Examines the ancient Gallican liturgy, with its distinctive ceremonial elements and theological symbolism that differed significantly from the Roman Rite before Carolingian reforms.

Historical Context

The Expositio brevis antiquae liturgiae Gallicanae (“Brief Exposition of the Ancient Gallican Liturgy”) is a short treatise that illuminates the Gallican Rite of the early medieval Church in Gaul. For a long time it was attributed to St. Germanus of Paris (c.496–576) as a pair of letters explaining the Mass, but modern research has shown it is pseudonymous. In the early 20th century, liturgical scholar André Wilmart demonstrated that the work could not have been written by Germanus and instead dated it to around circa 700 A.D. in southern Francia (Gallican Rites - Encyclopedia.com). The text survives in a single manuscript from the Abbey of St. Martin of Autun – notably, the only known copy (Gallican Rites - Encyclopedia.com). This suggests the exposition was not widely copied, yet its preservation in monastic circles hints at its value for instructing clergy in a rapidly changing liturgical landscape.

By the time of its composition (late 7th to early 8th century), the Gallican liturgy had developed a distinctive form, enriched by various external influences. Gaul’s liturgy originally shared much with other Western rites, but over the 6th–7th centuries it incorporated new rites from the East (often via Spain or Milan) (Gallican Rites - Encyclopedia.com). The author of the Expositio brevis – sometimes called Pseudo-Germanus of Paris – likely wrote to document and interpret the liturgical practices of his church, possibly to ensure they were understood and preserved as the Gallican Rite was on the verge of being supplanted by the Roman Rite. Indeed, within a few decades (under Pepin and Charlemagne in the 8th–9th centuries) the Roman liturgy would be officially imposed in Frankish realms, causing the Gallican usage to fade. Thus, this exposition stands at the end of the Gallican tradition, offering a last glimpse into its order of worship. Its purpose seems to have been pedagogical and explanatory: the text is framed as two epistles, suggesting a didactic letter format addressing someone’s inquiries about the Mass. Through these letters, the author carefully outlines the ceremony and provides spiritual meanings, likely aiming to educate clergy or laity about the significance of each rite.

Theological Themes

The Expositio brevis is not merely a dry liturgical order; it richly infuses the description of ceremonies with theological interpretation and symbolism. From the very outset, the author underscores the sacrificial and salvific nature of the Mass. He calls the Eucharist the “first and greatest of all gifts” and explains that Mass is celebrated “in commemoration of the Lord’s death, because Christ’s death became the life of the world, so that by offering it [the Mass] may profit the salvation of the living and the repose of the dead.” (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). This reflects a robust theology of the Eucharist as a re-presentation of Christ’s redemptive sacrifice, effective for both the living and the deceased – a belief in the communion of saints and prayer for the dead that was well-established in 7th-century Christian doctrine. The Mass is seen as a mystical participation in Christ’s one sacrifice (“Christ’s death [has] become the life of the world”) and an instrument of grace for souls, anticipating later medieval emphases on the Mass’s propitiatory power.

A dominant theme is allegorical exegesis of the liturgy: the author links virtually every ritual action or object to events in salvation history or moral/spiritual realities. For example, the entrance antiphon sung by the choir before the readings is interpreted as representing the voices of the ancient patriarchs before the Flood (such as Enoch) who prophetically “thundered” about Christ’s coming (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). As the clergy chant the antiphon, the priest processes to the altar “in the figure of Christ coming from heaven into the Ark (the Church)” to nourish the people with teaching, just as Noah’s ark preserved the righteous (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). This vivid typology shows how the Gallican theologian read the Old Testament as prefiguring the liturgy: the priest = Christ, the church = Ark, the liturgical chant = prophetic voices. Such interpretations echo the wider patristic tradition of mystagogical catechesis, where biblical events (Noah’s ark, Exodus, etc.) were seen as foreshadowing Christian rites.

