<div1>fol. 39r (cont.)I</div1>
<foreign>pa<expan>ssus</expan> x<expan>us</expan></foreign>
<head><foreign><hi>Passus decimus de visione vt s<expan>upra</expan> . <seg></seg> <seg></seg></hi></foreign></head>
<l> <hi><hi>Þ</hi></hi>anne<note>R.10.1: The initial is flourished with red, as usual, and a man's face has been drawn in the loop of the thorn.</note> had wit a wif  was <app><lem>called</lem></app><note>R.10.1: Cf. F's <hi>klepid</hi>. Beta's reading is <hi>hote</hi>, which agrees with <hi>Ax</hi> and <hi>Cx</hi>.</note> dame studie</l>
<l> Þat lene was of lere  and of <app><lem>lichee</lem></app> bothe .</l>
<l> Sche was wonderliche wroth  þat wit me þus tauȝte .</l>
<l> And alle starynge dame studie  sterneliche seyde .</l>
<l> Wel art þow wis q<expan>uo</expan>d sche to witt  any wisdomes to telle .</l>
<l> To flatereres or to foles  þat frentik ben of wittes .</l>
<l> And blamed hym and banned hym  and bad him be stille .</l>
<l> With swiche wise wordes  to wissen any sottes .</l>
<l> And seyde <foreign>noli mitter<expan>e</expan></foreign> man  <sic>magerie</sic><corr>ma[r]gerie</corr> perles .</l>
<l> Amonges hogges þat han  hawes at wille .</l>
<l> Þei doth but dreuele þer<seg>-</seg>on  draf were hem leu<expan>er</expan>e .</l>
<l> Þan alle þe preciouse perre  þat in paradis wexeth .</l>
<l> I seye it be <app><lem>schuche</lem></app><note>R.10.13: This form is unique to R. <title>MED</title>, <hi>s. v.</hi> <hi>swich</hi>, indicates that the <title>South English Legendary</title> (ca. 1300) has the only comparable form of this word, which it labels as a SW Midlands form for <hi>swich</hi>. <hi>Cx</hi> reads <hi>suche</hi>.</note> q<expan>uo</expan>d sche  þat scheweth be her<expan>e</expan> werkes .</l>
<l> Þat hem were leuer<expan>e</expan> lond  and lordschipe <app><lem>here</lem></app> .<note>R.10.14: For alpha's <hi>here</hi>, beta reads <hi>on erthe</hi>, which agrees with <hi>Ax</hi>.</note></l>
<l> <app><lem>Other</lem></app> ricchesse <app><lem>other</lem></app><note>R.10.15: R's <hi>Other ... other</hi> is unique. F omits this line, but beta reads <hi>Or ... or</hi>, which agrees with <hi>Ax</hi>.</note> rentes  and rest at her<expan>e</expan> wille .</l>
<l> Þanne alle þe soth sawes  þat salomo<expan>n</expan> seyde euere .</l>
<l> ¶ Wisdom and witt now  is nauȝt worth a carse .</l>
<l> But if it be carded with couetise  as clotheres kembe<expan>n</expan> wolle</l>
<l> Ho<seg>-</seg>so kan co<expan>n</expan>treue deseites  and conspire wronges .</l>
<l> And leden forth a loueday  <app><lem>and letten</lem></app> <app><lem>þe</lem></app> trewthe .<note>R.10.20: Beta reads this b-verse as <hi>to latte with treuthe</hi>. F has <hi>& lettyn euere trewthe</hi>. <hi>Ax</hi> appears to have read <hi>to lette þe truþe</hi>.</note></l>
<l> He þat suche craftes can  to conseil is cleped . <seg></seg></l>
<milestone>fol. 39vI</milestone>
<l> Þei lede lordes with lesynges  and belyeth treuthe . <seg></seg></l>
<l> ¶ Iob þe gentil  in his gestes witnesseth .</l>
<l> Þat wicked men þei welden  þe welth of þis worlde .</l>
<l> And þat þei ben lordes in<note>R.10.25: Though Hm agrees with R's <hi>in</hi>, beta has <hi>of</hi> (F rewrites the line).</note> vch a londe  þat oute of lawe libbeth .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Quare impij viuu<expan>n</expan>t b<expan>e</expan>n<expan>e</expan> est om<expan>n</expan>ib<expan>us</expan> qui preuarica<expan>n</expan>t<expan>ur</expan> & iniq<expan>ue</expan> agu<expan>n</expan>t .</foreign></hi> </l>
<l> ¶ Þe sauter seith þe same  by such þat don ille .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Ecce ip<expan>s</expan>i peccatores habu<expan>n</expan>dantes in seculo <app><lem>opt<expan>inuerunt</expan></lem></app> .</foreign><note>R.10.28: Alpha omits the last word of this citation as found in beta: <foreign>diuicias</foreign>.</note></hi></l>
<l> Lo seith holy lettrur<expan>e</expan>  whiche lordes beth þis schrewes</l>
<l> Þilk þat god most <app><lem>greueth</lem></app><note>R.10.30: For alpha's <hi>greueth</hi>, beta reads, more probably, <hi>gyueth</hi> (though manuscript C agrees with alpha). The <hi>C</hi> version tries to resolve this difference between <hi>greueth</hi> and <hi>gyueþ</hi> by rewriting the line so as to include both words (a timid choice paralleled elsewhere in <hi>C</hi>), and in the process makes a line that is inferior to both earlier versions. Evidently, by the time he was laboring on the <hi>C</hi> revision, Langland had forgotten which of these two variants he had composed and which one was scribal. Or, having perhaps written both himself at different times, he had forgotten which one was supposed to supersede the other.</note>  lest gode þei deleth .</l>
<l> And most vnkende to þe comune  þat most catel weldeth .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Que perfecisti destruxerunt  iustus autem &c<expan>etera</expan> .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> Harlotes for here harlotrie  may haue of her godes .</l>
<l> And iaperes and iogoloures  and iangeleres of gestes .</l>
<l> ¶ Ac he þat hath holy writ  ay in his mouthe .</l>
<l> And can telle of tobye  and of þe twelue apostles .</l>
<l> Or prechen of þe penaunce  þat pilat wrouȝte .</l>
<l> To Ih<expan>es</expan>u þe gentil  þat iewes to<seg>-</seg>drowe . <seg></seg></l>
<l> Litel is he loued  þat such a lesson scheweth .</l>
<l> Or daunted or drawe forth  I do it on god hym<seg>-</seg>selue .</l>
<l> ¶ But þo þat feynen hem foles  and with faytynge libbeth .</l>
<l> Aȝeyne þe lawe of oure lorde  and lyen on hem<seg>-</seg>selue .</l>
<l> Spitten and spewen  and speken foule wordes .</l>
<l> Drynken and dreuelen  and do men for to gape .</l>
<l> Likkene men and lyen on hem  þat leneth hem no ȝiftes</l>
<l> Þei conne namore minstracie  ne musike men to glade</l>
<l> Þanne mu<expan>n</expan>de þe mulener<expan>e</expan>  of <foreign>multa fecit deus</foreign> .</l>
<l> Ne were her<expan>e</expan> vile harlotrie  haue god my trouthe .</l>
<l> Schuld neuer<expan>e</expan> kynge ne knyȝt<expan>e</expan>  ne canou<expan>n</expan> of seynt poules .</l>
<l> Ȝyue hem to here ȝeresȝyue  þe <app><lem>worth</lem></app><note>R.10.50: R's <hi>worth</hi> is an alpha variant. The most reliable beta witnesses, including L and M, read ȝifte. <hi>Ax</hi> reads <hi>value</hi>.</note> of a grote .</l>
<l> ¶ Ac murth and mynstracie  amonges men is nouthe .</l>
<l> Lecherie and losengerie  and loseles tales . <seg></seg></l>
<milestone>fol. 40rI</milestone>
<l> Glotonye and grete othes  þis murth<note>R.10.53: Beta has <hi>murthe <hi>þei</hi> louieth</hi> (though manuscript Y agrees with R in omitting <hi>þey</hi>. F completely revises the b-verse. The b-verse of <hi>Ax</hi> is somewhat different from both alpha and beta, but the stave word, <hi>games</hi> alliterates appropriately with the unrevised a-verse. Both Kane-Donaldson and Schmidt emend to the <hi>A</hi> reading.</note> louyeth .</l>
<l> Ac ȝif <app><lem><sic>ȝei</sic><corr>[þ]ei</corr></lem></app> carpen of crist  þis clerkes and þes lewede .</l>
<l> At þe mete in her<expan>e</expan> murthes  whan mynstrales ben stille .</l>
<l> Þanne tellen þei of þe trinyte  a tale other tweyne .</l>
<l> And bryngeth forth a balled resou<expan>n</expan>  and taken bernard to witnesse .</l>
<l> And putten forth a p<expan>re</expan>su<expan>m</expan>pciou<expan>n</expan>  to p<expan>re</expan>ue þe sothe .</l>
<l> Þus þei driuele at here <app><lem>dayes</lem></app>  þe deyte to knowe .</l>
<l> And gnawen god with þe gorge  whan her<expan>e</expan> gutte is full<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> ¶ Ac þe careful may crie  and carpen at þe ȝate .</l>
<l> Bothe afyngred and a<seg>-</seg>þurst  and for chele quake .</l>
<l> Is non to nymen hym nere  his <app><lem>nuye</lem></app><note>R.10.63: The other <hi>B</hi> witnesses read <hi>his noye <hi>to</hi> amende</hi>. However, <hi>Ax</hi> agrees with R in omitting <hi>to</hi> .</note> amende .</l>
<l> But hoen on<note>R.10.64: <hi>Hoen</hi>, "shout at, raise an outcry against."</note> hym as an hownde  and hoten hym go þennes .</l>
<l> Litel loueth he þat lorde  þat lent hym alle þat blisse .</l>
<l> Þat þus parteth with þe pore  a parcel whan hym nedeth .</l>
