fol. 96rI
Passus vicesimus de visione vt supraR.20.0: At the top left of
fol. 96r, an early modern italic hand, probably the same as that found at the bottom of fol.
95v, adds the passus heading.
Passus
vicessimus
wenyng is no
wisdom
R.20.8KD.20.33α-34
Homo proponit & deus disponit
and gouerneth alle . Alpha's and beta's line
division differ here. Beta reads as follows:
Homo proponit & deus disponit & gouerneth alle good vertues
Ac nede is next hym for anon he meketh. The C manuscripts also show considerable variation in how this series of lines is divided.
Homo proponit & deus disponit & gouerneth alle good vertues
Ac nede is next hym for anon he meketh. The C manuscripts also show considerable variation in how this series of lines is divided.
And as lowe as a lamb for lakkynge
þatR.20.10:
Beta reads of þat; a majority of the P family of C
manuscripts agrees here with beta, but the X family and some P manuscripts agree with
alpha. hym nedeth .
¶ For nede maketh nede fele nedes lowh herted .R.20.11: This line is omitted by beta but attested by the C
witnesses.
R.20.12KD.20.38
FilosofresR.20.12:
Beta reads Wyse men, taking the line to alliterate on /w/. However, Cx agrees here with alpha. forsoke welth for thei wolde be nedy .
And woneden wel
elenglyR.20.13:
For R's wel elengly (cf. F's wol elengely), beta reads
in wildernesse. Cx agrees here with alpha.
and wolden nouȝte be riche .
R.20.16KD.20.42
So he was nedyR.20.16:
This phrase is transposed in beta as So nedy he was; F reads He was so needy. The P family of C manuscripts agrees with F on
this phrasing, but the X family agrees with R. as seyth þe boke
in many sundri places .
¶ Whan ned hadde vnder-nomeR.20.25: At this
point F and most beta manuscripts include a direct object, me; but R
shares the omission with O, while M supplies the missing pronoun above the line. The same
omission of me is seen in three of the best X family manuscripts of C: manuscripts XYcUc. þus anon I fel a-slepe .
R.20.28KD.20.54
Turned it vp-so-doun and ouertilthR.20.28:
R's spelling here is unique (cf. the comments on this lection in the Introduction III.2.2.10, but the meaning is likely to be
identical with that found in all the other B manuscripts, which read tilte. Cx has tulde. þe rote
.
And madeR.20.29:
Beta omits made but the C witnesses include
it. fals springe and sprede & spede mennes nedes .
Fryers
And religiousesR.20.33:
This plural form is unique to R; beta and F both show the singular, as does the C version. reuerensed hym and
rongen here belles .
fol. 96vI
And alle þe couent camR.20.34:
R's reading, cam, is unique among the B copies; F has
cam holly; beta reads forth cam. Among the C manuscripts at this point, the P family reads þo cam
but the X family agrees exactly with R. to welcome aR.20.34:
For R's a, both beta and F read þat. Among the C manuscripts, the P family and several of the X family agree with the B majority; however, a majority of the X family, including the most
reliable copies, agrees with R's reading. tyraunt .
R.20.36KD.20.62
Whiche foles were gladdereR.20.36: Beta reads wel leuer. The C manuscripts agree here with alpha. to deye þan to lyue .
And þat weR.20.39:
For alpha's we, beta reads were. Cx agrees with beta. mylde men and holy þat non meschef
dradden .
And what kynge þat hem conforted knowynge
hem gyleR.20.41:
For alpha's gyle, beta reads any while. Cx agrees with alpha. .
R.20.44KD.20.70
And pride it bare boldely aboute .R.20.44:
There is a diagonal smudge of uncertain origin between the <e> of aboute and the terminal punctus.
Ouer kynde cristene and cardinalesR.20.47:
R's plural is unique in the B tradition; both F and beta read the
singular cardynale. Among C copies, though
manuscripts EcRcMcVcNc agree with R, Cx agrees with the B majority. vertues .
R.20.52KD.20.78
And crie we onR.20.52:
For alpha's on, beta reads to. Cx
agrees with alpha. alle þe comune þat þei come to vnite .