Another notable theological theme is the call to interior devotion and purity during worship. When the deacon proclaims “Silence” before the Scripture readings, Pseudo-Germanus explains it has a twofold purpose: “that the people, being quiet, may better hear the word of God, and that our heart may fall silent from every impure thought, so that the word of God may be better received.” (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). This little commentary reveals a concern for the spiritual disposition of the worshippers – emphasizing attentive listening and inner silence as necessary for God’s word to take root. The liturgy is thus presented not just as ritual, but as a means of moral and spiritual formation: it exhorts the faithful to approach with reverence, faith, and focus.

Throughout the exposition, the author frequently highlights the Trinitarian and Christological dimensions of the rites. The Trisagion hymn (“Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal, have mercy on us”) is sung in Greek and Latin by the choir as an act of praise to the Trinity (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). The text also alludes to the Paschal mystery often – for instance, it interprets the linen corporal cloth on the altar in light of Christ’s burial. The author writes that the corporal (the cloth upon which the Eucharistic offerings are placed) is made of pure linen specifically “because the body of the Lord was wrapped in pure linens in the tomb.” (Shroud Spectrum International No. 5 Part 4). This theological reasoning connects the altar rites directly to Jesus’ Passion and Resurrection: just as Christ’s body was laid in a linen shroud, so the Eucharistic Body rests on linen, underscoring continuity between the historical Christ and the sacramental presence. In a similar vein, the practice of reserving the consecrated Host in a small tower-like receptacle (turris) is given a biblical rationale – the tower symbolizes the rock-hewn tomb from which the “King of glory” rose ( - MedCrave online). Such explanations reveal a deeply incarnational and historical understanding of the liturgy: every physical aspect (linen cloths, vessels, gestures) is freighted with meaning tied to Christ’s earthly life and saving acts. The liturgy is a living memorial of Christ’s death and resurrection, and by these symbolic correlations the faithful are taught to recognize that mystery at every turn.

Equally, the exposition reflects the theological ideals of the Merovingian Church in its day. There is an assumption of a thoroughly Christian society in which catechumens and penitents still exist (the text describes prayers for catechumens and the dismissal of unbaptized before the Eucharist), indicating an ideal of maintaining the ancient order of a discipled community. The author’s inclusion of a detailed section on the rites of Lent and the “traditio symboli” (handing over the Creed to candidates for baptism) – reportedly found in the second letter (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource) – highlights the importance of the pre-baptismal catechesis and the Creed’s role. This suggests ongoing theological emphasis on preparing converts and the significance of Lent as a penitential, formative season. He even notes practices “hitherto unknown” regarding Lent and catechumens, implying he is preserving precious knowledge of customs that were in danger of being forgotten (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). All these themes – Eucharistic sacrifice, allegory, Trinitarian worship, moral preparation, and catechesis – situate the Expositio brevis firmly within the theological currents of its time. It straddles the line between patristic tradition and medieval development, echoing Church Fathers in its mystagogy while also anticipating later medieval allegorical commentaries on the Mass.

In the Gallican tradition, the consecrated Eucharist was reserved in hanging “towers” or dove-shaped vessels suspended above the altar. Pseudo-Germanus explicitly links this practice to Christ’s burial: *“the Body of the Lord is carried in towers because the Lord’s tomb was cut in the rock in the likeness of a tower, with an inner chamber where the Lord’s body rested, from which the King of glory arose.” ( - MedCrave online) Medieval liturgical art preserved this symbolism; for example, ornate dove reliquaries like the one shown (France, 13th c.) were used to house the Eucharist, simultaneously evoking the Holy Spirit and the sepulcher of Christ.

Linguistic Characteristics

The Latin style of the Expositio brevis reflects the Late Latin/Early Medieval milieu in which it was written. It is decidedly non-Classical in flavor – the author writes in the somewhat unpolished, workmanlike Latin typical of Merovingian clerics, replete with biblical phrases and technical liturgical jargon. Even an 18th-century editor remarked on its language: “its clumsy manner of writing and barbarous words demonstrate its antiquity” (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). Indeed, the syntax can be convoluted and the vocabulary includes terms foreign to Classical Latin, betraying the influence of vernacular speech patterns and regional usage. For instance, the text uses constructions like “Antiphona ad praelegendo canetur” (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource), an awkward gerundive phrase literally meaning “the antiphon will be sung for the reading ahead.” A Classical Latin writer might have phrased this differently, but in the 7th-century context such phrasing was acceptable. The narrative often strings together clauses with less concern for Ciceronian elegance and more for clarity in instruction, suggesting it may have been meant to be read aloud or easily understood by clergy whose Latin education varied.

