<div1>fol. 71v (cont.)I</div1>
<foreign>pass<expan>us</expan> xiiij<expan>us</expan> .</foreign>
<head><foreign><hi>Passus <orig><sic>xiiij<expan>us</expan></sic><corr>x[v]<expan>us</expan></corr></orig><reg><sic>quartus decim<expan>us</expan></sic><corr>[quintus] decim<expan>us</expan></corr></reg> de visione vt sup<expan>ra</expan> .</hi></foreign></head>
<l> <hi><hi>A</hi></hi>c<note>R.15.1: Inside the triangle formed by the top of the ornamental capital, the rubricator has drawn a nun's face.</note> after my walkyng<expan>e</expan><note>R.15.1: R shares this error (<hi>walkyng<expan>e</expan></hi> for <hi>Bx</hi>'s <hi>wakyng</hi> ) with Bm and Bo alone.</note>  it was wonder longe .</l>
<l> Ar I coude kendely  knowe what was dowel .</l>
<l> And so my wit wexe and wanyed  til I a foel were .</l>
<l> And som<expan>m</expan>e lakked my lif  alowed it fewe .</l>
<l> And leten me for a lorel  and lothe to reuerencen .</l>
<l> Lordes or ladyes  or any lif elles  </l>
<l> As persones in pelur<expan>e</expan>  with pendauntes of suluer .</l>
<l> To seriauntz <app><lem>and</lem></app><note>R.15.8: R's <hi>and</hi> is an alpha variant; cf. beta's <hi>ne</hi>.</note> to suche  <app><lem>and</lem></app> seide<note>R.15.8: R's phrase, <hi>suche and seide</hi>, is unique; beta omits <hi>and</hi>, while F reads <hi>swiche men seyde</hi>.</note> nauȝt ones .</l>
<l> God loke ȝow lordes  ne louted fair<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> Þat folke helden me a foel  and in þat folye I raued .</l>
<l> Til reson hadde reuthe on me  and rokked me a slepe .</l>
<l> Til I seyȝ as it <app><lem>of</lem></app><note>R.15.12: R's line closely parallels that of beta, but R's <hi>of</hi> is unattested in any beta witness. F includes <hi>of</hi>, but does so in a totally revised version of this a-verse.</note> sorserie wer<expan>e</expan>  a sotil thynge with<seg>-</seg>alle .</l>
<l> One with<seg>-</seg>oute tonge and teth  tolde me <app><lem>wonder</lem></app> I schulde .</l>
<l> And wher<expan>e</expan><seg>-</seg>of I cam and <app><lem>whider I schulde</lem></app><note>R.15.14: R's b-verse is seriously corrupt, deploying the final phrase from the previous archetypal line (<hi>whider I schulde</hi>)—a phrase which he had miscopied in its proper place; by contrast, F has <hi>kendely</hi> here and beta manuscripts read <hi>what kynde</hi>. Moreover, R uniquely divides this botched passage so as to cause the final phrase of the <hi>Bx</hi> line to be displayed as a separate, following line, R15.15.</note></l>
<l> I co<expan>n</expan>iured hym at þe laste  </l>
<l> If he wer<expan>e</expan> cristes creatur<expan>e</expan>  for c<expan>ri</expan>stes loue me to tellen : </l>
<l> ¶ I am cristes creatur<expan>e</expan> q<expan>uo</expan>d he  and cristene in many place .</l>
<l> In cristes court I<seg>-</seg>knowe wel  and of his kynne a party .</l>
<l> Is noyther peter þe porter  ne powel with <app><lem>þe</lem></app><note>R.15.19: R's <hi>þe</hi> is unique; the other <hi>B</hi> manuscripts have <hi>his</hi>. Among the <hi>C</hi> copies, the X family agrees with R while the P family agrees with the others.</note> fauchon .</l>
<l> Þat wole defende me þe dore  dyng<expan>e</expan> ych neuer so late .</l>
<l> At mydnyȝte at mydday  my voys <app><lem>is so</lem></app> I<seg>-</seg>knowe .</l>
<l> Þat Ich a creatur<expan>e</expan> of his courte  welcometh me faire .</l>
<l> ¶ What ar ȝe cald q<expan>uo</expan>d I  in þat courte  amonge c<expan>ri</expan>stes poeple .</l>
<l> ¶ Þe whiles I quikye þe corps  q<expan>uo</expan>d he  <app><lem>I<seg>-</seg>cald</lem></app> am I <foreign>anima</foreign> .</l>
<l> And whan I wilne and wolde  <foreign>anim<expan>us</expan></foreign> Ich hate .</l>
<l> And for þat I can and knowe  cald am I <foreign>mens</foreign> . <app><lem>thouȝte</lem></app><note>R.15.26: R's <hi>thouȝte</hi> is a unique reading among the <hi>B</hi> copies and has the appearance of a scribal gloss erroneously incorporated into the text. F's line terminal <hi>ofte</hi> then would represent a fairly typical example of that tradition's tendency toward "smoothing" earlier mistakes. However that may be, <hi>thouȝte</hi> also appears at this point in a large number of <hi>C</hi> manuscripts of both major families, including XYcP<hi>2</hi>TH<hi>2</hi>Ch (of the X group) and PEcQZWaGcNcFcCa (of the P group); so if it is an error, its source is a manuscript prior to <hi>Bx</hi> in the line of transmission. </note> .</l>
<hi>And whanne I make mone to god</hi> .
<milestone>fol. 72rI</milestone>
<l> And whanne I make mone to god  <foreign>memoria</foreign> is my name .</l>
<l> And whanne I deme domes  and do as treuthe techeth .</l>
<l> Þanne is <foreign>rac<expan>i</expan>o</foreign> my riȝte name  resou<expan>n</expan> an englisch .</l>
<l> And whanne I fele þ<expan>a</expan>t folke telleth  my furst name is <foreign>sensus</foreign> .</l>
<l> And þat is wit and wisdome  þe welle of alle craftes .</l>
<l> And whanne I chalenge or chalenge nauȝte  chepe or refuse .</l>
<l> Þanne am I consience I<seg>-</seg>called  godes clerk and his notarie .</l>
<l> And whanne I loue lelly  our<expan>e</expan> lorde and alle other .</l>
<l> Þanne is lele loue my name  and in latyn <foreign>amor</foreign> .</l>
<l> And whanne I fle fro þe flesche  and forsake þe caroyne .</l>
<l> Þanne am I spirit speche<seg>-</seg>les  <app><lem>and</lem></app><note>R.15.37: RF are joined by L alone among the beta copies in adding the conjunction here. However, <hi>Cx</hi> clearly agrees with this LRF reading.</note> <foreign>spiritus</foreign> þanne Ich hatte .</l>
<l> Austyn and Isodorus  ayther of hem bothe  </l>
<l> Nempned me þus to name  now þow miȝt chese .</l>
<l> How þow coueytest to calle me  now þow knowest alle my names .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Anima p<expan>ro</expan> diu<expan>er</expan>sis accionib<expan>us</expan> diu<expan>er</expan>sa no<expan>m</expan>i<expan>n</expan>a sortitur .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> <foreign>Du<expan>m</expan> viuificat corpus anima est</foreign> .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Du<expan>m</expan> wlt<note>R.15.43: R's <foreign>wlt</foreign> is a common English scribal spelling for Latin <foreign>vult</foreign>; it appears to have resulted from an association between the customary phonetic value assigned to Latin initial <v> (= /w/) and a popular sense of the origin of the <w> graph itself as a "double v." Because many other European languages, as well as Latin, had no <w> graph, and foundries therefore omitted the form from standard typographic templates, English printers often resorted to using the digraph <vv> to represent English <w> till the end of the seventeenth century.</note> anim<expan>us</expan> est </foreign></hi></l>
<l> <foreign>Du<expan>m</expan> <app><lem><sic>sit</sic><corr>s[c]it</corr></lem></app> mens est</foreign> .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Du<expan>m</expan> recolit memoria est .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> <foreign>Du<expan>m</expan> iudicat rac<expan>i</expan>o est</foreign> .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Du<expan>m</expan> sentit sensus est</foreign></hi> </l>
<l> <foreign>Du<expan>m</expan> amat amor est</foreign> .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Du<expan>m</expan> negat v<expan>e</expan>l consentit co<expan>n</expan>siencia e<expan>st</expan> .</foreign></hi><note> In the right margin, just inside the vertical boundary of the page ruling, someone has inscribed, in drypoint, a figure resembling a backwards Roman capital <N>; opposite line 51, in the same vertical column, a figure resembling a properly faced capital <N> has been inscribed; still lower, and slightly closer to the text, in the margin opposite line 53, another reversed <N> appears to have been entered in drypoint. </note></l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Du<expan>m</expan> spirat sp<expan>iritu</expan>s est .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> ¶ Ȝe ben as a bischop<expan>e</expan> q<expan>uo</expan>d I  alle bourdyng<expan>e</expan> þat tyme .</l>
<l> For bischopes I<seg>-</seg>blessed  þei bereth many names .</l>
