It seems like.
Welcome to this second lecture.
There's no singer today, I'm afraid I should warn you that at this point there will be a singer in a week's time and at the last lecture.
On seeing these two pages from an English pontifical,
our first reaction might be to think how well English scribes could write this text scribe, wrote Caroline.
Minuscule script in a style associated with Canterbury new care.data this manuscript to the beginning of the 11th century.
The musical notation is elegant,
written with an unusually thin pen and good control of the direction traced so that the angle of strokes to the baseline is constant.
This notation is written in a musical script familiar throughout the 11th century in England without being more closely datable.
Yet the generally harmonic impression conveyed by these pages conceals significant information about their history.
A closer look lays bare difficulties experienced by the music's great.
At the beginning of the gradual told to host, yes, he had to write the names for the first syllable inside parts of the letter T.
Then only half of the Alameda text was written out, and he had to abandon the phrase at coffee table nominee to.
At the beginning of the offertory,
an elaborate melody for the syllable RA in Uruguay had to be written far over the following syllables stretching beyond Dayem.
Juxtaposition with the layout in the middle 11th century book from Santini is instructive here.
This text allied space for musical notation at the end of August.
Yes, I'm sure you can all see that. Yeah, there.
And then in the verse for dominance, the dominance done here in the same book, the opening of the offertory is again well spaced.
I need not press the point with further examples in order to determine whether a book was made with the intention of entering musical notation.
It's important to look not for vertical space between lines, but for horizontal space between words and syllables.
It's a very, very common mistake. The scribe who copied this early 11th century pontifical either did not envisage the addition of
musical notation or did not have an exemplar from which he could judge the spacing necessary.
That is the first indication that this text and this music were written out independently.
The same music scribe turns up elsewhere in the Pontifical,
not only extensively in the old parts of the book, but also in many of the supplements made to it.
Here, he notes chants for the rituals of Ash Wednesday. And then here, notating liturgy for Maundy Thursday.
And here in the last of the ad, in the latest of the added gatherings, he noted its chance for the reconciliation of all tours or other holy places.
This music scribe who's a in the list is one of the three main music scribes who worked in the Pontifical,
alongside several others who made just one or two interventions. There's a lot of scribes in the book.
The simple fact that a worked in both the older and the supplementary parts of the book means that he
must have been writing up the institution to which the old book was transferred during the 11th century.
That is the monastic community at Wooster. In other words, the old Pontifical did not have music notation when it was first brought to stir,
and the extensive addition of notation to its older parts constitutes a
significant element in the work of improvement of the book undertaken at Wooster.
This pontifical and benediction must have reached Worcester in the middle of the century,
certainly by some time in the ten sixties and perhaps even in connexion with Wilson's appointment as Bishop in turn 65.
Once UT Worcester, the book became the focus of sustained effort to render its content suitable for use.
The original content was extensively modified and several different campaigns
led to the addition of gatherings at front and back an extra 70 or so folios.
And I should say that the dates in this table. These this is all Michael Garlic's work very carefully done looking at other Worcester manuscripts.
Some of that work of modification and addition might be situated in the 10 sixties, certainly in the third quarter of the century.
It was Neil Care who first drew attention to aspects of mid-century wooster script in a
charter dated 10:58 and in which Woolston is the first witness after Bishop Eldridge,
a similar kind of script is used in parts of the first supplementary layers of the Pontifical.
As well as in marginal traditions in the older part of the book,
these are formulas to be read aloud by whoever was performing the consecration of a church just stating what he was doing.
The co-mingling of salt, ashes and water in the name of the father and so on.
This work of making short modifications to the older book continued through the 70s and 80s.
Here, ritual instructions were written beside a prayer for the ordination of a deacon.
And on a page with prayers for blessing across a new prayer for the blessing of water prior to exorcism or consecration of a cross was added.
In relation to the evidence of revisions made to this pontifical in the period 10, 60 to 90, I have hardly shown more than the tip of an iceberg.
