<div1>fol. 80v (cont.)I</div1>
<foreign>Pass<expan>us</expan> xv<expan>us</expan></foreign>
<head><foreign><hi>Passus <orig><sic>xv<expan>us</expan></sic><corr>xv[j]<expan>us</expan></corr></orig><reg><sic>quintus decim<expan>us</expan></sic><corr>[sextus] decim<expan>us</expan></corr></reg> . de visione vt sup<expan>ra</expan> . <seg></seg> <seg></seg></hi></foreign></head>
<l> <hi><hi>N</hi></hi>ow fair<expan>e</expan> falle ȝow q<expan>uo</expan>d I þo  for ȝour<expan>e</expan> fair<expan>e</expan> schewyng<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> For haukynes loue þe actif man  eu<expan>er</expan>e I schal ȝow louye .</l>
<l> Ac yet I am in a wer<expan>e</expan>  what charite is to mene .</l>
<l> ¶ It is a ful trie tre q<expan>uo</expan>d he  <app><lem>treuthe</lem></app><note>R.16.4: This is an alpha variant. Beta reads <hi>trewly</hi>.</note> to telle .</l>
<l> Mercy is þe more þere<seg>-</seg>of  þe mydel stok is reuthe .</l>
<l> Þe leues ben lele wordes  þe lawe of holy cherche .</l>
<l> Þe blosmes beth buxu<expan>m</expan> speche  and benigne lokyng<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> Pacience hatte þe puir tre  and pore symple of herte .</l>
<l> And so þoruȝ god and gode men  groweth þe fruit charite .</l>
<milestone>fol. 81rI</milestone>
<foreign>Agite penitenciam</foreign>
<l> ¶ I wolde trauaile q<expan>uo</expan>d I þis tre to se  twenty hundreth mile . .<note>R.16.10: In the right margin, close to the text, an early reader has added a gloss: <foreign><add>Agite penitenciam</add></foreign>.</note></l>
<l> And to haue my fille of þat fruit  forsake alle other soule .</l>
<l> Lord q<expan>uo</expan>d I if any wiȝt wite  whoder<seg>-</seg>out<note>R.16.12: R's <hi>whoder</hi> is a unique form among the <hi>B</hi> manuscripts (which mainly attest <hi>whider</hi>) but is well-attested as a western form of that adverb (<hi>LALME</hi>, dot map 576). R's <hi>þat</hi> is probably an alpha form since F's altered b-verse also attests its presence at approximately the same position but beta shows no evidence of its presence.</note> <app><lem>þat</lem></app><note>R.16.12: Beta omits <hi>þat</hi>.</note> it groweth .</l>
<l> ¶ It groweth in a gardyn q<expan>uo</expan>d he  þat god made hym<seg>-</seg>selue .</l>
<l> Amyddes mannes body  þe more is of þat stokke .</l>
<l> Herte hatte þe erber  þat it inne groweth </l>
<l> And <foreign>liberu<expan>m</expan> arbitriu<expan>m</expan></foreign>  hath þe londe to ferme .</l>
<l> <app><lem>And</lem></app><note>R.16.17: <hi>And</hi> is an alpha variant unattested by beta witnesses.</note> vnder peres þe plowman  to piken it and to weden it .</l>
<l> Peres þe plowman q<expan>uo</expan>d I þo  and al for puir ioye .</l>
<l> Þat I herde nempne his name  anon I swowned after .</l>
<l> And lay longe in a loue dreme  and atte þe last me þouȝte .</l>
<l> Þat peres þe plowman  alle þe place me schewede .</l>
<l> And bad me toten on þe tre  on top and on rote .</l>
<l> With thre piles was it vnder<seg>-</seg>piȝt  I parceyued it sone .</l>
<l> Peres q<expan>uo</expan>d I<note>R.16.24: R's omission of the second <hi>I</hi> in this a-verse (immediately following the first one) is shared only with M.</note> preye þe  whi stonden þise piles here .</l>
<l> ¶ For wyndes wiltow wit q<expan>uo</expan>d he  to <app><lem>kepen</lem></app><note>R.16.25: R's non-alliterating stave-word is an alpha variant; in place of <hi>kepen</hi>, beta reads <hi>witen</hi>.</note> it fram fallyng<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Cu<expan>m</expan> ceciderit iustus non collidetur q<expan>uia</expan> d<expan>omi</expan>n<expan>u</expan>s s<expan>upponit</expan> . m<expan>anum</expan> . s<expan>uam</expan></foreign></hi> .</l>
<l> And in blowyng<expan>e</expan> tyme abit þe floures  but if þis piles helpe .</l>
<l> Þe werld is a wikked wynde  and crepeth amonge þe leues .<note>R.16.28: Here alpha compressed two <hi>Bx</hi> lines into one, merging the a-verse of KD16.27 with the b-verse of KD16.28. The missing b-verse and following a-verse, as witnessed in beta, reads:<lb/>
<hi>to hem þat willen treuthe <lb/>
Coueityse cometh of þat wynde</hi>
. <lb/>
The <hi>C</hi> version also attests the authenticity of these verses omitted by alpha.
