I. Description of the Manuscript: Cambridge, Trinity College, MS B.15.17
S. xiv/xv. The texts are all in one hand, the English in Anglicana Formata, and an enlarged and somewhat formalised version of this as the display script for Latin lines, Latin words within English lines and for the Latin incipits in red. George Kane and E. Talbot Donaldson compare the hand of the Ellesmere manuscript,NGeorge Kane and E. Talbot Donaldson, eds., Piers Plowman: The B Version (London: Athlone Press, 1975, 2nd impression 1988), pp. 13-14. and A. I. Doyle adds that the script "in certain respects resembles that of a prolific Staffordshire scribe of the same period and in others that of the scribe of the Hengwrt and Ellesmere manuscripts of the Canterbury Tales."NA. I. Doyle, "Remarks on Surviving Manuscripts of Piers Plowman," in Medieval English Religious and Ethical Literature: Essays in Honour of George H. Russell, ed. Gregory Kratzmann and James Simpson (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1986), pp. 35-48 (quotation on p. 39). In a letter of 23 November 1999, Dr Doyle informs Thorlac Turville-Petre that the "prolific Staffordshire scribe" is the Prick of Conscience "Lichfield Master," found in Oxford, Bodleian Library, Rawlinson A.389, London, British Library, Harley 1205, Manchester, John Rylands, Eng. 50, London, College of Arms 57, and Cambridge, Trinity College 383 (R.3.8), but Dr Doyle now thinks that this shows only that "scribes arrived simultaneously at similar modes of an anglicana formata." Doyle further remarks that its opening illuminated capital "I" is "of late fourteenth century style, not with those features which appear in metropolitan work very soon after 1400."
147 vellum leaves (with two paper leaves at head and two at end). On iir (the second paper leaf) is written in a hand of the 17th century:
In this volume are
A Treatise on SinThe first of these titles is repeated on iiv and the second at the top of 131r.
There are two booklets, as follows:
|Booklet 1 (fols. 1-130):||William Langland, Piers Plowman, the B Version, chosen by Wright (hence the sigil W), Kane-Donaldson, and Schmidt as their base version.|
|begins "In a somer seson whan softe was þe sonne"|
|ends "And siþþe he gradde after Grace til I gan awake Explicit hic Dialogus Petri Plowman"NOther manuscripts of the B Version with this explicit are C, C2, G, L, M, O and Y.|
|Booklet 2 (fols. 131-47):||fols. 131r-147r Richard Rolle, Form of Living.|
|begins "In euery synful man or womman þat is bounden in dedly synne"|
|ends "þe grace of Iesu crist be wiþ þee and kepe þee Amen"|
|fol. 147r-v "Crist made to man a fair present" (IMEV 611)|
|ends "And loue in loue shal make fyn Amen"|
DoyleNA. I. Doyle, "Remarks on Surviving Manuscripts of Piers Plowman," in Medieval English Religious and Ethical Literature: Essays in Honour of George H. Russell, ed. Gregory Kratzmann and James Simpson (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1986), p. 39. notes that the last two items on fols. 131r-147v are an addition, their texts found together also in Huntington Library HM 127, and Ralph Hanna explores this further.NRalph Hanna III, Index of Middle English Prose, Handlist 1, A Handlist of Manuscripts in the Henry E. Huntington Library (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1984), 12-13; Ralph Hanna III, "Notes toward a Future History of Middle English Literature: Two Copies of Richard Rolle's Form of Living," in Chaucer in Perspective, ed. Geoffrey Lester (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999), pp. 279-300. Editors have shown that the versions of these items as recorded in the two manuscripts are closely related.NOn the Form of Living (sigla T2 and H) see the edition by S. J. Ogilvie-Thomson (1988), Richard Rolle: Prose and Verse, EETS 293 (Oxford, 1988), pp. lii-lxv, esp. p. lx. In the earlier edition by Hope Emily Allen, Writings Ascribed to Richard Rolle (London, 1927), Allen overlooks the text of the Form of Living in W. On "Crist made to man" (sigla T and P) see the edition by Carleton Brown, Religious Lyrics of the XIVth Century (Oxford, 1924), no. 90 and p. 273.
The binding is tight, but there are thick binding stubs of about six leaves dividing the two booklets (between fols. 130 and 131) and after fols. 16, 40, 64, 88 and 112 to gather groups of quires. The collation can be determined from the catchwords at the ends of quires 1-16 and 18, thus on the versos of fols. 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80, 88, 96, 104, 112, 120, 128, 138, boxed in red with some highlighting in red. Modern quire and folio numbers are in pencil.