It's truly extensive that work of revision continued through the 90s and into the first decades of the 12th century.
The book thus demonstrates an intensive and sustained interest in getting the detail of what was to be read or sung right,
and in knowing how to perform the ritual so that in knowing how to perform the ritual actions that accompany prayers and chants.
The high number of text and music scribes involved in making him indications suggests that this concern with
the moment to moment delivery of pontifical ceremonies was well anchored in the work of the Wooster community.
The conventional naming of this book for Bishop Samson,
a Norman appointed to the Bishop of Worcester in the tens in 10 '96 depends on the profession of obedience to be sworn in his presence.
This was a late edition marking a later campaign of supplements, and it would make much more sense to call Caucus one for six.
The pontificate of Bishop Woolston for that is certainly what it was.
Wilson was installed as Bishop at Worcester in 10 62 and died in 10 '95, the last of the old Anglo-Saxon bishops.
The direct connexion between Woolston and this pontifical, already suggested by Richard Jameson and Francesca Tinetti,
is well supported by the narrative of William of Malmesbury.
Veto will study with its many accounts of church dedications and destruction of wooden altars.
In a paper on the Anglo-Saxon bishop and his book, Richard first raised the question as to whether Pontifical belonged to individuals
and could just be taken on to another appointment or two places being C specific.
In the case of Corpus 146th, such questions hardly arise.
Given the extent of shared identity between Woolston and the monastic community around him,
he himself had risen through the offices of Novice Master Cantor Sacristy and prior of that community before becoming Bishop,
the number of different scribe of hands involved in the work of revising this,
pontifical suggests a closeness of ties and interests amongst the Worcester monks.
One of the sustaining of that work of revision over the three decades of since Episcopacy
before there's any sign of Norman intervention reveals the late Anglo-Saxon church,
at least in the Worcester diocese, as a dynamic cultural institution responsive to change.
Woolston had once been come to administer this might provide grounds for arguing
that he himself had driven the work of notating been put difficult he inherited,
even if Wilson's own hand has never been identified. To my knowledge, it's likely that he knew how to write musical notation,
and there can be no doubt about his assessment of the usefulness of musical notation.
During the period of his episcopacy, a series of text and music, scribes can be traced through several books made at Worcester,
placing most at the centre of a concentrated bookmaking enterprise.
Today, I'll talk about two more of those books.
First, the enormous national no split between London and Cambridge and then the office book named Port, a forum in Dom and some whose edition of 1958.
Work on the passion may have been begun well before the rooster alterations to the Pontifical.
Michael Gulick has identified one of its gripes as identical to the writer of the 10:58 charter.
This was always a gigantic project made in a large format and containing 165 saints lives.
Although Knight divided into three, it was originally made in two parts.
The first volume included Saints with feasts from 1st of January to 30th September,
while the second completed the rest of the year up to Saint Sylvester on 31st of December.
If you notice some missing some gas,
it's because I don't know what was there because there are pages lost because the book split up in such a strange way.
These two volumes were copied by three main scribes tech scribes, whose work can also be traced in other Wooster books.
First, there is the charter scribe who copied much of Volume one and Volume two in its original form.
A second scribe who wrote almost 200 photos in the original first one is also one of the
main tech scribes in the Worcester Reporter Forum containing liturgy for the office.
And then Scribes C, the writer of a contents table, can be found in multiple parts of the ecclesiastical handbook,
which is no corpus to six five, to which he contributed more than any other scribe.
And that scribe is also one of the main annotators of the Pontifical.
From a musical point of view. The most interesting part of the panel is an office for St. Nicholas, copied at the end of the first volume.
This was copied by Text Scribe B, continuing his stint at the end of that first volume,
and there's no reason to consider this last entry as anything but contemporaneous.
That's partly a graphical observation can be supported on grounds of other content.
Amongst the additions made on FF. added to the original volumes, there are a good number which can still be dated in the third quarter of the century.
