L.8.100KD.8.101 To croune one to be kynge to reuleL.8.100: LCr alone have reule. Other B manuscripts have rulen, covering the -e and thus assuring a metrically regular b-verse. hem bothe
# On to be kyng & Rule all
Cr1.8.100KD.8.101 To coroune one to be Kynge to rule hem boeth
C.8.98KD.8.101 To crowne oon to be kyng to reulen hem bathe
R.8.96KD.8.101 To croune andR.8.96:
R's and is a unique reading. F omits the entire line, and beta reads one to be kynge to kepen hem alle . For R's kepen hem alle, beta reads rulen hem bothe. F omits the whole line.
The alliteration in R is clearly preferable to that in beta, and Cx
agrees at least with R's verb. But R's b-verse seems conflated with a similar b-verse
properly belonging several lines below this point in Bx (= Crouned one to be kynge to kepin hem alle [KD8.108]). To judge from the evidence of
both R and F (each shows corruptions and omissions for several lines in a row), alpha was
significantly deficient in this passage. Alpha probably omitted all five of the lines in this
passage which are present in beta but missing from R (presumably by eyeskip induced from
similar a-verses). The two sub-archtypes rejoin each other at KD8.109, but part of the
problem continues beyond that point.
When Kane and Donaldson examined this garbled
passage, they hypothesized that alpha's text for this passage was accurately reflected in F
(R being solely responsible for the omission in question); they further postulated that Bx itself had lost two lines (i.e., KD8.103 and KD8.105), lines which are
now available only in F and in the A-version. Of course it must be
recalled that their hypothetical narrative of F's production included the supposition that F
had access, for proofing purposes, to a copy of B whose text was
superior to that of the common archetype of all extant B manuscripts.
However, it must be recalled that F not only reproduces, in this passage, three A lines unattested in any other B manuscript (KD8.113
as well as the two mentioned above). In addition, F puts forward three distinctive A-version variants in lines that do survive in beta (presoun for beta's in yrens [KD8.104]; & be here
conseyl wirche for beta's to kepin hem alle [KD8.108]; and so me crist helpe for the R/beta I coueite to lerne)
Collectively, this evidence suggests a different, simpler explanation of F's text: having
found his alpha copytext deficient in this verse paragraph, the F-scribe (or his predecessor)
borrowed all of the missing text from an A manuscript usually available
to him.
F
[Not found.]