<l> And forfret neiȝ þe fruit  þoruȝ many fair<expan>e</expan> siȝtes .</l>
<l> <app><lem>And</lem></app><note>R.16.30: R's <hi>And</hi> is unique among the <hi>B</hi> manuscripts but agrees with <hi>Cx</hi>; beta begins the line with <hi>Þanne</hi> while F omits both and shows a radically different version of the line.</note> with þe furst pile  I pall<expan>e</expan> hym doun  <hi>þ<expan>a</expan>t is <foreign>pote<expan>n</expan>cia dei p<expan>at</expan>ris</foreign></hi> .</l>
<l> ¶ Þe flesch is a fel wynd  and in flouryng<expan>e</expan> tyme .</l>
<l> Þoruȝ likyng<expan>e</expan> and lustus  so loude he gynneth blowe .</l>
<l> Þat it norescheth nyce siȝtes  and some<seg>-</seg>tyme wordes .</l>
<l> And wikked werkes þere<seg>-</seg>of  wormes of synne .</l>
<l> And for<seg>-</seg>biteth þe blosmes  riȝt to þe bar<expan>e</expan> leues .</l>
<l> ¶ Þanne sette I to þe secunde pil  <hi><foreign>sapiencia dei p<expan>at</expan>ris </foreign></hi> .</l>
<l> Þat is þe passion and þe power<expan>e</expan>  of our<expan>e</expan> prince ih<expan>es</expan>u .</l>
<l> <app><lem>With</lem></app><note>R.16.38: <hi>With</hi> is an alpha variant; beta reads <hi>Þorw</hi>.</note> preyeres and þoruȝ penaunces  & godes passion i<expan>n</expan> mynde .</l>
<l> I saue it til I se it ripen  and so<expan>m</expan>me<seg>-</seg>del I<seg>-</seg>fruited .</l>
<l> And þanne fondeth <app><lem>fende</lem></app><note>R.16.40: R uniquely omits <hi>þe</hi> before <hi>fende</hi>. <hi>Cx</hi> agrees on this reading with the <hi>B</hi> majority.</note>  my fruite to destruie .</l>
<l> With alle þe wiles þat he can  and waggeth þe rote .</l>
<l> And casteth vp to þe crop  vnkende neyȝbores .</l>
m ij<expan>us</expan>
<milestone>fol. 81vI</milestone>
<l> Bagbiteres <app><lem>brewe</lem></app><seg>-</seg>cheste<note>R.16.43: R's <hi>brewe-cheste</hi> is unique; F shows <hi>& boosteris &</hi>; beta copies diverge, with CrWHm reading <hi>breke þe cheste</hi> while LCGOC<hi>2</hi>YB have <hi>breke-cheste(s)</hi>. </note>  brauleres and chideres .</l>
<l> And leith a ladder þer<expan>e</expan><seg>-</seg>to  of lesynges aren þe ronges .</l>
<l> And feccheth awey my floures su<expan>m</expan><seg>-</seg>tyme  <app><lem>byfore</lem></app> bothe myn eyes</l>
<l> Ac <foreign>liberu<expan>m</expan> arbitriu<expan>m</expan></foreign>  letteth hem<note>R.16.46: Most other <hi>B</hi> witnesses have the singular form here, correctly since the antecedent is the <hi>fende</hi> of R16.40. Cr<hi>2-3</hi> and Hm agree with R's plural form.</note> su<expan>m</expan><seg>-</seg>tyme .</l>
<l> Þat is liu<seg>-</seg>tenant to loken it wel  by leue of my<seg>-</seg>selue .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Videatis qui p<expan>ec</expan>cat in sp<expan>iritu</expan>m sanctu<expan>m</expan> nu<expan>n</expan>q<expan>ua</expan>m re<expan>mittetur</expan> . &c<expan>etera</expan> .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Hoc est idem qui p<expan>ec</expan>cat p<expan>er</expan> liberu<expan>m</expan> arbitriu<expan>m</expan> no<expan>n</expan> repug<expan>nat</expan> .</foreign></hi> </l>
<l> Ac <app><lem>what</lem></app><note>R.16.50: Alpha's <hi>what</hi> seems an obvious error (cf. beta's <hi>whan</hi>).</note> þe fende and þe flesche  forth with þe worlde .</l>
<l> Manasen byhynde me  my fruit forto feche .</l>
<l> Þanne <foreign>liberu<expan>m</expan> arbitriu<expan>m</expan></foreign>  laccheth þe <app><lem>thridde</lem></app> <app><lem>planke</lem></app> .<note>R.16.52: The phrase <hi>thridde planke</hi> is from alpha (with L agreeing on <hi>thridde</hi>). The majority beta phrase is <hi>firste plante</hi>.</note></l>
<l> And palleth a<seg>-</seg>downe þe pouke  <app><lem>priueliche</lem></app><note>R.16.53: For alpha's <hi>priueliche</hi>, beta reads <hi>purelich</hi>.</note> þoruȝ grace .</l>
<l> And helpe of þe holy goste  and þus haue I þe maystrie .</l>
<l> ¶ Now fair<expan>e</expan> falle ȝow peres q<expan>uo</expan>d I  so fair<expan>e</expan> ȝe descreuen .</l>
<l> Þe power of þis postes  and her<expan>e</expan> p<expan>ro</expan>pre miȝte .</l>
<l> Ac I haue thouȝtes a thraue  of þis thre piles .</l>
<l> In what wode þei woxen  and wher<expan>e</expan> þat þei growed .</l>
<l> For alle ar thei a<seg>-</seg>liche longe  non lasse þan other .</l>
<l> And to my mynde as me thenketh  on one more þei growed .</l>
<l> <app><lem>And</lem></app><note>R.16.61: R uniquely omits <hi>of</hi> after <hi>And</hi>.</note> o gretnesse  and grene of greyne þei semen .</l>
<l> ¶ Þat is sothe <app><lem>seide</lem></app><note>R.16.62: For alpha's <hi>seide</hi>, also supported by L, most beta manuscripts read <hi>quod</hi>.</note> peres  so<note>R.16.62: Only G shares with R in the omission of <hi>it</hi> after <hi>so</hi>; F uniquely transposes the phrase: <hi>it may so</hi>.</note> may be<seg>-</seg>falle .</l>
<l> I schal telle þe as tyt  what þis tre hatte .</l>
<l> Þe grounde þere it groweth  godnesse it hiȝte .</l>
<l> And I haue tolde þe what hiȝte þe tre  þe trinite it meneth .</l>
<l> And egreliche he loked on me  and þer<expan>e</expan>for I spared .</l>
<l> To asken hym anymore þer<expan>e</expan><seg>-</seg>of  & bad hym ful fair<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> To descreue þe fruit  þat so faire hangeth .</l>
<l> ¶ Here now by<seg>-</seg>nethe q<expan>uo</expan>d he þo  If I nede hadde .</l>
<l> Matrimonie I may nym  a moyst fruit with<seg>-</seg>all<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> Þanne continence is nere þe crop : as caylewey bastarde .</l>
<l> Þanne bereth þe crop kende fruit  and clennest of alle .</l>
<l> Maydenhode angeles peres  and rathest wol be ripe .</l>