One of those groups of added beauty included one for St. Nicholas,
with an office copied by one scribe in the first volume and a victor copied by another scribe in the second.
We can guess that someone at Wooster had become interested in that st.
In England, notice was taken of Saint Nicholas from as early as the second quarter of the 11th century.
Amongst the entries for Nicholas in English calendars and listeners,
the earliest is in Custom Nero, a two dated by Rebecca Rosch, fourth to between 10 29 and 10 46.
Then the middle 11th century Dover sole trade perhaps made it Crosland has entries in the calendar and litany.
Nicholas is then included in the litany of a mid-level and.
Well, I think it's probably late in the middle of the century.
But anyway, let's say third quarter penitential handbook Lord Misc., 42, perhaps made it Worcester.
And then at the end of the 11th century, his name was added to the calendar of the Worcester portfolio.
Now over to the office, this office is monastic with 12 readings and responses for the night office.
It was copyright on five pages, beginning with first vespers.
Then the night office and Lord's. Followed by prayers for the mass and into pits of mass, proper chants.
And finally, second vespers, the whole office was written by one tech scribe with some editions by others at the end.
The musical notation was also mainly entered by one scribe.
As you can see here. His work is not at all elegant, and he wrote news of varied angles.
But it's all written with clear musical competence.
Three other scribes each wrote out one response, three each and the last of these responsible for Thuma ransom.
I'm here. Is that music scribe of the Pontifical Saints scribe?
In relation to the treatment of liturgy at Worcester early in Worcester's Episcopacy, there's one aspect of this office which is really interesting.
Well, it's common enough to see a music scribe correcting the work of a tech scribe.
It's very, very common, and it's how you work out of text and music track to the same person.
It's the extent to which the main music scribe here acted to alter the work of the text.
Scribe is really unusual. So these two examples show pretty simple corrections here he he wrote in Bono and counsel Bono.
And here, he added, it's just quite in the margin.
But here you can see the music scribe changing the point to which the singer must return in the response after singing the verse.
A response was performed, response reversed and then a so-called repr tendon, which takes part of the response.
And it's part of the task with the scribe to show where the where that represented begins and the text Grapefruit Merritt going back here.
But the music scribe changed it to a bit so. And then.
After notating the first two words of an end to form beginning, Beatrice Nicholas, the music scribe,
wrote out and annotated an entirely different text just abandoned what the text created, written.
The most extensive example of alteration is to the response resumé, the phrase who.
On the first line, the notato left appraisal on notated, notated and added confessor instead see the notation that is written in confessor.
And then he abandoned to a cocktail of an adjective in a Randi's.
And then we got a big change, there's some erasure here. It probably said simply, I say Semper S.A., someone does.
But it Nouri's is policy slavery. Now behind these alterations, we can trace to quite different channels.
The tech scribe was writing the chant Sumi, the phrase, you know,
and in versions of the Nicholas office from Luther India and Germany and sent to a melody in the play demoed.
The music scribe chose instead to write a chant which began Sumaidaie Confessor,
which is transmitted in manuscripts from France and northern Spain and sent to a quite different melody in the authentic G mood.
Such variations between the charts copied by the text and music scribes were noticed more than 50 years ago by Christopher Foley.
What interested holder most was Hi, this Mr Nicholas office could aid reflection on the composition and composition of that office.
He characterised the National Office as fundamentally the German secular text adapted to Benedictine use.
Certainly, what sits at the base of most versions of the Nicholas office is a nine lesson, nine response, three secular office,
and I've just given it's a using response, which is a very easy way of determining the difference between offices.
So that's that those are the nine responses of the night office in the secular version.
An 11th century chronicle attributes composition of that secular office to a late 10th century Bavarian Bishop Reginald of Ancient,
much of his secular office remained relatively stable in transmission.
But at the moment, when the office was to be extended for monastic use, eastern and western capitals took different paths.
Much more significant for understanding the Western material, I believe, is the fact of change over time.