1-168, 172 (ending at fol. 130, a booklet boundary), 188, 1910 (lacks 10).
Quires, folios and divisions of text correspond as follows:
|Two leaves at head, numbered i, ii|
|i: 8, ff. 1-8||WP.1-W2.12|
|ii: 8, ff. 9-16||W2.13-W3.220|
|iii: 8, ff. 17-24||W3.221-W5.98|
|iv: 8, ff. 25-32||W5.99-W5.543|
|v: 8, ff. 33-40||W5.544-W6.338|
|vi: 8, ff. 41-48||W7.1-W9.97|
|vii: 8, ff. 49-56||W9.98-W10.323|
|viii: 8, ff. 57-64||W10.324-W11.291|
|ix: 8, ff. 65-72||W11.292-W13.16|
|x: 8, ff. 73-80||W13.17-W14.43|
|xi: 8, ff. 81-88||W14.44-W15.153|
|xii: 8, ff. 89-96||W15.154-W16.10|
|xiii: 8, ff. 97-104||W16.11-W17.181|
|xiv: 8, ff. 105-112||W17.182-W18.292|
|xv: 8, ff. 113-120||W18.293-W19.311|
|xvi: 8, 121-128||W19.312-W20.286|
|xvii: 2, ff. 129-130 (booklet boundary).||W20.287-W20.385|
|xviii: 8, ff. 131-138||Form of Living, "In euery synful man...appetit of mete. And ofte þov"|
|xix: 10-1, ff. 139-147||Form of Living, "shalt be in qwaches as þow";N This is 1.448 in The Form of Living, ed. S. H. Ogilvie-Thomson, Richard Rolle: Prose and Verse, EETS 293 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988). "Crist made to man a fair present"|
|Two endleaves, numbered 147a and 147b.|
I.4 Physical Description:
Overall 290 x 190mm. The leaves have been cropped with some loss of marginalia (e.g. fols. 24v, 25v, 26v) and occasionally text (e.g. fols. 67v, 78r, 115r). There is no loss in the gutter, notwithstanding the apparent loss in a few of the photographs. Fol. 1r has dark stains at the edges from binding and is rubbed in the left margin leaving some text very faint but legible. Fols. 3-4 are creased down the centre. Otherwise the manuscript is in excellent condition.
I.5 Arrangement of Page:
Fols. 1r-130v (Piers) written in long lines, ruled (often very faintly, but for a clear example see fols. 53v-54r) for 33-35 lines per page, with a written space of 225-235 x 145-165mm. The prose text on fols. 131r-147r is written in double columns, with a written space of 235 x 135mm, with 34 lines per column.
The main body of English text is written in Anglicana Formata similar in its features to that of the Hengwrt-Ellesmere scribe.NSee A. I. Doyle and M. B. Parkes, "A Paleographical Introduction," in The Canterbury Tales. Geoffrey Chaucer. A Facsimile and Transcription of the Hengwrt Manuscript, with Variants from the Ellesmere Manuscript, A Variorum Edition of the Works of Geoffrey Chaucer, vol. 1, ed. Paul G. Ruggiers (Norman, Okla., 1979), pp. xix-xlix; A. I. Doyle, "The Copyist of the Ellesmere Canterbury Tales," in The Ellesmere Chaucer: Essays in Interpretation, ed. Martin Stevens and Daniel Woodward (San Marino, CA: The Huntington Library, and Tokyo: Yoshudo, 1995), pp. 49-67. The hand is expert, well formed, and generally uniform.
For headings and Latin lines the scribe uses a larger and bolder version of this script, with more or less of the broken minims and angled strokes characteristic of Bastard Anglicana.NSee the foot of fol. 3r, WP.132-7 for the more formal style of this script in the text. The same enlarged Anglicana (which we have for convenience regularly tagged as Bastard Anglicana) is used for some individual words within English lines. In most cases, but not always, the enlarged script is surrounded by a red box.NFor a list of "Words Emphasized" in manuscripts of the B Version, see C. David Benson and Lynne S. Blanchfield, The Manuscripts of Piers Plowman: the B-version (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1997). Those in W are listed on pp. 160-2, with comparative tables on pp. 238-313. Since there is some variety in size in his normal script, there are instances of words, both boxed and unboxed, where it is impossible to be certain that the scribe intended enlarged characters and where we have tagged according to our own judgment.