<l> And swete with<seg>-</seg>oute swelyng<expan>e</expan>  sour<expan>e</expan> worth it neu<expan>er</expan>e .</l>
<l><app><lem>In pri<add>e</add>de</lem></app><note>R.16.75: Here the R scribe made a colossal mistake, misconstruing his exemplar's <hi>I prayed</hi>, the <hi>Bx</hi> reading, as <hi>In pride</hi>. His corrector notices the mistake and alters the noun with a supralinear <e>, but he overlooks the need to correct the initial preposition, so that the "corrected" reading is still nonsense.</note> peres to pulle a<seg>-</seg>doune  an appel & he wolde .</l>
<milestone>fol. 82rI</milestone>
<l> And suffre me to assay  what sauour<expan>e</expan> it hadde .</l>
<l> And peres caste to þe crop  and þanne co<expan>m</expan>sed it to crie .</l>
<l> <app><lem>A</lem></app><note>R.16.78: R's <hi>A</hi> (= ModE "He"), though unique, agrees with <hi>Cx</hi>; F has <hi>& anoon</hi> while beta reads <hi>And</hi>.</note> wagged wedew<seg>-</seg>hod  and hit wepte after .</l>
<l> And whanne <app><lem>he</lem></app><note>R.16.79: For alpha's <hi>he</hi> (presumably original), beta manuscripts read <hi>it</hi>.</note> meued matrimonie  it made a foule noyse .</l>
<l> <app><lem>Þat</lem></app><note>R.16.80: R uniquely omits <hi>I</hi> before <hi>hadde</hi>.</note> hadde reuthe whan peres <app><lem>rused</lem></app><note>R.16.80: R's <hi>rused</hi> is unique but more closely akin to F's <hi>rusched</hi> than to beta's <hi>rogged</hi>.</note>  it gradde so reufulliche .</l>
<l> For euer as þei dropped adoune  þe deuel was redy .</l>
<l> And gadered hem alle to<seg>-</seg>gyderes  bothe grete and smale .</l>
<l> Adam and abrah<expan>a</expan>m  and Isaie þe p<expan>ro</expan>phete .</l>
<l> Sampson and samuel  and seint Ioh<expan>a</expan>n þe baptiste .</l>
<l> Bare hem forth baldely  no<seg>-</seg>body hem <app><lem>lette</lem></app> .<note>R.16.85: Beta has <hi>letted</hi>, but <hi>Cx</hi> agrees with alpha's reading.</note></l>
<l> And made of holy men his horde  <foreign> in lymbo inferni</foreign> .</l>
<l> Þer<expan>e</expan> is dernesse<note>R.16.87: <hi>dernesse</hi>, "darkness." Cf. R's form with <hi>C</hi> manuscript P's <hi>deornesse</hi> and also note the spelling <hi>dernesse</hi> in manuscript A at <hi>C</hi>20.104. For loss within consonant clusters, cf. also <ref>R.18.121:</ref> where <hi>sofly</hi> appears for "softly."</note> and drede  and þe deuel maister .</l>
<l> And peres for puir tene  þat o pyl he lauȝte .</l>
<l> And hitte after hym  happe how it miȝte .</l>
<l> <foreign>Filius</foreign> by þe <app><lem>faderes</lem></app><note>R.16.90: RF are here joined by Cr (and agree with <hi>Cx</hi>); beta reads <hi>fader</hi>.</note> wille  and frenesse of <foreign>sp<expan>iritu</expan>s s<expan>an</expan>c<expan>t</expan>i</foreign> .</l>
<l> To go robbe þat rageman  & <app><lem><sic>reuend</sic><corr>reuen</corr></lem></app><note>R.16.91: R's <hi>reuend</hi> is an error for beta's <hi>reue</hi> (cf. F's <hi>be-reve</hi>). The <hi>Cx</hi> reading, albeit in a revised line, agrees with beta's.</note> þe fruit fro hym .</l>
<l> ¶ And þanne spake <foreign><expan>spiritus</expan> sanct<expan>us</expan></foreign>  in <app><lem>gabriel</lem></app><note>R.16.92: This form is unique to R; the other <hi>B</hi> manuscripts read <hi>Gabrieles</hi>. The <hi>C</hi> manuscripts attest both forms (P<hi>2</hi>TH<hi>2</hi>Gc agreeing with R), but <hi>Cx</hi> clearly supports the F/beta reading.</note> mouthe .<note>R.16.92: In the right margin opposite this text line, there were two lines of a gloss, now erased, apparently in the same hand as a number of others, including one on 94r.</note></l>
<l> To a mayde þat hiȝt marie  a meke thynge with<seg>-</seg>alle .</l>
<l> Þat on ih<expan>esu</expan>s a iustice sone  moste iouken in her<expan>e</expan> chaumbre .</l>
<l> Til <foreign> plenitudo temporis</foreign><app><lem>tyme</lem></app> <app><lem>I<seg>-</seg>come</lem></app><note>R.16.95: Alpha's reading probably was identical to R's <hi>tyme I<seg>-</seg>come</hi> rather than to F's <hi>tyme come it</hi>; beta reads <hi>fully comen</hi>. R's version agrees with <hi>Cx</hi>.</note> were .</l>
<l> Þat peres fruit flourede  and fel to be ripe .</l>
<l> And þanne schulde ih<expan>esu</expan>s iuste þer<seg>-</seg>fore  <app><lem>&</lem></app> by<note>R.16.97: For R's <hi>& by</hi> (supported by most <hi>C</hi> copies), the other <hi>B</hi> manuscripts read <hi>bi</hi>.</note> iugement of armes .</l>
<l> Whether schulde fonde þe fruit  þe fende or hym<seg>-</seg>sulue .</l>
<l> ¶ Þe mayde mildliche þo  þe messager<expan>e</expan> graunted .</l>
<l> And seyde hendely to hym  lo me his hande<seg>-</seg>maiden .</l>
<l> Forto worchen his wille  with<seg>-</seg>outen any synne .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Ecce ancilla d<expan>omi</expan>ni fiat michi &c<expan>etera</expan> .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> And in þe wombe of þat wenche  was he fourty wekes .</l>
<l> Til he wex a faunt þoruȝ hir<expan>e</expan> flesche  & of fyȝtyng<expan>e</expan> coude .</l>
<l> To haue yfouȝte with þe fende  ar ful tyme come .</l>
<l> And peres þe plowman parseyued <app><lem>þe</lem></app><note>R.16.106: R's <hi>þe</hi> is a unique addition to this phrase as witnessed by beta (<hi>parceyued plenere tyme</hi>). F has its own unique wording at this point, <hi>parseyuede <hi>in þat</hi> plener tyme</hi>.</note> plener tyme .</l>
<l> And lered hym leche<seg>-</seg>craft  his lif forto saue .</l>
<l> Þat þouȝ he wer<expan>e</expan> wonded with his enemy  to warschen hym<seg>-</seg>selue .</l>
<l> And ded hym assaye his surgerye  on hem þat sike were .</l>
<l> Til he was parfite practisour  if any perel fulle .</l>