The monastic versions represented in this table and on the basis of which Fola was making
judgements I find in manuscripts made two centuries or more after the Worcester National.
If we reverse the upside down chronology, then it becomes plain that what we're seeing in the Worcester manuscript is liturgy.
In a rather more fluid state than it was prepared to envisage.
The Worcester monks were using material they had received in order to fashion an office for Nicholas for their own use.
There's no other extant version of the Nicholas office, which matches the Wooster version,
but it is plain that what the text Craig was working from was neither a German secular version nor a French Benedictine version.
Four. It included the response three quantum quantum.
That's number six, otherwise found only in northern French books.
And one further response three also characteristic of French and northern Hispanic transmission.
This is number nine through ad hoc and then in contradiction to this French direction of the following.
It has a rare chant at the end tellurium bricks omnipotence,
which appears otherwise only in one other 11th century manuscript, made it quite the book.
It was huge there, along with the response three that we've been talking about SUMIDA appraisal in honour of since Cervantes use.
In other words, the this office copy by the tech scribe was a Benedictine outstation of the earlier secular office,
but it cannot be directly linked with either east or west and certainly draws on traditions from both directions.
Meanwhile, the music scribes, evidently aware of more than one way of singing in office for Nicholas,
made choices and opted for versions of charts which drew more fully on French traditions
and where the text did not provide for chance that he knew from that French version.
French tradition? He made sure they were recorded anyway.
Finally, the last entry made to the Nicholas office is the response free to marines who otherwise find only in German sources and,
to my current knowledge, never in French over splenic books.
What is unusual about this Nicholas office is not then the simple fact of finding mendacious by music scribes to the work of a tech scribe.
But the extent of those mendacious? And those lamentations are indicative not only of a process of improvement of received material,
but also of the availability to Worcester monks of more than one version of an office for St. Nicholas,
who does seems to have missed the quality of transience in what he was reading for.
I think we can see here the reactions of Worcester monks to material as it came into their hands.
They needed to shape the office to make it suitable for use before it could be further copied into other books.
Such preparatory work must have been relatively common, but is almost always invisible to modern readers,
since it would surely have been carried on using wax tablets or scraps of parchment and soon discarded.
In a not extensive literature on the cult of St. Nicholas in England,
it's clear that interest in the Saint was well-established in England before the Norman conquest,
its roots leading back to both Normandy and attorney in Germany in the early 11th century.
It's easy to speculate that in the middle 11th century, Worcester monks might have been on the lookout for a liturgy composed in honour of Nicholas.
So I know and I myself have short speculation. In turn, 61, an English delegation of bishops went to Rome.
These included aged at that time Bishop of Worcester and already named Archbishop of York.
With him, we're also Geezer Bishop of Wells and Walter Bishop of Hereford.
There was quite a to do in Rome.
They got into trouble with the pope for being bishop of two diocese is this took a great deal of sorting out and then leaving Rome.
The party was set upon by thieves. All of this is related in the late 11th century life of King Edward.
I am thrilled, and the party eventually returned to England carrying with them Eldridge's York pallium.
The papal privilege was then read by Alfred before the King and his nobles.
In 10 62, Alfred consecrated Woolston as the new bishop of Wooster.
Two people, Liggett's were present at Wilson's election to the bishopric.
They were described by John Wooster as enthusiastically urging both clergy and laity on to it.
Confirming his election by their authority. Thus, between the English party, which had gone to Rome in 10 161, including bishops,
the elder Gizo and Walter and these people Liggett's who visited Worcester in 10 62.
There are two possible lines of trouble for books and liturgy from Rome.
Now, you might legitimately wonder why I am so focussed on Rome, when liturgy for Saint could come from anywhere, including northern Europe.
Yet, as I will not explain, the context of the Nicholas office in the Worcester National leads directly to Rome and to
a situation in which interest in Saints offices may have been high on the papal agenda.
This is the end of the entry for Jerome, whose feast day was 30th of September in order to finish the Jerome Beta.