<l> Ne were m<expan>er</expan>cye in mene men  more þan in riche .</l>
<l> Mendynantes meteles  myȝt go to bedde .</l>
<l> God is muche in þe <app><lem>gorges</lem></app><note>R.10.69: Beta reads <hi>gorge</hi>. <hi>Ax</hi> agrees with beta.</note>  of þes grete maystres .</l>
<l> Ac amonges mene men  his m<expan>er</expan>cye and his werkes .</l>
<l> And so seith þe sauter  Ich haue I<seg>-</seg>seye it oft .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Ecce audiuim<expan>us</expan> <app><lem>eu<expan>m</expan></lem></app> i<expan>n</expan> effrata  inuenim<expan>us</expan> <app><lem>eu<expan>m</expan></lem></app><note>R.10.72: In both cases where alpha has <foreign>eum</foreign>, beta reads <foreign>eam</foreign>. Both <hi>Ax</hi> and <hi>Cx</hi> agree with beta, and most <hi>C</hi> manuscripts go further, glossing <foreign>eam</foreign> as <foreign>caritatem</foreign>.</note> i<expan>n</expan> campis silue .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> Clerkes and <app><lem>other</lem></app> men<note>R.10.73: R's <hi>other men</hi> is the alpha reading; beta reads <hi>other kynnes men</hi>.</note>  carpen of god faste .</l>
<l> And haue hym muche in þe mouthe  ac mene men i<expan>n</expan> herte .</l>
<l> ¶ Freres and faytoures haue founde suche questions .</l>
<l> To plese with proude men  sitthen þe <app><lem>pestilence</lem></app> .<note>R.10.76: Beta reads <hi>pestilence tyme</hi>. The <hi>Ax</hi> version of this phrase agrees with beta, but a majority of <hi>C</hi> manuscripts supports a reading similar to alpha's: <hi>pestelences</hi>.</note></l>
<l> And p<expan>re</expan>chen at seynt poules  for pure enuye of clerkes .</l>
<l> Þat folke is nouȝt fermed in þe feith  ne free of her<expan>e</expan> godes .</l>
<l> Ne sori for here synnes  so <app><lem>pruyde is</lem></app><note>R.10.79: Beta transposes this phrase as <hi>is pryde</hi>. <hi>Cx</hi> agrees with beta on the word order.</note> woxen . <seg></seg></l>
<l> In religiou<expan>n</expan> and in alle þe rewme  amonges riche and pore .</l>
<l> Þat preyeres haue no power<expan>e</expan><app><lem>þis</lem></app> <app><lem>pestilences</lem></app><note>R.10.81: R's <hi>þis</hi> is a plural determiner, as with F's <hi>þese</hi>. Beta shows a singular for this phrase: <hi>þe pestilence</hi>. <hi>Cx</hi> reads <hi>þis pestilences</hi>, agreeing with alpha.</note> to lette .</l>
<l> For god is def <app><lem>now<seg>-</seg>a<seg>-</seg>dayes</lem></app>  and deyneth <app><lem>his heres to opne</lem></app><note> Beta omits these lines. The b-verse of KD10.79 in F reads <hi>& deyȝneþ not vs to here</hi>. <hi>Cx</hi> agrees with F.</note></l>
<l> <app><lem>Þat gerles</lem></app> for her<expan>e</expan> gyltes  he for<seg>-</seg>grynt<note>R.10.83: <title>MED</title> has no listing for this compound, but the inflected form from the base is clearly the 3rd singular indicative of "grinden, v. 1" = "to break into small particles; reduce . . . to powder by crushing." For <hi>togrinden</hi>, v., a citation is offered from the cognate line of the <hi>C</hi>-version of <title>Piers</title>: <hi>And good men for oure gultes he al to<seg>-</seg>grynt to deþe</hi>.</note> hem alle .<seg></seg></l>
<l> And ȝet þe wrecches of þis worlde  is non ywar<expan>e</expan> by other</l>
<l> Ne for drede of þe deth  with<seg>-</seg>drawe nauȝt here pruyde .</l>
<l> Ne beth plentyuous to þe pore  as pure charite wolde .</l>
<milestone>fol. 40vI</milestone>
<l> ¶ But in gaynesse and in glotonye  for<seg>-</seg>glotten her<expan>e</expan> goed hem<seg>-</seg>selue .</l>
<l> And breketh nauȝt to þe beggere  as þe boek techeth .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Frange esurienti panem tuu<expan>m</expan> & cet<expan>er</expan>a .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> And þe more he wynneth and welt  welthes and richesses .</l>
<l> <app><lem>Eu<expan>er</expan>e as he</lem></app><note>R.10.91: In place of alpha's <hi>Euere as he</hi>, beta reads <hi>And</hi>. <hi>Cx</hi> revises the line, but the opening phrase agrees with beta.</note> lordeth in londes  þe lasse goed he deleth .</l>
<l> ¶ Tobie <app><lem>techeth</lem></app><note>R.10.92: Beta reads <hi>telleth</hi>. <hi>Cx</hi> either agrees completely with alpha (X family) or deploys a preterite of <hi>techen</hi> (P family).</note> ȝow nauȝt so  taketh hede ȝe riche .</l>
<l> How þe boek bible  of hym bereth witnesse .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Si tibi sit copia  habundant<expan>er</expan> tribue </foreign></hi> <note>R.10.94: In the left margin, a hand points at this line and the next.</note></l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Si autem exiguu<expan>m</expan> illud <app><lem>inp<expan>er</expan>tire</lem></app><note>R.10.95: Though several beta manuscripts agree with alpha's verb form here, beta itself probably read <hi>impertiri</hi>, as reflected in LCrWO. The readings of the <hi>C</hi> manuscripts—for the entire Latin phrase—are quite mixed, but a majority, including XYcP<hi>2</hi>, agree with alpha.</note> <app><lem>libent<expan>er</expan> stude</lem></app><note>R.10.95: Beta transposes this phrase as <foreign>stude libenter</foreign>; <hi>Cx</hi> attests the same word order here as alpha.</note> .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> Who<seg>-</seg>so hath muche  spene manlyche  so meneth tobie .</l>
<l> And ho<seg>-</seg>so litel weldeth  rewle hym þer<expan>e</expan><seg>-</seg>after .</l>
<l> For we haue no l<expan>ett</expan>re of oure lif  how longe it sal dure .</l>
<l> Suche lessones lordes schulde  loue to here .</l>
<l> And how he miȝt most meyne  manliche fynde .</l>
<l> Nouȝt to fare as a fithelere  or <app><lem>as</lem></app><note>R.10.101: R's <hi>as</hi> is a unique addition to the text attested by beta (F completely alters the b-verse).</note> a frer<expan>e</expan> to seke festes .</l>
<l> Homliche at other me<expan>n</expan>n<expan>us</expan> howses  and hatyen her<expan>e</expan> owne .</l>
<l> Elyng<expan>e</expan> is þe halle  vche daye in þe weke .</l>
<l> Þere þe lorde ne þe lady  liketh nauȝt to sitte</l>
<l> Now hath vch riche a reule  to eten by hym<seg>-</seg>selue .</l>
<l> In a priuy parlour  for pore mennes sake .</l>
<l> Or in a chaumber <app><lem>by</lem></app><note>R.10.107: R's <hi>by</hi> is unique; <hi>Bx</hi> reads <hi>with</hi>.</note> a chymene  and leue þe chief halle .</l>
<l> Þat was made for meles  men to eten Inne .</l>
<l> And alle to spare to spille  þat <app><lem>spene</lem></app><note>R.10.109: R's <hi>spene</hi> is a unique reading here (the other <hi>B</hi> manuscripts read <hi>spende(n)</hi>); however, <hi>spene</hi> is a verb that developed from <hi>spende(n)</hi>, is synonymous with it, and occurs in free variation with it throughout R. From its sometimes parallel occurrence in L (as at KD10.90), the form seems likely to be an authorial relict.</note> schal an<seg>-</seg>other .</l>
<l> ¶ I haue herd hye men  etyng<expan>e</expan> at þe table .</l>
<l> Carpen as þei clerkes were  of crist and of his miȝtes .</l>
<l> And leyden fautes vpon þe fader  þat formed vs alle .</l>
<l> And carpen aȝeine clerkes  crabbed wordes .</l>
<l> Whi wold oure saueor suffre  such a worm in his blisse </l>
<l> Þat bygiled þe womma<expan>n</expan>  and þe man after .</l>
<l> Þorȝ which wiles and wordes  þei wenten to helle</l>
<l> And alle her<expan>e</expan> seed for her<expan>e</expan> synne  þe same deth suffrede .</l>
<l> ¶ Here lieth ȝour<expan>e</expan> lore  þis lordes g<del>u</del><add>y</add>nneth dispute .</l>
<l> Of þat ye clerkes vs kenneth  of crist by þe gospel .</l>
<hi><foreign>filius no<expan>n</expan> portab<expan>i</expan>t</foreign></hi>
<milestone>fol. 41rI</milestone>
<l> <hi><foreign>Filius non portabit <app><lem>iniquitatem</lem></app><note>R.10.120: R uniquely omits <foreign>patris</foreign> after <foreign>iniquitatem</foreign>.</note> &c<expan>etera</expan> .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> Whi schulde we þat now ben  for þe werkes of adam .</l>