m iij<expan>us</expan>
<milestone>fol. 82vI</milestone>
<l> And souȝt oute þe sike  and synful bothe .</l>
R.16.112KD.16.110, 108
<l> And saluede sike and synful  bothe blynde & crokede .</l>
<l> <note>R.16.113: R uniquely omits <hi>And</hi> at the head of this line. The <hi>C</hi> version here confirms the accuracy of the majority <hi>B</hi> reading.</note> <app><lem>Comune</lem></app> wo<expan>m</expan>men co<expan>n</expan>u<expan>er</expan>ted  and to gode turned .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Non e<expan>st</expan> sanis opus <app><lem>medici</lem></app><note>R.16.114: R's <foreign>medici</foreign> is a unique reading; some copies (LWHmCBmBoF) have <foreign>medicus</foreign>; others (CrMO) show <foreign>medico</foreign>; G reads <hi>medicine</hi>.</note> sed m<expan>ale</expan> h<expan>abentibus</expan><note>R.16.114: The phrase <foreign>m<expan>ale</expan> h<expan>abentibus</expan></foreign> is an alpha variant; beta probably read <foreign>in &c</foreign>.</note> &c<expan>etera</expan> .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> Bothe meseles and mute  and i<expan>n</expan> þe meneson blody .</l>
<l> Ofte he heled suche  he ne helde it for no maystrie .</l>
<l> Saue þo he leched lazar  þat hadde I<seg>-</seg>leye in graue .</l>
<l> <foreign> Quatriduan<expan>us</expan></foreign> quelt  quik dede hym walke .</l>
<l> Ac as he made <app><lem>þat</lem></app><note>R.16.119: In place of alpha's <hi>þat</hi>, beta reads <hi>þe</hi>.</note> maistrie  <hi><foreign>mestus cepit esse </foreign></hi> .</l>
<l> And wepte water with his eyes  þer<expan>e</expan> seyȝen it manye .</l>
<l> So<expan>m</expan>me þat þe siȝte seye  seyde þat tyme .</l>
<l> Þat he was leche of lif  and lorde of heye heuene .</l>
<l> Iewes Iangeled þer<expan>e</expan><seg>-</seg>aȝeyne  <app><lem>þat</lem></app><note>R.16.123: For R's unique <hi>þat</hi>, F reads <hi>þo þat</hi>; beta reads <hi>and</hi>.</note> iuged lawes .</l>
<l> And seyde he wrouȝte þoruȝ wicche<seg>-</seg>crafte  & wit þe deueles miȝte . </l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Demoniu<expan>m</expan> habes . &c<expan>etera</expan> .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> ¶ Þanne ar ȝe cherles q<expan>uo</expan>d <app><lem><expan>ihesus</expan></lem></app><note>R.16.126: R's reading is unique; cf. F's <hi>crist</hi> and beta's <hi>ich</hi> / <hi>I</hi>.</note>  and ȝour<expan>e</expan> childre bothe .</l>
<l> And sathan ȝoure saueour<expan>e</expan>  ȝow<seg>-</seg>selue now ȝe witnessen .</l>
<l> For I haue saued <app><lem>ȝow<seg>-</seg>selue</lem></app><note>R.16.128: Beta adds, at the end of the a-verse <hi>seith cryst</hi>. F agrees with R in omitting the phrase.</note>  and ȝour<expan>e</expan> sones after .</l>
<l> Ȝoure bodies ȝour<expan>e</expan> bestes  and blynde men holpen .</l>
<l> And fedde ȝow with fisches  and with fyue loues .</l>
<l> And left basketes ful of broke mete  bere awey ho<seg>-</seg>so wolde .</l>
<l> And mysseyde þe iewes manliche  & manased hem to bete .</l>
<l> And knocked on hem with a corde  and cast a<seg>-</seg>doun her<expan>e</expan> stalles .</l>
<l> Þat in cherche chaffaredden  or chaunged any mone .</l>
<l> And seyde it in siȝt of hem alle  so þat alle herden .</l>
<l> I schal ou<expan>er</expan><seg>-</seg>torne þis temple  and adoun throwe .</l>
<l> And in thre dayes after  edifye it newe .</l>
<l> And make it as muche other more  in all<expan>e</expan> man<expan>er</expan> poyntes .</l>
<l> As eu<expan>er</expan> it was and as wide  wher<expan>e</expan><seg>-</seg>fore I hote ȝow .</l>
<l> Of preyeres and of parfitnesse  þis place þat ȝe callen .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Dom<expan>us</expan> mea dom<expan>us</expan> orac<expan>i</expan>o<expan>n</expan>is vocabitur</foreign></hi> .</l>
<l> Enuye and euel wil  <app><lem>aren</lem></app><note>R.16.142: R's <hi>aren</hi> is unique but outweighs the consensus of F and the beta copies (which have <hi>was</hi>) on account of the latter's defective alliteration. A majority of <hi>C</hi> manuscripts (= <hi>ern</hi>, preterite of <hi>rennen</hi>) also support this reading. See Kane and Donaldson, p. 186, for discussion of the forms.</note> in þe iewes .</l>
<l> Þei casten & co<expan>n</expan>treueden  to kullen hym whan þei miȝte .</l>
<l> Vche day after other  þeir<expan>e</expan> tyme þei awaited .</l>
<l> Til it byfel on a friday  a <app><lem>lite</lem></app><note>R.16.145: R's <hi>lite</hi> is unique; most other <hi>B</hi> manuscripts read <hi>litel</hi>, supported by <hi>Cx</hi>. Cr1-2 show <hi>little</hi>.</note> be<seg>-</seg>fore pasche .</l>
<l> Þe thoresday be<seg>-</seg>fore  þere he made his <app><lem>cene</lem></app> .<note>R.16.146: In place of alpha's <hi>cene</hi>, beta reads <hi>maundee</hi>.</note></l>
<milestone>fol. 83rI</milestone>
<l> <app><lem>Sittande</lem></app> at þe sopere  <app><lem>and</lem></app><note>R.16.147: For R's <hi>and</hi>, F reads <hi>hym<seg>-</seg>selue</hi> and beta has <hi>he</hi>.</note> seide þise wordes .</l>
<l> I am solde þoruȝ <app><lem>su<expan>m</expan>me</lem></app><note>R.16.148: This is an alpha variant; beta reads the non-alliterating <hi>one</hi> in place of <hi>summe</hi>.</note> of ȝow  he schal þe tyme rewe .</l>
<l> Þat <app><lem>eu<expan>er</expan></lem></app><note>R.16.149: R uniquely omits <hi>he</hi> after <hi>euer</hi>.</note> his saueour solde  for siluer or elles .</l>
<l> ¶ Iudas ianglede þer<expan>e</expan><seg>-</seg>aȝeyne  ac <expan>ihesus</expan> hym tolde .</l>
