OALLIOAN
358
GALLIOAN
some archaic features (now often mistaken for Orien-
talisms) which had been later dropped by Rome. At
some period in the fourth century — it has been con-
jectured that it was in the papacy of St. Damasus
(366-84) — reforms were made at Rome, the position
of the Great Intercession and of the Pax were altered,
the latter, perhaps because the form of the dismissal
of the catechumens was disused, and the distinction
between the 7nissn catechumenoruni and the missa
Jidelium was no longer needed, and therefore the want
was felt of a position with some meaning to it for the
sign of Christian unity, and the long and diffuse prayers
were made into the short and crisp collects of the
Roman type. It was perhaps then that the variable
Post-Sanctus and Post-Pridie were altered into a fixed
Canon of a type similar to the Roman Canon of to-
day, though perhaps this Canon began with the clause
which now reads "Quam oblationem", but according
to the pseudo-Ambrosian tract "De Sacramentis"
once read "Fac nobis hanc oblationem". This may
have been introduced by a short variable Post-Sanc-
tus. This reform, possibly through the influence of
St. Ambrose, was adopted at Milan, but not in Gaul and
Spain. At a still later period changes were again
made at Rome. They have been principally attrib-
uted to St. Leo (440-61), St. Gelasius (492-96), and
St. Gregory (590-604), but the share that these popes
had in the reforms is not definitely known, though
three varj'ing sacramentaries have been called by
their respective names. These later reforms were not
adopted at Milan, which retained the books of the first
reform, which are now known as Ambrosian.
Hence it may be seen that, roughly speaking, the Western or Latin Liturgy went through three phases, which may be called for want of better names the Galilean, the Ambrosian, and the Roman stages. The holders of the theory no doubt recognize quite clearly that the line of demarcation between these stages is rather a vague one, and that the alterations were in many respects gradual. Of the three theories of origin the Kphesine may be dismissed as practically disproved. To both of the other two the same objec- tion may be urged, that they are largely founded on conjecture and on the critical examination of docu- ments of a much later date than the periods to which the conjectures relate. But at present there is little else to go upon. It may be well to mention also a theory put forward by Mr. W.C. Bishop in the "Church Quarterly" for July, 1908, to the effect that the Galil- ean Liturgy was not introduced into Gaul from any- where, but was the original liturgy of that country, apparently invented and developed there. He speaks of an original independence of Rome (of cour.se liturgi- cally only) followed by later borrowings. This does not seem to exclude the idea that Rome and the West may have had the germ of the Western Rite in com- mon. Again the theory is conjectural and is only very slightly stated in the article.
The later history of the Galilean Rite until the time of its abolition as a separate rite is obscure. In Spain there was a definite centre in Toledo, whose in- fluence was felt over the whole peninsula, even after the coming of the Moors. Hence it was that the Spanish Rite was much more regulated than the Galilean, and Toledo at times, though not very success- fully, tried to give liturgical laws even to Gaul, though probably only to the Visigothic part of it. In the greater part of France there was liturgical anarchy. There was no capital to give laws to the whole coun- try, and the rite developed there variously in various places, so that among the scanty fragments of the service-books that remain there is a marked absence of verbal uniformity, though the main outlines of the services are of the same type. Several councils attempted to regulate matters a little, but only for certain provinces. Among these were the Councils of Vannes (465), Agde (506), Vaison (529), Tours (367),
Auxerre (578), and the two Councils of M4con (581,
623). But all along there went on a certain process
of Romanizing, due to the constant applications to
the Holy See for advice, and there is also another
complication in the probable introduction during the
seventh century, through the Columbanian mission-
aries, of elements of Irish origin. The changes towards
the Roman Rite happened rather gradually during the
course of the late seventh and eighth century, and seem
synchronous with the rise of the M aires du Palais, and
their development into kings of France. Nearly aU
the GaUican books of the later Merovingian period,
which are all that are left, contain many Roman ele-
ments. In some cases there is reason to suppose that
the Roman Canon was first introduced into an other-
wise GaUican Mass, but the so-called Gelasian Sacra-
mentary, the principal MS. of which is attributed to
the Abbey of St-Denis and to the early eighth century,
is an avowedly Roman book, though containing
GaUican additions and adaptations. And the same
may be said of what is left of the undoubtedly Prank-
ish book known as the "Missale Francorum" of the
same date. Mgr Duchesne attributes a good deal of
this eighth-century Romanizing tendency to St. Boni-
face, though he shows that it had begun before his
day. The Roman Liturgy was adopted at Metz in
the time of St. Chrodegang (742-66). The Roman
chant was introduced about 760, and by a decree of
Pepin, quoted in Charlemagne's "Admonitio Gene-
ralis" in 789, the GaUican chant was abolished in its
favour. Pope Adrian I between 784 and 791 sent to
Charlemagne at his own request a copy of what was
considered to be the Sacramentary of St. Gregory,
but which certainly represented the Roman use of the
end of the eighth century. This book, which was far
from complete, was edited and supplemented by the
addition of a large amount of matter derived from the
GaUican books and from the Roman book known as
the Gelasian Sacramentary, which had been graduaUy
supplanting the GaUican. It is probable that the
editor was Charlemagne's principal liturgical adviser,
the Englishman Alcuin. Copies were distributed
throughout Charlemagne's empire, and this "compo-
site liturgy", as Mgr Duchesne says, "from its source
in the Imperial chapel spread throughout all the
churches of the Prankish Empire and at length, find-
ing its way to Rome gradually supplanted there the
ancient use". More than half a century later, when
Charles the Bald wished to see what the ancient
GaUican Rite had been like, it was necessary to import
Spanish priests to celebrate it in his presence.
It should be noted that the name GaUican has also been applied to two other uses: (1) a French use introduced by the Normans into Apulia and Sicily. This was only a variant of the Roman Rite. (2) The reformed Breviaries of the French dioceses in the seventeenth to mid-nineteenth centuries. These have nothing to do with the ancient GaUican Rite.
II. MSS. AND Other Sources. — There are no MSS. of the GaUican Rite earlier than the latter part of the seventh century, though the descriptions in the letters of St. Germanus of Paris (555-76) take one back an- other century. The MSS. are: —
(1) The Reichenau Fragments (Carlsruhe, 253), described (no. 8) in Delisle's "M^moire sur d'anciens Sacramentaires." — These were discovered by Mone in 1850 in a palimpsest MS. from the Abbey of Reichenau in the library of Carlsruhe. The MS., which is late seventh century, had belonged to John II, Bishop of Constance (760-81). It contains eleven Masses of purely GaUican type, one of which is in honour of St. Germanus of Auxerre, but the others do not specify any festival. One Mass, except the Post-Pridie, which is in prose, is entirely in hexameter verse. Mone published them with a facsimUe in his "Latein- ische und Griechische Messen aus dem zweiten his sechsten Jahrhundert "(Frankfort, 1850). They were
