COURSE. – Ancient orators, in delivering their speeches, were accustomed to modulate the end of their sentences to emphasize their cadence and prepare for the pause. This vocal inflection relied on special combinations of short or long, unstressed or stressed syllables. The oratorical period thus took on the form of a free stanza and was divided into members of varying length, which the Greeks called *cola* and *commata*, and the Latins *membra* and *incisa*.
Cicero, to indicate the rhythmic flow of discourse—which facilitated melodic recitation and oral reading—sometimes employs the word *c.* (*c. orationis*: *De orat.*, II, 10, 39; 19, 82; *Orat.*, 58, 198, etc.; *c. verborum*: *De orat.*, I, 35, 161; III, 33, 136, etc.). Quintilian (IX, 4, 70) and Aulus Gellius (XI, 13) also use *c.* in this sense. Medieval masters of *ars dictaminis* employed the term *c.* to denote both the rhythmic flow of the entire period and the sonorous cadences at the close of sentences. Classical rhetoricians, in the latter case, preferred the word *clausula*. Modern scholars have termed *metric* or *quantitative clausulae* those cadences based on syllable quantity, and *rhythmic* or *accentual clausulae* those grounded in word stress.
The rhythmic structure of the period with harmonious cadences was a spontaneous phenomenon among great Greek and Latin orators, since the ear naturally favors certain cadences and rejects others; yet soon rhetoricians began to codify rules governing both the rhythmic structure of the period and its cadences. These rules were derived from the spontaneous practice of the great orators. Taught in schools and recommended by teachers, they were applied with varying rigor by the majority of Greek and Latin prose writers. Thus what had first been a spontaneous and aesthetic phenomenon became a deliberate literary device.
Isocrates in particular took meticulous care to ensure the harmony of his periods. He himself declares that, having abandoned judicial eloquence, he wished to compose speeches resembling works of art that accompany music. He desired his discourses to be read and reread, and—without resorting to the devices used by poets—to afford readers a pleasure equal to that derived from beautiful verse. In Rome, Cicero, following in Isocrates’ footsteps and cultivating with knowledge and love the musical element inherent in language, perfected Latin periodic structure. The principal cadences he employed in orations and rhetorical and philosophical treatises are:
- Form 1: cretic-trochee
- Form 2: double cretic
- Form 3: dicoreus
- Form 4: catalectic trochaic tripody
Zielinski has grouped these cadences synthetically, arguing that they are formed from a cretic base and a trochaic, catalectic, or complete cadence:
Base
If this theory were correct, the third and fourth forms should always be preceded by a cretic; this often occurs, but not always. Sometimes, especially in the first form, a long syllable is resolved into two shorts; more rarely, the cretic is replaced by a molossus or the *dispondeus* is substituted.
Cicero’s harmonious and architectonic periodic structure, with its ample development and sonorous cadences, did not immediately gain widespread favor. The declaimers, Seneca, Tacitus, Fronto, and Apuleius favored concise and pointed expression. The fashion then turned to witty conceits, terse and incisive maxims, poetic and glittering phrases, and piquant epigrams. Yet Cicero found followers and admirers, such as Quintilian and Pliny. In the third century, a kind of compromise emerged between these two opposing literary currents: to the rich phrasing with parenthetical remarks, assonances, and pointed effects was joined a rhythmic periodic structure with parallel or antithetical members ending in harmonious cadences. Indeed, in place of Cicero’s varied beauty, a monotonous chant of a few favored cadences took hold. From the third century onward, this periodic style was adopted by nearly all prose writers, both pagan and Christian.
Thus, when Christian writers addressed not only the humble masses but sought to win over the educated classes, they were compelled to employ the literary language taught in schools. The Church, in the prayers of its liturgy, the homilies of its bishops, and the works of its finest champions, adapted with discernment the rhythmic period with its harmonious cadences to the changed circumstances.