And sendeR.20.55:
Only G agrees with R in reading an apparent present tense here; all other B manuscripts read sent. However, in light of the morphological and
phonological ambiguities discussed in the Introduction III.2.2.10, and since R20.54 clearly depicts a situation in the preterite, it may
well be that the R scribe intended sende here as a preterite. Although
several C copies (DcQScFc) share the RG reading, Cx
agrees with the B majority. forth his forreores feueres
& fluxes —
After kniȝteR.20.65:
In place of R's truncated kniȝte, which clearly involves an omission,
beta reads conforte a knyghte. The omission appears to have occurred in
alpha, with F attempting a typical repair by fleshing out a komely knyght.
Cx agrees with beta, and no C manuscript shows a
comparable error to that attested by the alpha manuscripts. to come and bere
his banere .
fol. 97rI
Alarme alarme quod þat lord ech lyf kepe
his owene .R.20.66: After this line, the R scribe failed to leave a blank line, his usual custom
for dividing verse strophes. No reason beyond oversight is apparent.
¶ ÞanneR.20.67:
Beta begins this line And þanne; the C manuscripts
agree with alpha. mette þise men er mynstralz miȝt pipe .
Elde þe horelR.20.69:
Kane-Donaldson thought that the <l> of R's horel (= "whoremonger")
was inserted later. The ink color is identical to that used by the R scribe, though the
character form is much more compressed than his typical final <l>, so the likelihood is
that he himself added the character, possibly even before copying the next line, in order to
"correct" R to the alpha reading also found in F. Beta shows hore, which
is also the reading of C. One would normally assume, when confronted by
such an array, that the beta / C reading is authorial; however, in this
instance it would be easy to argue that their shared phrase, Elde þe hore,
is not only a classical example of an "easier reading" (because stereotypical) but that the
initial omission of final <l> in R's transcription offers evidence of another motive
that may explain the widespread presence of the dominant lection: censorship.
he was in vaunt-wardeR.20.69:
Following in, R uniquely omits þe. The C manuscripts here agree with the B majority. .
¶ Deth cam driuende after and al to duste pdaschte .R.20.74: Once more, R began with the correct reading, paschte (cf.
beta's passhed and Cx's paschte)
but was "corrected" by Hand2 to the erroneous reading attested in F. The likeliest cause for
this seemingly bizarre series of "corrections" (cf. R5.178 and R18.53) is that Hand2 was
comparing R to a debased alpha copy; in this particular instance, the scribe of that debased
copy would have found daschte appealing on grounds of extra alliteration
(aa|aa) as well as greater familiarity.
R.20.76KD.20.102
Lered ne lewed he leftR.20.76:
Beta reads let. Cx agrees with alpha. no man
stande .
Many a louelyR.20.78:
Here R shows a unique omission: the other B and C
witnesses attest louely lady. and lemmanesR.20.78:
Once more, R shows a unique reading (relative to its B cousins): most of
them attest lemmanes of knyghtes. F shows an entirely
unique half-line. However, in this instance, Cx agrees with R.
kniȝtes .
With vntidyR.20.93:
At this point, beta reads his vntydy. Cx agrees with
alpha. tales he tened ful ofte .
Consience and his companye of holy kerkeR.20.94:
Alpha is responsible for correctly alliterating kyrke, and is joined by Cr
in that reading. The remaining beta and almost all C witnesses attest
either chirche or cherche. þe techeres .R.20.94:
After this line, the R scribe failed to leave a blank line, his usual custom for dividing
verse strophes. No reason is apparent.
R.20.96KD.20.122
Ouercome consience and cardinalesR.20.96:
Once more (cf. R20.47), R's rendering of this word as a plural is unique; the other B manuscripts attest the singular, cardynal. Among C copies, though manuscripts EcMcNc agree with R, Cx
agrees with the B majority. vertues .
And armed hym in auarice & vngriselicheR.20.97:
R's vngriseliche is unique; cf. beta's hungriliche and F's vngryly. R's form is not found in any C manuscript; moreover, the sole attestation for the word in
MED, s. v.
ungriseliche, is from this passage. MED offers a possible
gloss of "Not hideously, sumptuously" but also notes that it may be merely an error for the
commonly attested form, hungriliche. liuede .
fol. 97vI
R.20.100KD.20.126
Symonye hym seudeR.20.100: R uniquely deploys this apparent nonsense word; almost all other B manuscripts read sent. However, on the basis of R's
apparent metathesis of a very plausible reading unanimously attested in C manuscripts, Kane-Donaldson proposed emending B to that
reading, suede. to assaile consience .