<l> Roten and <app><lem>to<seg>-</seg>reue</lem></app><note>R.10.122: It is uncertain how to transcribe this word; it may be rendered as <hi>to<seg>-</seg>reue</hi> or as <hi>to<seg>-</seg>rene</hi>. If the latter of these options is adopted, it is merely a transcriptional error on the scribe's part for <hi>Bx</hi>'s <hi>torende</hi>. However one construes it, the form is unquestionably intended as a compound participial adjective and constitutes a unique reading in R (F agreeing here with the beta majority). <title>MED</title> cites <hi>toriuen</hi> as a compound <hi>s. v.</hi> <hi>riven</hi> (v. 2), (with <hi>toriue</hi> and <hi>toreuen</hi> as possible participle forms). Meaning 3a would seem closest to the context of R10.122 = "To split, splinter, shatter, or break apart as the result of a blow, collision, or other force; also, fig. be emotionally shattered; (b) fig. of the heart: to break on account of emotion." Two examples from fifteenth-century sources of <hi>toreue</hi> are cited under this heading. If this is the form intended by R's scribe, it represents an unconscious substitution of a synonym (in its sense of "torn" or "shattered") for original <hi>to-rende</hi>. The third possibility is that the form may be a compound participle of "reuen, v. 1a" = "to regret, to be embarrassed or shamed," a context that would fit well (albeit textually aberrant) with the meaning of <hi>roten</hi>, "destroyed, ruined."</note>  reson walde it neu<expan>er</expan>e .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Vnusquisq<expan>ue</expan> <app><lem>honus suu<expan>m</expan> portabit</lem></app><note>R.10.123: Beta transposes this phrase as <foreign>portabit onus suum</foreign>.</note> .</foreign></hi> </l>
<l> Suche motifs þei meue  þis maystres in her<expan>e</expan> glorie</l>
<l> And maketh men in mysbyleue  þat muse muche on her<expan>e</expan> wordes .</l>
<l> ¶ Ymaginatif here<seg>-</seg>afterwarde  schal answerie to ȝour<expan>e</expan> porpos .</l>
<l> ¶ Austyn to suche argueres  he telleth hem þis teme .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Non plus sapere q<expan>ua</expan>m oportet &c<expan>etera</expan> </foreign></hi></l>
<l> Wilneth neu<expan>er</expan>e to wite  whi þat god wolde .</l>
<l> Suffre sathan his seed to begile . <seg></seg></l>
<l> Ac byleue lelly  in þe lore of holy cherche .</l>
<l> And preye hym of pardou<expan>n</expan>  and penance in þi lyue .</l>
<l> And for his muche m<expan>er</expan>cy  to amende ȝow here .</l>
<l> ¶ For alle þat wilneth to wite  þe weyes of god almiȝty .</l>
<l> I wold his eye were in his ers  and his fynger after .</l>
<l> Þat eu<expan>er</expan>e wilneth to wite  whi þat god wolde .</l>
<l> Suffre sathan his seed to bygile .</l>
<l> Or Iudas <app><lem>þe Iew</lem></app><note>R.10.138: For alpha's <hi>þe Iew</hi>, beta has <hi>to þe iuwes</hi>. <hi>Ax</hi> agrees with alpha.</note>  ih<expan>es</expan>u betraie . <seg></seg></l>
<l> ¶ Alle was as <app><lem>he wolde</lem></app><note>R.10.139: Beta reads <hi>þow</hi>. <hi>Ax</hi> agrees with alpha.</note>  lorde yworschiped be þow .</l>
<l> And alle worth as þow wolt  what<seg>-</seg>so we despute .</l>
<l> ¶ And þo þat vseth þis hauelons  to blende mennes wittes .</l>
<l> What is dowel fro dobet  now def mote he worthe .</l>
<l> Sitth he wilneth to wite  which þei ben <app><lem>alle</lem></app> .<note>R.10.143: For alpha's <hi>alle</hi>, beta reads <hi>bothe</hi>. <hi>Ax</hi> agrees with alpha.</note></l>
<l> But if he lyue in þe lyue<note>R.10.144: Cf. F's <hi>lyȝue</hi> (transcribed by Kane-Donaldson as <hi>lyȝne</hi>); beta reads <hi>lyf</hi>.</note> þat longeth to dowel .</l>
<l> For I dare ben his <app><lem>boruȝh</lem></app><note>R.10.145: Beta reads <hi>bolde borgh</hi> here. <hi>Ax</hi> agrees with beta.</note>  þat dobet wil <app><lem>be nere</lem></app> .</l>
<l> Þow dobest drawe on hym  day after other .</l>
<l> ¶ And whanne þat wit was Iwar<expan>e</expan><app><lem>how</lem></app><note>R.10.147: Beta reads <hi>what</hi>. <hi>Ax</hi> agrees with alpha.</note> dame studie tolde</l>
<l> He bycom so confus  he couthe nauȝt loke </l>
<l> And as doumbe as deth  and drowe hym arere .</l>
<milestone>fol. 41vI</milestone>
<l> ¶ And for no carpyng<expan>e</expan> I couth after  ne kneling<expan>e</expan> to þe grounde .</l>
<l> I miȝt gete no greyne  of his grete wittes .</l>
<l> But alle lauȝynge he louted  and loked vpon stude .</l>
<l> In sygne þat I schulde  be<seg>-</seg>seche hire of grace . <seg></seg></l>
<l> ¶ And whan I was ware of his wille  to his wif gan I loute .</l>
<l> And seyde mercy ma<seg>-</seg>dame  ȝoure man schal I worthe .</l>
<l> As longe as I lyue  bothe late and rathe .</l>
<l> <app><lem>And</lem></app><note>R.10.157: Alpha's <hi>And</hi> is omitted by beta. <hi>Ax</hi> agrees with beta's wording, but <hi>Cx</hi> agrees with alpha.</note> forto werche ȝour<expan>e</expan> wille  þe while my lyf dureth .</l>
<l> With þat ȝe <app><lem><sic>kendely</sic><corr>[kenne me] kendely</corr></lem></app><note>R.10.158: The omission of verb and object here is unique to R. <hi>Cx</hi>'s wording agrees with the F/beta reading.</note>  to knowe what is dowel .</l>
<l> ¶ For þi mekenesse man q<expan>uo</expan>d sche  and for þi milde speche .</l>
<l> I schal kenne þe to my cosyn  þat <app><lem>clergise</lem></app><note>R.10.160: R's <hi>clergise</hi> is a unique variant; <hi>Bx</hi> has <hi>clergye</hi>, and the archetypes of the other two versions show the same reading.</note> is hoten .</l>
<l> He hath wedded a wif  withInne þis six monethus .</l>
<l> Is sib to þe seuen ars  scripture is hir<expan>e</expan> name .</l>
<l> Þei to as I hope  after my teching<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> Schullen wise þe to dowel  I dar <app><lem>wel</lem></app><note>R.10.164: R's <hi>wel</hi> is a unique variant; the other <hi>B</hi> copies all have <hi>it</hi>. However, <hi>Ax</hi> agrees with R.</note> vndertaken .</l>
<l> ¶ Þanne was I as fayne  as foule of fair<expan>e</expan> morwe .</l>
<l> And gladder þanne þe gleman  þat golde hath to ȝifte .</l>
<l> And hasked hire þe heye wey  where þat clergie dwelte .</l>
<l> And telle me so<expan>m</expan>me tokne q<expan>uo</expan>d I  for tyme Is þat <app><lem>we</lem></app><note>R.10.168: R's <hi>we</hi> is unique; <hi>Bx</hi> has <hi>I</hi>. The other two versional archetypes agree with <hi>Bx</hi>'s reading.</note> wende .</l>
<l> ¶ Aske þe heye wey q<expan>uo</expan>d sche  hennes to suffre .</l>
<l> Both wel and wo  ȝif þat þow wilt lerne .</l>
<l> And ride forth bi richesse  ac rest þow nauȝt þer<expan>e</expan><seg>-</seg>Inne .</l>
<l> For ȝif þow couplest þe þer<expan>e</expan><seg>-</seg>with  to <app><lem>cherche</lem></app><note>R.10.172: The correct reading is beta's <hi>clergye</hi> (as confirmed by an identical b-verse in the other two versions). R's <hi>cherche</hi>, which makes only superficial sense, may derive from alpha or may be an attempt to emend hopeless corruption; cf. F's reading, <hi>c<expan>ri</expan>st</hi>.</note> comest þow neu<expan>er</expan>e .</l>
<l> ¶ And also þe likerouse launde  þat lecherie <app><lem>is hote</lem></app><note>R.10.173: Beta reads <hi>hatte</hi> in place of alpha's <hi>is hote</hi>; <hi>Ax</hi> confirms beta's reading.</note> .</l>
<l> Leue hym on þin left half  a large mile or more .</l>
<l> Til þow come to a court  kepe wel þi tonge .<note>R.10.175: Though the next line is marked for a new strophe by the usual <hi>cc</hi> in the left margin, the scribe forgot to insert his customary blank line to mark this verse paragraph.</note></l>
<l> ¶ Fro lesynges and lither speche  and likerouse drinkes .</l>
<l> Þane schaltow se sobrete  and symplete of <app><lem>berynge</lem></app> .<note>R.10.177: In place of alpha's <hi>berynge</hi>, beta reads <hi>speche</hi>. <hi>Ax</hi> confirms beta's reading.</note></l>
<l> Þat vch wyȝth <app><lem>ben</lem></app> in wille  his wit þe to schewe .</l>
<l> And þus schalt þow come to clergie  þat can many þinges .</l>
<l> Sey hym þis signe  I sette hym to scole .</l>
<milestone>fol. 42rI</milestone>
<l> And þat I grette wel his wif  for I wrote hire many bookes .</l>
<l> And sette hire to sapience  and to þe sauter glose .</l>
<l> Logike I lernede hire  and many other lawes .</l>
<l> And alle þe muysones in <app><lem>musike</lem></app><note>R.10.184: R uniquely omits <hi>I</hi> before <hi>made</hi>.</note> made hire to knowe .</l>