The Expositio also employs specialized liturgical terminology unique to the Gallican and Mozarabic usage, some of which would sound strange to a Roman liturgist of the time. For example, it refers to the “Sonus” sung by the choir during the offertory – explaining that this was an antiphonal chant analogous to the Roman Offertory chant (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). It notes that this Sonus (also called Laudes) consisted of an Alleluia repeated three times, a distinctly Gallican feature symbolizing the three ages of human history (before the Law, under the Law, under Grace) (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). Likewise, the text mentions the mysterious “Trecanum” sung during or after Communion (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). This word is exceedingly rare; even the medieval commentator admitted “I do not quite understand what the Trecanum is” (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). The term’s etymology suggests a “thrice chanted” formula, and the author speculates it might be the Apostles’ Creed expressing faith in the Trinity, recited in triple form. Such vocabulary – laudes, sonus, trecanum, collectio post nomina (prayer “after the names” of the diptychs), contestatio (the Preface dialogue) – marks the text as a product of the Gallican liturgical culture, which had developed its own nomenclature distinct from the standard Roman Rite. For philologists, these terms provide valuable insight into regional variations of ecclesiastical Latin. They also demonstrate how the language of liturgy had evolved: partly in continuity with Latin tradition (using inherited words like antiphona, canon, osculum pacis for the kiss of peace), and partly through innovation or borrowing (e.g. Kyrie eleison and the Trisagion are Greek phrases that appear, reflecting Eastern influence).

In addition, the Latin is imbued with biblical Latin influences. Pseudo-Germanus frequently quotes or paraphrases Scripture, and his Latin style often mirrors the Vulgate. For example, he cites Jude 14 (the prophecy of Enoch) (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource), and his description of liturgical actions sometimes echoes biblical language (he uses tonuerunt “thundered” for the patriarchs’ prophesying, a vivid verb reminiscent of biblical theophanies). The use of hagiographical and patristic vocabulary is also evident – words like missa (Mass), mysterium, sacrarium (sanctuary), collecta (collect prayer) had specific Christian connotations by this era. Some spelling and orthography might appear “irregular” by classical standards (for instance, writing Enoc for Enoch, or carismatum for charismatum (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource)), typical of the pre-Carolingian spelling reforms when uniformity in Latin was yet to be imposed. Overall, the linguistic character of the Expositio is that of Merovingian ecclesiastical Latin – somewhat rough-hewn yet rich in church terminology, a blend of scripture, law (council canons are referenced), and emerging medieval usage. This makes it a noteworthy text for philologists tracing the transition from Classical to Medieval Latin, as it is “incondite” (unrefined) but functional, carrying the weight of complex theological ideas in a Latin that was accessible to its contemporaries (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource).

Liturgical Significance

Because it systematically describes the order of worship, the Expositio brevis is an invaluable witness to the structure and ceremonies of the Gallican Mass in the late 7th century. It essentially provides a blueprint of the Gallican Rite, highlighting many elements that distinguish it from the Roman rite. Through this text, scholars have been able to confirm and understand numerous features of Gallican liturgy that were otherwise known only fragmentarily from missals and church canons. Some of the key liturgical components detailed include:

• Entrance Rite and Exhortation: The Mass began with an antiphona ad praelegendum – an antiphon (introductory chant) sung by the choir with a psalm verse and Gloria Patri (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). Uniquely, this was followed by a praefatio or admonitory address to the people delivered by the priest (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). Before any Scripture was read, the celebrant would exhort the congregation to worship with proper reverence, essentially a short sermon preparing them for the solemnity to come. (This Gallican practice has no exact parallel in the Roman rite, which has no priestly exhortation at the start except the opening collect prayer.)