And boldliche bare adoune with many a
redeR.20.106: In place of alpha's rede, beta and Cx correctly alliterate with briȝte. noble .
And in-toR.20.110: Beta
copies (except for Hm, which agrees with alpha), read to. Among the C manuscripts, the P family agrees with beta while the X family agrees with
alpha. þe arches in haste he ȝede anon after .
R.20.112KD.20.138
For a menyuere mantelR.20.112: Beta reads mentel of menyuere. Cx
agrees with alpha. he made lele matrimonie .
Departen ar deth cam and a deuosR.20.113: Beta reads & deuos where alpha attests and a deuos. Cx agrees with alpha. schupte .
¶ Allas quod consience and cride þo wolde
crist of graceR.20.114: R uniquely omits his before grace. Cx agrees with the B majority. .
Þat coueityse were cristene þat is so
kene to fiȝte .R.20.115: For alpha's to fiȝte, beta reads a
fiȝter. Cx agrees with alpha.
R.20.116KD.20.142
And bolde and abydynge þe whileR.20.116: In place of alpha's þe while, beta has while. Cx is uncertain here since the manuscripts are almost
evenly divided, with members of both major families supporting alpha and others agreeing with
beta. However, those that agree here with alpha include most of the best copies of both X and
P groups. his bagge lasteth .R.20.116: After this line, the R scribe failed to
leave a blank line, his usual custom for dividing verse strophes. No reason is
apparent.
Consience and conseil he counted it folye .R.20.121:
After this line, the R scribe failed to leave a blank line, his usual custom for dividing
verse strophes. No reason is apparent.
And calleR.20.125: For alpha's calle, beta reads either kille (the lection found in WCrCO) or, more likely, culle (the
reading of LM). The latter reading is also that of the C version. All
three choices are textually and theologically viable, but the agreement of LM with C probably indicates the authorial original. alle erthly
creature saue consience one
Lif seith
occideR.20.126: For R's non-alliterating seith occide, F has seyde occide, but beta (agreeing here with C) reads leep asyde. and lauȝte hym a lemman .
R.20.132KD.20.158
On þat muche wrouȝteR.20.132: Here alpha omitted a word; cf. the phrase from beta and the C version: moche wo wrouȝte.
slewthe was his name
fol. 98rI
R.20.136KD.20.162
On tohomme to-tongge
ateynte at vch a queste .R.20.136: After this line, the R scribe failed to leave a blank line, his
usual custom for dividing verse strophes. No reason is apparent.
For care consience þo criedencriedR.20.139: R's plural form for this line's verb is unique error. vppon elde
.
R.20.140KD.20.166
And badR.20.140: After bad, alpha omits hym, witnessed
by beta and the C version. fonde to fiȝte and afere wanhope
.
And gaf hym goelgo[ld] goed wone þat gladede here hertesR.20.145: R's plural possessive in this phrase is unique among the B manuscripts; both beta and F read his herte. However, all but six
of the C manuscripts agree with R's reading. .
R.20.148KD.20.174
And toR.20.148: Beta omits to. More than half a dozen of the P family
manuscripts of C concur with alpha on this reading, but the
rest—and all of the X family—agree with beta's omission. driue awaye
deth with dayesR.20.148: R's dayes occurred as an error in alpha for dyas, witnessed in beta and in Cx. and dragges .R.20.148:
After this line, the R scribe failed to leave a blank line, his usual custom for dividing
verse strophes. No reason is apparent.
¶ And in hope of his hele gode herte hente .R.20.154: The Bx phrase is herte he hente; Bo and Cot also omit he, but F includes it. Cx agrees with the B majority.
R.20.156KD.20.182
Þe companye of conforte men clepeden it
sum-tyme .R.20.156: After this line, the R
scribe failed to leave a blank line, his usual custom for dividing verse strophes. No reason
is apparent.
¶ And elde anon after hymR.20.157: Where alpha reads hym, most beta copies read me. Cx agrees with alpha. and
ouer myn hede ȝede .