<l> It was hym<seg>-</seg>self sothely  and seyde <foreign>tu dicis</foreign> .<note>R.16.151: In the right margin opposite this line and extending down five lines to R16.156, there is an erased gloss, apparently in the same hand as the long, erased note on 94r.</note></l>
<l> Þanne wente forth þat wikked man  & with þe iewes mette</l>
<l> And tolde hem a tokne how  to knowe with ih<expan>es</expan>us .</l>
<l> <app><lem>Þe</lem></app><note>R.16.154: <hi>Þe</hi> is an alpha reading; beta has <hi>And</hi>.</note> whiche tokne to þis day  to muche is vsed .</l>
<l> Þat is kyssyng<expan>e</expan> and faire co<expan>n</expan>tenaunce  & vnkende wille .</l>
<l> And so was with Iudas þo  þat <expan>ihesus</expan> bitraied .</l>
<l> <foreign>Aue rabi</foreign> q<expan>uo</expan>d þat ribaude  and riȝt to hym he ȝode<note>R.16.157: R's <hi>ȝode</hi> is unique in form but not in sense; the beta manuscripts have <hi>ȝede</hi> while F shows <hi>wente</hi>.</note> .</l>
<l> And kest hym to ben cauȝt þer<seg>-</seg>by  and kulde <app><lem>þoruȝ</lem></app><note>R.16.158: Alpha's <hi>þoruȝ</hi> is replaced in beta by <hi>of</hi>.</note> þe iewes .</l>
<l> ¶ Þanne Ih<expan>esu</expan>s to Iudas  and to þe iewes seyde .</l>
<l> Falsnesse ich<note>R.16.160: R's <hi>ich</hi> is unique in form but not in sense; the other <hi>B</hi> manuscripts (as well as those of the <hi>C</hi> version) have <hi>I</hi> or <hi>y</hi>.</note> fynde  in þi fair<expan>e</expan> speche .</l>
<l> And gile in þi glade chere  and galle is in þi lauȝyng<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> Þow schalt be myrour to manye  men to deseyue .</l>
<l> Ac þe wors and þe wikkednesse  schal worth vpon þi<seg>-</seg>selue .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Necesse est vt veniant scandala .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Ve homini illi p<expan>er</expan> que<expan>m</expan> scandalu<expan>m</expan> venit .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> Þouȝ I be treson be take  <app><lem>and</lem></app><note>R.16.166: R's <hi>and</hi> is unique; cf. beta's <hi>at</hi> and F's <hi>& þorgh</hi>.</note> ȝoure owene wille .</l>
<l> Suffreth my postles<note>R.16.167: Only L joins R in this clipped form; all other <hi>B</hi> manuscripts have <hi>Apostles</hi>. R and L are also alone in reading the possessive as <hi>my</hi> where the other copies have <hi>myn</hi>. The <hi>C</hi> manuscripts are divided on this phrase, with most of the X family supporting LR and most of the P family agreeing with the beta majority.</note> in pays  and in pees gange .</l>
<l> <app><lem>In</lem></app><note>R.16.168: Beta reads <hi>On</hi>.</note> a thorsday in thesternesse  þus was he taken .</l>
<l> Thoruȝ Iudas and iewes  <expan>ihesus</expan> was his name .</l>
<l> Þat on þe friday folwynge  for mankende sake .</l>
<l> Iusted in ier<expan>usa</expan>l<expan>e</expan>m  a ioye to vs alle .</l>
<l> On cros vpon caluarie  criste toke þe bataile .</l>
<l> Aȝeynes deth and þe deuel  destruyde <app><lem>þer<expan>e</expan></lem></app> <app><lem>beir<expan>e</expan></lem></app><note>R.16.173: According to <title>OED2</title>, <hi>s. v.</hi> <hi>bo</hi> (a. and pron.) and <hi>both</hi> (a. and adv.), R's unique form <hi>beire</hi> is a genitive plural form of <hi>bo</hi> (= "both"). So R's phrase, <hi>þere beire miȝtes</hi>, means <hi>the powers of both of them</hi>. Beta has <hi>bother(es)</hi> while F rewrites the line.</note> miȝtes .</l>
<l> Deyede and deth for<seg>-</seg>dede  and day of nyȝt made .</l>
<l> ¶ And I awaked þer<expan>e</expan>with  and wiped myn eyes<note>R.16.175: Beta's form is <hi>eyghen</hi>.</note> .</l>
<l> And after peres þe plowman  pried and stared</l>
<l> Estward and westwarde  I waited after faste .</l>
<l> And ȝede forth as an Ideot  in contre to a<seg>-</seg>spie .</l>
<l> After peres þe plowman  many a place I souȝte .</l>
<l> And þan mette I with a man  a mydlenten soneday .</l>
m iiij<supplied><expan>us</expan></supplied>
<milestone>fol. 83vI</milestone>
<l> As hoer as an hauȝthorne  and abrah<expan>a</expan>m he hiȝte .</l>
<l> I frayned hym furste  from whennes he come .</l>
<unclear>John Sympson</unclear><note> In the left margin, between these two verse paragraphs, a sixteenth-century signature (apparently a pen trial) has been mostly erased.</note>
<l> And of whennes he wer<expan>e</expan>  and whider þat he thouȝte .</l>
<l> ¶ I am feith q<expan>uo</expan>d þat freke  it falleth nauȝt <app><lem>me</lem></app><note>R.16.184: F transposes this phrase as <hi>falleþ me nowht</hi>; beta omits <hi>me</hi>. In a revised line, the prevalent <hi>C</hi> reading agrees with R's (though a minority of <hi>C</hi> witnesses read the phrase in F's order).</note> to lye .</l>
<l> And of abrah<expan>a</expan>mes hous  an heraude of armes .</l>
<l> I seke after a segg<expan>e</expan>  þat I seiȝ ones .</l>
<l> A ful bolde bachelere  I knewe hym by his blasen . </l>
<l> ¶ What bereth þat buyrn q<expan>uo</expan>d I þo  so blisse þe be<seg>-</seg>tyde .</l>
<l> ¶ Thre ledes in on lith  non lenger þan other .</l>
<l> Of on muchele and miȝt  in mesur<expan>e</expan> and in lenthe .</l>
<l> Þat on doth alle doth  and vch<note>R.16.191: R's <hi>vch</hi> is unique in form but not in sense; <title>OED2</title>, <hi>s. v.</hi> <hi>each</hi> (a., quasi-pron.), lists it as a viable form from twelfth-fifteenth century Most other <hi>B</hi> manuscripts have <hi>ech(e)</hi>.</note> doth by his one .</l>
<l> Þe firste hath miȝt and mageste  maker<expan>e</expan> of alle thyng<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> <foreign>Pater</foreign> is his p<expan>ro</expan>pre name  a p<expan>er</expan>sone by hym<seg>-</seg>selue .</l>
<l> Þe secunde of þat sir<expan>e</expan> is  sothfastnesse <foreign>filius</foreign> .</l>