<l> <foreign>Presul</foreign> and <foreign>pontifex</foreign>  and <app><lem><foreign>metropolanus</foreign></lem></app> .<note>R.15.53: The term <foreign>metropolanus</foreign> (= <foreign>metropolitanus</foreign> in beta, seems to be an alpha error. However, this spelling is also found in about half of the <hi>C</hi> witnesses, including manuscript X.</note></l>
<l> And other names an hepe  <foreign>ep<expan>iscop</expan>us</foreign> and <foreign>pastor</foreign> .</l>
<l> ¶ Þat is soth seyde he  now I se þi wille .</l>
<l> Þow woldest knowe and ku<expan>n</expan>ne  þe cause of alle her<expan>e</expan> names .</l>
<l> And of myne if þow miȝtest  me thenketh by þi speche .</l>
<l> ¶ Ȝe sir<expan>e</expan> I seyde  by so no man wer<expan>e</expan> greued .</l>
<l> Alle þe science vnder sonne  and alle þe sotil craftes .</l>
<l> I wolde Ich<note>R.15.60: R's <hi>Ich</hi> is unique, but only in form; the other <hi>B</hi> manuscripts have <hi>I</hi> or <hi>y</hi>, as does <hi>Cx</hi>.</note> knewe and coude  kendelyche in myn herte .</l>
<milestone>fol. 72vI</milestone>
<l> ¶ Þanne art þow inparfit q<expan>uo</expan>d he  and on of pruydes kniȝtes .</l>
<l> For suche a luste and likynge  lucifer fel fram heuene .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Pona<expan>m</expan> pedem meu<expan>m</expan> in aquilone  et si<expan>mi</expan>l<expan>is</expan> ero altissimo .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> ¶ It wer<expan>e</expan> aȝeynes kende q<expan>uo</expan>d he  and alle kyne resou<expan>n</expan> .</l>
<l> Þat any creatur<expan>e</expan> schuld <app><lem>kenne</lem></app> al  excepte <app><lem>criste</lem></app> .<note>R.15.65: R here shows a unique omission; <hi>Bx</hi> reads <hi>cryste one</hi>. <hi>Cx</hi> agrees with the <hi>B</hi> archetype.</note></l>
<l> Aȝeynes suche salomon speketh  and despiseth her<expan>e</expan> wittes .</l>
<l> And seith <foreign>sicut qui mel comedit </foreign><note>R.15.67: The scribe has included midline punctuation here, but he has partially obscured it by overwriting it with the first stroke of the following <m>.</note> <foreign>multu<expan>m</expan> no<expan>n</expan> est ei bonu<expan>m</expan></foreign> .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Sic qui scrutator est maiestatis <app><lem>opp<expan>ri</expan>matur</lem></app><note>R.15.68: Cf. F's <foreign>opprimetur</foreign> and beta's <foreign>opprimitur</foreign>. <hi>Cx</hi> agrees with R on this inflectional form.</note> a gl<expan>or</expan>ia .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> To englisch men þis is to mene  þat mowen speke and her<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> Þe man þat muche hony <app><lem>eet</lem></app><note>R.15.70: This is an alpha variant; cf. beta's <hi>eteth</hi>. Most <hi>C</hi> copies agree with alpha, but some with beta.</note>  his mawe is <app><lem>englaymed</lem></app> .</l>
<l> And þe more þat a man  of gode mat<expan>er</expan>e hereth .</l>
<l> But he do þer<expan>e</expan><seg>-</seg>after  it doth hym double skathe .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Beatus est</foreign> seith seint bernarde  <foreign>qui scripturas legit .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Et <app><lem>vertit v<expan>er</expan>ba</lem></app> in opera</foreign>  follich to his power<expan>e</expan> .</hi></l>
<l> Coueytyse to kunne  and to knowe science .</l>
<l> Pulte oute of paradys  adam and eue .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Sciencie<note>R.15.77: There is an otiose curl on the tail of the first <e> of <foreign>Sciencie</foreign>; it is not altogether different from a flourish that is part of the scribe's normal repertoire, but from its slightly altered position, it looks as though he was planning to bar the <e> to represent the following <n> but then changed his mind.</note> appetitus ho<expan>m</expan>i<expan>n</expan>em immortalitatis gl<expan>or</expan>iam spoliauit .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> And <app><lem>ȝet</lem></app><note>R.15.78: R's <hi>ȝet</hi> is unique; <hi>Bx</hi> and <hi>Cx</hi> = <hi>riȝte</hi>. </note> as hony is euel to defie  and engleymeth þe mawe .</l>
<l> Riȝt so þat thurȝ resou<expan>n</expan>  wolde þe rote knowe  </l>
<l> Of god and of his grete miȝtes  his graces it letteth .</l>
<l> For in þe likynge lith a pruide  and a lycames coueytise .</l>
<l> A<seg>-</seg>ȝeynes cristes consell<expan>e</expan>  and alle clerkes techyng<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> <hi>Þat is <foreign>non plus saper<expan>e</expan> q<expan>ua</expan>m oportet sapere .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> ¶ Freres and <app><lem>other</lem></app><note>R.15.84: After <hi>and</hi> beta supplies <hi>fele</hi>, a modifier omitted by G as well as alpha.</note> maistres  þat to þe lewed men p<expan>re</expan>chen .</l>
<l> Ȝe meuen materes vnmesurables  to tellen of þe trinite .<note>R.15.85: Hereafter RF omit a line found in beta:<lb/>
<hi>Þat ofte tymes þe lewed peple of her bileue douten</hi>.
<l> Beter<expan>e</expan> <app><lem>by<seg>-</seg>leue</lem></app> <app><lem>by</lem></app> mone<note>R.15.86: <hi>Mone</hi>, "many."</note>  doctoures <app><lem>techyng<expan>e</expan></lem></app> .<note>R.15.86: The <hi>Bx</hi> version of this line seems much in doubt; there are complex textual variations among all the manuscripts. Likeliest to represent the beta version is L, whose rendering closely parallels that of Cr: <hi>Bettere byleue were mony doctoures such techyng</hi>. F has <hi>Bettre it were to be-leve on / as doctouris vs techeþ</hi>.</note></l>
<l> And telle men<note>R.15.87: Here R is joined only by G in omitting <hi>of</hi> after <hi>men</hi>; F omits <hi>men</hi>.</note> þe ten comaundementz  & touchen þe seuen synnes .</l>
<l> And of þe braunches þat <app><lem>bourgeleth</lem></app><note>R.15.88: R's <hi>bourgeleth</hi> is unique. F reads <hi>burgoneþ</hi> and beta manuscripts show spelling variations of the same, e.g., <hi>burgeouneth</hi>.</note>  of hem  and bringeth me<expan>n</expan> to helle .</l>
<l> And how þat folke in folies  myspenden her<expan>e</expan> fyue wittes .</l>
<l> As wel freres as other folke  folilich spenen .</l>
<l> In housyng<expan>e</expan> in hateryng<expan>e</expan><app><lem>in<seg>-</seg>to</lem></app><note>R.15.91: Beta's phrase is <hi>and into</hi>.</note> hey clergie schewyng<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> More for pompe þanne for puir<expan>e</expan> charite  þe pople wote þe sothe<note>R.15.92: There is an ink smudge in the left margin at this point, apparently the result of blotting contact with the note in the right margin at R15.125 on the recto page.</note></l>
<l> Þat I lye nauȝt loo  for lordes ȝe plesen .</l>
<l> And reuerencen þe riche  <app><lem>rather</lem></app><note>R.15.94: R uniquely omits <hi>þe</hi> before <hi>rather</hi>. <hi>Cx</hi> agrees with the other <hi>B</hi> manuscripts on this.</note> for her<expan>e</expan> suluer .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Confundant<expan>ur</expan> om<expan>n</expan>es qui adorant sculptilia . et alibi .</foreign></hi></l>
<milestone>fol. 73rI</milestone>
<l> <foreign>Vt quid diligitis vanitatem et <app><lem>queritis</lem></app><note>R.15.96: R uniquely omits <foreign>mendacium</foreign> after <foreign>queritis</foreign>.</note> &c<expan>etera</expan></foreign> .</l>
<l> Go to þe glose of þe vers  ȝe grete clerkes .</l>
<l> If I lye on ȝowe to my lewed wit  ledeth me to brennyng<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> For as it semeth ȝe forsaketh  no mannes almesse .</l>
<l> Of vsureres of hores  <app><lem>and</lem></app><note>R.15.100: R's <hi>and</hi> is unique; F reads <hi>& of</hi> while beta has <hi>of</hi>. </note> auerous chapmen .</l>
<l> And louten to þis lordes  þat mowen lene ȝow nobles</l>
<l> Aȝeyne ȝour<expan>e</expan> reule & <app><lem>ȝour<expan>e</expan></lem></app><note>R.15.102: Here R uniquely adds a second <hi>ȝour<expan>e</expan></hi> to the line.</note> religiou<expan>n</expan>  I take recorde at Ih<expan>es</expan>us .</l>
