How'd we get these eighteen?
  • Mark M.Mark M.
    Posts: 632
    I'm curious as to just how the eighteen settings of the Ordinary (which I see in the Gregorian Missal) came to be. I see that the collection of the various chants in each setting are almost from different centuries, so I figure that the arrangement of "this" Kyrie with "that" Gloria, etc., was somewhat a matter of evolution… as was the determination that certain settings would be for certain liturgical seasons.

    Incidentally, I learned from this thread from a couple of years ago that the names of the various Masses came from the most common tropes of the Kyries. (Thanks, Jeff O.!) And I learned from good ol' Wikipedia just what tropes are, or were!

    I'm guessing, too, that there were many, many other chants for the Ordinary that "didn't make it" into these eighteen, or which were eventually supplanted with those chants which we see today.

    Anyway, I'd appreciate any insight which someone could offer here. Perhaps this has been discussed before. Thanks!
  • RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
    Dear Mark M.,

    The question you ask is very complicated. However, a relatively full treatment can be found in the CUA Pierre Combe book, translated by Marier & Skinner (although that book does not explain the Rheims-Cambrai influence, which also played a roll).
  • Felicity
    Posts: 77
    The book, The Restoration of Gregorian Chant: Solesmes and the Vatican Edition by Pierre Comb, and translated by Theodore N. Marier and William Skinner, describes "... how the eighteen settings of the Ordinary came to be."

    Deo gratias!
  • Mark M.Mark M.
    Posts: 632
    Fantastic… thank you both! (And my university library is open for just another ten minutes, AND I see that we have that title… gotta run!)
  • Michael O'Connor
    Posts: 1,637
    I say bring back the tropes that were removed! They are beautiful. Maybe I should say "bring back the prosae" since the tunes are still there...
  • Mark M.Mark M.
    Posts: 632
    It's complicated, indeed, as Jeff O. said… lots of material in that Combe/Marier & Skinner book. I've got lots to read and learn.
  • David Sullivan
    Posts: 355
    I better go read that chapter too--this book has been sitting on my shelf for years.
    Apel and Hiley both say there are hundreds of each Mass Ordinary part in the manuscripts, so I've long wondered how we got the eighteen settings.
  • Mark M.Mark M.
    Posts: 632
    If you can point me to a particular chapter to answer this question, David, that'd be great… again, there's lots to wade through there.
  • gregpgregp
    Posts: 632
    I went to Corpus Christi Watershed's Leland Library, and looked at the 1858 Gradual they have online. The Ordinary settings are not numbered or named, but they do appear to be many of the the same 'sets' that we have:

    In this order, starting on page 21:
    A. Described as being for Doubles and Solemn Feasts - same as Mass IV (With Credo I)
    B. For Feasts of the BVM and in the Octaves of Christmas and Corpus Christi - same as Mass IX
    C. For Ordinary Sundays, Semi-Doubles, and in the Octaves of those not of the BVM - same as Mass XI
    D. For Sundays of Advent and Lent - same as Mass XVII (with Kyrie B)
    E. During Paschal Time, for Sundays and Feasts - same as Mass I (with an Agnus Dei I cannot identify)
    F. For simple Feasts - same as Mass XV
    G. For Ferias - same as Mass XVIII

    Masses ad Libitum
    H. 1st Mass ad Libitum or 'de Angelis' - same as Mass VIII
    I. 2nd Mass ad Libitum - same as Mass II
    J. Kyrie XII + a Gloria, Sanctus, and Agnus Dei I cannot identify

    (BTW, Jeff O, the PDF jumps abruptly from page 47 to 94, in case you didn't know that).
  • RagueneauRagueneau
    Posts: 2,592
    gregp: I was not aware there were pages missing: hopefully this can be fixed some day. I had limited funds as an undergraduate (and now!), and copies were 15 cents each, so sometimes I had not the funds to copy entire book ---- this happened to the Springer Graduale (organ accomps)

    Mark M. ---- the reason the Vatican Edition Commission fell apart (and ultimately became a Commission of only Pothier and his Secretary, Dom L. David, occasionally advised by Gastoué and Wagner) was because of controversies over which melodies to include in the Kyriale and which variants to accept. I believe the final third of the book treats this. What's interesting is that the Commission specifically voted NOT to include certain things, e.g. an adaptation by Pothier, but that Mass ended up in the Editio Vaticana anyway!!!

    While in college, I learned that Committees often sound like a great idea.....but they never work.
  • Carl DCarl D
    Posts: 992
    Actually, committees are reasonably good for doing some things. Decision-making isn't one of them.
  • David Sullivan
    Posts: 355
    I've been dipping into the Combes book over the weekend, and I don't see specifically HOW the Kyriale was selected. There's a good bit of discussion of the Vatican Commission process for working on it. An interesting dispute on how best to follow tradition: Pothier/Wagner vs Mocquereau/DeSanti as best I can tell.

    A specific piece mentioned is a mode 7 Asperges, which I infer is the "ad libitum" one in today's Kyriale. Pothier seemed to regard it as superfluous, while Mocquereau considered it the epitome of the best manuscript tradition.

    Like gregp, I looked at a pre-Solesmes Gradual posted by Jeff Ostrowski, and saw some fascinating parallels--and differences--in the pre- and post-Solesmes Kyriale. I would be interested in more info if anyone here can steer me in the right direction. Meanwhile, I'll look into the Combes book some more.
Add a Comment