This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
At a glance, the image has nothing to do with the hymn, and it makes the article look like something about astronomy. Please consider to make a connection in the caption. Perhaps clarify further by using an infobox such as Locus iste (Bruckner) has. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 19:56, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
Agreed, although I do also like the picture given. I was hoping to find a MS page showing this at the head of the chants of the first day in Advent (shown with at least one search result when I entered the hymn title). I can't download one presently but if there's a wikimedia link that would be an appropriate addition--maybe even replacement as the header photo, although I don't mind it so much where it is.
Also, more info on the reason for the second text version might be good to add. While Latin usage changed, was it so different by then that only a new version would be intelligible to the singers, or were there expressions that had come to be seen as theologically objectionable? Or was it just to "spiff it up"? 209.6.47.220 ( talk) 15:32, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
I'm going to go ahead and add a translation of the original hymn. Aside from the first stanza and to an extent the doxology, the hymns are entirely different, so the article should reflect that. The monks of Solesmes (or perhaps Dom Anselmo Lentini, OSB, who supervised the revision of the hymns in the creation of the Liturgia Horarum, which is, by the way, not the "traditional" breviary) used a different doxology in Antiphonale Romanum II for , not the one found in the appendix of the 1912 Antiphonale Romanum which contains the ancient texts. Johnnygoesmarchinghome ( talk) 22:09, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
At a glance, the image has nothing to do with the hymn, and it makes the article look like something about astronomy. Please consider to make a connection in the caption. Perhaps clarify further by using an infobox such as Locus iste (Bruckner) has. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 19:56, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
Agreed, although I do also like the picture given. I was hoping to find a MS page showing this at the head of the chants of the first day in Advent (shown with at least one search result when I entered the hymn title). I can't download one presently but if there's a wikimedia link that would be an appropriate addition--maybe even replacement as the header photo, although I don't mind it so much where it is.
Also, more info on the reason for the second text version might be good to add. While Latin usage changed, was it so different by then that only a new version would be intelligible to the singers, or were there expressions that had come to be seen as theologically objectionable? Or was it just to "spiff it up"? 209.6.47.220 ( talk) 15:32, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
I'm going to go ahead and add a translation of the original hymn. Aside from the first stanza and to an extent the doxology, the hymns are entirely different, so the article should reflect that. The monks of Solesmes (or perhaps Dom Anselmo Lentini, OSB, who supervised the revision of the hymns in the creation of the Liturgia Horarum, which is, by the way, not the "traditional" breviary) used a different doxology in Antiphonale Romanum II for , not the one found in the appendix of the 1912 Antiphonale Romanum which contains the ancient texts. Johnnygoesmarchinghome ( talk) 22:09, 28 November 2021 (UTC)