<l> Þat seyde to his disciples  <foreign>ne sitis <app><lem>accept<expan>ores</expan> p<expan>er</expan>sonar<expan>um</expan></lem></app></foreign> .<note>R.15.103: Beta transposes the RF phrase to <foreign>personarum acceptores</foreign>.</note></l>
<l> ¶ Of þis mat<expan>er</expan>e I miȝte  make a <app><lem>grete</lem></app><note>R.15.104: In place of R's <hi>grete</hi>, F reads <hi>mychil</hi> and beta shows <hi>longe</hi>.</note> bible .</l>
<l> Ac of curatoures <app><lem>ouer</lem></app><note>R.15.105: R's <hi>ouer</hi> is unique; the other manuscripts read <hi>of</hi>.</note> c<expan>ri</expan>stene poeple  as clerkes bereth witnesse .</l>
<l> I schal tellen it for <app><lem>treuthe</lem></app> sake  take hede ho<seg>-</seg>so lyketh .</l>
<l><hi>As holynesse and honeste  oute of holy cherche spredeth .</hi><note> These lines are marked by a brace in the right margin, as well as a pointing hand. There is a brown ink stain immediately above the end of line 107.</note></l>
<l> <hi>Þoruȝ lele lybbyng<expan>e</expan> men  þat godes <app><lem>lawes</lem></app> techeth .</hi></l>
<l> <hi>Riȝt so oute of holy cherche  alle eueles spredeth .</hi></l>
<l> <hi>Þer<expan>e</expan> inparfit p<expan>re</expan>sthode is  <app><lem>and</lem></app></hi><note>R.15.110: The beta manuscripts omit this conjunction.</note> <hi>p<expan>re</expan>choures and techoures .</hi><note> Beginning just below the pointing hand referred to at R15.107, there is an erased note in the right margin, written horizontally in some 16 short lines that extend down the page to a point approximately 2.2 cm. below the last line of scribal text. The hand appears to be the same as that discernible in the extensive erased note on fol. 94r.</note> </l>
<l> <hi>And se it by ensaumple  in somer tyme on trewes .</hi></l>
<l> Þer<expan>e</expan> so<expan>m</expan>me bowes ben leued  and so<expan>m</expan>me bereth none .</l>
<l> Þer<expan>e</expan> is a meschief in þe more  of suche man<expan>er</expan> bowes .</l>
<l> Riȝt so p<expan>er</expan>sones and prestes  and p<expan>re</expan>choures of holy <app><lem>cherches</lem></app><note>R.15.114: R uniquely deploys the plural; the other manuscripts read <hi>cherche</hi>. <hi>Cx</hi> agrees with them against R.</note></l>
<l> <app><lem>Is þe</lem></app><note>R.15.115: Where R reads <hi>Is þe</hi>, beta has <hi>Þat aren</hi> and F shows <hi>Þey sholde been</hi>. A majority of <hi>C</hi> manuscripts agrees with R.</note> rote of þe riȝt faith  to reule þe poeple  </l>
<l> Ac þer<expan>e</expan> þe rote is roten  reson wote þe sothe .</l>
<l> Schal neu<expan>er</expan>e flour<expan>e</expan> ne fruit  ne fair<expan>e</expan> lefe be grene .</l>
<l><hi>For<seg>-</seg>thi walde <app><lem>þe</lem></app> lettred  leue þe lecherie of clothynge .</hi></l>
<l> <hi>And be kynde as byfel for clerkes  and curteys of cristes godes .</hi></l>
<l> <hi>Trewe of ȝour<expan>e</expan> tonge  and of ȝour<expan>e</expan> taile bothe .</hi></l>
<l> <hi>And hatyen to here herlotrie  and <app><lem>auȝt</lem></app><note>R.15.121: R uniquely reads <hi>auȝt</hi>; F reads <hi>looþ wrong</hi>; a majority of the beta copies show <hi>nouȝt</hi>.</note> to vnderfonge .</hi></l>
<l> <hi>Tythes of <app><lem>trewe</lem></app></hi><note>R.15.122: RF are in agreement on <hi>trewe</hi> (supported by CrWG), but most beta manuscripts read <hi>vntrewe</hi>.</note> <hi>thynge  I<seg>-</seg>tyled or <app><lem>I<seg>-</seg>chafared</lem></app> .</hi></l>
<l> ¶ Lothe were lewed men  but þei ȝour<expan>e</expan> lore folwede .</l>
<l> And amenden hem þat <app><lem>þei</lem></app><note>R.15.124: R's <hi>þei</hi> is unique; all the other manuscripts omit it.</note> mysdon  more for ȝour<expan>e</expan> ensaumples .</l>
<l> <hi>Þan for to p<expan>re</expan>chen and p<expan>re</expan>ue it nauȝt  ypoc<expan>ri</expan>sie it semeth .</hi><note>R.15.125: A sixteenth-century reader has inscribed in the right margin opposite this line <add><hi>Ipocrysye</hi></add>.</note></l>
<l> For ypocrisie in latyn  is likkned to a <app><lem>dongou<expan>n</expan></lem></app><note>R.15.126: Beta reads <hi>dongehul</hi> where RF have <hi>dongou<expan>n</expan></hi>. In a substantially revised version of this line, the <hi>C</hi> version attests <hi>donghep</hi>, suggesting that beta's reading was original.</note></l>
<l> Þat wer<expan>e</expan> bi<seg>-</seg>snewed with snowe  and snakes with<seg>-</seg>Inne .</l>
<l> Or to a wal þat wer<expan>e</expan> white<seg>-</seg>lymed  and wer<expan>e</expan> foule with<seg>-</seg>Inne .</l>
l ij<expan>us</expan>
<milestone>fol. 73vI</milestone>
<l> Riȝt so many p<expan>re</expan>stes  p<expan>re</expan>choures and p<expan>re</expan>lates .</l>
<l> Ȝe ar enblaunched with <foreign>bele</foreign> <foreign>paroles</foreign> . and <app><lem>with clothes</lem></app> .<note>R.15.130: F's final phrase is completely unique (<hi>blewe burnet cloþis</hi>), but beta differs here from R only by adding <hi>also</hi> at the end of the line. The <hi>C</hi> version attests <hi>with bele clothes</hi>.</note></l>
<l> <app><lem>And</lem></app> ȝour<expan>e</expan> werkes and ȝour<expan>e</expan> wordes  þer<expan>e</expan><seg>-</seg>vnder aren ful <app><lem>wlueliche</lem></app> .<note>R.15.131: For R's <hi>wlueliche</hi>, F shows <hi>foxly</hi> and beta reads <hi>vnlouelich</hi>.</note><note>R.15.131: The spelling <hi>wlueliche</hi> is probably not erroneous. Cf. <ref>R.15.43:</ref>, and the note on <foreign>wlt</foreign>.</note></l>
<l> ¶ Ioh<expan>ann</expan>es <app><lem><sic>criostomus</sic><corr>cri[s]ostomus</corr></lem></app>  of clerkes speketh and p<expan>re</expan>stes .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Sicut de templo om<expan>n</expan>e bonu<expan>m</expan> <app><lem>p<expan>ro</expan>cedit</lem></app><note>R.15.133: The form <foreign>procedit</foreign> is from alpha. Beta witnesses read <foreign>progreditur</foreign>, the same verb form found at this point in the <hi>C</hi> version.</note></foreign></hi> </l>
<l> <foreign>Sic de templo om<expan>n</expan>e malu<expan>m</expan> p<expan>ro</expan>cedit</foreign> .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Si sac<expan>er</expan>dociu<expan>m</expan> integru<expan>m</expan> fuerit  tota floret ecc<expan>les</expan>ia .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> <foreign>Si autem <app><lem>corupta</lem></app><note>R.15.136: Beta reads <foreign>coruptum</foreign>. Both inflectional forms are found in <hi>C</hi> witnesses, but distribution and numbers suggest that the alpha reading was archetypal in <hi>C</hi>.</note> fu<expan>er</expan>it  o<expan>mn</expan>i<expan>u</expan>m fides marcida est</foreign> .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Si <app><lem>sacerdos</lem></app><note>R.15.137: Beta reads <foreign>sacerdocium</foreign>. Both inflectional forms are found in <hi>C</hi> witnesses, but the beta reading is archetypal in <hi>C</hi>.</note> fu<expan>er</expan>it in p<expan>ec</expan>catis  totus p<expan>o</expan>p<expan>u</expan>l<expan>u</expan>s co<expan>n</expan>u<expan>er</expan>tit<expan>ur</expan> ad <app><lem>p<expan>ec</expan>catu<expan>m</expan></lem></app> .<note>R.15.137: Beta reads <foreign>peccandum</foreign>. Both readings are found in <hi>C</hi> witnesses, but the beta reading is archetypal in <hi>C</hi>.</note></foreign></hi></l>
<l> <foreign>Sicut cu<expan>m</expan> videris arbore<expan>m</expan> pallidam & marcidam</foreign> .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign><app><lem><sic>In tellis</sic><corr>Intelli[gi]s</corr></lem></app> quod viciu<expan>m</expan> h<expan>ab</expan>et in radice .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> <foreign>Ita cu<expan>m</expan> videris p<expan>o</expan>p<expan>u</expan>l<expan>u</expan>m indisciplinatu<expan>m</expan> & irreligiosu<expan>m</expan></foreign> .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Sine dubio sac<expan>er</expan>dociu<expan>m</expan> eius no<expan>n</expan> est sanu<expan>m</expan> .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> ¶ If lewed men wiste  what þis latyn meneth .<note> In the left margin, a black brace extends the entire length of this verse paragraph.</note></l>
<l> And who was myn auctour  muche wonder me thenketh .</l>