The <a> nearly always has a double compartment, and the single-compartment secretary version is very rarely used (fol. 24r, W5.64 "garte"I).NThe single-lobed <a> is found in the Hengwrt-Ellesmere scribe's side-notes, but very rarely in the formal script of the text. Doyle and Parkes suggest that its presence in the text "may be due to inadvertence." See A. I. Doyle and M. B. Parkes, "A Paleographical Introduction," in The Canterbury Tales. Geoffrey Chaucer. A Facsimile and Transcription of the Hengwrt Manuscript, with Variants from the Ellesmere Manuscript, A Variorum Edition of the Works of Geoffrey Chaucer, vol. 1, ed. Paul G. Ruggiers (Norman, OK: Pilgrim Press, 1979), pp. xxxv-xxxvi. There are three forms of <A>: much the most common is an enlarged version of the double-compartment <a>,I but there is also a single-compartment form with a curved head and angular bowl (e.g. fol. 47v, W9.16 "Anima"I), and a straight two-legged form used for various types of elaboration at the top of the page (e.g. fols. 10v,I 100vI). All three forms can be seen on fol. 11v.I
<D> may be an enlargement of the small letter (fol. 5v, W1.28 "Dide"I), or with a rounded back (fol. 4v, WP.209 "Deuyne"I), or with an open headstroke and a line through the bowl (fol. 4v, WP.224 "Dieu",I fol. 5v, W1.29 "Delited"I), or the form resembling the modern capital (fol. 9v, W2.40 "Domine"I). The round form of <e> is occasionally used at the end of a word (fol. 51v, W10.18 "wolle",I W10.27 "ille"I).
<H> is usually distinguished from <h> by a loop through the ascender and sometimes a looped tail (fol. 18v, W3.319 "Huntynge"I), but the distinction is not always clear (e.g. fol. 93v, W15.408, "He"I). <I> has a pronounced loop or hook;I <i> has a curved tick when in proximity to other minims.I
<M> is quite often used within the line. It is distinguished from <m> by a final tail curving to the left, though there may be no distinction in size. For several clear examples, see fol. 22v, e.g. W4.162I and W4.181.I
Long <r>I is often joined to the next letter, while the 2-shaped form of <r> is used particularly after <o> (fol. 69v, W12.122 "or",I W12.140 "Pastores"I).
Long <s>I is used medially, the sigma-shaped <s> at the beginning of words, and 8-shaped <s> at the end.I The last two appear in normal distribution on fol. 1r, WP.8 "bournes syde".I <S>I is a more-or-less enlarged form of sigma-shaped <s>.
<T>I is variable in form and often quite complex; the loop often circles back to the top stroke enclosing the whole letter (see fol. 1v for examplesI). There are two forms of <v> with the first stroke curving backwardI or forward.I The form of <w> is often elaborate and indistinguishable from <W>.I
The forms of <y> and <þ> are quite distinct, since the descender of <y> has a pronounced curve, so that the dot often written above it is unnecessary. The dot over <y> may take the form of a large curl (e.g. on fol. 56r "gilty" W10.271,I "worþy" W10.273,I "ywar" W10.287I). On the top line of fol. 4r the scribe has dotted <þ> in error (WP.167 "sheweþ"I). There are only two examples of the littera notabilior <Þ>, both on fol. 61v (W11.103 and 112). Otherwise the scribe uses <Th>.
There are often flourishes on final <-c>,I <-d>,I <-g>,I <-k>,I <-p>,I <-r>,I <-t>,I and bars through <-h>I and <-ll>;I for further description of these and the interpretation of them see Transcription of the Manuscript.
There is very little correction by the scribe. A few miswritten words are neatly erased with corrections overwritten, and missing words are occasionally inserted, see e.g. W20.60, W20.146. There is no subpunction, and there are no words crossed through, although at W19.156 a wrongly placed punctus has a line through it.
I.7 Decoration and Textual Presentation:
The largest textual division of Piers is the passus, clearly marked with a centred Bastard Anglicana Latin incipit in red enclosed in a decorative box and usually completed with a tremolo-like flourish with a knot.INThe heading of Passus 7 (fol. 41r) is without the flourish. The passus headings include the division of the poem into "Visio" (passus I-VII), "Dowel" (VIII-XIV), "Dobet" (XV-XVIII) and "Dobest" (XIX-XX). On the model of the Visio with its prologue, Dobet and Dobest are each allotted a preliminary passus, so that XV is headed "Passus xvus &c finit do wel & incipit do bet," and XVI follows with ". . . primus de Dobet"; XIX has ". . . incipit dobest," and XX ". . . primus de Dobest." This is also the scheme in L and Cr, though not in M. However, Dowel begins in confusion in W, with VIII as "viijus de visione & primus de Dowel," IX as ". . . primus de Dobet," and X as ". . . iius de Dowel," after which the scheme is dropped until XV. This probably reflects confusion in W's exemplar. L and M have similar headings for VIII and X, but they have nothing other than the passus number for IX (with an illegible guide for the rubricator in L). Cr makes only superficial sense, with VIII as ". . . inquisicio prima de dowell," IX as ". . . primus de dowel," and X as ". . . "secundus de dowel."NFor a study see Robert Adams, "The Reliability of the Rubrics in the B-Text of Piers Plowman," Medium Ævum 54 (1985), 208-31.