The text scribe had started work in a new gathering of eight folios.
And he had lots and lots of more space in that gathering, but someone in charge must have quickly decided that a new volume should be envisaged.
The veto of central images on 1st of October was begun on the first version of a new gathering, allowing for a contents page on the preceding rector.
And this subsequently became the beginning of the passionless second volume.
So there was now a good deal of empty space in the gathering in which Jerome's veto was finished.
The scribe who had written about the previous one hundred and eighty four folios continued work,
copying for the sermon led Sheamus in his plays, he asked to.
His story is often read on the Feast of All Saints.
After this sermon, he copied a collection of the miracles of Pope Leo, the ninth, who had died in 10 54.
The miracles related here all took place in Rome on the day of Leo's death on the 19th of April 10:54 and late May in the same year.
Work by German and Italian philologist sets the writing of this data and to counter the miracles before 10 60,
given how early the Miracles text reached Worcester, the chances are rather high that it came directly from Rome.
Finally, the Roman papacy provides another significant contextual element for the content of this last gathering.
In a contemporary Victor Bruno of ABC Design, who became publisher of the 9th,
is directly associated with the composition of chance in honour of several saints.
Whether or not we allow that Bruno himself actually composed the officers attributed to him by literary historians,
it's at least likely that a pope in Rome he promoted the creation of new dad.
Newly dedicated liturgies for Saints counts. In this speculative model of transmission,
the miracles text would have been brought soon after its composition directly from Rome to Worcester
in the hands of a member of Aldridge's party and perhaps some version of the Nicholas office with it?
No. This is absolute speculation entirely admit that none of my conclusions about the impermanent nature
of the Nicholas office copied in the personal depend on this hypothetical model of transmission.
More interesting, I think, is the juxtaposition of Alfred's visit to Rome with this new liturgical initiative at Worcester.
It's a background that provides an interesting possibility for thinking about how new liturgical
material might come to an institution and how it might be treated once it got there.
Before examining the nature and contents of a third Worcester book,
I'll just take a moment to bring together information about music scribes in the three books, which are my focus today.
The musical notations in the National are probably the earliest extant examples
of music writing that can definitely be associated with Worcester scribes.
I mean, I would just briefly say that the Benedictine rule manuscript outside the room is eventually associated with Worcester,
but nobody knows when it got there. And we don't know if the music notation was written at Worcester, so that doesn't kind.
In this and in the fashion world, there were at least four music scribes involved in rotating the Nicholas office,
one of whom here the fourth also worked in the Pontifical.
You get to know his work very quickly.
In the Pontifical, substantial amounts of musical notation were added by two music scribes, both working at Wooster in the years up to 10 ninety.
But the most extensive, the notated Wooster book made in the time of war since Episcopacy is the office book known as the Port Forum of St Woolston.
Here, besides short entries by a variety of music scribes, including one who made occasional notations in the hymnal,
the work of notating this large book was carried out by three very good music scribes.
One of these who just notated 24 pages is the same scribe whose hand we've already seen in the National and pontifical.
But the overwhelming bulk of the work was done by two others.
You can see here how well both his music scribes controlled their writing,
setting the news clearly in relation to text syllables, maintaining the angle angles,
the strokes consistently and writing individual names in regular forms, something of a contrast to the main music notato of the national.
That's alongside indications of extensive collective work in the copying of texts at Worcester.
We can also find a great deal of evidence for collaborative work with music in the personal point of physical and porter for him.
There are substantial passages of music writing by a total of seven different music scribes,
leaving aside many short traditions by other scribes at Worcester.
The writing out of music manifesto belonged to the shared tasks of the community and in the period since Episcopacy.
There was always more than one scribe able to undertake musical tasks.
Finally, there are a number of situations in which it's possible to see younger scribes being trained.
That was probably the case for at least two, if not three,
responses in the fashionable in the pontifical to less accomplished scribes notated thoughts
of the hymn return to some common before it was completed by a scribe with no sign many times.