The first work in which cadences are applied with scrupulous exactitude is the *Octavius* of Minucius Felix. It appears as a dialogue, but a free and casual conversation soon turns into two orations—one against, the other in defense of, the new religion. The refined harmony of Saint Cyprian’s periods was recognized alike by pagans and Christians. The same cadences he employs in writing from Carthage to the Roman clergy are used by Novatian in his reply from Rome. Arnobius, a rhetorician from Africa, is one of the writers most attentive to cadences; his pupil Lactantius is less slavish in this regard—a further sign of Ciceronian influence.
The great Christian polymaths—Tertullian, Saint Jerome, Saint Ambrose, and Saint Augustine—are more free and varied in their use of cadences. Though acquainted with the scholastic rules of prose rhythm, they are not bound by them. Saint Augustine, in works addressed to the learned, such as *De civitate Dei*, employs the literary-rhythmic language; in sermons and other popular works, he relies more on rhyme and assonance to give sonority and harmony to his discourse. In fragments of some Manichaean works preserved by Augustine, in the pamphlets of Caelestius and Pelagius, in the treatises of Julian of Eclanum, and in the letters of the principal correspondents of the bishop of Hippo, one notes the same, more or less rigid, application of the rules on cadences.
The *Panegyrici* and Symmachus may serve as models of declamatory style with their fine cadences. Firmicus Maternus, both in his astrological work composed as a pagan and in the treatise *De errore profanarum religionum* written after his conversion to Christianity, employs oratorical periodic structure. In the Iberian peninsula, the rules on cadences are applied in the letters of Potamius, bishop of Barcelona; in the treatises of Pacian; in those attributed to the Priscillianist heir; in the works of Paul Orosius and Gregory of Elvira; in what remains of the monk Bachiarius; of Severus, bishop of Majorca; and of Martin, bishop of Braga.
Where the clauses took best root was Gaul, especially through the work of the flourishing schools of rhetoric. Ausonius is as perfect as one could wish; he is followed by Cassian, Hilary of Arles, Vincent of Lérins, Faustus of Riez, Prosper of Aquitaine, Valerian, Salvian, Sidonius Apollinaris, Gennadius of Marseille, and Caesarius of Arles. Less refined are Paul, bishop of Nola, Hilary of Poitiers, Victor of Rouen, and Phoebadius of Agen. Sulpicius Severus, while in his other works he submits to the rules of the clauses, abandons them in the *Chronica*, because he is inspired by a different literary ideal; the same applies to other historians such as Aurelius Victor, Eutropius, etc.; but the best historian of the 4th century, Ammianus Marcellinus, is a careful observer of them. Although the works of Eusebius, bishop of Vercelli, of Filastrius, bishop of Brescia, and of Victor, bishop of Capua, are not very refined with regard to the clauses, the treatises and sermons of Zenon, bishop of Verona, of Peter Chrysologus, bishop of Ravenna, of Gaudentius, bishop of Brescia, and of Maximus, bishop of Turin, are good. Among minor writers, clauses are found in the works of Arnobius the Younger, the African bishops Aurelius, Quodvultdeus, Deogratias, and Eugenius; in the writings of Optatus, Vigilius of Thapsus, Eustathius the African, Victor of Vita, Fulgentius of Ruspe, and Ferrandus; and in the biographies of St. Cyprian, St. Ambrose, and St. Augustine, written by the deacons Pontius, Paulinus, and Possidius. Notable is the fact that in the works of an Easterner who lived in Italy, Dionysius Exiguus, the clauses are used both in original works and in translations from Greek.
The writings of Cassiodorus, Ennodius, and Boethius show how carefully Roman literati, despite the grim times, cultivated eloquence and melodious cadences. The clauses triumph even in the imperial chancery, appearing not only in the rescripts preserved in the Gregorian and Theodosian Codes but also in the edicts and laws of Diocletian, Galerius, Constantine, and his successors.