<l> ¶ Plato þe poete I putte hym furst to booke .</l>
<l> Aristotele and <app><lem>other</lem></app><note>R.10.186: Beta reads <hi>other moo</hi>. <hi>Ax</hi> agrees with beta, but <hi>Cx</hi> agrees with alpha.</note>  to argue I tauȝte .</l>
<l> Gramer for girles  I gart furst write .</l>
<l> And bet hym with a baleys  but if þei wolde lerne .</l>
<l> Of alle kynnes craftes  I contreuede toles .</l>
<l> Of carpentrie of kerueres  and co<expan>m</expan>pasede masones .</l>
<l> And lerned hem leuele and lyne  þouȝ I loke dymme .</l>
<l> Ac theologye hath tened me  ten score tymes .</l>
<l> Þe more I muse þere<seg>-</seg>inne  þe mystier it semeth .</l>
<l> And þe deppere I dyuyne  þe derker<expan>e</expan> me it þinketh .</l>
<l> It is no sciens for<seg>-</seg>sothe  for to <app><lem>sauȝtele</lem></app><note>R.10.195: <hi>sauȝtele</hi>, "settle."</note> inne .</l>
<l> A ful lethi þinge it were  ȝif þat lof nere .</l>
<l> Ac for it leet best by loue  I loue it þe bett<expan>er</expan>e .</l>
<l> For <app><lem>þ<expan>a</expan>t þere</lem></app><note>R.10.198: R's phrase represents a unique transposition of the <hi>Bx</hi> form, <hi>þere þat</hi>. The <hi>Bx</hi> phrase is rendered identically in <hi>Ax</hi>.</note> loue is leder<expan>e</expan>  ne lakkede neuer<expan>e</expan> g<expan>ra</expan>ce .</l>
<l> <app><lem>Loue</lem></app><note>R.10.199: Beta reads <hi>Loke</hi>. The <hi>A</hi> version has <hi>Leue</hi>.</note> þow loue lelly  if <app><lem>þow</lem></app> <app><lem>thenke</lem></app><note>R.10.199: For R's <hi>þow thenke</hi>, beta reads <hi>þe lyketh</hi>. This lapse in alliteration descended to R from alpha (cf. F's <hi>þow þy<expan>n</expan>ke to</hi>) but is paralleled in the <hi>A</hi>-version. It may have resulted from scribal discomfort with the impersonal construction and inverted word order of <hi>Bx</hi>: dative pronoun + verb (i.e., <hi>þe lyketh </hi>).</note> do wel .</l>
<l> For dobet and dobest  ben of loues kynne .</l>
<l> ¶ In other science it seyth  I seye it in catou<expan>n</expan> .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Qui <app><lem>similat</lem></app><note>R.10.202: Alpha's verb form is supported by L, Cr<hi>2-3</hi>, and Cot, but most beta manuscripts read <foreign>simulat</foreign>. The <hi>A</hi> version manuscripts are equally divided between these two forms.</note> v<expan>er</expan>bis vel in<note>R.10.202: In place of R's <foreign>vel in</foreign>, beta reads <foreign>nec</foreign>, which is also the reading of <hi>Ax</hi>.</note> corde est fidus amicus .</foreign></hi> </l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Tu q<expan>u</expan>o<expan>que</expan> fac simile  sic ars diluditur arte .</foreign></hi> </l>
<l> Ho<seg>-</seg>so gloseth as giloures dou<expan>n</expan> go me to þe same .</l>
<l> And so <app><lem>schalstow</lem></app> fals folke  and faythles bygyle .</l>
<l> Þis is catones kennyng  to clerkes þat he lereth .</l>
<l> Ac theologie techeth nauȝt so  ho<seg>-</seg>so taketh <app><lem>gome</lem></app> .<note>R.10.207: This unique R reading is a synonym for beta's <hi>ȝeme</hi>. <title>MED</title> lists it, <hi>s. v.</hi> <hi>gome</hi> (n. 4), "Attention, heed, notice;" cf. F's <hi>heede</hi>.</note></l>
<l> He kenneth vs þe contrarie  aȝeyne catones wordes .</l>
<l> For he bit vs be as bretheren  and bidde for oure enemys .</l>
<l> And louen hem þat liȝen<note>R.10.210: R uniquely omits <hi>on</hi> before <hi>vs</hi>. <hi>Ax</hi> confirms the reading of the <hi>B</hi> majority.</note> <app><lem>vs</lem></app>  and lene hem whan he<expan>m</expan> nedeth .</l>
<l> And do goed aȝeynes euel  god hym<seg>-</seg>self it hoteth .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Du<expan>m</expan> te<expan>m</expan>pus <app><lem>est</lem></app><note>R.10.212: For alpha's <foreign>est</foreign>, beta reads <foreign>habemus</foreign>.</note> op<expan>er</expan>em<expan>ur</expan> <app><lem>bonu<expan>m</expan></lem></app><note>R.10.212: After <foreign>bonum</foreign>, R uniquely omits <foreign>ad omnes</foreign>.</note> maxi<expan>m</expan>e aute<expan>m</expan> ad domesticos fidei .</foreign></hi> </l>
<l> ¶ Poule p<expan>re</expan>ched þe poeple  þat parfitnesse louede .</l>
<milestone>fol. 42vI</milestone>
<l> To do goed for <orig>godesloue</orig><reg>godes loue</reg>  and gyue men þat asketh .</l>
<l> And namelich to suche  þat <app><lem>scheweth</lem></app><note>R.10.215: Beta reads <hi>sueth</hi>.</note> oure byleue .</l>
<l> ¶ And alle þat <app><lem>lakketh</lem></app><note>R.10.216: Beta has <hi>vs</hi> immediately after <hi>lakketh</hi>.</note> or lyeth vs  our<expan>e</expan> lorde techeth vs to louye .</l>
<l> And nauȝt to greuen hem þat greueth vs  god hym<seg>-</seg>self for<seg>-</seg>bad it .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Michi vindictam et ego retribuam </foreign></hi> </l>
<l> For<seg>-</seg>þi loke þow louie  as longe as þow dureste .</l>
<l> For is no science vnder sonne  so sou<expan>er</expan>eyne for þe soule .</l>
<l> ¶ Ac astronomye is <app><lem>hard</lem></app><note>R.10.221: Beta has <hi>an harde</hi>, but <hi>Ax</hi> supports alpha's omission of <hi>an</hi>.</note> þinge  and euel for to knowe .</l>
<l> Geometrie and geomesye  is gynful of speche .</l>
<l> Ho<seg>-</seg>so þenketh werch with þo to  þriueth ful late :</l>
<l> For sorcerye is þe sou<expan>er</expan>eyne boke  þ<expan>a</expan>t to <app><lem>þo</lem></app> science<note>R.10.224: R's combination of a plural determiner (<hi>þo</hi>) with a singular noun (<hi>science</hi>) is unique; some <hi>B</hi> witnesses read <hi>þe science</hi> (which is the <hi>Ax</hi> reading), while others, including WHmF, read <hi>þo sciences</hi>. It may be that R's <hi>þo science</hi> represents an unmarked plural rather than the casual error it appears (on a number of occasions, R offers unique, s-less genitive forms for his nouns).</note> longeth .</l>
<l> ¶ Ȝeet ar þer<expan>e</expan> fibiches in forceres  of fele mennes makyng<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> Exp<expan>er</expan>imens of alconomie  þe poeple to deseyue .</l>
<l> If þow þenke to dowel  dele þere<seg>-</seg>with neu<expan>er</expan>e .</l>
<l> Alle þis sciences I my<seg>-</seg>selue  soteyled and ordeyned .</l>
<l> And <app><lem>by<seg>-</seg>fond</lem></app><note>R.10.229: Cf. F's <hi>fond</hi> and beta's <hi>founded</hi>. <hi>Ax</hi> agrees with beta.</note> hem formest  folke to deseyue .</l>
<l> ¶ Telle clergie þise toknes  and <app><lem>to</lem></app><note>R.10.230: Beta omits alpha's <hi>to</hi>.</note> scripture after .</l>
<l> To conseile þe kendely  <app><lem>for</lem></app> to <app><lem>knowe dowel</lem></app> .<note>R.10.231: Beta reads this b-verse as <hi>to knowe what is dowel</hi>.</note></l>
<l> ¶ I seyde g<expan>ra</expan>unt m<expan>er</expan>cy madame  and mekelich hir<expan>e</expan> grette .</l>
<l> And went <app><lem>miȝteliche</lem></app> <app><lem>my wey</lem></app><note>R.10.233: Beta reads <hi>wiȝtlich awey </hi>; F omits the entire line. The <hi>Ax</hi> version seems a mixture of alpha and beta: <hi>wiȝtly my wey</hi>.</note>  with<seg>-</seg>oute more lettyng<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> And<note>R.10.234: R uniquely omits <hi>til</hi> before <hi>I</hi>.</note> <app><lem>I</lem></app> come to clergie  I couthe neu<expan>er</expan>e stynte .</l>
<l> <app><lem>I</lem></app> grette þe gode man  as <app><lem>þe gode wif</lem></app><note>R.10.235: R's rendering of this line is unique among the <hi>B</hi> manuscripts but is identical to the phrasing in <hi>Ax</hi>. For R's <hi>I</hi>, F and beta have <hi>And</hi>; for R's phrase, <hi>þe gode wif</hi>, beta has <hi>Studie</hi>) while F reads <hi>þe Ientil lady</hi>. Neither F nor beta alliterates properly.</note> me tauȝte .</l>
<l> And after<seg>-</seg>wardes þe wif  and worchiped hem bothe .</l>
<l> And tolde hem þe<note>R.10.237: It appears that the tail of <e> in <hi>þe</hi> was written over an erasure, perhaps of an intrusive descender from the <þ> of <hi>þe</hi> in the line above.</note> tokenes  þat me tauȝte were .</l>
