubrics, the directions not about what to say but what to do. This matter would be one of the latest to be written down. Long after the more or less complicated prayers had to be written and read, tradition would still be a sufficient guide for the actions. The books of prayers (Sacra- mentaries, Antiphonaries^ ete.) contained a few words of direction for the most important and salient things to be done — elementary rubrics. For instance the Gre- eorian " Sacrament ar>' " tells priests (as distinct from bishops) not to say the Gloria except on Easter Day; the celebrant chants the preface excelsa voce^ and so on (P. L., LXXVIII, 25). In time, however, the growing elaborateness of the papal functions, the more com- plicated ceremonial of the Roman Court, made it neces- sary to draw up rules of what custom and ^va^^sfiO^