<l> But if many <app><lem>p<expan>re</expan>ste</lem></app> bere  <app><lem>for her<expan>e</expan> broches and for her<expan>e</expan> baselardes</lem></app> .<note>R.15.144: Most beta witnesses have <hi>But if many a prest bere for here baselardes and here broches</hi>, where the alliterative pattern suggests that <hi>Bx</hi> was already corrupt. R reads the nouns of beta's final phrase in transposed order. The R scribe's placement of a punctus elevatus after <hi>bere</hi> probably indicates that he did not take <hi>and for here baselardes</hi> to have constituted the b-verse by itself. F's line (<hi>But euery prest sholde bere / for here broode baselardis</hi>) is unique, revised in the light of a seemingly confused exemplar.</note></l>
<l> A peyre bedes in her<expan>e</expan> honde  <app><lem>or</lem></app><note>R.15.145: R's <hi>or</hi> is an alpha reading; beta has <hi>and</hi>.</note> a boke vnder her<expan>e</expan> arme .</l>
<l> <hi>Sire ioh<expan>a</expan>n and sir<expan>e</expan> gefferey  hath a gurdel of suluer .</hi></l>
<l> <hi>A baselard or a ballok<seg>-</seg>knyf  with botones ou<expan>er</expan>gilte .</hi></l>
<l> <hi>Ac a portos þat schulde be his plow  <foreign>placebo</foreign> to segge .</hi></l>
<l> Hadde he neu<expan>er</expan>e s<expan>er</expan>uise to <app><lem>haue</lem></app><note>R.15.149: For R's <hi>to haue</hi>, F reads <hi>ne</hi>; the other manuscripts read <hi>to saue</hi>.</note> siluer þer<expan>e</expan><seg>-</seg>to  seith it with euel<note>R.15.149: Most beta manuscripts have <hi>ydel</hi>; but L (= <hi>yvel</hi>) joins alpha in reading <hi>euel</hi>.</note> wille .</l>
<l> <hi>Allas ȝe lewed men muche lese ȝe on p<expan>re</expan>stes .</hi></l>
<l> Ac þinge þat wikkedliche is wonne and with fals sleȝtes .</l>
<l> Walde neu<expan>er</expan>e <app><lem>wit</lem></app> of witty god  but wikked men it <app><lem>maked</lem></app> .<note>R.15.152: R's <hi>maked</hi> is an alpha reading (cf. F's <hi>made</hi>). Beta reads <hi>hadde</hi>. <hi>Cx</hi> agrees with beta.</note></l>
<l> Þe whiche aren p<expan>re</expan>stes in<seg>-</seg>parfit  and p<expan>re</expan>choures after siluer .</l>
<l> Seketoures and sodenes  somnoures and her<expan>e</expan> lemmanes .</l>
<l> <hi>Þis þat with gile was gete  vngraciousliche is <app><lem>spened</lem></app> .</hi><note>R.15.155: R's <hi>spened</hi> is unique; F and most beta copies have <hi>spended</hi>, from the R verb's etymological parent—though W reads <hi>despended</hi>. The P family of <hi>C</hi> agrees with W (and by implication beta and F), but the majority of the X family supports R (reading <hi>yspened</hi>).</note></l>
<l> So harlotes and hores  aren hulpen with suche <app><lem><sic>godeth</sic><corr>gode[s]</corr></lem></app> .</l>
<l> <app><lem>Ac</lem></app> godes folke for defaute þer<expan>e</expan><seg>-</seg>of  forfaren and spillen . .</l>
<l> ¶ Curatoures of holy cherche  <app><lem>and</lem></app> clerkes þat ben auerous .</l>
<l> Liȝteliche þat þei leuen  loseles it habbeth  </l>
<l> Or deyeth intestate  and þanne þe bischop<expan>e</expan> entreth .</l>
<l> And maketh murthe þere<seg>-</seg>with  and his men bothe .</l>
<l> And seggen he was a nygarde  þ<expan>a</expan>t no gode miȝt aspar<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<milestone>fol. 74rI</milestone>
<l> To frende ne to fremede . þe fende haue his soule .</l>
<l> For a wreched hous he helde  al his lyf<seg>-</seg>tyme .</l>
<l> And þat he spared and bi<seg>-</seg>sperred  spene we in murthe .</l>
<l> ¶ By lered by lewed  þat lothe is to <app><lem>spene</lem></app> .<note>R.15.166: R's <hi>spene</hi> is unique; F and most beta copies have <hi>spende</hi>, from the R verb's etymological parent—though W reads <hi>despende</hi>. Cf. <ref>R.15.155:</ref> above.</note></l>
<l> Þus goen her<expan>e</expan> godes  be þe goste faren .</l>
<l> Ac for gode men god wote  grete doel men maketh .</l>
<l> And bymeneth gode meteȝiueres  and in mynde <app><lem>hem</lem></app> haueth .</l>
<l> In preyeres and in penaunces  and in parfite charite .</l>
<l> ¶ What is charite q<expan>uo</expan>d I þo  a childisch þinge he seyde .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Nisi efficiamini sicut paruuli  no<expan>n</expan> intrab<expan>itis</expan> in regn<expan>um</expan> cel<expan>orum</expan> .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> Withoute fauntelte or folye  a fre liberal wille .</l>
<l> Where schuld men fynde suche a frende  with so fre an herte .</l>
<hi><hi>Longe Wylle</hi></hi><note>R.15.175: This decorative, rubricated marginal, very unusual in the typical pattern of <title>Piers Plowman</title> glosses, may offer evidence for how early in the transmission chain MS R stands: MSS L and M both have sixteenth-century glosses taking note of <hi>Longe Wylle</hi> (M repeating the actual textual phrase, as in R); but among beta copies, only MS O (which Ralph Hanna dates to the first quarter of the fifteenth century) shows this gloss in a hand contemporary to its main scribal hand. Another alpha/beta shared gloss, involving MSS R and L, occurs somewhat later in this passus with the unexpected and atypical <hi>Isa. 3</hi> note at R15.582, attested solely by MSS L, R and F. </note>
<l> ¶ Ich haue lyued in londe q<expan>uo</expan>d I  my name is longe wille .</l>
<l> And fonde I neu<expan>er</expan>e ful charite  by<seg>-</seg>fore ne byhynde :</l>
<l> Men beth merciable to <app><lem>mendinauns</lem></app><note>R.15.177: R uniquely reads <hi>to</hi>; cf. beta's <hi>& to</hi> and F's <hi>ne to</hi>.</note> to pore .</l>
<l> And wole lene þer<expan>e</expan> þei leue  leleliche to ben <app><lem>apayed</lem></app> .</l>
<l> Ac charite þat powel p<expan>re</expan>yseth best  and moste plesaunt to <app><lem>god</lem></app> .<note>R.15.179: F reads the end of this line as <hi>god in heuene</hi> while beta reads <hi>owre saueoure</hi>.</note></l>
<l> <hi>As <foreign>no<expan>n</expan> inflatur no<expan>n</expan> e<expan>st</expan> ambiciosa no<expan>n</expan> q<expan>ue</expan>rit q<expan>ue</expan> sua su<expan>n</expan>t .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> I seiȝ neu<expan>er</expan>e suche a man  so me god helpe .</l>
<l> Þat he ne wolde aske after his  and other<seg>-</seg>while coueyte .</l>
<l> Þing<expan>e</expan> þat <app><lem>hym neded</lem></app><note>R.15.183: R's <hi>hym neded</hi> is an alpha reading transposed in beta to <hi>neded hym</hi>. The beta order is also that found in <hi>Cx</hi>.</note> nauȝt  and nyme it if he miȝte .</l>
<l> ¶ Clerkes kenneth<note>R.15.184: R uniquely reads <hi>kenneth</hi>; All other manuscripts have <hi>kenne(n)</hi>.</note> me þat criste  is in alle places .</l>
<l> Ac I seyȝ hym neu<expan>er</expan>e sothly  but as my<seg>-</seg>sulue i<expan>n</expan> <app><lem>myrour<expan>e</expan></lem></app> .</l>
<l> <foreign><app><lem>Hic</lem></app> in enigmate tunc facie ad faciem</foreign> : </l>
<l> And so I trowe trewely  by þat men telleth of charite .</l>
<l> It is nouȝt championes fiȝt  ne chaffar<expan>e</expan> as I trowe .</l>
<l> ¶ Charite q<expan>uo</expan>d he ne chaffareth nouȝte  <app><lem>noþ<expan>er</expan></lem></app><note>R.15.189: R uniquely reads <hi>noþer</hi> at the head of the b-verse; the other copies have <hi>ne</hi>.</note> chalengeth ne craueth . </l>
<l> As proude of a peny as of a pounde of golde .</l>
<l> And is as glad of a gowne  of a <app><lem><sic>grayre</sic><corr>graye</corr></lem></app> russet .</l>
<l> As of a tunicle of tars  or of trie skarlet .</l>
<l> He is gladde with alle glade  and gode til all<expan>e</expan> wikked .</l>
<l> <app><lem>He</lem></app> leueth<note>R.15.194: R's <hi>He</hi> is an alpha lection; beta has <hi>And</hi>; R's <hi>leueth</hi> is matched only in Cr; F reads <hi>beleviþ</hi> while beta manuscripts are ambiguous. Kane and Donaldson read them as <hi>leneth</hi>, but Skeat construed L's reading as <hi>leueth</hi>.</note> and loueth alle  þat our<expan>e</expan> lorde made .</l>
l iij<expan>us</expan>
<milestone>fol. 74vI</milestone>
<l> Curseth he no creatur<expan>e</expan>  ne he can bere no wrathe</l>
