Thanks for catching that. The corresponding end-bracket should be after "-son." at the end of the line. So the text in the Superius at the top on pg. 5 should be:

Kyrie [eleison.]

Thanks, JQ.

Many of the things that you mention are going to happen once I get the whole thing transcribed into modern notation from the original parts. As I said, this is a Draft, and a very rough one at that, but I want to get as much of the 'stuff' out of the MSS and into the computer as possible, that way, I don't have to go digging through the MSS looking for something quite so often. Much of this stuff will go into a "critical report", along with the ossia, except for the canonic rubrics, which will be in the main text.

The final version will have measure numbers, or perhaps letters a la orchestra/band parts, but either way that will involve doing some arguing with the software, which I'm not spiritually prepared to do at this point.

I have thought about resolving the mensuration in the canons--Adam Renner did this in his "cheat sheet" for the comes of the Canon of the Qui tollis, resolving from cut-O to cut-C--but for the moment, it was easier to keep the C.F. in perfect tempus when doing the transcription. Also, re. breaking up long notes in the C.F.: In the "Qui tollis" I copied the text underlay directly from Renner's "cheat sheet", so things are dealt with differently there than in the un-realized bits of the Canons.

Thanks for the input about the text underlay for the CF: I was wondering whether it would be better to do the small-notes or the "Adora- mus" version, I was leaning towards the latter. The other option, once the rough transcription is done, is just break up the Breves without comment in the main text, and mention that it was done in the "critical report".

Regarding putting the Contratenor below the CF: its to do with clefs: The CF is written in C3 clef (aka Alto Clef), the Contratenor is in C4 clef (aka Tenor clef), so mentally it was easier to put the Contra under the CF; the three voices are roughly the same ranges, but the CF is more an Alto part (range G-a) than the Contra (which is D-g). And even though the comes of the canon is the lower of the three middle voices (range C-e in Kyrie-Gloria), I kept it immediately below the CF for my own sanity.

I don't have the original choirbooks in front of me at the moment, but I think that in D-Ju the parts are labelled as:

1(left top). [Blank]
2(left bottom). Canon
3(right top). Contra[tenor]
4(right bottom). Bassus

In Capp.Sist.160, IIRC, they are

1(left top). [Blank]
2(left bottom). Canones super voces musicales...
3(right top). Contratenor
4(right bottom). Bassus

I'm currently using (hold your breath) MuseScore 3.5.

The ordering of the parts struck me as well: when I first saw that the cantus firmus (tenor) was in C3 clef, I immediately thought "OK. High clefs"; But then looked closer and saw that the superius and bassus were in their normal clefs (C1 and F4, respectively), then saw that the Contratenor ("alto") was in the C4 clef that tenors are usually written in. So I said "OK. This is different. Maybe it will make sense later."

One writer called this Mass 'One of the most idiosyncratic of the many Masses written on the "L'homme arme" cantus firmus', and it certainly is.

Attached is an updated version including the Credo ('Patrem omnipotentem') thru the end of the 'Et incarnatus'.

The 'Et incarnatus' was an interesting movement to transcribe: The 'Tenor' with the C.F. is silent, and the phrases of the C.F. are passed primarily between Superius and Contratenor, but the Bassus has a phrase as well. There is another 'free' tenor part (called here 'Septimus', editorily, since I already allotted 'sextus pars' to the second 'soprano' part for Agnus III) which only appears in Capp.Sist.160 in a later hand and in a different tint of ink: The original copyist used the section for the 'residuum' of the Tenor to continue the 'residuum' of the Superius, skipped a line, then used the remaining stave for the over-flow from the Bassus on the facing page. The extra tenor for this movement is completely lacking in D-Ju Ms 3 and in the so-called 'Occo Codex' (all three of which were copied by Petrus Alamire): both Occo and D-Ju leave the 'tenor' section blank, though with ruled staff-lines.

Further, the mensuration is interesting: the over-lapping perfect tempus (O) of the C.F. and the imperfect tempus (C) of the free parts, almost creates the feeling of perfect minor modus. In the Superius and Bassus there are (at different points) syncopated semibreves when the mensuration changes from imperfect to perfect tempus. (I have not transcribed the 'Et resurrexit' yet so I don't know if the other have of the breve is in that section, or if it just disappears into thin air.)

There is also in interesting 'problem' of perfect tempus in diminution (cut-O) used as duple proportion in the Superius: I am attaching two versions: One with the mensuration sign in brackets, with the original note-values halved so that the written values stay consistent; the Second version uses the proportion sign, and keeps the note values as in the original, so that at this point a breve in the Superius is equal to a semibreve in the other parts, where the signs remain ut jacet.

I am inclined to used the diminished note-values (with commentary in the 'critical report'). But I also like the look of the other one, where the note-values of the C.F. stay consistent.

(NB: I also just noticed some barlines where note-values cross over, that need to be turned into quarter-bars. Also, as with the first up-load this is rough; and most of the 'critial report' stuff will end up out of the score and into front- or back-matter.)

EDIT: New file below.

COMPLETE EDITION WITH CRITICAL REPORT.

Again, if anyone catches anything, let me know.

Thanks!