David,

I agree that a book on this subject is long overdo.

Obviously, as you can see by the Lalande Library, Pothier adhered closely to the groupings in his 1884 Graduale.

As you can also see by the Lalande Library, his groupings are, perhaps, influenced by the Rheims Cambrai edition, but NOT the same. They also differ substantially from the other collections (Pustet, Mechlin, etc.)

I also believe that a few of Pothier's adaptations made it into the Vatican Edition, in spite of the Pontifical Commission's explicit wishes (we've discussed this on different CMAA threads).

Some of the higher ups at Solesmes have hinted that they will soon release a facsimile of the MSS that Pothier favored, but I'm not holding my breath. This would be quite revealing.

I think anyone who's looked at MSS of the middle ages and early Renaissance will agree that there is not really a strong tradition of grouping the Masses the same way the Editio Vaticana did.

Chanted parts of the Ordinary (generally speaking) have always been mixed and matched. I've seen many collections from the Middle Ages where all the Agnus Dei's are together, and all the Kyrie's are together, etc. However, I've also seen collections similar to what Pothier did, where "collections" are grouped according to the FEAST (Doubles, Semi-Doubles, etc.)

I think it's fair to say that the tradition of the GRADUALE (Introit, Gradual, Alleluia, Offertory, Communion) is much more consistent and goes back much further than do any traditions of "Ordinary Groupings" (that is, Mass Parts that form a "complete whole" like Mass VIII, or Mass XI or Mass V, etc.).

I would also humbly suggest that constantly renaming and renumbering the Masses of the Vatican Edition by some collections published after the Second Vatican Council has led to needless confusion. That being said, the reality of the situation is that most of our Catholic Parishes, if they sing Latin Chant AT ALL, sing the Funeral Mass (all year!!!) and the Alleluia from the Easter Vigil as the Gospel Acclamation (all year!!!). There is much work to do . . . .

I've been working (okay, hypothesizing) under the impression that the groupings of the Kyriale are done by complexity and nothing else. The most complex Kyrie should be grouped with the most complex Sanctus and then designated for Easter. The simplest should be grouped together and designated for weekdays in Advent and Lent and masses of the dead. I'd be interested in knowing who grouped them.

This subject came up this summer at the Solesmes chant course. According to Dom Saulnier (what I have in my notes anyways), and also drawing from a few chant history texts, here's a few interesting things to mention-

1) aside from the very recent Mass VIII (how recent?) many ordinaries are now thought to predate some of the propers. (This was news to me.) The reason they are not notated before square notation is that there was no need- they were passed down orally.
2) they were grouped somewhat arbitrarily, with the exception of Mass
I (Eastertide) and Mass XVIII (Requiem). These are thought to have been used together since ancient times, more so Mass I.
3) because of the more or less arbitrary nature of the groupings, it is acceptable to group them according to the competence of the schola and/ or congregation.
4) there are many (how many?) parts of the ordinary that had been poplular in various regions and in different centuries that did no make it into the Vatican edition.

I do not mean to use the word 'arbitrary' with a negative connotation, btw. In order to restore the chant to more common use, Solesmes scholars and editors thought it advantageous to systematize the ordinaries, to make them more accessible to people reclaiming an aural tradition where there had not been (a widespread) one for some time. There is something practical and laudable to this, IMO.
Especially after considering the monumental task undertaken by the
Solesmes monks, I might be critical but remain loathe to criticize them.

MaryAnn, I would second your comment on some .. "thought it advantageous to systematize the ordinaries". It is certainly a lot more convenient for me to say, "We're singing Kyrie IX" than to try and remember its name (if indeed it has one).