• Liturgy of the Word: After the exhortation, a deacon cried out “Silence!” to still the assembly for the readings. The Gallican lectionary included multiple readings: typically one from the Old Testament (the Prophets) and one from an Epistle, in addition to the Gospel (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). This triple reading scheme (Prophecy, Epistle, Gospel) is notable – the Roman liturgy by this time usually had only an Epistle and Gospel, but the Gallican (like the Spanish Mozarabic rite) preserved an Old Testament lesson as well. The Expositio even mentions that on saints’ feast days, the acts or passions of the martyrs could be read publicly before the Gospel (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource), to edify the people with the examples of the saints.

• Chant and Psalmody: The Gallican Mass was rich in chant. After the first collect, the choir sang the Trisagion (the “Thrice Holy” hymn Sanctus Deus, Sanctus Fortis, Sanctus Immortalis…) in Greek and then in Latin (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). This practice likely came from the East (the Trisagion was a standard part of Eastern liturgies) and had been adopted in Gaul – something not found in the Roman Mass. The Trisagion was followed by the Canticle of Zachary (Benedictus Dominus Deus Israel, Luke 1:68-79) on ordinary days (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource) – another striking feature, as the Benedictus is otherwise known as a morning canticle (Lauds) in the Roman breviary, not as a Mass chant. Pseudo-Germanus notes that in Lent this joyful canticle and other “hymns of gladness” were omitted (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource), indicating a seasonal adjustment. After the readings, instead of a Gradual psalm and Alleluia (as in Rome), the Gallican choir chanted the Hymn of the Three Youths (Dan. 3:57-88, “Benedicite, omnia opera Domini…”) as a responsory (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). Significantly, the Expositio connects this to the Fourth Council of Toledo’s decree that the Three Youths’ hymn be sung “in omnium missarum solemnitate” (at every Mass) throughout Spain and Gaul (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). This shows a coordinated liturgical tradition between the Visigothic and Gallican churches. During the Gospel procession, the Trisagion was sung again by the choir as a processional response (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource) – and repeated once more after the Gospel reading (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource), framing the Gospel with this ancient hymn.

• Homily and Intercessions: After the Gospel, the bishop (or priest) preached a sermon from the pulpit (or had authorized readings from the Church Fathers’ homilies if he was unable to preach himself) (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). This reflects the emphasis on preaching and teaching. Then followed a series of intercessory prayers led by the deacon for various groups – specifically for the audientes (penitents or hearers) and catechumens – after which those not yet baptized were dismissed from the assembly (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). This mirrors the ancient pattern of the Mass of the Faithful beginning once catechumens depart, a practice that was dying out by 700 but still remembered here. The presence of formal prayers over catechumens in the Gallican rite, as noted by the Expositio, is a vestige of the early Church’s two-part liturgy (Mass of Catechumens/Mass of Faithful) and underscores the penitential and catechetical character of Gallican worship.

• Offertory and Eucharistic Prayer: The exposition provides fascinating details about the offertory rite. Once the faithful (catechumens) had left and silence was again enjoined, the deacon would bring the Corpus Domini – the reserved Eucharistic bread from the previous liturgy – from the turris (a tower-like receptacle) to the altar (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). This practice of carrying in pre-consecrated Eucharist was a distinct Gallican custom (perhaps for the communion of the clergy or as a sign of continuity between liturgies). The author even contrasts it with Roman usage, noting that “the Romans did not use a tower, but a box (capsa) to carry [the Eucharist]” (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource), showing an awareness of different regional traditions. After this, the bread and wine to be consecrated were brought forward and offered. During the offering of gifts, the choir sang a piece called the “Sonus”, described as an offertory antiphon comparable to the Roman offertory chant (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). In the Gallican rite, this chant – also termed Laudes – was characterized by a thrice-repeated Alleluia (to signify the ages of history) often with verses, akin to the Mozarabic laus (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). Next, the diptychs were read aloud: a list of names of bishops and the faithful departed inscribed on tablets, placed on the altar (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). The priest then prayed the collectio post nomina – a prayer “after the names” for those commemorated (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). Following this, the kiss of peace was exchanged among the faithful (interestingly, in the Gallican order, the kiss of peace comes before the anaphora, whereas in the Roman Rite of that era it usually came after the Canon, just before Communion). A special collectio ad pacem (prayer for peace) was recited by the priest after the kiss (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). Only then did the Eucharistic prayer proper begin: the text calls the preface the contestatio and notes that the Canon was extremely short in this rite (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). This suggests the Gallican anaphora was more concise than the Roman Canon (which is quite lengthy) – a fact supported by surviving Gallican prayers in sources like the Missale Gothicum. The Canon included a Sanctus (implied by the mention of contestatio, since contestatio likely included the praise leading into the Holy Holy Holy) and the consecration. The Expositio remarks that the Words of Institution were said secretly and inaudibly by the priest (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource) (much as in the Eastern liturgies and later medieval practice), evidenced by the term “Post secreta” for the prayer said after the consecration. This orationem post secreta was recited aloud by the priest (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource), indicating that after the silent canon, there was a public prayer concluding the anaphora.