<l> Was neu<expan>er</expan> gome vpou<expan>n</expan> þis grou<expan>n</expan>de  synnes<note>R.10.238: R's <hi>synnes</hi> is unique (cf. R20.295 = <hi>synnes ȝe desiren</hi>) but semantically equivalent to the majority <hi>B</hi> reading, <hi>sith</hi>; <title>MED</title>, <hi>s. v.</hi> <hi>sinnes</hi>, cites this form from R as a rare contracted example of the conjunction <hi>sitthenes</hi>.</note> god made þe worlde .</l>
<l> Fairer vnderfonge  ne frendloker at ese .</l>
<l> Þanne <app><lem>me<seg>-</seg>self</lem></app> sothliche  sone so he wiste .</l>
<l> Þat I was of wittes hows  and with his wif dame studie .</l>
<l> I seyde to hem sothly  þat sent <app><lem>I was</lem></app><note>R.10.242: Cf. F's <hi>y was sent</hi> and beta's <hi>sent was I</hi>.</note> þider .</l>
<l> Dowel and dobet  and dobest to lerne .</l>
<l> ¶ It is a comune lif q<expan>uo</expan>d clergie  on holy cherche to byleue .</l>
<milestone>fol. 43rI</milestone>
<l> With alle þe articles of þe feith  þat falleth to be knowe .</l>
<l> And þat is to byleue lelly  bothe lered and lewede .</l>
<l> On þe grete god  þat gynnyng<expan>e</expan> hadde neu<expan>er</expan>e .</l>
<l> And on þe sothfast sone  þat saued man<seg>-</seg>kende .</l>
<l> Fro þe dedly deth  and þe deueles power .</l>
<l> Þoruȝ þe helpe of þe holy goste  þe which goste is of bothe .</l>
<l> Thre <app><lem>p<expan>ro</expan>pre</lem></app><note>R.10.251: R's <hi>propre</hi> is unique, having been omitted by both beta and F. Nevertheless, it is clear that the alliterative pattern of the line requires it. In all likelihood, it was found in alpha and <hi>Bx</hi>. The apparently odd coincidence of the word's having been separately omitted by beta and F is probably explainable in terms of how it would have been abbreviated. It would have occurred in a phrase which, at a glance, looked like this: <hi>þre <hi>ppre</hi> psones</hi>. If the required loop from the descender of the initial <p> was missing or unobtrusive, a copyist might easily mistake the word for an errant attempt (uncancelled) at writing the following word (especially if the final <re> was rendered merely as a superscript loop). Or <hi>ppre</hi> might have been misconstrued as an unerased dittography of the preceding word, <hi>þre</hi>.</note> p<expan>er</expan>sones  and nauȝt in plurel<expan>e</expan> noumbre .</l>
<l> For alle is but on god  and eche is god hym<seg>-</seg>selue .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Deus pater deus filius  deus sp<expan>iritu</expan>s s<expan>an</expan>c<expan>tu</expan>s .</foreign></hi> </l>
<l> God þe fader god þe sone  god holy gost of bothe .</l>
<l> Makere of mankende  and of bestes bothe .</l>
<l> ¶ Austyne þe olde  here<seg>-</seg>of <app><lem>he</lem></app><note>R.10.256: Though the other beta copies omit <hi>he</hi>, L joins RF in attesting this variant. At first glance, it appears that the <hi>C</hi> reading for this phrase, which agrees with the beta majority, might undercut the authenticity of the LRF reading here; however, in fact <hi>C</hi> has expanded this whole passage and reproduces verbatim the LRF b-verse, with <hi>he</hi>, some six lines below its original position.</note> made bokes .</l>
<l> And hym<seg>-</seg>self ordeyned  to sadde vs in bileue .</l>
<l> Ho<note>R.10.258: <hi>Ho</hi>, "who."</note> was his autour  alle þe foure eu<expan>au</expan>ngelistes .</l>
<l> And crist cleped hym<seg>-</seg>self so  þe <app><lem>eu<expan>au</expan>ngeliez</lem></app><note>R.10.259: Beta's reading is <hi>ewangeliste(s)</hi>; F has <hi>wangelye</hi>.</note> bereth witnesse .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Ego in patre et pater in <app><lem>me</lem></app><note>R.10.260: After <foreign>me</foreign>, beta adds <foreign>est</foreign>. The X family of <hi>C</hi> manuscripts agrees with beta in this addition, but the P family agrees with alpha.</note>  et qui <app><lem>me vidit</lem></app> . <app><lem>p<expan>at</expan>rem M<expan>evm</expan> v<expan>idit</expan> &c<expan>etera</expan> .</lem></app><note>R.10.260: R's two uses of <foreign>vidit</foreign> are unique in the <hi>B</hi> tradition; F and beta read <foreign>videt</foreign>. However, a majority of <hi>C</hi> manuscripts (including copies from both major families) agrees with R's verb form. With regard to alpha's version of the end of this citation, beta's rendering involves phrasal transposition: <foreign>& qui videt me videt et patrem meum</foreign>.</note><note>R.10.260: The <hi>&c .</hi> has been rubbed or obscured by a stain, so that the final punctus is now barely detectable.</note></foreign></hi></l>
<l> ¶ Alle þe clerkes vnder criste  ne coude þis assoile .</l>
<l> But þus it <app><lem>longeth</lem></app> to bileue  to lewede þat willen dowel .</l>
<l> For hadde neu<expan>er</expan>e freke fyne wit  þe feyth to despute .</l>
<l> Ne man hadde no <app><lem>m<expan>er</expan>cy</lem></app><note>R.10.264: Beta reads <hi>merite</hi> in place of alpha's <hi>mercy</hi>. The Latin citation following this line confirms the correctness of beta's variant, as does its agreement with the reading of <hi>Cx</hi>.</note>  myȝtte it be <app><lem>p<expan>ro</expan>ued</lem></app> .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Fides non habet m<expan>er</expan>itu<expan>m</expan>  vbi humana <app><lem>rac<expan>i</expan>o . &c<expan>etera</expan></lem></app> .</foreign><note>R.10.265: Among the <hi>B</hi> witnesses, R uniquely omits the final words of this citation: <foreign>prebet experimentum</foreign>. The evidence for <hi>Cx</hi> is mixed, but a majority of <hi>C</hi> manuscripts, primarily those from the X family, agrees with R's omission of these words.</note></hi></l>
<l> ¶ Þanne is do<seg>-</seg>bet to suffre  for þi <app><lem>soule</lem></app><note>R.10.266: Though CB support alpha's uninflected possessive, beta reads <hi>soules</hi>.</note> helthe .</l>
<l> Alle þat þe boke bitt  by holy cherche techyng<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> And þat is man bi þi myȝt  for m<expan>er</expan>cyes sake .</l>
<l> Loke þow werche it in werke  þat <app><lem>þis</lem></app><note>R.10.269: Beta reads <hi>þi</hi>; F has <hi>þe</hi>.</note> worde scheweth .</l>
<l> Suche as þow semest in siȝte  be in assay I<seg>-</seg>founde .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Appare quod es <app><lem>aut</lem></app><note>R.10.271: Beta has <foreign>vel</foreign>.</note> esto quod appares .</foreign></hi> </l>
<l> And late no<seg>-</seg>body be  by þi <app><lem>beryng<expan>e</expan> be</lem></app><note>R.10.272: This redundancy is owed to alpha (cf. F's <hi>berynge here be</hi>); correcting it would have required only common sense and minimal attention from R's scribe; it is shared by Hm through convergence.</note> bygiled .</l>
<l> But be suche in þi sole  as þow semest withouten .</l>
<l> ¶ Þanne is dobest to be bolde  to blame þe gulty .</l>
<l> Sethenes þow sest þi<seg>-</seg>selue  as in soule clene .</l>
<l> Ac blame þow neu<expan>er</expan> body  and þow be blame<seg>-</seg>worthi .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Si culpar<expan>e</expan> velis  culpabilis e<expan>ss</expan>e cauebis . <seg></seg></foreign></hi> </l>
<milestone>fol. 43vI</milestone>
<l> <hi><foreign>Dogma tuu<expan>m</expan> sordet cu<expan>m</expan> te tua culpa remordet</foreign></hi></l>
<l> God in þe gospel  griml<del>.</del><add>y</add>che rep<expan>re</expan>ueth .</l>
<l> Alle þat lakketh eny lif  and lakkes han hem<seg>-</seg>selue .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Quid consideras festucam in oculo fratris tui t<expan>ra</expan>be<expan>m</expan> i<expan>n</expan> oculo tuo <app><lem>no<expan>n</expan> vid<expan>es</expan></lem></app> .</foreign><note>R.10.281: Beta omits <foreign>non vides</foreign>.</note></hi> </l>
<l> Whi meues þow þi mode for a mote  in þi <app><lem>brother</lem></app><note>R.10.282: Beta reads <hi>brotheres</hi>.</note> eyȝe .</l>
<l> Siþþe a bem in þin owen  a<seg>-</seg>blendeth þi<seg>-</seg>selue .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Eice primo trabem de oculo tuo . &c<expan>etera</expan> .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> <app><lem>Witt</lem></app><note>R.10.285: This reading is unique to R; beta reads <hi>Whiche</hi> while F has <hi>Þe wiche</hi></note> letteth þe to loke  lasse other more .</l>