This is a hymn that was often sung by children, so it's it's I mean, I haven't gone too far with that because I haven't got a rubric in the West,
a book that says this was sung by children, but there are other books that tell you it's sung by children,
which is why it may be the place they had to notated.
It would have been a good exercise to say to a young scribe to work out how a repeated melody should be modulated to fit new sets of words.
The first of these less competent scribes didn't get very far.
I think he was probably bewildered, I mean, he did this and this, and then he just stopped.
But the problem is that he had a burst pattern that was different to what went before and he didn't understand it.
The second less accomplished scribe had a much easier passage to work with, and he managed quite well,
and he did get to the end of his set passage and then the the expert scribe begins again.
I think in this kind of situation, you may not see the detail of the difference between the hands,
but if you look it up on the poker website, you will see quite easily.
He would often recite the soul tour or a book of prayers to which he was as devoted as the soul to.
And which he carried around constantly in his pocket.
This passage from William of Malmesbury Life, William of Mullen's Prison Life of Woolston continues,
Sometimes he did this all alone so as not to prevent others sleeping, but sometimes with some companion, he found more wasteful than the rest.
The book, which Wilson carried around in his pocket and from which he could recite sums, prayers and chants was identified by others.
Lawrence McLoughlin of Stanbroke, a supporter forum corpus three one.
My own view is that this actual book is perhaps too large to have been easily carried in Ralston's robes.
And I note especially, it's not only these sizes, but look at this.
The book is 86 inches thick.
It's the note. And however, it's at least likely that Corpus three 911 is related to whatever Woolston himself was using.
Since it brings together between two covers, a calendar to hymnal and a collector for the Divine Office.
The connector includes prayers, chapter readings and proper chants.
Each of these forms written out in full and then also the interprets of hymns.
This combination of different liturgical forms runs parallel to the missile, in which prayers,
readings and chants for the mass are brought together as a type of liturgical book.
The missile can be dated back to the late 8th century, with a good number of Italian examples made in the 9th century for 11th century England.
The missile is the type of liturgical book most represented amongst surviving codices and fragments.
Making books for the office, which combined liturgical forms, resulting eventually in the periphery was much less easy.
Mainly because of the sheer amount of stuff which needed to be assembled.
As well as variation of practise at different times of the year, as a result,
the history of such combinations is much less smooth than that of the missile, as well as a more diverse.
Since we can see in extant books the results of separate individual attempts to create such contained books.
Caucus three nine one is one such individual example, not unlike the slightly earlier Leah Fritz colleague Tom made it Exeter,
except that the Worcester book is monastic and the extra book Secular, and the two certainly did not share a model.
We cannot know whether the monks of Worcester who made this collector had an exemplar from which they
copied over uniting materials drawn from several exemplars during the making of this actual book.
The copy is relatively clean, however, and does not portray in any obvious way a first attempt at uniting prayers and readings with chants.
Nevertheless, that someone changed their mind about what the book should include while it was being made is evident.
For the second part of the collector is much fuller in its contents than the first.
The first part had included liturgy for all of the day hours from vespers through to noon,
but not for the night of this martins in the collect or second part.
Beginning at Page 621, the night office is included, as you can see here with the inverted tree and then six onto phones for the first Nocturne.
However, clean and well-made, this book represents a project still in development.
Much resource was poured into making this book one tech scribe here showing his be copied all of the calendar and computers.
Salter and him know, as well as much of the second part of the collector.
The collector itself was made by a series of tech scribes.
The largest chunk by Scribe E with two other scribes, C and D coming and going, and then two more tech scribes F and G.
And then there is the scribe labelled here as a only when you realise that the folio,
which is paginated 39 40, is the other half of the BI Folio, paginated at its beginning 25 to 26.
Do you understand that Scribe A was not an overseer or initiator of this office book project,
but someone who came along later and replaced the idea by William of the first gathering of the slaughter?