• Communion Rite: The fraction (breaking of the Bread) and the commingling of the chalice with a particle of the Host took place after the Canon (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). During the fraction, the choir sang an antiphonal chant (perhaps analogous to a Communion antiphon) (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). Before Communion was distributed, the Gallican rite included a formal blessing of the people. The bishop would pronounce three prayers of blessing over the congregation (if a simple priest was presiding, only one brief blessing was given) (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). The Expositio even provides the formula for the priest’s single-sentence blessing: “Pax, fides et caritas et communicatio corporis et sanguinis Domini sit semper vobiscum” – “May peace, faith, and charity, and the participation of the Body and Blood of the Lord be always with you” (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). This elaborate blessing before Communion, often called the “Benedictio”, is something the Roman Mass did not have (in Rome, a single blessing is given at the very end of Mass instead). It survived, however, in the Mozarabic and Ambrosian liturgies, and here we see its use in Gaul. The faithful then received Communion. The text notes that during Communion (or immediately after it), the choir sang the “Trecanum.” (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource) This is one of the more enigmatic aspects of the Gallican rite. The term Trecanum (literally “thrice-song”) is not fully explained, but the author muses that it might have been a triple recitation of the Creed or a triple chant of some acclamation of Trinitarian faith (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). He even connects it to a rubric in the Mozarabic Missal where the Creed (Symbolum) is prescribed after the consecration, suggesting that in Gaul they may have sung a creedal hymn after Communion as a final affirmation of faith in the Holy Trinity (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). This practice has no equivalent in the Roman Rite of the time (the Nicene Creed was not regularly part of Mass in Rome until much later, and never as a post-Communion element). It illustrates how the Gallican Church often placed a strong Trinitarian and didactic emphasis throughout the liturgy. Finally, the priest said the orationem post Eucharistiam (Post-Communion prayer), followed by a last collect, to conclude the Mass (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource).

In sum, the Expositio brevis enumerates almost every part of the Gallican Mass, from the entrance to the dismissal, thereby confirming what other scattered sources suggest and filling gaps in our knowledge. It demonstrates that the Gallican Rite was a complex, ceremony-rich liturgy with many moving parts – more ornate in some respects than the contemporary Roman Rite (due to extra hymns, multiple readings, etc.), yet also retaining some primitive features (like the dismissal of catechumens) that Rome by then had lost. The work explicitly notes differences from Roman practice (for instance, how the Eucharist was reserved, or the length of the Canon) (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource) (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource), showing a self-awareness of the Gallican Rite’s unique identity. Its detailed account also underscores the influence of the Mozarabic (Spanish) liturgy on Gaul – they shared hymns like the Trisagion and Benedicite and practices mandated by common councils (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). For liturgists, this exposition is thus a key to unlocking the Gallican Rite, allowing a reconstruction of its order of Mass. It ties together information from Gallican sacramentaries, lectionaries (like the Luxeuil Lectionary), and church regulations into a coherent picture of worship. Without it, many of the above elements would be known only in isolation or by conjecture. Therefore, the Expositio brevis has immense liturgical significance: it is the most comprehensive early description of Gallican Mass we have, and it illuminates the practice and spirituality of Frankish Christianity on the eve of the Carolingian liturgical reforms.