The effective work of the Roman schools of rhetoric continued even after the fall of the Western Empire. The acts and laws of the Ostrogothic kings in Italy, the Burgundians and Merovingians in Gaul, the Visigoths in Spain, and the Vandals in Africa are consistently in clausulated prose.
From the imperial chancery, the use of oratorical prose with its harmonious cadences passed to the papal chancery. In the letters of the popes Liberius and Siricius, in the letters and decrees of Innocent I, Zosimus, Boniface I, Sixtus III, as well as in those of Hilary, Simplicius, Felix III, Gelasius I, Symmachus, and Hormisdas, the clauses are almost always regular. The same result is found in examining the collection of papal decretals from Siricius to Anastasius, compiled by Dionysius Exiguus, and the decrees of the Roman synods, the African, Spanish, and Gallic councils.
The most important result of the study of clauses in ancient Christian writers has been to reveal that the Latin they used is not incorrect, popular, or vulgar, but a literary language formed especially in the schools of rhetoric and law, and used in writings, correspondence, and conversation among educated people. This language is not only literary but also strongly expressive and concise. It naturally reflects linguistic evolution and changed political and cultural conditions, but one should not fault these writers for using lexical, morphological, and syntactic forms current in their time, even if they no longer conformed to Ciceronian norms. Linguistic evolution led to the predominance of stress over syllabic quantity.
Ciceronian clauses are based on quantity: although stress exerted some influence, it was entirely secondary. Later, linguistic evolution caused a shift: stress prevailed, and quantity weakened. In the rapid phonetic and linguistic development that Latin underwent during the centuries of the Empire—when it evolved from a dialect of Latium into the spoken language of millions of people of different races, customs, and languages—the sense of quantity diminished, while stress took precedence and, as grammarians say, became the soul of the word and its music. Scholastic teaching and literary tradition sought to curb this decline, but by now, especially in Africa, the ears of speakers could no longer distinguish long from short syllables. Among the various types of clauses, preference began to be given to those in which the metrical ictus coincided with the stress.
From the 3rd to the 6th century, Christian writers, for the most part, take both quantity and stress into account. If one considers only stress, the clauses preferred in these centuries can be reduced to four main types, which, following the terminology of medieval dictatores, are called:
1. *C. planus*, stress on the second and fifth syllables counting from the end: *regna caelórum*, *spiritus vénit*. — 2. *tardus*, stress on the third and sixth syllables: *ésse cognóvimus*, *differunt génere*. — 3. *velox*, stress on the second and seventh syllables: *Dóminum confiténtur*. — 4. *C. trispondiacus*, stress on the second and sixth syllables: *térra venerátur*.
These clauses derive from quantitative clauses. The *c. planus* derives from the classical clause, a cretic followed by a trochee or spondee. It was used especially in two forms, either with a caesura after the first short syllable: *regna caelórum*, or with diaeresis after the cretic: *spiritus venit*. In these two forms, by the law of Latin accentuation, the metrical ictus coincides with the stress. In the *c. tardus*, two quantitative clauses were merged: the double cretic and the cretic followed by a tribrach. Here too the preferred forms were those with a caesura after the first short syllable: *ésse cognóvimus*, or with diaeresis after the cretic: *differunt génere*.
The *c. velox* derives mainly from the most harmonious of the quantitative clauses, the *discore* preceded by a cretic: *apóstolis conferátur*; but with the predominance of stress, instead of the *discore*, the *dispondee* and the first *epitrite* were also used, and the cretic was replaced by any proparoxytone word. In Christian authors, the stress-based *c. velox* can be represented by the following quantitative clauses:
\[
\begin{array}{c}
\text{velox}
\end{array}
\]
The *c. trispondiacus* derives from the quantitative clause, first *paeon* plus trochee: *ésse videátur*.