<l> Wardan of þat wit <app><lem>hat</lem></app><note>R.16.195: R's <hi>hat</hi> is unique in form among the <hi>B</hi> manuscripts, but not in sense; <title>OED2</title>, <hi>s. v.</hi> <hi>have</hi>, lists it as a viable fifteenth century form for the 3rd sing. pres. of <hi>have</hi>. Most other <hi>B</hi> manuscripts read <hi>hath</hi>.</note>  was euer with<seg>-</seg>outen gynny<expan>n</expan>g<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> Þe thridde hat þe holy goste  a p<expan>er</expan>sone by hym<seg>-</seg>seluen .</l>
<l> <app><lem>Þat alle þe liȝt of þe lif</lem></app><note>R.16.197: The syntactic confusion in this a-verse began in alpha, which omitted the verb (cf. F's <hi>Þat al þe lyght & þe lyf</hi>). Beta witnesses read the full line as <hi>Þe liȝte of alle þat lyf hath a londe & a watre</hi>.</note>  a londe and a wat<expan>e</expan>re .</l>
<l> Confortour<expan>e</expan> of creatoures  of hym cometh alle blisse .</l>
<l> So thre bylongeth for a lorde  þat lordschip<expan>e</expan> claymeth .</l>
<l> Miȝt and a mene <app><lem>to</lem></app><note>R.16.200: After <hi>to</hi>, R omits the verb <hi>knowe</hi>. This line was already metrically defective in <hi>Bx</hi>, which appears to have read as beta does: <hi>Myȝte and a mene to knowe his owne myȝte</hi>. Assuming this shape for <hi>Bx</hi>, R's only additional deficit is the aforementioned loss, which probably occurred in alpha. Cf. F's version of the line: <hi>Myght & eek a meyne to his myght owiþ</hi>. The <hi>C</hi> version of this line also seems metrically defective: <hi>Miȝte and a mene to se his owne myhte</hi>.</note> his owene miȝte .</l>
<l> Of <app><lem>hym<seg>-</seg>selue</lem></app><note>R.16.201: R's <hi>hym<seg>-</seg>selue</hi> is an alpha variant; cf. beta's <hi>hym</hi>.</note> and of his s<expan>er</expan>uant  and what <app><lem>soffret hem</lem></app><note>R.16.201: The phrase <hi>soffret hem</hi> is an alpha variant; beta reads <hi>þei suffre</hi>. Both alpha variants in this line are authenticated by their presence in <hi>Cx</hi>.</note> bothe .</l>
<l> So god þat gynnyng<expan>e</expan> hadde <app><lem>ner<expan>e</expan></lem></app><note>R.16.202: R's <hi>nere</hi> is a unique form; the other manuscripts read<hi>neure</hi>.</note>  but þo hym gode thouȝte .</l>
<l> Sent forth his sone  as for s<expan>er</expan>uant þat tyme .</l>
<l> To ocupien hym here  til issue wer<expan>e</expan> spronge .</l>
<l> Þat is childurne of charite  and holy cherche þe moder .</l>
<l> Patriarkes and p<expan>ro</expan>phetes  and apostles wer<expan>e</expan> þe <app><lem>barnes</lem></app> .<note>R.16.206: Beta has <hi>chyldren</hi> in place of RF's <hi>barnes</hi>, and <hi>Cx</hi> agrees with beta's reading.</note></l>
<l> And crist and cristendom  and <app><lem>alle</lem></app><note>R.16.207: Beta omits <hi>alle</hi>, as does the P family of <hi>C</hi> manuscripts; but the X family of <hi>C</hi> manuscripts agrees with RF, including the word.</note> cristene holy cherche .</l>
<l> In menyng<expan>e</expan> þat man moste  <app><lem>in</lem></app><note>R.16.208: This is an alpha variant (also attested in Cr); the other beta copies read <hi>on</hi>.</note> o god byleue .</l>
<l> And þer<expan>e</expan> hym lyked and louede  in thre p<expan>er</expan>sones hym schewed .</l>
<l> And þat it may be so & soth  man<seg>-</seg>hode it scheweth .</l>
<l> Wedlok and widewehode  with virginite I<seg>-</seg>nempned .</l>
<l> In tokenyng<expan>e</expan> of þe trinite  was take out of o man<note>R.16.212: R's <hi>o man</hi> and beta's <hi>a man</hi> are both enumerative and semantically identical, emphasizing that all three states of grace emanate from "one man," while F seems to miss the point, reading <hi>mankynde</hi>.</note> .</l>
<l> Adam our<expan>e</expan> aller fader  eue was of hym<seg>-</seg>selue .</l>
S <unclear>o</unclear>pp<note>R.16.214: At the bottom margin of fol. 83v, near the gutter, in a brown secretary hand, there is a pen trial: S <unclear>o</unclear>pp.</note>
<l> And þe isue þat þei hadde  it was of hem bothe .</l>
<milestone>fol. 84rI</milestone>
John Sympson Smithe John<space>        </space>John Sympson<lb/>
William Joh
Sympson<note> Across the top margin of fol. 84r, all of the pen trials appear to be in the same hand, but the different shades of ink and variations in cut of the stylus suggest that they were executed at different times.</note>
<l> And eyther is otheres ioye  in thre sondri p<expan>er</expan>sones .</l>
<l> And in heuene and here one singuler<expan>e</expan> name .</l>
<l> And <app><lem>þat</lem></app><note>R.16.217: For alpha's <hi>þat</hi>, beta reads <hi>þus</hi>.</note> is man<seg>-</seg>kende  or manhode  of matrimonie spronge .<note>R.16.217: In the extreme right margin there is some scribbling that appears to be a continuation of the pen trials higher on the page, with the writer continuing to practice the capital <S> of <hi>Sympson</hi>.</note></l>
<l> And bi<seg>-</seg>tokeneth þe trinite  and trewe byleue :</l>
<l> ¶ Miȝte is <app><lem>in</lem></app><note>R.16.219: Beta omits <hi>in</hi>.</note> matrimonie  þat multiplieth þe erthe .</l>
<l> And bitokeneth treweli  telle if I durste .</l>
<l> He þat first formed alle  þe fader of heuene .</l>
<l> Þe sone if I it durste say  resembleth wel þe widewe .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Deus m<expan>eu</expan>s deus m<expan>eu</expan>s vt quid <app><lem>me dereliquisti</lem></app> .</foreign><note>R.16.223: For R's <foreign>me dereliquisti</foreign>, the other <hi>B</hi> copies show a reversal: <foreign>dereliquisti me</foreign>.</note></hi></l>
<l> Þat is creatour wax creature  to knowe what was bothe .</l>