Comparative Analysis

In comparison to other liturgical traditions and explanatory texts, the Expositio brevis occupies a special place, bridging the gap between the ancient patristic commentaries and the later medieval liturgical expositions.

Within the Western liturgical family, the Gallican Rite described by Pseudo-Germanus shows both commonality and contrast with its peers. It shares a basic structure with the Roman Rite – i.e. readings, offertory, Eucharistic prayer, communion – but the sequence and emphasis of elements differ notably. For instance, the presence of an Old Testament reading and the post-Gospel Benedicite hymn aligns the Gallican usage more closely with the Mozarabic (Visigothic) Rite of Spain than with Rome. This is not surprising, as Gaul and Visigothic Spain had extensive cultural and ecclesiastical exchange. The Expositio itself cites the Council of Toledo (633) as authority for a liturgical practice across “all the churches of Spain and Gaul,” indicating a coordinated rite in the two regions (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource). Both Gallican and Mozarabic liturgies featured elements like the Trisagion, multiple collects and post-communion prayers, and a generally florid ceremonial style with many proper prayers. In contrast, the Roman Rite by the 7th century was somewhat more streamlined: in Rome the Mass began with a single Introit chant and went straight into the Kyrie/Gloria (if prescribed) and a single Collect, whereas the Gallican began with an Introit psalm and a praefatio exhortation. Rome had only two readings (usually) whereas Gaul had three; Rome did not include the Trisagion or the Benedicite canticle at Mass, whereas Gaul did. The kiss of peace in Rome came later in the liturgy (after the Canon and Pater Noster), whereas in Gaul it came before the Eucharistic Canon. These differences illustrate that while the core Eucharistic theology was shared (as seen in the Expositio’s orthodox theology of sacrifice), the ritual expression could diverge significantly due to different historical development.

The Ambrosian Rite of Milan provides an interesting intermediate case. Older scholarship (like that of Louis Duchesne) once hypothesized that the Gallican Rite itself originated from Milan or the East. Duchesne thought that an Eastern-influenced liturgy was brought to Milan in the 4th century and then spread to Gaul, making Milan the “missing link” for Gallican practices. He and others leaned heavily on the Expositio brevis, assuming it was a 6th-century document, to reconstruct a 6th-century Gallican Mass with Oriental traits (Gallican Rites - Encyclopedia.com). However, this theory has been largely overturned by modern research. The discovery that our exposition was actually composed around 700 (long after St. Ambrose) has led scholars to conclude that early Gallican liturgy was not as exotic as once thought. In fact, evidence now suggests the early Gallican Rite was initially close to Rome’s, and only in the 6th–7th centuries acquired Eastern and extra-Roman features (Gallican Rites - Encyclopedia.com). Milan’s liturgy itself was fundamentally Roman in the 4th century (Gallican Rites - Encyclopedia.com) (St. Ambrose’s De sacramentis shows use of the Roman Canon (Gallican Rites - Encyclopedia.com)). So rather than Gallican being a transplanted Eastern rite, it appears that Gallican and Roman rites branched from a common trunk, and Gallican later accumulated unique customs (some possibly imported from Syria or Constantinople via missionaries or councils). The Expositio confirms this later enrichment: e.g. the Trisagion likely entered Gaul after the 5th century, the use of Greek chants and Eastern-style Great Intercessions point to influence that wasn’t present in the earliest Latin liturgies. Thus, when we compare Gallican to Ambrosian, we find Ambrosian is in many ways closer to Roman (e.g. it lacks the Trisagion and retains the Roman-style Canon, though it has its own distinct features), whereas Gallican (and Mozarabic) took a more divergent path.