<l> Ne no likyng<expan>e</expan> <app><lem>haue</lem></app><note>R.15.196: R's <hi>haue</hi> is unique; beta reads <hi>hath to</hi>; F transposes the opening of the a-verse as <hi>Ne he haþ lykynge to</hi>. <hi>Cx</hi> supports beta here.</note> lye  ne lawhe <app><lem>me</lem></app><note>R.15.196: R's <hi>me</hi> is unique; cf. beta's <hi>men</hi> and F's <hi>non</hi>. <hi>Cx</hi> supports beta here also.</note> to scorne .</l>
<l> Alle þat men seith  he let it sothe  and in solace taketh .</l>
<l> And alle maner meschiefes  in myldenesse he suffreth .</l>
<l> Coueyteth he non erthely <app><lem>godes</lem></app><note>R.15.199: Alpha shows the plural; beta reads the singular, <hi>good</hi>.</note>  but heuene<seg>-</seg>riche blisse .</l>
<l> ¶ Hath he any rentes or richesse  or any riche frendes .</l>
<l> ¶ Of rentes ne of richesse  ne recheth he neu<expan>er</expan>e .</l>
<l> For a frende þat fynt<note>R.15.202: R's <hi>fynt</hi> is a unique form of the verb; most of the other manuscripts, including F, read <hi>fyndeth</hi>. The <hi>Cx</hi> reading is uncertain: most P family copies support the F/beta reading, but most X family witnesses agree with R.</note> hym  failed <app><lem><sic>hy</sic><corr>hy[m]</corr></lem></app> neu<expan>er</expan>e at nede .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Fiat voluntas tua</foreign>  fynt hym eu<expan>er</expan><seg>-</seg>more .</hi></l>
<l> And if he soupeth eet but a soppe  of <foreign>spera in deo</foreign> .</l>
<l> He can portreye wel þe pat<expan>er</expan>n<expan>oste</expan>r  and peynten it with <app><lem><foreign>aue</foreign></lem></app> .<note>R.15.205: Alpha shows the singular; beta reads the plural, <hi>aues</hi> (as does the <hi>C</hi> version).</note></l>
<l> And other<seg>-</seg>while <app><lem>is</lem></app> wone<note>R.15.206: R uniquely omits a pronoun reference from <hi>is wone</hi>. Most beta manuscripts read <hi>he is wone</hi>; others (LMHm) read <hi>is his wone</hi>; F has <hi>he is wont</hi>. <hi>Cx</hi> attests <hi>his wone is</hi>.</note> to wende o pilgrimage .</l>
<l> Þer<expan>e</expan> pore men and p<expan>ri</expan>sones liggeth  her<expan>e</expan> pardou<expan>n</expan> to haue .</l>
<l> Þouȝ he bere hem no brede  he bereth hem swetter<expan>e</expan> liflode .</l>
<l> Loueth hem as our<expan>e</expan> lorde bit  and loketh how þei fare .</l>
<l> ¶ And whan he is weri of þat werke  þan wole he su<expan>m</expan><seg>-</seg>tyme .</l>
<l> Labory in a lauandrie  wel þe lengthe of a myle .</l>
<l> And ȝerne in<seg>-</seg>to ȝouthe  and ȝepliche <app><lem>seche</lem></app><note>R.15.212: R's <hi>seche</hi> is unique; cf. beta's <hi>speke</hi> and F's <hi>þere seken</hi>. <hi>Cx</hi>'s reading (<hi>secheth</hi>) supports R here.</note> .</l>
<l> Pruide with alle þe purtenaunce  and pakken hem to<seg>-</seg>gyderes .</l>
<l> And bouken hem at his breste  and beten hem clene .</l>
<l> And leggen on longe  with <foreign>laboraui in gemitu meo</foreign> .</l>
<l> And with warme water at his eyȝes  waschen hem after</l>
<l> <app><lem>Þanne</lem></app><note>R.15.217: Beta's opening phrase reads <hi>And þanne</hi>. In a slightly revised line, <hi>Cx</hi> supports alpha, omitting <hi>And</hi>.</note> he sengeth whan he doth so  and su<expan>m</expan>tyme seith weping<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Cor contritu<expan>m</expan> & humiliatu<expan>m</expan> deus no<expan>n</expan> despicies </foreign></hi></l>
<l> ¶ By crist I wold þat I knewe hym q<expan>uo</expan>d I  no creatur<expan>e</expan> leuere .</l>
<l> ¶ With<seg>-</seg>outen helpe of peres þe plowman q<expan>uo</expan>d he .<note>R.15.220: R uniquely divides a <hi>Bx</hi> line in half here, rendering it as two.</note></l>
<l> His persone seest þow neuere  </l>
<l> ¶ Wher<expan>e</expan> clerkes knowen hym q<expan>uo</expan>d I  <app><lem><sic>þa</sic><corr>þa[t]</corr></lem></app> kepen holy cherche .</l>
<l> ¶ Clerkes han no <app><lem>knowlechyng<expan>e</expan></lem></app><note>R.15.223: R's <hi>knowlechyng<expan>e</expan></hi> is unique; the other manuscripts read <hi>knowyng</hi>.</note> q<expan>uo</expan>d he  but by werkes & by wordes .</l>
<l> Ac peres þe plowman  parseyueth more depper<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<milestone>fol. 75rI</milestone>
<l> <app><lem>Þat</lem></app> <app><lem>is</lem></app> wil<note>R.15.225: After <hi>is</hi> alpha omits <hi>þe</hi>, which is present in beta.</note> and wher<expan>e</expan>fore  þat mony <app><lem>wit</lem></app><note>R.15.225: R's <hi>wit</hi> is unique in form but probably represents the same word as beta's <hi>wyȝte</hi> and F's <hi>whyȝt</hi>. Both <title>MED</title> and <title>OED2</title> document this spelling <hi>s. v.</hi> <hi>wight</hi>.</note> suffreth .</l>
<l> <hi><app><lem>And</lem></app><note>R.15.226: R's <hi>And</hi> is unique; the other manuscripts read <foreign>Et</foreign>. <hi>Cx</hi> supports the majority here.</note> <foreign>vidit deus cogitaciones eor<expan>um</expan> .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> For þer<expan>e</expan> are ful proude <app><lem>herte</lem></app><note>R.15.227: R's <hi>herte</hi> is unique. Other <hi>B</hi> manuscripts read <hi>herted</hi>.</note> men  pacient of tonge .</l>
<l> And buxu<expan>m</expan> as of beryng<expan>e</expan>  to bu<del>g</del><add>r</add>geys<note>R.15.228: The <r> of <hi>burgeys</hi> appears to have been written over another character.</note> and to lordes .</l>
<l> And to pore peple  han peper in þe nose .</l>
<l> And as a leon he loketh  þer<expan>e</expan> men lakketh his werkes .</l>
<l> ¶ For þer<expan>e</expan> aren beggeres and bydderes  bedmen as it wer<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> Loketh as <del>a</del> lambrou<expan>n</expan>  and <app><lem>semed</lem></app><note>R.15.232: R's <hi>semed</hi> is unique; cf. beta's <hi>semen</hi> and F's <hi>seme of</hi>.</note> lif<seg>-</seg>holy .</l>
<l> Ac it is more to haue her<expan>e</expan> mete  <app><lem>on</lem></app> suche an esye man<expan>er</expan>e </l>
<l> Þanne for penaunce & parfitnesse  þe pouerte þat such taketh .</l>
<l> ¶ Þer<expan>e</expan><seg>-</seg>for by colour<expan>e</expan> ne by clergie  knowe schal þow hym neu<expan>er</expan>e .</l>
<l> Noyther þoruȝ wordes ne werkes  but þoruȝ wil one .</l>
<l> And þat knoweth no clerke  ne creatur<expan>e</expan> an erthe .</l>
<l> But peres þe plow<seg>-</seg>man  <foreign>petrus id est <expan>christus</expan></foreign> .</l>
<l> For he nis nauȝt in lolleres  ne in lande<seg>-</seg>leperes eremites .</l>
<l> Ne at ancres þer<expan>e</expan> a box hangeth  alle suche þei fayten .</l>
<l> Fy on faitoures  and <foreign>in fautores suos</foreign> .</l>
<l> ¶ For charite is godes chaumpion  & as a gode childe hende .</l>
<l> And þe muriest of muthe  at mete wher<expan>e</expan> he sitteth .</l>
<l> <app><lem>To</lem></app><note>R.15.244: R's <hi>To</hi> is unique error; all the other manuscripts read <hi>Þe</hi>.</note> loue þat lyth in his herte  maketh hym liȝt of speche .</l>
<l> And is co<expan>m</expan>panable and co<expan>n</expan>fortatif  as crist bit hym<seg>-</seg>selue .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Nolite <app><lem>tristes fieri sicut <sic>yporcrite</sic><corr>ypocrite</corr></lem></app> .</foreign></hi><note>R.15.246: Kane-Donaldson note R's unique phrasal variation for this Latin line (the other manuscripts have <foreign>Nolite fieri sicut ypocrite tristes &c</foreign>), but they overlook the erroneous spelling, <foreign>yporcrite</foreign>. <hi>Cx</hi> supports R's phrasing of this tagline.</note></l>
<l> ¶ For I haue seyne hym i<expan>n</expan> silke  & su<expan>m</expan><seg>-</seg>tyme i<expan>n</expan> russet .</l>
<l> Bothe in gray and in gris  and i<expan>n</expan> gulte herneys .</l>
<l> And as gladliche he it gaf  to gomes þat it neded .</l>
<l> ¶ Emu<expan>n</expan>d and edwarde  eyther wer<expan>e</expan> kynges .</l>
<l> And seyntes I<seg>-</seg>sette  <app><lem>so</lem></app><note>R.15.251: For RF's <hi>so</hi>, beta reads <hi>tyl</hi> or <hi>for</hi>.</note> charite hem folwede .</l>
<l> ¶ Ich haue I<seg>-</seg>seyn charite al<seg>-</seg>so  syngen and reden .</l>
<l> Riden and rennen  in ragged wedes .</l>
<l> Ac biddyng<expan>e</expan> as beggeres  byhelde I hym neuer<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> Ac in riche robes  rathest he walketh .</l>