<l> ¶ I rede ech <orig>ablynde</orig><reg>a blynde</reg> bosard  do bote to hym<seg>-</seg>selue .</l>
<l> For abbotes and for prioures  and for alle maner p<expan>re</expan>lates .</l>
<l> As p<expan>er</expan>sones and parisch p<expan>re</expan>stes  þat p<expan>re</expan>che <app><lem>schulle</lem></app><note>R.10.288: Both beta and F read <hi>shulde</hi>.</note> and teche .</l>
<l> Alle man<expan>er</expan> men  to amende be hir<expan>e</expan> miȝte .</l>
<l> Þis tixt was <app><lem>I<seg>-</seg>told</lem></app> ȝow  to ben war ar ȝe tauȝte .</l>
<l> Þat ȝe wer<expan>e</expan> suche as ȝe seyde  to salue with other<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> For godes worde wolde nouȝte be <app><lem><sic>boste</sic><corr>[l]oste</corr></lem></app>  for þat worcheth eu<expan>er</expan>e .</l>
<l> If it auailed nauȝt þe comune  it miȝt auaile ȝour<expan>e</expan><seg>-</seg>seluen .</l>
<l> ¶ Ac it semeth <app><lem>no</lem></app><note>R.10.294: This obvious error (<hi>no</hi> for <hi>now</hi>) stems from alpha (cf. F's <hi>not</hi>). R's failure to correct it probably attests to misplaced reverence for his exemplar.</note> sothliche  to<note>R.10.294: Though Cr agrees with R's omission here, the beta sub-archetype and F show <hi>þe</hi> before <hi>worldes</hi>.</note> worldes siȝte .</l>
<l> Þat goddes <app><lem>wordes</lem></app><note>R.10.295: Beta has <hi>worde</hi>, while F garbles the entire half-line and omits any reading at this point.</note> worcheth nauȝth  on lered ne on lewed .</l>
<l> But in swich a maner as mark  meneth in þe gospell<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Du<expan>m</expan> <app><lem><sic>secus</sic><corr>[c]ecus</corr> ducit <sic>secu<expan>m</expan></sic><corr>[c]ecu<expan>m</expan></corr></lem></app><note>R.10.297: This slip (<foreign>secus</foreign> for <foreign>cecus</foreign> / <foreign>caecus</foreign>) cannot be owed to the scribe's own pronunciation of Latin (in which the voiceless velar plosive /k/ of classical phonology would have been rendered, as was conventional in ecclesiastical Latin, as the voiceless palato-alveolar affricate /č/). Instead, this mental lapse reveals momentary confusion with English phonology, where initial <c> often represented the voiceless alveolar fricative /s/. No other <hi>B</hi> copyist makes this mistake.</note>  ambo in fouiam cadunt .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> ¶ Lewed men may likne ȝow þus  þ<expan>a</expan>t þe bem lyth in ȝour<expan>e</expan> eyȝes .</l>
<l> And þe <foreign>festu</foreign> is fallen  for ȝour<expan>e</expan> defaute .</l>
<l> In alle man<expan>er</expan> men  þoruȝ mansede p<expan>re</expan>stes .</l>
<l> Þe bible bereth witnesse  þat alle þe folke of israel .</l>
<l> Bytt<expan>er</expan>e abouȝte þe gultes  of to badde prestes .</l>
<l> Offyn and fynes  for her<expan>e</expan> coueytise .</l>
<l> <foreign>Archa dei</foreign> <app><lem>meskapud</lem></app><note>R.10.304: This is either a mistake or an extremely rare form. <title>MED</title>, <hi>s. v.</hi> <hi>miskepen</hi>, lists no occurrences for the inflected form nor for the base. <title>OED2</title>, <hi>s. v.</hi> <hi>miscape</hi>, lists R's use of the term as the only known occurrence of <hi>meskapud</hi>. It is classified as a past tense form of <hi>miscape</hi>, an intransitive verb meaning "To have a mishap, come to grief." A citation from 1477 in a treatise on alchemy is the only other known use of the verb as an intransitive. One transitive use from 1535 is cited.</note>  and ely brak his ne<del>..</del><add>kk</add>e .</l>
heare I beganne
<l> ¶ For<seg>-</seg>þi ȝe corectoures claweth here<seg>-</seg>on  and corecteth furst ȝow<seg>-</seg>selue<expan>n</expan> .</l>
<l> And þan<expan>n</expan>e mow ȝe <app><lem>ma<expan>n</expan>liche</lem></app><note>R.10.306: Beta reads <hi>saufly</hi> while F has <hi>soþly</hi>, but neither word alliterates properly; R's <hi>manliche</hi> appears to be authorial.</note> segge  as dauid made þe sauter .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Existimasti iniq<expan>ue</expan> q<expan>uo</expan>d ero tui si<expan>mi</expan>lis  argua<expan>m</expan> te & statua<expan>m</expan> co<expan>n</expan>t<expan>ra</expan> fac<expan>iem</expan> t<expan>uam</expan> .</foreign></hi> </l>
<l> ¶ And þanne schulle<expan>n</expan> burel clerkes  be abasched to blame <app><lem>ȝow</lem></app> .<note>R.10.308: At the end of this line, beta adds <hi>or to greue</hi>.</note></l>
<l> And carpe<expan>n</expan> nauȝt as þei carpe<expan>n</expan> now  and calle ȝow dow<expan>m</expan>be houndes .</l>
<milestone>fol. 44rI</milestone>
<l> <hi><foreign>Canes no<expan>n</expan> valentes latrare </foreign></hi> </l>
<l> And drede to wrathe ȝow in eny worde  ȝour<expan>e</expan> werkmanschip<expan>e</expan> to lette .</l>
<l> And be p<expan>re</expan>steore at ȝour<expan>e</expan> <app><lem>preyeres</lem></app><note>R.10.312: R's plural is unique; <hi>Bx</hi> witnesses the singular <hi>prayere</hi>.</note>  þan for a pounde of nobles .</l>
<l> And alle for ȝour<expan>e</expan> holynesse  haue ȝe þis in herte .</l>
<l> ¶ Amonges riȝtful religiouse  þis reule schulde be holde .<note> These lines are not attested in beta. F's version is sufficiently different from R's to require full reproduction here (cf. Appendix 1, R10.314-26, for details and any cross-references to the <hi>C</hi> version): <lb/>
<hi>A-mongis ryghtful relygous / þis rewle sholde be holde. <lb/>
[¶] Seynt Gregory þe grete clerk / & þe goode pope. <lb/>
Of Relygyonys rewle / he reersiþ in hise bookis. <lb/>
& seyþ in exsomple / þat þeyhȝ sholde do þere-after. <lb/>
¶ Whan fysshis faile þe flood / & þe fressh water. <lb/>
Þey dyȝen for drowhte / whan þei dreyȝe lyȝe. <lb/>
Ryght so quod Gregory / religioun trollyþ. <lb/>
It steruyþ & stynkþ / & stelyþ lordis almesse <lb/>
Þat owt of Couent & cloistre / coueytyn to lybbe. <lb/>
For if hevene be in erthe / & ese to þe soule. <lb/>
It ys in cloystre / or in skole / be fele skylys y fyȝnde. <lb/>
For in Cloistre comeþ no man / to fyȝhte / ne to chyȝde. <lb/>
But al is buxumnesse & bookis / to rede & to leerne</hi>
<l> <app><lem>Gregorie</lem></app> þe grete clerke  and þe goed pope .</l>
<l> Of <app><lem>religioun þe reule</lem></app>  reherseth in his <app><lem>morales</lem></app> .</l>
<l> And seyth <app><lem>it</lem></app> in ensaumple  <app><lem>for</lem></app> þei schulde do þer<expan>e</expan><seg>-</seg>after .</l>
<l> Whenne fissches failen þe flode  <app><lem>or</lem></app> þe fresche water .</l>
<l> Þei deyen for drouthe  whanne þei drie ligge .</l>
<l> Riȝt so q<expan>uo</expan>d Grigori  religioun <app><lem>rolleth</lem></app> . <seg></seg></l>
<l> <app><lem>Sterueth</lem></app> and stynketh  and steleth lordes almesses .</l>
<l> Þat oute of couent and cloystr<expan>e</expan>  coueyten to libbe .</l>
<l> For if heuene be <app><lem>on þis</lem></app> erthe  and ese to <app><lem>any</lem></app> soule .</l>
<l> It is in cloister<expan>e</expan> or in scole  be <app><lem>many</lem></app> skilles I fynde</l>
<l> For in cloistr<expan>e</expan> <app><lem><sic>cometh man</sic><corr>cometh [no] man</corr></lem></app>  to <app><lem>chide</lem></app> ne to <app><lem>fiȝte</lem></app> .</l>
<l> But alle is buxu<expan>m</expan>nesse <app><lem>þer<expan>e</expan></lem></app> and bokes  to rede and to lerne .</l>
<l> ¶ In scole þer<expan>e</expan> is <app><lem>skile  and</lem></app> scorne but ȝif <app><lem>he</lem></app> lerne .<note>R.10.327: Alpha and beta apparently diverged considerably here (the latter omitting <hi>skile and</hi> from mid-verse and expanding <hi>he</hi> to <hi>a clerke wil</hi>); R presumably reflects alpha's reading, while F somewhat distorts it. Kane-Donaldson choose to print the beta version of the line (<hi>In scole þere is scorne but if a clerke wil lerne</hi>), while Schmidt endorses R's reading, which has the merit of alliterating properly.</note></l>
<l> And grete loue and likyng<expan>e</expan>  for vch of hem loueth other .</l>
<l> Ac now is religioun a rider<expan>e</expan>  a romer<expan>e</expan> by stretes .</l>