The Christian writer in whom the rhythm of the period reaches the greatest perfection is St. Leo the Great, who, for his *concinnitas* and sonorous clauses, may be considered the Cicero of Christian times. The works of this great pope are distinguished by greater classicism and correctness in the use of literary language, by a more refined taste in handling rhetorical and expressive means, and by a harmonious flow in rhythmic periods. His periods unfold in parallel or antithetical members, ending in a clause that respects both the norms of stress and those of quantity. St. Leo, with great stylistic skill, succeeds in giving a rhythmically perfect form to his letters and sermons. In him, rhythm and clauses are not something mechanical or external but flow spontaneously in intimate union with thought.
To give an idea of the use of Leo’s clauses, the results of an examination of the clauses in the periods of his sermons and letters are provided below. Considering only stress, the following clauses are found:
| Sermons | Letters |
|---------|---------|
| *C. planus* | 874 | 395 |
| *C. tardus* | 795 | |
| *C. velox* | 738 | |
| *C. trispondiacus* | 217 | |
Of these clauses, the vast majority are also regular in terms of quantity. Indeed, they present the following quantitative forms:
Sennoni
| Epistole |
| Forma 1a | 810 |
| " | 302 |
| " | 504 |
| Forma 3a | 79 |
| " | 112 |
| Forma 4a | 176 |
| 386 |
In Western Europe, literary-rhythmic culture and language suffered a severe blow due to the barbarian invasions, the fall of North Africa and Spain under Arab domination, and the raids of the Saracens.
The last writers in Spain who appear to have known the rules on clausulae and applied them with greater or lesser regularity were Isidore of Seville and his disciple Braulio, Bishop Eugenius III, and the learned archbishop Julian. Their contemporaries, St. Fructuosus and Abbots Evanthius and Valerius, also employed literary-rhythmic language.
In France, during the 6th and 7th centuries, culture experienced a strong stagnation; however, documents from the chancery of the Merovingian kings and the so-called "Marculf formulae" show that the sense of rhythmic writing had not been entirely lost.
The letters of the popes, among which those of Gregory the Great, Honorius I, and Adeodatus are worthy of mention, reveal that in Italy, despite so many disasters and ruins, the tradition of rhythmic periodization had not been entirely lost. The rules of clausulae are applied in the formulae of the Liber Diurnus, in the letter that the Milanese priest Damian addressed to the Fathers gathered at the Synod of 679, in the prose prologue to his treatise on medicine in verse by Benedict Crispus, bishop of Milan, and in the prologue that Felix, bishop of Ravenna, prefixed to a collection of *sennoni* by St. Peter Chrysologus.
Irish writers were a kind of humanists in advance. They did not continue the tradition of Roman schools of rhetoric. Literary-rhythmic Latin, despite everything, was a living language that had acquired its own characteristics. The Irish were classicists, but they substituted a dead language for a living one. Under the influence of Irish and English writers, clausulae lost ground; only a few writers, such as Lupus, abbot of Ferrières, seem not to have forgotten the traditional rules regarding the rhythmic arrangement of words in clausulae. In general, writers of the Carolingian Renaissance did not follow the laws of clausulae. These persisted in the schools of the Benedictine monasteries of southern and central Italy, especially Montecassino. When, in the 9th century, Rome and Naples had a little respite, then the reformer also flourished here, as the tradition of literary-rhythmic Latin had not entirely died out. Two good writers, John, a deacon of Naples, and John, a deacon of Rome, wrote prose that was rhythmically almost perfect. Around them gathered other minor figures who often ornately rewrote passions of martyrs and legends of saints. Clausulae are present in Guido d'Arezzo’s *Micrologus*, in the works of Peter Damian, and in the epistles of Gregory VII. Pope Urban II brought the young John Gaetan from Montecassino with him so that he might continually improve the chancery Latin of the Roman curia by applying the rules of Leonine clausulae. Another pope, Gregory VIII, set forth in a *Summa dictaminis* some of the oldest rules that had previously been transmitted orally. Once the rules for phrasing were established and the cadences to be used at their endings in the three clausulae—*planus*, *tardus*, and *velox*—were determined, the prose thus elaborated and cadenced took the name of the Roman curial style. Under the protection of Rome’s sacred name, this style spread first in Italy, then in France, Germany, England, and Spain. The rules on clausulae were taught in the university schools of *ars dictaminis* and in the schools of the new religious orders, the Franciscans and Dominicans. It would be too lengthy to cite all the writers of the 12th–14th centuries who followed the rules of clausulae; we will limit ourselves to recalling the papal letters and bulls, especially those of Alexander III and Innocent III, the epistles of Dante and Cola di Rienzo, the documents of the Angevin and Aragonese chanceries, and many Franciscan and Dominican legends.