l iiij
<milestone>fol. 75vI</milestone>
<l> I<seg>-</seg>called and I<seg>-</seg>crymeled  and his croune yschaue .</l>
<l> And in a <app><lem>frere</lem></app><note>R.15.257: R's <hi>frere</hi> (an unmarked genitive) is unique; all the other manuscripts read <hi>freres</hi> however, the preponderance of <hi>C</hi> evidence (most of the X family and some of the P family) supports R's reading.</note> frocke  he was Ifounde ones .</l>
<l> Ac it is ferre agoo  in seynt fraunceys tyme .</l>
<l> In þat secte sitthe  to selde hath he be knowe .</l>
<l> ¶ Riche men he recomendeth  and of here robes taketh .</l>
<l> Þat with<seg>-</seg>oute wiles  leden here lyues .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Beatus est diues qui &c<expan>etera</expan> .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> ¶ In kynges court he cometh ofte þer<expan>e</expan> þe conseil is trewe .</l>
<l> Ac if coueytise be of þe conseil  he wol nauȝt come þ<expan>er</expan><seg>-</seg>inne .</l>
<l> In court amonges iaperes  he cometh but selde .</l>
<l> For braulyng<expan>e</expan> and bagbytyng<expan>e</expan>  and beryng<expan>e</expan> of fals witnesse .</l>
<l> ¶ In þe constorie byfore þe comissarie  he cometh nauȝt ful ofte .</l>
<l> For her<expan>e</expan> lawe dureth ou<expan>er</expan><seg>-</seg>longe  but if þei lacchen suluer</l>
<l> And matrimonye for mone  maken and vn<seg>-</seg>maken .</l>
<l> And þat consience and criste  hath yknyt faste .</l>
<l> Þei vndon it vnworthiliche  þo doctoures of lawe .</l>
<l><app><lem>Amonges erchebischopes and oþer bischopes</lem></app><note> These lines are unique to alpha and there are line-division problems. Moreover, there are sufficient differences between R and F in these lines to justify reproducing the latter's lines verbatim (cf. Appendix 1, R15.272-77, for details and any cross-references to the <hi>C</hi> version): <lb/>
<hi>¶ With Bisshopis & abbotys / & prelatis of holy chirche. <lb/>
For to wone with hem / hys wone was sum-tyme. <lb/>
& cristis parsymonye to þe pore / parcel-mel þey deltyn. <lb/>
But Auerise hathorn; þe keyȝes /& kepithorn; for hise kenysmen. <lb/>
& for hise seketouris & seruauntis /& summe for hise chirdryn</hi>
<l> And p<expan>re</expan>lates of holy cherche  </l>
<l> Forto wonye with hem  his wone was su<expan>m</expan><seg>-</seg>tyme .</l>
<l> And cristes <app><lem>patrimonye</lem></app> to þe pore  p<expan>ar</expan>cel<seg>-</seg>mel <app><lem>dele</lem></app> .</l>
<l> <app><lem>Ac</lem></app> auerice hath þe keyes <app><lem>now</lem></app>  and kepeth for his kynnesmen .</l>
<l> And for his seketoures & <app><lem>his</lem></app> s<expan>er</expan>uantz  & so<expan>m</expan>me for <app><lem>her<expan>e</expan></lem></app> childru<expan>n</expan> .</l>
<l> Ac I ne lak no lif  but lord amende vs alle .</l>
<l> And gif vs grace gode god  charite to folwe .</l>
<l> For ho<seg>-</seg>so miȝt mete with hym  suche maneres hym aileth .</l>
<l> Noyther he blameth ne banneth  bosteth ne preyseth .</l>
<l> Lakketh ne loseth  ne loketh vp sterne .</l>
<l> Craueth ne coueyteth  ne crieth after more .<note>R.15.283: Immediately after this line, alpha omits a Latin line found in beta:<lb/>
<foreign>In pace in idipsum dormiam &c</foreign>. OC<hi>2</hi> have this line in the margin, suggestive of how it might have been overlooked in alpha if this were its location in Bx.
<l> Þe moste lyflode þat he <app><lem>lyueth</lem></app><note>R.15.284: After <hi>lyueth</hi> R uniquely omits <hi>by</hi>.</note>  is loue in godes passiou<expan>n</expan> .</l>
<l> Neyther he <app><lem>ne</lem></app><note>R.15.285: R's first <hi>ne</hi> in this line is unique; all the other <hi>B</hi> manuscripts omit it. However, among the <hi>C</hi> manuscripts, most of the X family agrees with R, while the others agree with beta.</note> byddeth<note>R.15.285: There is a discoloration in the parchment (resembling a large punctus) immediately after <hi>byddeth</hi>, but it has no significance.</note> ne beggeth  ne borweth to ȝelde .</l>
<l> Misdoth he no man  ne with his mouth greueth .</l>
<l> ¶ Amonges cristene men  þis myldnesse schuld laste .</l>
<milestone>fol. 76rI</milestone>
<l> In alle man<expan>er</expan> angres  haue þis atte herte .</l>
<l> Þat þouȝ þei suffred alle þis  <app><lem><sic>go</sic><corr>go[d]</corr></lem></app> suffred for vs more .</l>
<l> In ensaumple we schulde do so  and <app><lem><sic>take</sic><corr>take [no]</corr></lem></app> veniaunce .<note>R.15.290: R inadvertently (and uniquely) omits <hi>no</hi> before <hi>veniaunce</hi>, causing the statement to express a very uncharitable outlook.</note></l>
<l> Of oure foes þat doth vs falsenesse  þat is our<expan>e</expan> fad<expan>e</expan>res wille .</l>
<l> For <app><lem>euery man may wel</lem></app><note>R.15.292: Beta transposes the opening phrase of this line as <hi>For wel may euery man</hi>.</note> wite  if <app><lem>god</lem></app><note>R.15.292: With the exception of G, which here joins alpha, the beta manuscripts read <hi>god <hi>hadde</hi> wolde</hi> here.</note> wolde hym<seg>-</seg>sulue .</l>
<l> Schulde <app><lem>ner<expan>e</expan></lem></app><note>R.15.293: R's <hi>nere</hi> is unique; the other manuscripts read <hi>neuere</hi>.</note> iudas þe<note>R.15.293: R's <hi>þe</hi> is shared only with BmBoCot; F reads <hi>hise</hi> and beta reads <hi>ne</hi>. Beta's reading is unquestionably the original.</note> Iewe  haue ih<expan>es</expan>u done on rode .</l>
<l> Ne haue martyred peter ne powel  ne in p<expan>ri</expan>sone holde .</l>
<l> Ac he suffrede in ensaumple  þat we schuld suffre also .</l>
<l> And seide to suche þat suffre wolde  þat <foreign>pacientes vi<expan>n</expan>cu<expan>n</expan>t</foreign> .</l>
<l><foreign>Verbi g<expan>ra</expan>cia</foreign> q<expan>uo</expan>d he  and verrey ensaumples manye .</l>
<l> In <foreign>legenda s<expan>an</expan>c<expan>t</expan>or<expan>um</expan></foreign>  þe lif of holy seyntes .</l>
<l> What penaunce and pou<expan>er</expan>te  and passion þei suffred .</l>
<l> In hunger in hete  in alle man<expan>er</expan> angres .</l>
<l> Antonye and egidie  and oþ<expan>er</expan> holy faderes .</l>
<l> Woneden in <app><lem>wildernesses</lem></app><note>R.15.302: R's <hi>wildernesses</hi> is unique; the other manuscripts read <hi>wildernesse</hi>.</note>  amonges wilde bestes .</l>
<l> Monkkes and mendynans  men by hem<seg>-</seg>selue .</l>
<l> In spekes and spelonkes  selde speken to<seg>-</seg>gyderes .</l>
<l> Ac noyther antonye ne egydie  ne eremite þat tyme .</l>
<l> Of lyons ne of leopartz  no lyflode ne<note>R.15.306: A brown stain makes <hi>ne</hi> almost illegible.</note> toke .</l>
<l> But of <app><lem>þe</lem></app><note>R.15.307: Beta here omits <hi>þe</hi>.</note> foules þat fleeth  þus fynt men in bokes .</l>
<l> Excepte þat egide  after an hynde criede .</l>
<l> And þoruȝ þe melke of þat <app><lem>meke</lem></app><note>R.15.309: F shows no adjective (= <hi>þe beeste</hi>), while R's <hi>meke</hi> is replaced in beta with <hi>mylde</hi>.</note> beste  þe man was <app><lem>ysusteyned</lem></app> .</l>
<l> <app><lem>Ac</lem></app><note>R.15.310: R's <hi>Ac</hi> is unique; beta reads <hi>And</hi> while F shows an omission.</note> day by day hadde he hir<expan>e</expan> nauȝt  his honger forto slake .</l>
<l> But selden and sundry <app><lem>tyme</lem></app><note>R.15.311: Where alpha has the unmarked plural <hi>tyme</hi>, beta has <hi>tymes</hi>.</note>  as seith þe boke and techeth .</l>
<l> ¶ Antonye <app><lem>on a day</lem></app>  aboute none<seg>-</seg>tyme  </l>
<l> Hadde a bridde þat brouȝte hym  <app><lem>his</lem></app><note>R.15.313: R's <hi>hym his</hi> is unique; beta reads <hi>hym</hi> and F has <hi>hym to</hi>.</note> brede þ<expan>a</expan>t he by lyuede .</l>
<l> And þouȝ þe gome hadde a geste  god <app><lem>fedde</lem></app><note>R.15.314: Cf. beta's <hi>fonde</hi>.</note> hem bothe .</l>
<l> ¶ Powel <foreign>p<expan>r</expan>imus heremita</foreign>  hadde parroked <app><lem>in</lem></app><note>R.15.315: Beta omits alpha's <hi>in</hi>. The <hi>C</hi> version agrees with beta's omission.</note> hym<seg>-</seg>selue .</l>
<l> Þat no man miȝt hym se  for mosse and for leues .</l>
