324 On the Consuetudinary of S. Osmund. 



was only another name for, the Directory ; and in the " Ordinale r \ 

 published at Antwerp in 1488 there is a section expressly called 

 " Directorium Sacerdotum " (Rock, i., 9). The " Consuetudinary " 

 dealt, as its name implies, with the special customs of the church, 

 both as regards the members o£ the cathedral body who were severally 

 responsible for their performance, and the precise character of the 

 observances themselves. In the " ordinal" we have precise direc- 

 tions as to the service itself — in the " consuetudinary/'' instructions 

 as to the outward ceremonies and ritual with which it was to be 

 accompanied. The latter consequently dealt with the duties and 

 privileges of the several members of the cathedral body, defining 

 accurately the relations in which they stood to each other, and ex- 

 plaining the part they were to take in celebrating mass, or in the 

 daily reading in the chapter-house, or in the ceremonial observances 

 appropriate to certain seasons, or in processions (no unimportant 

 portion of the worship of the eleventh and following centuries), or 

 in offices for the dead. The precise character of the Consuetudinary 

 will be more evident when I come presently to speak of the headings 

 of its various sections. Meanwhile I may say, that the broad 

 distinction that may be drawn between these two formularies may 

 be perhaps thus summed up, viz., that in the " ordinal " the officiating 

 minister learnt what service was to be carried out — in the " consue- 

 tudinary/' how, by whom, and with what special outward forms it 

 was to be accompanied. 



Osmund compiled both an " ordinal" and a " consuetudinary," 

 It is of the latter— the most ancient as well as most perfect copy of 

 which is still preserved among the muniments of the Bishop of Sarum 

 — that I wish to speak. As to the precise date of this copy I shall 

 treat presently ; meanwhile I may say that this manuscript, unique 

 and precious as it is, must have been copied or compiled from an 

 older, and perhaps an original, one. There is internal evidence, as 

 will soon be proved, that the manuscript we possess cannot be of 

 earlier date than the thirteenth century, whereas among the records 

 of Lichfield Cathedral we find no small portion of this same treatise, 

 which was made by Bishop Hugh de Nonant (who would seem 

 probably to have been at one time a canon of Sarum from his 