When comparing the Expositio brevis to other liturgical expositions or writings, it stands as one of the earliest Western examples of a systematic mystical explanation of the Mass. In the East, analogous works existed – notably, St. Germanus of Constantinople (8th century) wrote a famous commentary on the Byzantine Divine Liturgy, using allegory to explain it. It is intriguing that Pseudo-Germanus of Paris and Germanus of Constantinople were near-contemporaries, both offering symbolic interpretations of their respective rites (Western Gallican and Eastern Byzantine). This suggests a broader Christian impulse in that era to document and interpret the liturgy in the face of change (the East was experiencing iconoclasm debates; the West, liturgical unification). In the Latin West, earlier precedents include St. Isidore of Seville who in the 7th century wrote De ecclesiasticis officiis in Visigothic Spain – a work describing the liturgical offices and their spiritual meanings. Isidore’s style is more straightforward and catechetical, but certainly Pseudo-Germanus would have been in sympathy with Isidore’s explanations (both operating in the milieu of Iberian-Gallican rites). Later on, in the 9th century, Carolingian writers like Amalarius of Metz and the author known as Pseudo-Alcuin composed extensive allegorical treatises on the Mass (e.g. De ecclesiasticis officiis, Liber Officialis). These later works often go even further in elaborate symbolism, but one can see them as inheritors of the tradition exemplified by the Expositio brevis. It’s quite plausible that Amalarius or others had access to texts like Pseudo-Germanus or at least were influenced by the same interpretative atmosphere. For example, the symbolic link between the altar linens and Christ’s burial shroud which Pseudo-Germanus draws (Shroud Spectrum International No. 5 Part 4) appears again in later medieval commentaries almost verbatim – a sign that such interpretations became part of the standard repertoire of Latin liturgical spirituality.

In terms of influence and reception: within its own time, the Expositio may have served as a guide or clarifier for clergy in regions still using the Gallican Rite. It might have circulated (albeit limitedly) among Frankish bishops or monasteries interested in codifying their local practices. However, as the Gallican Rite was progressively supplanted by the Roman Rite during the 8th century, any direct influence on practice waned. Instead, its influence is more evident in the long-term intellectual tradition – contributing to the preservation of Gallican practices which were later studied and selectively integrated into the emerging Frankish-Roman liturgy. Notably, some elements of Gallican origin found their way into the Roman usage during the Carolingian reform (the Gallican and Roman rites blended to form the Medieval Roman Rite). For example, some scholars argue that the Western practice of singing the Nicene Creed at Mass (which was adopted in Frankish lands and finally in Rome by the 11th century) may have been propelled by Gallican influence, where something like the Trecanum (a Trinitarian creed-hymn) was customary. While Pseudo-Germanus’ text itself might not have been explicitly cited, it represents the kind of Gallican custom that left a mark on the unified rite.

Impact and Legacy

The most significant legacy of the Expositio brevis antiquae liturgiae Gallicanae is its role as a principal source for our understanding of the Gallican Rite. As modern liturgical historians acknowledge, it is “the most important source for knowledge of the late Gallican liturgy” (Gallican Rites - Encyclopedia.com). After the Gallican liturgy’s abolition, much of its memory was obscured or lost; this humble exposition, hidden in a single manuscript, preserved crucial knowledge of how the old Gallican Mass was structured and celebrated. When interest in ancient liturgies revived in the 17th–18th centuries, scholars like Cardinal Jean Mabillon and Dom Edmond Martène were thrilled to recover this text. Martène published it (with commentary) in his De antiquis ecclesiae ritibus, using it to illuminate the fragmentary Gallican missals that had been found. For a time, these letters were universally accepted as genuine writings of St. Germanus of Paris – thus, they were treated as eyewitness accounts from the 6th century. Luminaries of liturgical scholarship such as Pierre Lebrun and Louis Duchesne built reconstructions of Merovingian liturgy on that assumption (Gallican Rites - Encyclopedia.com). Duchesne, for example, in his Christian Worship, relied on Pseudo-Germanus to depict a 6th-century Gallican Mass rich with Eastern-imported ceremony. This influenced generations of thought about non-Roman Western rites.