<l> Foules hym fedde<note>R.15.317: An ink blot covers the <hi>-ed</hi> of <hi>fedde</hi>.</note>  fele wyntres with<seg>-</seg>alle .</l>
<l> Til he founded freres  of austynes ordre .</l>
<l> Powel after his prechyng<expan>e</expan>  payneres he made .</l>
<l> And wan with<note>R.15.320: Virtually all beta manuscripts (and F) add <hi>his</hi> before <hi>hondes</hi>.</note> hondes  þat his wombe nedede .</l>
<l> Peter fischede for his fode  and his felawe andrewe .</l>
<milestone>fol. 76vI</milestone>
<l> So<expan>m</expan>me þei solde and som<expan>m</expan>e þei <app><lem>eeten</lem></app><note>R.15.322: Alpha's <hi>eeten</hi> is an easier replacement for the correctly alliterating <hi>sothe(n)</hi> found in the best beta manuscripts. Cf. <ref>R.15.468:</ref>. The <hi>C</hi> version incorporates this same line, but the lemma in question shows a wide range of attested readings among <hi>C</hi> witnesses.</note>  & so þei lyued bothe .</l>
<l> And also marie maudeleyne  by mores <app><lem>and by</lem></app><note>R.15.323: Alpha omits <hi>lyued</hi> after <hi>mores</hi>; beta omits the second <hi>by</hi> from this b-verse, as witnessed by alpha. On both of these issues, <hi>Cx</hi> agrees with beta.</note> dewes .</l>
<l> Ac moste thoruȝ deuocion  and mynde of god almiȝty .</l>
<l> I schulde nouȝt þis seuen dayes  seggen hem alle .</l>
<l> Þat lyueden þus for our<expan>e</expan> lordes loue  <app><lem>amonges wilde bestes</lem></app> .<note>R.15.326: For alpha's <hi>amonges wilde bestes</hi>, beta (and the <hi>C</hi> version) read <hi>manye longe ȝeres</hi>.</note></l>
<l> Ac þer<expan>e</expan> ne was lyon ne <app><lem>leopartz</lem></app><note>R.15.327: R uniquely shows the plural; F and beta read the singular, <hi>leopart</hi>.</note>  þat on laundes wente .</l>
<l> Noyther bere ne bore  ne other best wilde .</l>
<l> Þat ne fel to hire fete  and fauned with þe <app><lem>taile</lem></app> .</l>
<l> And ȝif þei couthe haue I<seg>-</seg>carped  by crist as I trowe .</l>
<l> Þei wolde haue I<seg>-</seg>fedde þat folke  by<seg>-</seg>fore wilde foules .</l>
<l> For alle þe <app><lem>curteisie þat bestes kunne</lem></app><note>R.15.332: R's <hi>curteisie þat bestes kunne</hi> is unique; F reads <hi>kyȝndenesse þat þey cowde</hi> and beta omits the entire line.</note>  þei kidde <app><lem>þ<expan>a</expan>t</lem></app><note>R.15.332: R's second <hi>þat</hi> is unique; F reads <hi>to</hi>. Beta omits this entire line as well as the next one.</note> folke ofte .</l>
<l> In likkyng and <app><lem>in lowynge</lem></app>  þer<expan>e</expan> þei on laundes <app><lem>ȝede</lem></app> .<note>R.15.333: R's <hi>in lowynge </hi> is unique; F reads <hi>lovynge</hi>. R's <hi>ȝede </hi> is unique; F reads <hi>wentyn</hi>. Beta omits the entire line.</note></l>
<l> Ac god sent hem fode by foules  and by no ferce bestes .</l>
<l> In menyng<expan>e</expan> þat meke thynge  mylde þing<expan>e</expan> schulde fede .</l>
<l> As ho seith religiouse  riȝtful men schulde fynde .</l>
<l> And lawful men to lif<seg>-</seg>holy men  liflode brynge .</l>
<l> And þanne wolde lordes and ladyes  <app><lem>by</lem></app><note>R.15.338: R's <hi>by</hi> is unique here; based on the scribe's uniform spelling of the linking verb elsewhere (= <hi>be</hi>), this occurrence may be an error, but it cannot be so designated conclusively. It may represent another example of R's many relict forms. <title>MED</title>, <hi>s. v.</hi> <hi>ben</hi>, attests to the viability of <hi>by</hi> in this sense with citations from both the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, including one from the <title>Ayenbite of Inwyt</title> (<hi>He haþ niede, by hit to þe bodie, by hit to þe zaule</hi>—BL Arundel 57) and <title>The Seven Sages</title> (<hi>He schal dwelle on lyue tyl to morwe day, And by than as hit may</hi>—Cam. Dd.1.17). Moreover, at R16.166, the scribe demonstrates his comfort with the inverse situation, signifying ModE "by" with <hi>be</hi>, a form that <title>OED2</title>, <hi>s. v.</hi> <hi>by</hi> (prep., adv.), attests as viable for this period.</note> lothe to agulte .</l>
<l> And to take of her<expan>e</expan> tenauntz  more þan treuthe wolde .</l>
<l> Fonde þei þat freres  wolde forsake her<expan>e</expan> almesse .</l>
<l> And bidden hem beren it  þer<expan>e</expan> it was <app><lem>borwed</lem></app> .</l>
<l> For we beth goddes foules  and abyden alwey .</l>
<l> Til briddes bringen vs  þat we schulde leue<note>R.15.343: R's <hi>leue</hi> is unique among the <hi>B</hi> manuscripts (cf. R15.400), but <title>OED2</title> attests it as a recognized form for <hi>liue</hi>. (See Trevisa, 1387, <hi>s. v.</hi> <hi>live</hi> (v. 1).</note> by .</l>
<l> For hadde ȝe potage and payne I<seg>-</seg>now  and peniale to drinke .</l>
<l> And on<note>R.15.345: In place of alpha's <hi>on</hi> or <hi>oo</hi> (= F), beta here shows <hi>a</hi>.</note> mess<expan>e</expan> þer<expan>e</expan><seg>-</seg>myde of on maner<expan>e</expan> kende .</l>
<l> Ȝe hadde riȝt I<seg>-</seg>now ȝe religious  & so ȝour<expan>e</expan> <app><lem>ordre</lem></app><note>R.15.346: Alpha here substitutes non-alliterating <hi>ordre</hi> for <hi>Bx</hi>'s <hi>reule</hi> (attested in beta).</note> me tolde .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Nu<expan>m</expan>q<expan>ua</expan>m dicit Iob <app><lem>rugiet</lem></app><note>R.15.347: Beta reads <foreign>rugit</foreign>, but <hi>Cx</hi> agrees with alpha's verb form.</note> onager cu<expan>m</expan> <app><lem>h<expan>ab</expan>uerit herbam</lem></app> .</foreign><note>R.15.347: Beta transposes this phrase as <foreign>herbam habuerit</foreign>, but <hi>Cx</hi> agrees with alpha's phrasing.</note></hi></l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Aut mugiet bos cu<expan>m</expan> ante plenu<expan>m</expan> p<expan>re</expan>sepe <app><lem>steterit</lem></app> .</foreign><note>R.15.348: Here alpha drops a long passage from the Latin citation as witnessed by both beta and the <hi>C</hi> version: <foreign>brutorum animalium natura te condempnat quia cum eis pabulum comune sufficiat</foreign>.</note></hi></l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Ex adipe p<expan>ro</expan>dijt iniquitas tua </foreign></hi> </l>
<l> ¶ If lewed men knewe þis latyn  þei wold loke wham þei ȝeue .</l>
<l> And auise hem byfore  <note>R.15.351: The beta phrasing is <hi>a fyue dayes</hi>.</note> <app><lem>fyue dayes</lem></app> or sixe .</l>
<l> Ar þei amortised to monkes  or chanounes here rentes .</l>
<l> Allas lordes and ladyes  lewed conseil haue ȝe .</l>
<l> To ȝyue fram ȝour<expan>e</expan> heyres  þat ȝour<expan>e</expan> ayeles ȝow lefte .</l>
<l> And ȝiueth to bydde for ȝow  to suche <app><lem>as</lem></app> ben riche .</l>
<l> And ben <app><lem>I<seg>-</seg>founded</lem></app> and feffed eke  to bydden for other .<note>R.15.356: The scribe fails here to skip a line between strophes, as is his custom, presumably because the next line is the last ruled one for this side.</note></l>
<l> ¶ Ho parfourneth þis p<expan>ro</expan>phecie  of þe peple þat now libbeth </l>
<milestone>fol. 77rI</milestone>
<l> <hi><foreign>Dispersit dedit paup<expan>er</expan>ib<expan>us</expan> &c<expan>etera</expan> .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> Ȝif any poeple parforne þat tixte  it are þis pore freres</l>
<l> For þat þei beggen aboute  in buyldynge þei spende .</l>
<l> And on hem<seg>-</seg>selue su<expan>m</expan>  and <app><lem>such</lem></app><note>R.15.361: R's <hi>such</hi> is followed by a unique omission; most beta copies follow <hi>such</hi> with <hi>as</hi> and BF read <hi>þat</hi>.</note> ben here laboreres .</l>
<l> And of hem þat habbeth þei taketh  and ȝiueth hem þat ne habbeth .</l>
<l> ¶ Ac clerkes and kniȝtes  and comuneres þat ben riche .</l>
<l> Fele of ȝow fareth  as if I a forest hadde .</l>
<l> Þat were ful of feir<expan>e</expan> tres  and I founded and caste .</l>
<l> How I miȝte mo þer<expan>e</expan><seg>-</seg>inne  amonges hem sette .</l>
<l> Riȝt so ȝe riche  ȝe robbeth<note>R.15.367: In this case (cf. R15.371), RF share with some beta copies a root form, <hi>Robbe</hi>, classified by <title>OED2</title> as a sixteenth-century variant spelling for <hi>robe</hi>, v. (= ModE "clothe"); it is traceable to OF <hi>robbe</hi> (= ModE "robe"), derived from the same root as OF <hi>rob</hi> since the original meaning of "robe" was "booty, spoils."</note> þat beth<note>R.15.367: R's <hi>beth</hi> is unique; all other witnesses read <hi>be(n)</hi>.</note> riche .</l>