<l> A ledere of louedays  and<note>R.10.330: The omission of the indefinite article is unique to R. Cf. the <hi>Bx</hi> phrase, <hi><hi>a</hi> londebugger</hi>. The same phrase occurs in <hi>Ax</hi>, where it also includes the indefinite article.</note> <app><lem>londe</lem></app> bugger<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> A priker<expan>e</expan> on a palfray  fram maner to maner .</l>
<l> An hepe of houndes at his ers  as he a lorde wer<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> And but if his knaue knele  þat schal his cupp<expan>e</expan> bringe .</l>
<l> He loureth on hym and axeth hym  ho tauȝte hym curteisie</l>
<l> Litel hadden lordes to done  to ȝiue lond fram her<expan>e</expan> heires .</l>
<l> To religiouse þ<expan>a</expan>t han no reuthe  þouȝ it reyne on her<expan>e</expan> aut<expan>er</expan>res .</l>
<l> ¶ In many places þer<expan>e</expan> hij p<expan>er</expan>sones ben  be hem<seg>-</seg>self at ese .</l>
<l> Of þe pouer<expan>e</expan> haue þei no pite  & þ<expan>a</expan>t is hir<expan>e</expan> <app><lem>pur<expan>e</expan></lem></app><note>R.10.338: Beta breaks the alliterative pattern by omitting <hi>pure</hi>. <hi>Cx</hi> confirms alpha's variant here.</note> charite .</l>
<l> Ac þei leten hem as lordes  her<expan>e</expan> londe lith so brode .</l>
<l> ¶ Ac þer<expan>e</expan> schal come a kynge  & co<expan>n</expan>fesse ȝow religiousses .</l>
<l> And bete ȝow as þe bible telleth  for brekyng of ȝoure reule .</l>
<milestone>fol. 44vI</milestone>
<l> And amende moniales  monkes and chanou<expan>n</expan>s .</l>
<l> And putten hem to her<expan>e</expan> penau<expan>n</expan>ce  <foreign>ad p<expan>ri</expan>stinu<expan>m</expan> statu<expan>m</expan> ire .</foreign></l>
<l> And barones with erles  <app><lem>biten</lem></app><note>R.10.344: R's form is unique; <hi>Bx</hi> has <hi>beten</hi>.</note> hem  þoruȝ <foreign>beat<expan>us</expan> vir</foreign>res teching<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> Þat her<expan>e</expan> barnes claymen  and blame ȝow foule .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Hij in currib<expan>us</expan> et hij in equis<note>R.10.346: A stain has partly obscured the <equ> of <foreign>equis</foreign>.</note>  ip<expan>s</expan>i obligati sunt &c<expan>etera</expan> . </foreign></hi></l>
<l> ¶ And þanne freres in here freyt<expan>ur</expan>e  schal fynden a keye .</l>
<l> Of costantynes cofferes  in which is þe catel .</l>
<l> Þat gregories <app><lem>gode</lem></app><note>R.10.349: Most <hi>B</hi> manuscripts read <hi>godchildren</hi> instead of the erroneous <hi>good(e) children</hi> of FHmG. R's <hi>gode childerne</hi> almost certainly intends the former, not the latter (cf. <title>MED</title>, <hi>s. v.</hi> <hi>god</hi>, [n. 1]).</note> childerne  han euel despended .</l>
<l> ¶ And þanne schal þe abbot of abyndou<expan>n</expan> .<note> R's line division here, splitting the two halves of a single archetypal verse, is unique.</note></l>
<l> And alle his vssue for euer<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> Haue a knok of a kynge  and incurable þe wou<expan>n</expan>de .</l>
<l> ¶ Þat þis worth soth seke ȝee  þat ofte ou<expan>er</expan><seg>-</seg>seen þe bible .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Quomodo cessauit exactor quieuit tributu<expan>m</expan> .</foreign></hi> </l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Contriuit domin<expan>us</expan> baculu<expan>m</expan> impior<expan>um</expan> & virgam d<expan>omi</expan>nanciu<expan>m</expan> .</foreign></hi> </l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Cedenciu<expan>m</expan> plaga <app><lem><sic>insabili</sic><corr>insa[<expan>na</expan>]bili</corr></lem></app> .</foreign></hi> </l>
<l> ¶ Ac ar þat kyng<expan>e</expan> come  caym schal awake .</l>
<l> Ac dowel schal dyngen hym adou<expan>n</expan>  & destruyen his miȝte .</l>
<l> Þanne is dowel and dobet q<expan>uo</expan>d I  <foreign>d<expan>omi</expan>n<expan>u</expan>s</foreign> and kniȝt<seg>-</seg>hod<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> ¶ I nel nauȝt scorne q<expan>uo</expan>d scriptur<expan>e</expan>  but if scriueynes lye .</l>
<l> Kynghod ne kniȝthod<expan>e</expan>  by nauȝt I can awayte .</l>
<l> Helpeth nauȝte to heuene<seg>-</seg>warde  on heres ende .</l>
<l> Ne richesse riȝt nauȝt  ne realte of lordes .</l>
<l> ¶ Poule p<expan>re</expan>ueth it inpossible  riche men haue heuene .</l>
<l> Salomon seyth al<seg>-</seg>so  þat silu<expan>er</expan> is worste to louie .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Nichil iniqui<expan>us</expan> q<expan>ua</expan>m amar<expan>e</expan> pecuniam .</foreign></hi> </l>
<l> And catou<expan>n</expan> kenneth vs to coueyten it  noȝt but <app><lem>at pur<expan>e</expan> nede</lem></app> .<note>R.10.367: R's wording is unique. Beta manuscripts show various versions of this line's last phrase, but beta itself probably read <hi>as nede techeth</hi>. F has <hi>in gret nede</hi>.</note></l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Dilige denariu<expan>m</expan>  s<expan>ed</expan> parce dilige formam .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> And pat<expan>ri</expan>arches and p<expan>ro</expan>phetes  and poetes bothe .</l>
<l> Writen to wissen vs  to wilne no richesse .</l>
<l> And p<expan>re</expan>yseden pou<expan>er</expan>te with pacience  þe apostles bereth witnesse .</l>
<l> Þat þei han heritage in heuene  & bi trewe riȝte .</l>
<milestone>fol. 45rI</milestone>
<l> Þer<expan>e</expan> riche <app><lem>man</lem></app><note>R.10.373: Beta reads <hi>men</hi>.</note> no riȝte may clayme  but of <del>riȝt</del> <add>reuth</add> and grace .</l>
<l><foreign>Cont<expan>ra</expan></foreign> q<expan>uo</expan>d I be crist  þat can I rep<expan>re</expan>ue .</l>
<l> And preuen it by peter  and by poule bothe .</l>
<l> Þat is baptized beth sauf  be he<note>R.10.376: A brown stain has rendered <hi>he</hi> almost illegible. It is the same stain responsible for discoloration on fol. 44v at R10.346.</note> riche or pore .</l>
<l> ¶ Þat is <foreign>in extremis</foreign> q<expan>uo</expan>d sc<expan>ri</expan>ptur<expan>e</expan>  amonges sarasines & Iewes .</l>
<l> Þei mowen be saued so  and þat is our<expan>e</expan> byleue .</l>
<l> Þat <app><lem>on</lem></app><note>R.10.379: F has <hi>a</hi> while beta reads <hi>an</hi>.</note> vnc<expan>ri</expan>stene in þat cas  may cristene an hethen .</l>
<l> And for his lele byleue  whan he þe lif tyneth .</l>
<l> Haue þe heritage of heuene  as any man cristene .</l>
<l> ¶ Ac cristen men with<seg>-</seg>outen more  may nouȝte come to heuene .</l>
<l> For þat crist for cristene men deyede  & co<expan>n</expan>fermed þe lawe .</l>
<l> Þat ho<seg>-</seg>so walde and wilneth  with crist to arise .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Si cu<expan>m</expan> <expan>christo</expan> surrexistis &c<expan>etera</expan> . </foreign></hi></l>
<l> He schulde louye and lene  and þe lawe fulfille .</l>
<l> Þat is loue <app><lem>god þi lorde</lem></app>  leuest aboue alle .<note>R.10.387: F omits this line completely; beta reads <hi>Þat is loue þi lorde god leuest aboue alle</hi>.</note></l>
<l> And after alle cristene creatures  i<expan>n</expan> comun vch ma<expan>n</expan> other</l>
<l> And þus bilongeth to louie  þat leueth to be saued .</l>
<l> And but we do þus in dede  ar þe day of dome .</l>
<l> It schal be<seg>-</seg>sitten vs ful sour<expan>e</expan>  þe silu<expan>er</expan> þat we kepen .</l>
<l> And our<expan>e</expan> backes þat mote<seg>-</seg>eten<note>R.10.392: The correct reading is <hi>moth</hi>-<hi>eten</hi>. R's apparently nonsensical phrase (cf. F = <hi>mote be bety<expan>n</expan></hi>) attests to the spelling practice of alpha, who frequently renders /θ/ as <t>, especially in syllable-final position. <title>MED</title>, <hi>s. v.</hi> <hi>motthe</hi>, lists no examples of <hi>mote</hi> as a variant spelling of <hi>motthe</hi>, and <title>OED2</title>, <hi>s. v.</hi> <hi>moth</hi>, notes none earlier than 1520. However, among recorded late-medieval forms, the closest is <hi>moȝte</hi>, which makes alpha's form easy to account for.</note> ben  & seen beggeres go naked .</l>
<l> Or deliȝt in wyn & <app><lem>in</lem></app><note>R.10.393: R's <hi>in</hi> here is a unique addition to the text of <hi>Bx</hi>.</note> wildefoule  & wote any in defaute .</l>