However, the 20th century brought a more critical legacy. Once Wilmart and others proved the text was actually 7th–8th century (Pseudo-Germanus), historians adjusted their understanding, recognizing that the Expositio reflects a later, “Gallicanized” stage of the rite (post-classical Gallican, with many additions) (Gallican Rites - Encyclopedia.com). This clarified that one cannot retroject all its content to the 5th century, thereby refining theories of liturgical origins. In this way, the work helped correct earlier hypotheses and sharpened the chronology of Western liturgical development. It stands now as a testament to the liturgy in transition: on the cusp of the Carolingian reform, looking back to inherited Gallican customs and interpreting them even as the tide was turning toward Roman usage.

The Expositio brevis also contributed to the 20th-century liturgical movement in another sense: it spurred interest in recovering the diversity of early Western rites. Scholars like Jean-François van der Mensbrugghe revisited “Pseudo-Germanus” in studies (e.g. “Pseudo-Germanus Reconsidered”) to glean insights into Gallican liturgy’s ethos. The text has been translated and commented upon in academic journals, making its content accessible to modern readers. Its allegorical interpretations have been noted for their spirituality and as precursors to medieval mysticism. In ecumenical and intercultural studies, Pseudo-Germanus’ work is frequently cited alongside Eastern liturgical commentaries to compare how different traditions understood the symbolism of worship.

In terms of modern liturgical life, while the Gallican Rite itself is no longer in regular use in the Roman Catholic Church, the Expositio has indirectly inspired some attempts at revival. In France and elsewhere, a few Old Catholic and Orthodox Western Rite communities in the 20th century undertook reconstructions of the Gallican Mass (sometimes called the “Divine Liturgy of St. Germanus of Paris”). These reconstructions heavily relied on Pseudo-Germanus’ description, combined with surviving Gallican sacramentary texts, to recreate the ceremonies as authentically as possible. Thus, Pseudo-Germanus’ legacy lives not only in library scholarship but even in certain chapels where, for example, the Trisagion is once again sung in Latin and Greek and the faithful receive a blessing before Communion – directly due to the influence of the Expositio brevis on those revival liturgies. Such usages remain niche, but they underscore the historical importance of the text: without it, any revival of Gallican worship would be guesswork.

Finally, the Expositio brevis holds a legacy in demonstrating the unity and diversity of early medieval Christianity. It shows that, despite ritual differences, the Gallican church held the same faith and goals as her Roman sister – to commemorate Christ’s death and resurrection, to preach the Gospel, to sanctify the faithful. Its detailed account of offering prayers for the departed, praising the Trinity, and instructing converts emphasizes a pastoral continuity that transcends rite. Today, liturgists and theologians study it to gain a fuller picture of how the Western liturgical tradition could accommodate variant practices and yet remain in communion. In sum, Pseudo-Germanus’ little exposition has proved to be a treasure trove: historically by preserving the Gallican Rite’s memory, theologically by conveying early medieval spiritual exegesis, and liturgically by enriching our awareness of how the Christian liturgy developed. Its impact is seen in scholarly literature, in comparative liturgy courses, and in the high appreciation modern experts have for the once “forgotten” Gallican rite. As one scholar aptly noted, these letters – once thought to be from a famed 6th-century saint, now understood as a product of the 7th-century Frankish church – “resuscitated” the Gallican liturgy from near oblivion (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource), allowing it to assume its place in the broad tapestry of Christian worship traditions. Thus, the Expositio brevis antiquae liturgiae Gallicanae continues to inform and inspire, securing the Gallican liturgy’s legacy in both historical scholarship and the Church’s collective memory.

Sources: The analysis above is based on information and excerpts from the Patrologia Latina edition of the Expositio brevis (PL 72) and modern scholarly evaluations. Notable references include the Encyclopedia of Religion entry on Gallican Rites (Gallican Rites - Encyclopedia.com) (Gallican Rites - Encyclopedia.com), Martène’s commentary and the PL text (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource) (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource), and various academic discussions (Wilmart’s dating (d.lib.msu.edu), council canons (Expositio brevis liturgiae Gallicanae - Wikisource), and comparative liturgy studies). The citations provided correspond to specific passages in these sources that substantiate the points made.