The humanists despised medieval Latin and sought to revive Ciceronian Latin; therefore, they attempted to replace the rules on clausulae of the *artes dictandi* with those on *numerus* given by Cicero and Quintilian. The last great writer to apply the rules of clausulae with a certain regularity was Baronius, who showed a great predilection for the cadence of the *velox* clausula.
Literary-rhythmic language, with its many clausulae cadences, is not always suitable for extensive doctrinal treatises, where a simpler, more conversational, and didactic tone is desired; it works better in smaller compositions: sermons, imperial constitutions, papal epistles. But where it proves most effective is in liturgical prose, especially that intended for chant and declamatory recitation. The *concinnitas* of the period, which assumes the form of a free lyrical stanza with members and phrases ending in beautiful cadences—now symmetrically interwoven, now harmoniously corresponding—seems created precisely for this purpose. The form adapts to the content, and what in other compositions might seem mere literary exercise here becomes art. In the liturgy of the early Christian centuries, the lyrical element is often united with the oratorical: prayer is wed to song, praise to exhortation and moral maxims. The Christian soul, contemplating the wonders of creation and the infinite majesty of the Heavenly Father, admiring the immense love of the Son in His redemptive work and the heroic virtue of the martyrs, cannot help but pour forth its own moving emotions. Yet at the same time, it desires that all share in its sentiments, and thus the lyrical is joined to the oratorical. Rhythmic prose and clausulae, more than verse and poetic meter, suit the lyrical-oratorical expression of the liturgy. The liturgical compositions where the union of lyrical effusion and eloquent exhortation is best revealed are the *ornus* and prefaces of the ancient sacramentaries. The strophic periodization, the cadences of the clausulae, and the chant give them a form that is at once articulate and popular. Here, thought, rhythm, and song merge into a single homogeneous and harmonious whole.
The oldest and most venerable collection of liturgical orations and prefaces—that is, the part of the Mass recited privately by the priest—is contained in the so-called Leonine Sacramentary. It is of Roman origin. The affinities of thought, language, and style between some of these prayers and the sermons of St. Leo are evident, and some of them may well be the work of this pope or his chancery; others are later, but many, rhythmically perfect, may date back even to the 3rd and 4th centuries.
At the end of the liturgical formulae of the Leonine Sacramentary, the following rhythmic clausulae are found:
| Formula | Cl. | claus. | 381 |
| | a | tardus | 281 |
| | b | velox | 327 |
| | c | trispondiac | 32 |
| Formula | Totale | 1021 |
| | | |
Considering the quantity of these endings, the following metrical clausulae are obtained:
| Formula | 1a | 2a | 3a | 4a |
| | | | | |
The vast majority of clausulae—96 percent—obey both the rules of quantity and those of accent; the few exceptions find their explanation in the linguistic evolution of those centuries.