The reason for that replacement was surely to provide a grand opening in a new style befitting the status of a book which
may have become one of the main books of office liturgy owned by the Abbey Scribe A's hand has been recognised elsewhere.
This is one of the scribes who copied the Worcester coach Tuileries combined in court and Tiberius A13.
In fact, Newcastle scribe,
to whom he cautiously identified as probably having a monk who had worked with Bishop Woolston to conserve the archives of the Church of Worcester.
The work of Hemming and other Wooster scribes on the second cotton, Tiberius Khatri is generally dated in the last decade of the century care and no,
Francesco Tinetti both explained how the formulation of that cautionary tale
that cautionary text dates from both before and after Wilson's death in 10 '95.
So this date harmonise as well with the appearance of this scribe in Corpus 3:09 one coming in to work on the compilation at a late stage,
possibly in the 1880s or as late as the ten nineties.
To conclude, the music notations written at Wooster in the second half of the 11th century reflect a settled and consistent practise in music writing.
Individual signs are written in fairly stable ways.
The most obvious characteristic shared by many of the worst music groups being the curve lower part of the sign for two rising notes,
which is sometimes just reduced to a tick, as you can see, I mean,
you can see very hear very clearly that curve, but look here, it's just become a tick.
And this is the scribe that we kept seeing over and over from typical through the caption to the photo for him.
Beyond these shared signs, habits, very little in the work of different scribes,
and there are very few refinements new sit in the space above the text without being moved up and down very much in relation to pitch significative.
Letters are quite rare and there's no use of special pitch signs.
Social pitched news like the ME Sign, a book which I'll talk next week,
introduced in other English establishments in the later 11th century and a strong indication of Norman influence.
This settled practise, writing an English music script in a traditional way seems to have lasted until at least Wilson's death, in turn 95.
It's only with later text Holmes that we can see a different way of writing music strongly influenced by Norman models on this page of the hymnal and
Corpus three nine one space that had been left empty has been used to write out to him Felix Omni's festooned with notation for the first two strokes,
the text hand is like that of other Wooster scribes writing in the ten.
But the musical notation is quite unlike previous ones to work with thick horizontal traces, including heads added to the vertical strokes.
This is how Norman's had been writing new since the ten sixties.
In three, one of these new ways of writing names are directly associated with new ways of singing hymns,
presumably recording melodies not previously sung to those texts in Worcester.
These Norman notations mark the arrival of Normans in the Worcester community absolutely at the end of the century.
In Corpus 391, these new ways of writing names are directly associated with new excuse me of those newcomers also
brought new musical repertory in a part of a manuscript which Kerry described as probably from Wooster.
Someone copied the sequence later.
Bundys composed in northern France in the late 11th century, it is actually its earliest excellent source in Wooster.
And although the text hunt here has to be described as Anglo Continental, I mean, I couldn't get Michael it to say it was English conferences.
It's just like continental. But the musicand, which is likely to belong to the same person, is certainly Norman.
It must have been the arrival of Bishop Samson in 10 96 and with him other Mormons that promoted new practises and
is likely to have prompted the replacement of the opening by volume of the soul to incorporate three nine one.
But preparation of this large office book must have begun well within Wilson's lifetime.
Older English approaches to the writing of music already well understood in the middle years of the
century seem to have endured and to have remained more or less unaltered throughout since Episcopacy.
In the pontifical acquired by Wister in the 10 sixties at the latest, we can see reflected decades of untiring Episcopal activity on Houston's part.
Extensive revision of many of the ceremonies copied their testifies to concerned with making
liturgy work well through improvement of expression and clarity about ritual instructions.
The Nicholas office, copied in the national is a further witness to this care for the detail of liturgical expression.
Finally, the study of liturgical books made at Worcester in the period of Wilson's Episcopacy reveals
a general practise of collaboration between scribes not only in the copying of text,
but also in the notation of chunked working under a trusted leader.
This was a community which understood the practical value and strengths of collective effort.
Thank you.