<l> ¶ For eu<expan>er</expan>y cristene creatur<expan>e</expan>  schuld be kende til other .</l>
<l> And sitthen hethen to helpe  in hope of amendement</l>
<l> God hoteth both heye and lowe  þat no man hurt other</l>
<l> And seith sle nauȝt þ<expan>a</expan>t semblable is  to myn owne liknesse</l>
<l> But if I sende þe sume tokene  & seith <foreign>no<expan>n</expan> mecaberis</foreign> .</l>
<l> Is sle nauȝt but suffre  and alle for þe beste .</l>
<l> <hi>For <foreign>Michi vindicta<expan>m</expan> & ego retribuam .</foreign></hi><note>R.10.400: Beta omits this biblical citation completely. Nevertheless, its genuineness is warranted by its presence at the same point in <hi>Ax</hi>.</note></l>
<l> For I schal punischen<note>R.10.401: R's <hi>punischen</hi> is the alpha reading; beta reads <hi>punysshen hem</hi>. <hi>Ax</hi> agrees with alpha.</note> <app><lem>in</lem></app> purgatorie  or i<expan>n</expan> þe put of hell<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> Vch man for his misdedes  but mercy it lette .</l>
<l> ¶ Þis is a longe lessou<expan>n</expan> q<expan>uo</expan>d I  and litel am I þe wiser .</l>
<l> Wher<expan>e</expan> dowel is or do<seg>-</seg>bet  derkliche ȝe schewen .</l>
<milestone>fol. 45vI</milestone>
<l> Many tales ȝe tellen  þat teologie lerneth .</l>
<l> And þat I man made was  and my name I<seg>-</seg>entred<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> In þe legen<del>t</del><add>d</add>e of lif  longe er I wer<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> Or elles vn<seg>-</seg>writen for sum wikkednesse . as holy writ <app><lem>telleth</lem></app><note>R.10.408: In place of alpha's <hi>telleth</hi>, beta's variant is <hi>wytnesseth</hi>. <hi>Cx</hi> has <hi>sheweth</hi>, while the b-verse in the <hi>A</hi> cognate of this line has a different word order but uses the same verb as beta.</note> .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Nemo ascendit ad celu<expan>m</expan> nisi qui de celo descendit .</foreign></hi> </l>
<l><app><lem>And</lem></app> I<note>R.10.410: Beta omits <hi>And</hi>; F substitutes <hi>For</hi>. However, <hi>Ax</hi> affirms the presence of R's <hi>And</hi> at the head of the line (the two <hi>C</hi> families disagree on this issue, the P group agreeing with the beta omission while the X set supports R).</note> leue it <app><lem>wel</lem></app><note>R.10.410: After <hi>wel</hi> beta adds <hi>quod I</hi>, but <hi>Ax</hi> and <hi>Cx</hi> both support RF on the omission of <hi>quod I</hi>.</note> be our<expan>e</expan> lorde  & on no lett<expan>er</expan>ur<expan>e</expan> bett<expan>er</expan>e .</l>
<l> For salomon þe sage  þat sapience tauȝte .</l>
<l> God gaf hym grace of witt  and <app><lem>alle</lem></app> godes<note>R.10.412: In place of R's <hi>alle godes</hi>, beta's variant is <hi>alle his godes</hi>. F reads <hi>of alle goodis</hi>. <hi>Cx</hi> has <hi>of goed</hi>.</note> after .</l>
<l> To reule þe reume and riche to make <note>R.10.413: Beta omits this line completely. F reads the line thus: <hi>To rewle his rewme wel / & hym ryche make</hi>.</note> </l>
<l> He demed wel and wiselich  as holy writt telleth .</l>
<l> Aristotel and he  who wissed men bett<expan>er</expan>e .</l>
<l> Maistres þat of goddes mercy  techen men and p<expan>re</expan>chen .</l>
<l> Of her<expan>e</expan> wordes þei wissen vs  for wisest <app><lem>in</lem></app><note>R.10.417: Beta reads <hi>as</hi> before <hi>in</hi>. <hi>Cx</hi> agrees with alpha in omitting <hi>as</hi>.</note> her<expan>e</expan> tyme .</l>
<l> And alle holy cherche  holdeth hem bothe ydampned .</l>
<l> ¶ And if I schulde werke by her<expan>e</expan> werkes  to wynne<expan>n</expan> me heuene .</l>
<l> Þat for here werkes and <app><lem>her<expan>e</expan></lem></app><note>R.10.420: Beta omits <hi>here</hi>. <hi>Cx</hi> agrees with beta in this omission. In a line whose first half parallels this <hi>B</hi> / <hi>C</hi> passage (but whose b-verse differs), the <hi>A</hi> witnesses are divided on the presence of <hi>here</hi> (2) — a majority agreeing with alpha and a minority agreeing with beta.</note> witt  now wonyeth in pyne .</l>
<l> Þanne wrouȝt I vnwisly  what<seg>-</seg>so<seg>-</seg>eu<expan>er</expan>e ȝe p<expan>re</expan>che .</l>
<l> ¶ Ac of fele witty in fayth  litel ferly I haue .</l>
<l> Þow her<expan>e</expan> goste be vngracious  god for to plese .</l>
<l> For many <app><lem>man</lem></app> on þis molde  more sett her<expan>e</expan> <app><lem>herte</lem></app> .<note>R.10.424: Beta renders plurals in this line: <hi>men</hi> instead of alpha's <hi>man</hi> and <hi>hertis</hi> instead of <hi>herte</hi>. <hi>Cx</hi> agrees with beta on <hi>men</hi> but with alpha on <hi>herte</hi>.</note></l>
<l> In goed þan In god  for<seg>-</seg>þi hem g<expan>ra</expan>ce faileth .</l>
<l> At her<expan>e</expan> most meschief  whan þei schul lyf lete .</l>
<l> As salomon <app><lem>and other dede</lem></app><note>R.10.427: Instead of alpha's non-alliterating <hi>and other dede</hi>, beta more plausibly reads <hi>dede and such other</hi>.</note>  þat schewed grete wittes .</l>
<l> Ac her<expan>e</expan> werkes as holy <app><lem><sic>writt</sic><corr>writt [seith]</corr></lem></app><note>R.10.428: Here R uniquely omits an essential verb.</note>  was eu<expan>er</expan>e þe contrarie .</l>
<l> For<seg>-</seg>þi wise witted men  <app><lem>ne</lem></app><note>R.10.429: R's <hi>ne</hi> is unique; <hi>Bx</hi> has <hi>and</hi>.</note> wel I<seg>-</seg>lettred clerkes .</l>
<l> As þei seyn hem<seg>-</seg>selue  selden dou<expan>n</expan> þer<expan>e</expan><seg>-</seg>after .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Sup<expan>er</expan> cathedram moysi . &c<expan>etera</expan> .</foreign></hi><note>R.10.431: Here the scribe again overlooks his usual insertion of a blank line to mark a new paragraph.</note></l>
<l> ¶ Ac I wene <app><lem><sic>I</sic><corr>I[t]</corr></lem></app> worth of many  as was in noes tyme .</l>
<l> Þo he schope þat schippe  of schides and <app><lem>of</lem></app> bordes<note>R.10.433: Though the CrW branch of beta agrees with alpha on the final b-verse phrase (<hi>and of bordes</hi>), it seems likely that beta itself read as LMOHmG (<hi>and bordes</hi>). This difference extends into <hi>C</hi>, where the predominant X-family reading agrees with LMOHmG (i.e., beta) while the majority P-family reading supports RFCrW (i.e., alpha).</note></l>
<l> Was neu<expan>er</expan>e wriȝt saued þat wrouȝt þer<expan>e</expan><seg>-</seg>on  ne oþer<expan>e</expan> werkma<expan>n</expan> elles</l>
<l> But brides and bestes  and þe blessed noe .</l>
<l> And his wif with his sones  and also her<expan>e</expan> wyues .</l>
<l> Of wriȝtes þat it <app><lem><sic>wouȝte</sic><corr>w[r]ouȝte</corr></lem></app>  was noen of hem saued .</l>
<milestone>fol. 46rI</milestone>
<l> ¶ God lene it fare nouȝt so by folke  þat þe feith techen .</l>
<l> Of holy cherche þat herborw is  and goddes hous to saue</l>
<l> And schilde vs fram schame þer<expan>e</expan><seg>-</seg>inne  as noes schip<expan>e</expan> dede bestes .</l>
<l> And men þat maden it  a<seg>-</seg>mydde þe floed a<seg>-</seg>dreynten .</l>
<l> ¶ Þe <foreign>culor<expan>um</expan></foreign> of þis clause  <app><lem>in</lem></app> curatoures<note>R.10.442: R's <hi>in</hi> is a unique addition to the presumptive archetypal text. F adds <hi>of</hi>. Beta agrees with <hi>Cx</hi> in omitting both of these prepositions.</note> is to mene .</l>
<l> Þat ben carpenteres  holy cherche to make . for c<expan>ri</expan>stes oune bestes .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Homines et iumenta saluabis d<expan>omi</expan>ne . &c<expan>etera</expan></foreign></hi></l>
<l> At domes<seg>-</seg>day þe <app><lem>deluye</lem></app> worth  of <app><lem>deth</lem></app> and feer at ones .<note> These three lines are not found in beta. In F, they read as follows: <lb/>
<hi>At domes-day / þe flood worþ / of watur & feer at onys . <lb/>
¶ For-þy y conseyle ȝou klerkis / of holy chirche wryghtis. <lb/>
Werke ȝee / as ȝee seen wrete / o lest ȝe worþ y-drenklid</hi>
<l> For<seg>-</seg>þi I conseil ȝow clerkes  of holy cherche <app><lem>þe</lem></app> wriȝtes .</l>
<l> Wercheth ȝe <app>