Some orations from the Leonian Sacramentary passed into other sacramentaries, and a few even entered, with additions and revisions, into the present Roman Missal: the preface of the Ascension results from the merging of two prefaces from the Leonian; but, more often than not, these adaptations were not improvements, and often they distorted the text, destroying its cadence and marring its original simplicity and beauty. The artistic composition of the prayers in the Leonian Sacramentary is due, in addition to cadence, to the *concinnitas* of the period, which is especially evident in the balance of the various members that correspond to one another symmetrically in thought, form, and cadence. The period unfolds organically and harmoniously without falling into monotonous uniformity. Unity and simplicity are characteristic of many Leonian orations. Discord among the faithful is always deplorable: now see with what efficacy and brevity the following oration invokes from the Lord the spirit of charity and pious concord among those who have been fed with the same Eucharistic bread:
« *Spiritum nobis, Domine, tuae caritatis infundé, et quos uno caelesti pânê sâtâtst, — una facias pietatê côncôrês*. »
It is a small stanza of three lines, with a *trispondiacus* cadence between two *planus* cadences.
The prefaces are more complex and elaborate, but they too are shaped by a simple and unified scheme. The Eucharistic Sacrifice is a sacrifice of thanksgiving; in the preface or anaphora, the celebrant invites the faithful to give thanks to the Lord (*Gratias agamus Domino Deo nostro*), and the people respond that this is indeed right and just (*Dignum et iustum est*). After this dialogue between the people and the celebrant, the latter suggests to the faithful the reasons for which they must give thanks to the Lord. These reasons are expressed with a relative or causal clause, or with a participle or infinitive, and are drawn either from the solemnity being celebrated or from the saint being honored, as well as from particular civil and ecclesiastical circumstances. We give two examples, choosing the shortest ones.
« *Qui non solum peccata dimittis, — sed ipsos etiam iustificas peccatores, — et reis non tantum poenas reláxas, — sed dónas et praémia*. »
It is a stanza of four lines ending with two *planus* cadences, one *velox* and one *tardus*.
The following preface was certainly composed when disputes with the Pelagians about Grace were raging:
« *Maiestatem tuam suppliciter implorantes, — ut sicut ex te habemus esse quod súmus, — sic per gratiam tuam et bene vélle sumámus, — et bonum póssé quod volé-mus*. »
It is a stanza of four lines: two *planus* cadences between one *velox* and one *trispondiacus*. Even in other liturgical prose, such as in the first part of the *Te Deum*, in the *Quicumque*, and in the *Exultet*, the rules of cadence are applied with great artistry. The *Exultet* is perhaps the liturgical composition in which the union of lyrical effusion and eloquent exhortation, of prayer and mystical inspiration, of sonorous cadence and song is best realized.
In the prayers of the Gelasian and Gregorian Sacramentaries, accentual clausulae begin to prevail, which are the only ones used by liturgical composers in the medieval centuries. In some medieval liturgical writers, especially French, German, and Irish, rhyme and assonance replace the cadences of classical prosody. This usage later gave rise to prayers and offices composed of rhymed lines. In some prayers from the Carolingian age, the *commutatus* style prevails: the period is divided into many small members, and the prayer then assumes an almost litanic form. The rules of classical cadence were no longer observed by the humanists. Nevertheless, in the 17th century, good *oremus* prayers were composed by scholars who, through long familiarity with ancient ecclesiastical writers, had preserved the sense of
melodic cadences. The melody and rhythm of these cadences reveal the ancient metrical clausulae on which they were modeled. Just as in the delivery of an oratorical period, rhetoricians distinguished the initial rhythm, the medial rhythm, and the clausula; so in the recitation of psalmody, there was the *intimun*, the *tenor*, and the final cadence. Most of the chants in the Sacramentary, Gradual, and Responsorial are set to melodic cadences that respect both the accent of the words and the cadences of classical prosody. Especially the *planus* and *velox* cadences have exerted a great influence on the formation of these melodies. In some liturgical compositions, such as the *Exultet*, this is evident to a high degree. This is why, whereas ancient liturgical prose is so easy to sing, modern compositions often prove unfit for singing. Among the ancients, whoever composed a prayer intended for singing composed it while singing, even when adapting to it a melody already in use; thus thought and word, rhythm and song flowed in harmonious union. Modern composers too often have sought to cram their compositions with theological formulas, more or less historical references, and linguistic flourishes, but have paid little heed to rhythmic flow designed to facilitate melodic recitation. For this reason, while the singing of the supplications in the so-called Litany of the Saints is smooth, solemn, and moving, that of the Litany of the Sacred Heart, composed in cold blood, is difficult and harsh. What offends and disturbs in certain modern *oramus* prayers is not only the absence of rhythmic clausulae, which results in broken cadences and stumbling, but also the lack of balance between the various lines, so that extremely short members—sometimes consisting of a single word—alternate with very long ones that proceed in gasping fashion.
