The Gallican Psalter text may not have changed, but in my experience, different editions of it are quite susceptible to having instances of differing punctuation. Also, for a properly modern EF breviary, there is the problem that "i" should always be used instead of "j".

Thus, for folks using the Gallican psalter with "i" instead of "j", was there an official edition somewhere with i's that they were checking themselves against?

Or were they looking an older official edition with j's and doing the conversion themselves?

That is what I am interested in - and the answer has to be some particular edition, because having a particular edition that can be selected as being the most official / relevant source provides a solution to the problem of differences between editions.

When you can select the one most official source, and stick to it as much as possible, this eliminates a lot of the worry about what you should do with known variant readings.

But, it seems as if the Pian psalter took over before the i's did, in which case an official edition of the Gallican psalter using i's looks unlikely.

I have been wondering if the best source might be the psalter as published separately when it was re-ordered by Pius X. There seem to have been published:

1911 Psalterium Breviarii Romani — Editio typica
1912 Psalterium Breviarii Romani — Editio typica iterum impressa
1914 Psalterium Breviarii Romani — Altera editio typica

(On grounds that these would have been the source for the psalter included in subsequent editions of the breviary.)

But I haven't seen the latter for sale.

Hey! I just found a 1915 Editio typica iterum impressa for the Breviary.

Actually, I'm not after the asterisk this time around - my current perception is that the asterisk is typically consistent across different Roman Breviaries, and doesn't vary from edition to edition.

(At least, my theory on the variances in asterisk placement that I am aware of is holding water at present: it is just that the breviary uses the asterisk differently than chant books.)

By the way, the "salutem tuam, Quam parasti" is what the typical edition gives for the text you mention in the Nunc dimittis. It also has "cotidianum" in the Pater noster. This kind of change is another nuisance.

You start to feel that folks took all of the toys out of the cupboard to re-organize it, and then moved on to other things before putting half of them back.

Although, come to think of it, changes like these were probably promulgated with the Pian psalter, and are thus tied up with it: such that if you aren't obligated to use the Pian psalter, you aren't obligated to use these other changes either. Because the "psalter" would not have been strictly the 150 psalms, but rather the psalter of the breviary, which of course contains these other items as well.

Interesting thought.

For longer verses in chant editions, you will have the flex, thus:

A + B * C

However, in the Roman Breviaries, for these verses you may not only find:

A B * C

but also:

A * B C

So I do not find that there is a predictable way to go from Breviary divisions to chant divisions, alas.

My working theories at present are:

Firstly, I no longer worry about where other traditions place the asterisk, e.g. Dominicans or Cistercians, because this is not relevant for Roman stuff. It seems that they do have the same divisions of the text as far as verses; well and good.

The flex seems to have been introduced into our Roman chant books from the monastic books with the promulgation of the Vatican Edition of the Antiphonale Romanum in 1912 (or the Cantorinus in 1911, I suppose). It may have been a novelty. For example, the Roman chant books prepared by Solesmes prior to this, in the 1890's, seem to follow the breviary divisions, and therefore have no flexes.

On the other hand, the placement of the asterisk in the Roman Breviaries seems to have remained constant for a long time [probably for centuries]. At any rate, it is the same say in 1945 as it is in 1888. Thus, the advent of the Vatican Editions of the chant books had no effect on this tradition, which remained separate.

The placement of the asterisk and flex in the Vatican Edition is what is proper to use for chant. However, Matins was never covered by the Vatican Edition, thus for some psalms, we are left guessing.

A complication to this issue is the question of * / + placement when psalms are included in Solesmes editions that are not found in the AR.

In some cases, these are included as part of liturgies for which there was some sort of typical edition promulgated, e.g. for Christmas Matins, or for the Holy Week liturgies. Or in other cases, we are given things taken "from the editions of Solesmes" e.g. Matins for Pentecost or Corpus Christi.

I have definitely come across a couple of discrepancies in asterisk placement in Lauds for Holy Week as given in the LU, versus what you would get if you were singing the same services from the AR 1949 and referring to the weekly psalter section of this book to locate the necessary psalms. I am guessing that somehow the LU felt bound to retain the breviary divisions (inserting flexes only when it would not disturb the existing asterisks) because of some technicality in how these liturgies were promulgated: maybe they were promulgated as "here are the chants you need; refer to the breviary for the psalms, etc."

It existed! Breviarium Romanum, Romae-Turonibus-Parisiis: Mame 1961: Vulgate psalter, new Latin orthography.

(The link will probably only work for members of this facebook group)