So harde he ȝede ouer myn hede it
wol be sene euere .R.20.159: After this line, the R scribe failed to
leave a blank line, his usual custom for dividing verse strophes. No reason is
apparent.
He buffeded me aboute þe mouthe & bet out my wange tetheR.20.165: The beta version of this b-verse is uncertain but is likely to have been
that now attested in LMCr: & bett out my tethe. F reads the verse as R
does, except that F's verb is the uniquely represented buscht. The reading
of Cx agrees with R.
p iijus
fol. 98vI
nota
R.20.168KD.20.194
And wischede welR.20.168: Cf. beta's ful and F's often. Cx agrees with R. witterly þat I were in
heuene .
¶ And wasR.20.173: For alpha's was, beta reads as. Cx agrees with beta. I seet in þis sorwe I say how kende
passed .
R.20.176KD.20.202
Lo elde þe hore hauethR.20.176: R's inflection for this
verb is unique among B copies, but manuscripts RcMcQScZNc of C show the same form, haueth. F, beta, and Cx all attest hath.
my lif
seyeR.20.176: R's seye is unique; both F and beta read biseye, as does Cx. The preceding phrase in R, my
lif, is from alpha; beta and Cx read me.
.
Awreke me ȝif ȝoure wille be
for I wolde be hennes .R.20.177: After this line, the R scribe failed to leave a blank line, his
usual custom for dividing verse strophes. No reason for this omission is apparent.
¶ If þow wilt ben IwrekeR.20.178: R's form for this verb is unique among B copies but closely resembles the spelling favored in many C manuscripts, awreke. wende into vnite .
R.20.180KD.20.206
And loke þow cune sum crafte ar þow come
þennes .R.20.180: After this line, the R scribe failed to leave a blank line, his usual custom
for dividing verse strophes. No reason for this omission is apparent.
¶ ConseilethR.20.181: R's inflection for this verb is unique among B copies,
but most C manuscripts agree with R. F and beta attest Co(u)nseille. me kende quod I what crafte beR.20.181: R's be is unique; beta reads is while
F rephrases the entire b-verse as what craft y myȝhte leerne. Though
several C manuscripts agree with beta, Cx agrees
with R. best to lerne .R.20.181: After this line, the R scribe failed to leave a blank
line, his usual custom for dividing verse strophes. No reason for this omission is
apparent.
love
¶ Lerne to loue quod kende
and leueR.20.182: Cr joins alpha in omitting of after this verb. The other
beta copies include it, reading leue of alle othre.
Cx agrees with Cr and alpha in reading simply leef alle
othere. alle othere .R.20.182: In the left margin opposite this line, in a black,
late-medieval cursive hand, the word love appears.
R.20.184KD.20.210
And þow loue lellyR.20.184: At the end of this a-verse, the beta manuscripts interject quod he. Cx agrees with alpha in omitting the phrase.
lakke schal þe neuere .
WedeR.20.185: In place of alpha's Wede ne worldly mete, beta reads Mete ne wordly wede; Cx agrees with alpha's
phrasing. ne wordly mete while þi lif lasteth .
And þere be conseile of kende comsedR.20.186: R here omits any reference to the subject; cf. beta's I
comsed and F's he comsed; F's reading suggests an inept attempt to
restore a word sensed as grammatically necessary. Among the C copies,
RcMcQScZFc read the b-verse as beta does, while the majority agrees with R. However, it is
clear that, unlike any B manuscript, Cx positioned
the pronoun reference in the a-verse: And y bi conseil of kynde. to
rome .
R.20.188KD.20.214
And þere was constableR.20.188: Again R omits a stave (cf. conscience constable, the
reading of beta and of Cx), presumably reflecting an error in alpha
since F tries to patch up the same omission with he was mad a
cunstable. cristene to saue .
R.20.192KD.20.218
Proude prestes come with hym passynge an hundreth .R.20.192: Beta's b-verse breaks the alliterative pattern of the line, reading the
b-verse as moo þan a thousand. Although two C
manuscripts—P2Fc—agree with beta's reading (presumably
through lateral contamination), Cx agrees exactly with alpha's
b-verse.
fol. 99rI
And hadden almoste vnite and holinesse adowne .R.20.201:
After this line, the R scribe failed to leave a blank line, his usual custom for dividing
verse strophes. No reason for the omission is apparent.