Moreover, the discovery of the laws of cadence has greatly aided the criticism of ancient texts, for they help to distinguish, among the various manuscript variants, the authentic one. They have also revealed later glosses and additions and have contributed useful insights for deciding on the authenticity or otherwise of an ancient writing.
Of the numerous studies on clausulae and on the cursus, the principal ones in which further bibliographical information may be found are listed here:
L. Havet, *La prose métrique de Symmaque et les origines du c.*, Paris 1892;
A. Mocquereau, *Le c. et la psalmodie*, in *Paléographie musicale*, Solesmes 1895;
W. Meyer, *Gesammelte Abhandlungen zur mittelalterlichen Rhythmik*, Berlin 1902;
A. De Santi, *Il c. nella storia letteraria e nella liturgia*, Rome 1903;
Th. Zielinski, *Das Clauselgesetz in Ciceros Reden*, Leipzig 1904;
F. Vacandard, *Le c. son origine, son histoire, son emploi dans la liturgie*, in *Revue des questions historiques*, 78 (1904), pp. 59–102;
F. Blass, *Die Rhythmen der asianischen und römischen Kunstprosa*, Leipzig 1905;
L. Ceci, *Il ritmo delle orazioni di Cicerone. La prima Catilinaria*, Turin 1906;
F. Norden, *Die antike Kunstprosa*, Leipzig 1909;
C. Zander, *Eurythmia vel compositio rythmica prosae antiquae*, I, Leipzig 1910; II, 1913; III, 1914;
F. Di Capua, *De numero in vetustis sacramentariis*, in *Ephemerides liturgicae*, 26 (1912), pp. 459 sqq., 591 sqq.;
P. Ferretti, *Il c. metrico e il ritmo delle melodie gregoriane*, Parma 1913;
Th. Zielinski, *Der constructive Rhythmus in Ciceros Reden*, Leipzig 1914;
F. Di Capua, *Il c. nel “De consolatione philosophiae” e nei trattati teologici di S. Boezio*, in *Didaskaleion*, 3 (1914), pp. 269–303;
A. W. De Groot, *A handbook of antique Prose-Rhythm*, Groningen 1918;
A. Copelli, *Il c. nelle prefazioni della Messa ambrosiana*, in *Athenaeum*, 10 (1922), pp. 126–35;
G. Rejnoel, *The clausulae in the “De civitate Dei” of S. Augustine*, Washington 1924;
L. Laurand, *Etudes sur le style des discours de Cicéron*, Paris 1927;
F. Di Capua, *Il ritmo nella prosa liturgica e il Praeconium paschale*, in *Didaskaleion*, nuova serie, 2 (1927), pp. 1–21;
id., *Il ritmo prosaico in S. Agostino*, in *Miscellanea agostiniana*, Rome 1931, pp. 607–64;
H. Hagendahl, *La prose métrique d’Amobe*, Göteborg 1937;
F. Di Capua, *Il ritmo prosaico nelle lettere dei papi e nei documenti della cancelleria pontificia*, I, Rome 1937; II, 1939; III, 1941;
M. G. Nicolau, *L’origine du c. rythmique et les débuts de l’accent d’intensité en latin*, Paris 1938.
The Catholic University of Washington is publishing a series of studies on clausulae in the writings of the Church Fathers.
Francesco Di Capua