N<expan>ota</expan><note>R.16.225: To the right of the nota, there is a symbol resembling a modern script capital <E>. </note>
<l> As widewe with<seg>-</seg>oute wedloke  was neu<expan>er</expan>e ȝet I<seg>-</seg>seye .</l>
<l> <app><lem>Ne</lem></app> na<note>R.16.226: R's <hi>Ne</hi> is a unique addition to the text of <hi>Bx</hi>.</note> more miȝte god be man  but if he moder hadde .</l>
<l> So widewe with<seg>-</seg>oute wedloke  may nouȝt wel stande .</l>
<l> Ne matrimonie with<seg>-</seg>oute moyler<expan>e</expan>  is nauȝt muche to p<expan>re</expan>yse .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Maledictus homo qui no<expan>n</expan> re<expan>liquit</expan> se<expan>men</expan> in isr<expan>ae</expan>l &c<expan>etera</expan> .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> Þus in thre p<expan>er</expan>sones  is p<expan>ar</expan>fitliche <app><lem>puir</lem></app><note>R.16.230: R's <hi>puir</hi> is unique (beta omits it while F reads <hi>þorghȝ</hi>); nevertheless, the metrical requirements of the line indicate that <hi>puir</hi> is authentic.</note> manhode .</l>
<l> Þat is man and his make  & moiller<expan>e</expan> <app><lem>her<expan>e</expan></lem></app><note>R.16.231: L agrees with RF, though the other beta copies omit <hi>here</hi>.</note> childerne .</l>
<l> And is nouȝt but gendre of o generac<expan>i</expan>ou<expan>n</expan>  bi<seg>-</seg>for ih<expan>es</expan>u crist in heuene .</l>
<l> So is þe fader forth with þe sone  and fre wil of bothe .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Sp<expan>iritu</expan>s procedens a patre et filio </foreign></hi></l>
<l> Which is þe holy gost of al  and al is but o god .</l>
<l> Þus in a somer I hym seyȝ  as I sat in my porche .</l>
<l> I ros vp and reuerenced hym  and riȝt fair<expan>e</expan> hym grette .</l>
<l> ¶ Thre men to my syȝte  I made wel at ese .<note>R.16.238: In the right margin, an early reader has written <add>knak</add> vertically, beginning here and extending upwards in the margin to a spot opposite R16.237. </note></l>
<l> Wesche here fete <app><lem><sic>in</sic><corr>[a]n[d]</corr></lem></app> wiped <app><lem>hes</lem></app><note>R.16.239: R's <hi>hes</hi> is unique but is not a careless error. According to <title>OED2</title>, <hi>s. v.</hi> <hi>his, hise</hi> (pers. pron., 3rd sing. fem. acc.), this form is a twelfth-fourteenth century variant of the 3rd person sing. accus., <hi>his(e)</hi>, which is equivalent to standard ME <hi>hem</hi>. <title>MED</title>, <hi>s. v.</hi> <hi>netheren</hi> (v.) and <hi>God</hi>, cites an example from the thirteenth-century <title>Vices and Virtues</title> (<hi>Bute hie hem seluen neðerien..scal goddalmihtin hes forliesen</hi> — BL Stowe 34).</note>  and afterwarde þei eten .</l>
<l> Calues flesche and cake brede  and knewen what I thouȝte .</l>
<l> Ful trewe toknesse bitwene vs is  to telle whan me liket<damage>h</damage> .<note>R.16.241: Someone after the R scribe had finished his work has partially erased the <h> of <hi>liketh</hi>, but its remains are still visible and recognizable.</note></l>
<l> Furste he fonded me  if I loued better<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> Hym or Isaac myn ayr  þe whiche he hiȝt me kulle .</l>
<l> He wist my will<expan>e</expan> bi hym  <app><lem>a</lem></app><note>R.16.244: <hi>A</hi>, "he."</note> wol me it a<seg>-</seg>lowe .</l>
<l> I am ful siker in soule ther<expan>e</expan>  of and my sone bothe .</l>
Wyll ND
<l> I circu<expan>m</expan>cised my sone  sith for his sake .<note> In the right margin, there is a pen trial (in a black secretary hand): <add>Wyll ND</add> . It is written vertically upwards from a point below the last text line to a point in the right margin opposite R16.246.</note></l>
<l> My<seg>-</seg>sulue and my mayne<note>R.16.247: R's <hi>mayne</hi> is unique in form but not meaning; <title>MED</title>, <hi>s. v.</hi> <hi>meine</hi>, attests its viability as a spelling of <hi>meine</hi> for the fourteenth-fifteenth centuries. F has <hi>meyghne</hi>. The beta manuscripts show a variety of spellings, with a majority reading <hi>meyne(e)</hi>. The <hi>C</hi> form is identical to R's.</note>  and al þat male wer<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> Bledden blode for þat lordes loue  & hope to blisse þe tyme .</l>
<l> My affiance and my fay<note>R.16.249: R's <hi>fay</hi> is unique in form but not meaning; <title>MED</title>, <hi>s. v.</hi> <hi>feith</hi>, attests its viability as a spelling variant of <hi>feiþ</hi> for the fourteenth-fifteenth centuries. The <hi>C</hi> form, however, is identical to that of the <hi>B</hi> majority.</note>  is ferme in þis bileue .</l>
<milestone>fol. 84vI</milestone>
<l> For hym<seg>-</seg>sulue be<seg>-</seg>hiȝt to me  and to myn issue bothe .</l>
<l> Londe and lordschip<expan>e</expan>  and lif withouten ende .</l>
<l> To me and to myn issue  more ȝet he me graunted .</l>
<l> Mercy for oure mysdedes  as many tyme as we asken .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Quam olim abrahe p<expan>ro</expan>misisti et semini eius .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> And sitthe he sent me to seye  I schulde do sacrifice .</l>
<l> And done hym <app><lem><sic>worschpe</sic><corr>worsch[i]pe</corr></lem></app> with brede  and with wyne bothe .<note> In the left margin opposite these lines, there are traces of an erased pen trial, apparently a signature, running vertically downwards and encroaching slightly, at the bottom, into the text area.</note></l>
<l> And called me þe fote of his feith  his folke for to saue .</l>
<l> And defende hem fro þe fende  folke þat on me leued<note>R.16.258: Kane and Donaldson read R here as <hi>lened</hi>.</note> .</l>