Þat þei come for noR.20.207: Erroneous no appeared in alpha. C
manuscripts support beta witnesses here in omitting it. coueytise to haue
cure of soules .
And sitthen þei chosen chele and cheytifteR.20.210: F is
uniquely garbled in this b-verse, reading this variant as chastite. The
most commonly attested reading in beta manuscripts at this point is cheitif (MCrHmCO); but the original beta reading is probably that of LW, which agrees
with R and Cx: cheytifte. The widespread misreading
of this word is probably owed to its comparative rarity relative to the adjective—as
well as to the unexpected syntax. pouerte .
Late hem chewe as þei chese and charge hem with no cure
.R.20.211:
Alpha omits the following two lines, which are attested by beta and by Cx:
For lomer he lyeth þat lyflode mote begge
Þan he þat laboureth for lyflode & leneth it beggeres.
For lomer he lyeth þat lyflode mote begge
Þan he þat laboureth for lyflode & leneth it beggeres.
¶ Consience of þis conseileR.20.214: Immediately after conseile, beta adds þo. Though a number of P family manuscripts (RcMcQScZWaFcNc) agree with alpha in
omitting þo, the word seems clearly attested in all other C manuscripts. comsed for to lauȝwe .
R.20.224KD.20.252
Frere franceys and dominik foR.20.224: Neither MED nor OED2, s. v.
for, cites an example of fo as viable for the
preposition signified here, but it occurs in R in four widely separated contexts (cf. R2.64,
R14.60, and R15.379) and probably represents an instance of idiolect apocope.
loue to be holy .
¶ And ȝif ȝe coueyte cure kende
wol ȝow telle .R.20.225: For alpha's telle, beta reads teche.
Cx agrees with alpha's reading.
R.20.228KD.20.256
And nempned hemR.20.228: Beta omits alpha's hem, but Cx
includes it.
names and neweR.20.228: Beta transposes the alpha phrase to newe and. None of the
C manuscripts attests newe in the line in either
position.
nombreR.20.228: R's uninflected verb form is a unique error; F, beta, and C all attest noumbred. þe sterres .
Quis numerat multitudinem stellarum .R.20.229: R's Quis is unique; all other B and C manuscripts read Qui. R's
complete omission of much of this Latin citation is unique among the B
witnesses; O shares R's gap for the initial part of the omission, a phrase that beta renders
as & omnibus eis (cf. F's & omnia
eis). The most interesting feature of the attestational array for the B manuscripts here is that the C-version's citation
of this text agrees completely in its shape with that of R.
Kynges and kniȝtes þat keptenR.20.230: R's preterite form is unsupported by any other B copy;
the others all show kepen. Nevertheless, though most C witnesses agree with beta, three of the most authoritative X family manuscripts
(XIP2) agree with R's preterite. and defenden .
Han officeres vnder hymR.20.231: R is joined by Bm and Bo in reading hym, but F agrees with beta and with Cx on the plural
pronoun, hem. and vch of hem
certeyne .
Wil no tresorere taken hymR.20.233: Once more F agrees with beta in reading the plural pronoun (hem) against R's singular; however, the entire phrase in which the pronoun occurs (take hem wages) has been corrupted in beta to read hem
paye. The C version reads the phrase in exact agreement with
F. wages trauaile þei neuer so sore .R.20.233: The
final punctuation here appears ambiguous because it has been partially rubbed away; it may
have been a punctus elevatus originally. After this line, the R scribe omits his customary
practice of inserting a blank line to divide poetic strophes, presumably because the next
line is the last one ruled for this side.
fol. 99vI
Piloures and pike-herneys
in vch a parischeR.20.235: The beta variant is place. C attests
the same variant as alpha. acursed .
HeraudeR.20.237: Alpha is responsible here for a botched a-verse (apparently alpha omitted
ordre, leaving Her ande, which R took to be Heraude). F attempted a complete revision of alpha's a-verse to Þer is in here rewle wel. Beta and C witnesses have Her ordre and her reule wil. here reule wol to haue a
certeyne nombre .