<l> And helpeth hem þat helpeth ȝow  & ȝyueth þer<expan>e</expan> no nede is .</l>
<l> As ho<seg>-</seg>so fulled a tonne <app><lem>ful</lem></app>  of a <app><lem>ful</lem></app><note>R.15.369: R's second <hi>ful</hi> is unique; beta reads <hi>fressh</hi> and F has an omission.</note> ryuer<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> And wente forth with þat water  to woke with temese .</l>
<l> Riȝt so ȝe riche ȝe robbeth<note>R.15.371: See note at <ref>R.15.367:</ref>.</note> and fedeth </l>
<l> Hem þat han as ȝe han  hem ȝe make at ese .</l>
<l> Ac religious þat rich ben  schulde rather <app><lem>fede</lem></app><note>R.15.373: In place of alpha's <hi>fede</hi>, beta has <hi>feste</hi>.</note> beggeres .</l>
<l> Þan burgeys þat riche ben  as þe boek techeth .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Quia sacrilegiu<expan>m</expan> est res paup<expan>er</expan>u<expan>m</expan> no<expan>n</expan> paup<expan>er</expan>ib<expan>us</expan> dar<expan>e</expan> .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> <foreign>Item <app><lem>idem</lem></app> p<expan>ec</expan>catorib<expan>us</expan> dar<expan>e</expan> est demonib<expan>us</expan> <app><lem>immolar<expan>e</expan></lem></app></foreign> .<note>R.15.376: Here alpha drops a long passage from the Latin citation as witnessed in beta: <foreign>Item monache si indiges et accipis pocius das quam accipis Si autem non eges & accipis rapis</foreign>.</note></l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Porro no<expan>n</expan> indiget monachus si h<expan>ab</expan>eat quod nature sufficit .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> For<seg>-</seg>thi I co<expan>n</expan>seill<expan>e</expan> alle cristene  to co<expan>n</expan>formen hem to charite .</l>
<l> <app><lem>Fo</lem></app><note>R.15.379: Neither <title>MED</title> nor <title>OED2</title>, <hi>s. v.</hi> <hi>for</hi>, cites an example of <hi>fo</hi> as viable for the preposition signified here, but it occurs in R in four widely separated contexts (cf. R2.64, R14.60, and R20.224) and probably represents an instance of idiolect apocope. Cf. R's common use of <hi>fro</hi> (= ModE "from") and <hi>mo</hi> (= ModE "more").</note> charite with<seg>-</seg>oute chalengyng<expan>e</expan> . <app><lem>vnchargeth</lem></app> .<note>R.15.379: R uniquely omits the end of <hi>Bx</hi>'s b-verse: <hi>þe soule</hi>.</note></l>
<l> And many a prison fram purgatorie  þoruȝ his preyeres <app><lem>is deliuered</lem></app> .<note>R.15.380: For R's <hi>is deliuered</hi>, F reads <hi>ben dylyuered</hi>; beta reads <hi>(he) delyureth</hi>.</note></l>
<l> ¶ Ac þer<expan>e</expan> is a defaute  in þe folke þ<expan>a</expan>t þe feith kepeth .</l>
<l> Wher<expan>e</expan><note>R.15.382: R is almost unique (cf. Cot) in this reading; F and the other beta copies read <hi>Wherfore</hi>.</note> folke is þe febler<expan>e</expan>  and nouȝt ferme of byleue .</l>
<l> As in lossheborues is a lither alay  & ȝut loketh he like a sterlyng<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> Þe merke of þat mone is gode  ac þe metal is feble .</l>
<l> And so it fareth by sum folke nowe  þei han a fair<expan>e</expan> speche .</l>
<l> Croune and c<expan>ri</expan>stendom  þe kynges merke of heuene .</l>
<l> Ac þe metal þat is mannes soule  with synne is foule alayed .</l>
<l> Bothe lettred and lewed beth  alayed now with synne .</l>
<l> Þat no lyf loueth other ne our<expan>e</expan> lorde as it semeth .</l>
<l> For <app><lem>what</lem></app> þoruȝ werre and wikked werkes  & wederes vnresonable .</l>
<l> Wederwise schipmen  and witty clerkes al<seg>-</seg>so .</l>
<l> Han no byleue to þe lift  ne to þe lore of filisofres .</l>
<milestone>fol. 77vI</milestone>
<l> ¶ Astrimyanes al<seg>-</seg>day  in her art failen .</l>
<l> Þat whilum warned bifore  what schuld <app><lem>byfalle</lem></app><note>R.15.394: R's <hi>byfalle</hi> is unique; all the other manuscripts read <hi>falle(n)</hi>. However, most of the <hi>C</hi> manuscripts agree with R.</note> after .</l>
<l> Schipmen and schepherdes  þat with schip<expan>e</expan> and schepp<expan>e</expan> wente<expan>n</expan> .</l>
<l> Wisten by þe <app><lem><sic>wakkne</sic><corr>wa[l]kne</corr></lem></app>  what schuld by<seg>-</seg>tyde .</l>
<l> As of wederes and <app><lem>of</lem></app> wyndes  þei warned men ofte .</l>
<l> ¶ Tilieres þat tiled þe erthe  tolden her<expan>e</expan> meystres .</l>
<l> By þe seed þat þei sewe  what þei selle miȝte .</l>
<l> And what to leue and <app><lem>to</lem></app> leue<note>R.15.400: <hi>Cx</hi> agrees here with R's unique form, against <hi>lyue</hi> found in most <hi>B</hi> witnesses. See note at <ref>R.15.343:</ref>.</note> by  þe londe was so trewe .</l>
<l> Now faileth þe folke of þe floed  and of þe londe bothe .</l>
<l> Schep<expan>er</expan>des and schipmen  and so doen þis tilieres .<note>R.15.402: An early reader has inserted a red star or cross in the right margin at this point.</note></l>
<l> Nother þei kunneth ne knoweth  on cours by<seg>-</seg>for an<seg>-</seg>other .</l>
<l> Astrimyanes also  ar<expan>e</expan> att her<expan>e</expan> wittes ende .</l>
<l> Of þat was calkuled of <app><lem>clement</lem></app><note>R.15.405: For alpha's <hi>of clement</hi>, beta reads <hi>of þe element(s)</hi>. Alpha's reference is opaque; but at least, unlike beta's, it alliterates. Schmidt conjectures <hi>clemat</hi>, based on the unquestioned reading of the <hi>C</hi> version at this point, <hi>clymat</hi>.</note>  þe contrarie þei fynde .</l>
<l> Gramer<expan>e</expan> þe grou<expan>n</expan>de of alle  bygileth now childurne .</l>
<l> For is non of þis new <app><lem>clerke</lem></app><note>R.15.407: R's apparent singular, <hi>clerke</hi>, is unique; the other copies have the explicit plural required by immediate context, <hi>clerkes</hi>.</note>  ho<seg>-</seg>so nymeth hede .</l>
<l> Þat can v<expan>er</expan>sifie fair<expan>e</expan>  ne formeliche <app><lem><sic>endenten</sic><corr>end[i]ten</corr></lem></app> .</l>
<l> Ne nauȝt on amonges an hundreth  þ<expan>a</expan>t an autour can co<expan>n</expan>strue .</l>
<l> Ne rede a lettre in any langage  but i<expan>n</expan> latyn or in englische .</l>
<l> Go now to any degre  and but if gyle be maister .</l>
R.15.412KD.15.379, 378
<l> And <app><lem>flatre</lem></app><note>R.15.412: For R's <hi>flatre</hi>, "flatterer, one who flatters" from OF <hi>flatour</hi>, <hi>Bx</hi> reads <hi>flaterere</hi>, the same form found in <hi>Cx</hi>.</note> his felawe  vnder hym to fourmen .</l>
<l> <app><lem>And</lem></app><note>R.15.413: <hi> And</hi> is alpha's erroneous addition to the text of <hi>Bx</hi>.</note> muche wonder me thenketh  amonges vs alle .</l>
<l> Doctoures of decres  and of diuinite maystres .</l>
<l> Þat schulde kunne and knowe  alkynne clergie .</l>
<l> And answer<expan>e</expan> to argumentz  and also to a <foreign>quod<seg>-</seg>libet</foreign> .</l>
<l> I dar nouȝt seggen it for schame  if suche weren apposed .</l>
<l> Þei schulde faile <app><lem>in</lem></app> her<expan>e</expan> filosophie  & in fisike bothe .</l>
<l> Wherefore Ich am afered  of folk of holy cherche .</l>
<l> Lest þei ouer<seg>-</seg>hippen as other don  in offices and in houres</l>
<l> Ac <app><lem>þouȝ</lem></app><note>R.15.421: R's <hi>þouȝ</hi> is unique; beta reads <hi>if</hi> and F shows an omission.</note> þei <app><lem><sic>oue</sic><corr>oue[r]</corr></lem></app>-hippe as I hope nauȝt  our<expan>e</expan> bileue <app><lem><foreign>sufficit</foreign></lem></app> .<note>R.15.421: For alpha's Latin, beta provides an English equivalent: <hi>suffiseth</hi>.</note></l>
<l> As clerkes in <foreign>corpus <expan>christi</expan></foreign> fest  syngen and reden .</l>
<l> Þat <foreign>sola fides sufficit</foreign>  to saue with lewed peple .</l>
<l> ¶ And so may sarasynes be saued  scribes and Iewes .</l>
<l> Allas then but our<expan>e</expan> lores<seg>-</seg>men  lyuen as þei leren vs .</l>
<l> And for her<expan>e</expan> liuyng