<l> Þus haue I ben his heraud  here and in helle .</l>
<l> And co<expan>n</expan>forted many a careful  þat after his co<expan>m</expan>myng<expan>e</expan> waiten .</l>
<l> And þus I seke hym he sayde  for I herde seyn late .</l>
<l> Of a <app><lem>buyrn</lem></app><note>R.16.262: Beta reads <hi>barne</hi>.</note> þat baptised hym  Ioh<expan>a</expan>n baptist was his name .</l>
<l> Þat to patriarkes and to p<expan>ro</expan>phetes  and to other peple i<expan>n</expan> derkenesse .</l>
<l> Seyde þat he <app><lem>seyde</lem></app><note>R.16.264: Beta has <hi>seigh</hi>.</note> here  þat schal sauen <app><lem>hem</lem></app> alle .<note>R.16.264: Beta's version of the b-verse is <hi>þat sholde saue vs alle</hi>. R's <hi>schal</hi> is shared with CF and <hi>hem</hi> with F alone. The <hi>Cx</hi> version of this entire line is substantively identical to that of beta.</note></l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Ecce agnus dei &c<expan>etera</expan> .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> ¶ I hadde wonder of his wordes  and of his wide clothes .</l>
<l> <app><lem>And</lem></app><note>R.16.267: In place of alpha's <hi>And</hi>, beta reads <hi>For</hi>, which is also the reading of <hi>Cx</hi>.</note> In his bosom he bare a thyng<expan>e</expan><app><lem>&</lem></app><note>R.16.267: Beta omits <hi>&</hi>. <hi>Cx</hi> agrees with alpha.</note> þ<expan>a</expan>t he blessed euer<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> And I loked on his lappe  a laȝar lay þer<expan>e</expan><seg>-</seg>Inne .<note>R.16.268: Immediately following the last word of this line, there is an indecipherable, tiny note written in a later hand, accompanied by a small vertical bar.</note></l>
<l> Amonges patriarkes and p<expan>ro</expan>phetes  <app><lem>pleyede</lem></app><note>R.16.269: R's use of the preterite is unique in the <hi>B</hi> tradition (a few copies of <hi>C</hi> attest a preterite here); most beta copies have <hi>pleyinge</hi> (which is also the reading of <hi>Cx</hi>); but cf. F's <hi>pleyende</hi> and L's <hi>pleyande</hi>. These forms of the present participle suggest that R's mistake may have amounted to nothing more than overlooking a nasal bar in his copytext.</note> to<seg>-</seg>gyderes .</l>
<l> ¶ What a<seg>-</seg>waitest þow q<expan>uo</expan>d he  & what <app><lem>wildestow</lem></app><note>R.16.270: The other <hi>B</hi> copies show <hi>woldestow</hi>, which is also the reading of a majority of <hi>C</hi> witnesses (primarily among the P family). Many X family witnesses read <hi>wost thow</hi>.</note> haue .</l>
<l> ¶ I wolde wite q<expan>uo</expan>d I þo  what is in ȝour<expan>e</expan> lappe .</l>
<l> ¶ Lo q<expan>uo</expan>d he and lete me se  lorde mercy I seyde .</l>
<l> Þis is a present of muche pris  what prince schal it haue .</l>
<l> ¶ It is a p<expan>re</expan>ciose p<expan>re</expan>sent q<expan>uo</expan>d he  ac þe pouke it hath atached .</l>
<l> And me þer<expan>e</expan><seg>-</seg>with q<expan>uo</expan>d þat <app><lem>weye</lem></app><note>R.16.275: <hi>Weye</hi>, "person, being, man." Beta has <hi>man</hi>.</note>  may no wed vs quite .</l>
<l> Ne no buyrn ben our<expan>e</expan> boruȝ  ne bryng<expan>e</expan> vs fram his daunger<expan>e</expan> .<note>R.16.276: Alpha omits the following line attested by beta manuscripts (and in a slightly revised form by the <hi>C</hi> version):<lb/>
<hi>Oute of þe poukes pondfolde no meynprise may vs fecche</hi>.
<l> Til he come þat I carpe of  crist is his name .</l>
<l> Þat schal deliuer<expan>e</expan> vs sum day  out of þe deueles power .</l>
<l> And better<expan>e</expan> wed for vs legge  þan we ben al worthi .</l>
<l> Þat is lif for lif  or ligge þus euer<expan>e</expan></l>
<l> Lollynge in my lappe  til suche a lorde vs feche .</l>
<milestone>fol. 85rI</milestone>
<l> ¶ Allas thouȝte I þo  þat is a longe a<seg>-</seg>bydynge .<note> These three lines are from alpha. They are judged by Kane-Donaldson as well as by Schmidt to be spurious. Kane-Donaldson hypothesize loss of the authentic lines through similarity of line heads (KD16.270 = <hi>Allas I</hi>; KD16.274 = <hi>I</hi>). This rationale seems unlikely and also depends on the assumption that alpha later noticed the loss and generated the spurious lines as a replacement. In reality, the alpha version of these lines was probably deliberate, motivated by censorship of material deemed to be theologically dangerous (in beta, sin is said to be able to hinder the might of God's mercy). Beta (as well as the <hi>C</hi> version, in a slightly revised form) reads: <lb/>
<hi>Allas I seyde þat synne so longe shal lette <lb/>
Þe myȝte of goddes mercy þat myȝt vs alle amende <lb/>
I wepte for his wordes with þat sawe I an other <lb/>
Rapelich renne forth þe riȝte waye went</hi>
. <lb/>
The last of these four lines was omitted by alpha. The text of alpha is not entirely clear, since R differs significantly from F, which reads as follows: <lb/>
<hi>Allas þowhte y þoo þat is a long a-bydynge <lb/>
& oon on foote sewede hym for he softely wente <lb/>
& he be-took hym þe targe as tyȝt trewly to me it telle</hi>
<l> And sued hym for he softe ȝede .</l>
<l> Þat he toek vs as tit  ac trewly to telle .</l>
<l> I afrayned hym furste  fram whennes he come .</l>
<l> <app><lem>What</lem></app> he hiȝte and whider he wolde  and whithliche<note>R.16.286: R's form here, <hi>whithliche</hi>, is unique in the <hi>B</hi> tradition but is identical with the spelling found in <hi>Cx</hi>. Though the form is not semantically distinctive, its occurrence in R is phonologically of interest and is likely a relict.</note> he tolde .</l>