It is wikked to wage ȝow ȝe wexeth of onR.20.241: Cf. R's of on to F's ouer ony and
beta's out of. Once again it appears that R probably reproduces an alpha
error here, which F attempts to correct. The C reading is the same as
beta's.
nombre .
¶ He lyethR.20.249: Beta reads And ȝit he lyeth. Cx agrees with alpha. as I leue þat to þe lewed so
precheth .
BethR.20.254: R's Beth is a unique form but semantically
equivalent to the predominant Ben. curatoures calde to
know and to hele .
Alle þat ben here parshiens
penauncesR.20.255: Beta reads the singular, penaunce. The C manuscripts are divided between these two options, with members of both major
families attesting each reading.
enioynen .
R.20.256KD.20.284
And bethR.20.256: Beta reads shulden be. The C
manuscripts agree with alpha. Once more, only R shows the verb form as beth. aschamed in here shrifte ac shame maketh
hem wende .
Ȝerne of forȝyuenesse or
lengere
yere leue .R.20.259: R's unmarked possessive (=yere) is completely unique. For
the entire phrase, the beta majority reads ȝeres loone. F's bleve seems an obvious editorial conjecture. R's leue is
uniquely shared with L and is almost certainly the original B reading.
It is shared with Cx.
And maketh hym merie with other menR.20.261: R's unmarked possessive (=men) is unique among the B copies; however, though a majority of C manuscripts
agrees with beta on mennes, a significant group of good copies in both
families agrees with R. godes .
And so it fareth with muche folke þat to
freresR.20.262: Though Cr reads this phrase in agreement with alpha, beta apparently had
to þe freres. Cx concurs with
alpha. shriueth .
confession made to Fryers
As sisoures and executoures þei schulR.20.263: Beta reads wil. Cx agrees with
alpha.
ȝyue þe freres .
R.20.264KD.20.292
A parcel to preye for hem & make hemR.20.264: The other B manuscripts read hemself
here, but Cx agrees with R's reading; the alliterative pattern of the
archetypal b-verse fails in C as well as B,
probably through an error in line division.
murie .
With residue & remenauntR.20.265: R omits two determiners from the beta (and presumably Bx) phrase, which reads With þe residue and þe remenaunt. Cx shows a major difference here,
completely omitting þe residue and.
þat other men by-swonke .
fol. 100rI
R.20.272KD.20.299
¶ Of alle tale telleres and tytereres anR.20.272: R's an is unique in the B tradition;
beta has in; F reads of. However, among the C manuscripts, most of the X family agrees with R. The P family and several
members of the X family agree with beta. ydel .
ItD
Ipocrisie and he an harde sawte þei made .R.20.273: In
the right margin, there are remains of a pen trial, in light brown ink.
Dvd
And wounded wel wikkedliche many aR.20.275: Though Cr1W agree with alpha on the presence of a here, the other beta copies omit it. A few C copies
agree with beta on this point, but Cx agrees with alpha. wise
techere .R.20.275: As with R20.273, here there are remains of a pen trial, in the
same hand.
R.20.276KD.20.303
Þat with consience acorded and cardinalesR.20.276: R's use of the plural form here is unique in the B
tradition (cf. R20.47, 96); the other B witnesses read cardinale. Manuscripts EcRcMcNc of the C tradition agree with R,
but Cx agrees with the B majority.
vertues .
Go salue þo þat syke wereR.20.278: In contrast to alpha's preterite form (cf. F's weren),
beta reads ben. Cx agrees with alpha.
and thoruȝ synne ywounded .
Ȝif any surgien were
in þe segeR.20.283: In place of alpha's in þe sege (also attested by Cr),
beta reads þe segge. Cx agrees with alpha.
þat softer coude playstre .
R.20.284KD.20.311
Sir lifR.20.284: Beta reads lief for alpha's lif, but
the alpha reading is supported by Hm and Cr as well as by Cx. The
Russell-Kane edition emends this reading, replacing it with that of beta. to lyue in
leccherie lay þere and groned .
For fastynge of o fridayR.20.285: All other B manuscripts read a
fryday. Although one manuscript of C shows the same numerical
determiner as R, Cx agrees with the B
majority. he ferde as he wolde deye .
QuatzR.20.289: R's spelling for this verb, quatz, is
anomalous and unique, probably attesting the Northeastern origins of the immediate scribe.
