1. The arguments in Anderson's article ('The Rhythm of Cum littera Sections') are reviewed below.
2. There is an interesting parallel here as the conductus at the end of its career began to assimilate characteristics of the motet and other genres in a similar way to that in which the motet, at the beginning of its career, drew on the conductus and other genres.
3. Appendix 1 below is a handlist of sources that preserve versions of two-part conducti that give the text only; Appendix 2 lists those that preserve versions in a monophonic form.
4. The point of reference for the ‘original’ version of the two-part conducti cum caudis in this article is F. Given the current state of knowledge concerning date and centrality/peripherality of the main sources for this repertory, this seems the most logical place to locate such a point of reference. This does, however, entail certain methodological problems in that the readings in other early sources (W1, W2 and Ma) are often different in two critical ways: the slight graphic elongation of otherwise unmeasured note-shapes, and the placement of suspirationes, rests and phrase-endings. For an attempt to take these differences into account, see below.
5. Donaueschingen, Fürstliche Bibliothek, 882, ff. 175v–177v; Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm 4660, f. 111; Limoges, Bibliothèque Municipale, 17, f. 282v; and Paris, Bibliothèque de l'Arsenal, 3517–18, f. 13v.