The manuscript 596 in the Library of the Abbaye-St-Pierre, Solesmes, is a copy, made in 1860, of a noted English processional, which was written between 1250 and 1320 for the Benedictine Abbey of St.Edith's at Wilton, near Salisbury. How the manuscript came to Dom Guéranger, and what subsequently became of it after 1860 is unknown. In 1961 Georges Benoit-Castelli published an examination of the provenance, date and contents of the processional, noting the presence of dramatic ceremonies, which include an Elevatio Crucis and Visitatio Sepulchri for Easter Day. This, in fact, makes the manuscript one of only five extant English sources of the Visitatio Sepulchri. Yet, despite Benoit-Castelli's report, this processional has been entirely neglected by historians of the liturgical drama. This article aims to describe the relation of the Visitatio ceremony to others in the Anglo-French repertory, and will conclude with a complete transcription based on the 19th-century copy.

The present bibliography was originally compiled to provide a basis for my research into the relationship between words and music and the social context of the medieval European planctus. The planctus, a lament normally written at the death of an important historical, biblical or classical personage, or at the destruction of a city, has featured prominently in discussions about the development of liturgical drama and the possible origins of the Passion play; in studies of funeral verse; and in histories of the interrelation of European verse and musical forms. The relationship between the Marienklage and German Passion plays, the sequence and lai characteristics of Abelard's six planctus and the melodic style of the sequence melody planctus cygni have to some extent been studied by both musical and literary scholars. It has not, however, been possible to estimate the significance of these three issues in the history of either the planctus or of medieval monophonic song, since the planctus has never before been considered as a whole, in a comparative study which investigates both words and music. In fact, it has never been established that the planctus constitutes a genre in the first place, in what way this might be, and whether the surprisingly numerous musical settings which survive are composed in a consistent style.

This joint article on aspects of the manuscript Wolfenbüttel, Herzog-August-Bibliothek, Helmstedt 628 (Heinemann catalogue 677), known to musicologists as “W1”, is designed to supplement the recent lengthy essay by Edward Roesner, ‘The origins of W1’, with discussions of topics where an advance on Professor Roesner's authoritative account was felt to be possible.

In spite of several differences in the general appearance of the handwriting, the main text of W1 was all written by the same experienced but not particularly elegant scribe. One or more of the following significant details can be found on most pages throughout the manuscript, a is narrow, open at the top, and usually rather tall, especially at the end of a word. The ascender of round d is rather long and low, and a common variant has a separate hairline stroke projecting upwards and to the right from the top of the ascender (ff.xxii/18r, 82/75r, 116/107r, 165/156r, 197/180v). At the beginnings of words and lines, the ascender is horizontal, with a downward flourish at the end (108/99r, 209/192r). Straight d occurs at 89/80r, 213/196r. e and r, at the ends of words, both finish in a brisk, upward-sloping hairline. g is usually open below the line, with a powerful horizontal tail ending well to left of the upper compartment. A less elegant alternative form (predominant from 197/180v to the end), substitutes a tight, angular loop for the long tail; but where both forms occur in the same line (169/160r, 193/176v), it is obvious that the upper compartment and the descender to which tail or loop is attached are made in the same way. Now and again (88/79v, 208/191v), a hairline closure is added at the end of the long tail. The second stroke of h ends well below the line. At the ends of words, the last strokes of m and n may descend and carry a heavy flourish on the right (201/184r).

An analysis of pen flourishing surrounding initials in a manuscript can provide useful evidence about the manuscript's place of origin and date. The reason for this lies in the technique of the flourisher: it is pen work that appears to have been no more skilled than that of the scribe. Indeed, it could on occasion have been the work of the copyist himself, or at least one of the same calibre working by his side. Because flourishing appears no more skilled as a technique than is writing, it would seem to require a training that is no more specialized. This is important when a comparison is made with the training, skill and payment of the artist-illuminator also employed in book production: in these respects the scribe and flourisher would be in the same category, but not in that of the artist. The writing and the flourishing could have been carried out at the same time, or with very little time lag between the two; there would have been no necessity to hold up production at this stage for the arrival of the artist-illuminator, who was presumably a more rare and highly paid workman.

Several writers – most notable among the recent ones being Max Lütolf, Rudolf Flotzinger and Edward Roesner – have commented on the choice of liturgical chants set in the additions to the main layer of Parisian polyphony in W1. The point of such comment is that by tracing concordances for those liturgical chants a clearer idea may be gained of the affiliations of W1 among the chant traditions of Britain and North France. The additions to W1 are more useful for this purpose than the main body of organa. The latter are settings of chants which were for the most part very widely known. Relatively few of them are unusual enough to permit speculation about the church for which W1 was compiled, or about the liturgical use to which it most nearly corresponds. So far as the organa are concerned, I do not feel that much advance can be made upon the careful discussion in Professor Roesner's article.