Both Bx and Cx read Quod.
contricioun to consience do hym come to
vnite .
R.20.292KD.20.319
Þen persone or parisch prest
penauncerR.20.292: R's penauncer is unique; beta has penytancere and F reads pentawncer. No C copy
supports R's lection. or bischope .
As a curatoure he were and
cam with his lettereR.20.299: Beta here shows a plural, lettres. The reading of Cx is uncertain; the P family agrees with beta while the X family agrees
with alpha's singular form. .
fol. 100vI
In contreyes þere he camR.20.301: The beta form of the verb is come. All beta copies except
W (which agrees with alpha in omitting the postpositional particle) read the phrase as come in. Cx agrees completely with alpha's
lection. confessiouns .R.20.301: R uniquely omits the end of this line, which in Bx
reads to here.
¶ I am am a surgyan
seyde þe frereR.20.309: The beta reading for alpha's frere is segge, presumably intended to resolve an anomaly in the line's alliteration. However,
Cx agrees with alpha. & salues can make .
But þow cunne anyR.20.315: R's any is unique in the B
tradition; cf. F's more and beta's somme. However,
though seven P family copies (RcMcQScZWaFc) read other, most C manuscripts agree with R. crafte þow comest nouȝt
hehe[r]-Inne .
¶ Hende speche heet pees þo R.20.321: Beta omits þo. However, Cx agrees with alpha. opene þe ȝates .
Late in frereR.20.322: R uniquely omits the determiner in the Bx phrase, þe frere. Only one C manuscript (Sc) duplicates this
error. and his felawe and make hem faire
chere
He may se and here her soR.20.323: Cf. F's er so. As the testimony of Cx suggests, this Bx line probably read as in R: He
may se and here her so may befalle. Surviving beta manuscripts read He
may se and here so it may bifalle. may befalle .
fol. 101rI
R.20.332KD.20.359
Þe plastres of þe persone and poudres
benR.20.332: R's ben is unique in the B
tradition; cf. F's byte and beta's biten. However, Cx agrees with R. to sore . There is a black ink
stain about 2 cm. long in the right margin beside these lines.
AndR.20.333: Among the B copies, And is unique to
R; beta and F read He. However, Cx agrees with
R. late hem liggen ouerlonge and lothe is to chaunge hem .
R.20.336KD.20.363
And gothR.20.336: R's reading is unique; F and beta show goth and. Nine C manuscripts, mostly of the P family, agree with
F and beta, but the majority of C witnesses, including most of the X
family, agrees with R. gropeth contricion and gaf hym a plaistre .
And wake for his wikked werkes as he wonedR.20.343: From the b-verse of beta (as he was wont
to done) and that of F (þat he was whont to
doone), as well as that of Cx (as he was woned bifore), it appears that R accidentally omitted alpha's was; nevertheless, F's general adroitness and eagerness to repair corruption make it
difficult to rule out the possibility that R's error is derived from an omission in alpha
itself. to done .
contricion
Þe frere with his fisyke þis folke hath soR.20.351: Beta omits so. Cx agrees with
beta. enchaunted .
To seke peres þe plowman þat pruyde myȝteR.20.355: Beta reads may. Cx agrees with
alpha. destruye .
And siththeR.20.359: Someone has scribbled
these replacements in modern pencil in the right margin opposite this
line.
And sithe heR.20.359: Although
the erasure here is thorough, with manipulation in Photoshop it is possible to make out the
probable original reading. gradde after grace til I gan a-wake .
William
Buttes
Passus ijus de dobest —
—
R.20.359:
Regarding the location and purport of this rubric, I have noted ("The Reliability of the
Rubrics in the B-Text of Piers Plowman," Medium Aevum
54 (1985): 214, n.11) that it "is an anomaly with no significance other than as an indication
of incidental contamination in the ordinatio of the MS. . . . It
appears at the very end of the text of Piers Plowman and would seem to be an
explicit, but this MS uses no explicits elsewhere and
there is no clear indication that the scribe even realized he had reached the end of the
entire poem." In actuality, the only manuscripts with an identical rubric are four C copies (XDcYcUc), which use the phrase as an incipit
for the final passus.
passus
ijus de dobest