Each passus begins with a large ornamental capital. On fol. 1r is a fine illuminated capital "I" of 10 lines (70mm) with a vinet.I The initials at the head of each passus are in blue ink on a red background, typically measuring between 25mm x 25mm, but up to 32mm x 30mm (passus 8 on fol. 45r).I There are eight slightly smaller initials, typically measuring 20mm x 18mm, but up to 25mm x 25mm on fol. 4v, at the following points: WP.208 (fol. 4v),I W2.117 (fol. 10v),I W7.158 (fol. 43v),I W8.62 (fol. 46r),I W10.383 (fol. 58r),I W11.324 (fol. 65v),I W16.184 (fol. 99v),I W20.50 (fol. 124v).I Each of these marks a major turning point, usually relating to the dreamer's comments about his own experience, but in two cases, W2.117 and W16.184, introducing important new speakers. Ascenders at the top of the page are extended often with tremolo strokes as decoration. There are particularly elaborate versions of this top-of-page ornamentation with touches in red at, for example, fol. 40v (W6.310),I fol. 66v (W11.378),I fol. 112v (W18.264),I and fol. 116r (W19.20).I There are in a few cases similar decorations on letters at line-end, generally on <-s> at the end of a line of Latin, e.g. W7.42 (fol. 41v),I W8.21 (fol. 45r),I W9.196 (fol. 50v),I W11.185 (fol. 63r),I W11.230 (fol. 63v),I W11.313 (fol. 65r),I W14.227 (fol. 84r),I W16.254 (fol. 101r),I but there are also examples in English contexts, on "hungry" W6.197 (fol. 38v),I "clerkes" and "Iesus" W15.88 and 93 (fol. 87v).I
Piers is divided into verse paragraphs, with paraphs of blue and red, generally alternating though all blue on fols. 1r and 9r. Blank spaces are left between marked verse paragraphs and before and after Latin lines.NAt W14.66 and W15.22 the paragraph is marked by a space followed by a rubricated letter rather than a paraph. At W2.9 a paraph has been inserted in error; there is no preceding space. Doyle compares L, R, M, and Y, B-Text manuscripts that may come from a commercial London workshop but have west midland dialect characteristics.NA. I. Doyle, "Remarks on Surviving Manuscripts of Piers Plowman," in Medieval English Religious and Ethical Literature: Essays in Honour of George H. Russell, ed. Gregory Kratzmann and James Simpson (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1986), pp. 39-40. Double virgule guidemarks appear beside paraphs on top lines (e.g. on fols. 2v,I 60v,I 98r,I 116v,I) because in this position there was no preceding blank space to act as a guide. Rarely the double virgule appears with a paraph after a space (e.g. WP.11 (fol. 1r),I W2.160 (fol. 11v)I). On a few occasions it appears at the top of a page with a coloured letter instead of a paraph; e.g. fol. 4v (WP.198),I fol. 22r (W4.130),I fol. 34r (W5.602).I
The Latin lines or words are enlarged and usually enclosed in a box of red ink (W13.252 and 259 on fol. 77rI are exceptions to this), and frequently the first letter of the Latin is highlighted with a fleck of red. The boxed text is often completed with a flourish in the text ink, and the box itself flourished in red ink; there is a good example of both on fol. 23v (W5.40),I and on fol. 24r (W5.58)I where a final flourished <-s> is followed by a brown tremolo line-filler with a knot and a knotted red tremolo to complete the box.
The prose Form of Living is written in double columns. It begins on fol. 131r with a 3-line "I" (25mm x 20mm) in blue with red and blue flourishes extending the length of the top and left border. There is some use of top-of-page ornamentation. There are 2-line flourished initial letters to indicate major sections throughout the work, and smaller divisions are marked by paraphs alternating in red and blue. The double virgule to guide the paraph usually remains, with clear examples on fol. 132v col. 2, and fol. 140v col. 2. Letters following paraph signs are flecked in red. Some words and phrases are in enlarged Anglicana and are boxed in red; these may be Latin expressions (e.g. "Aue maria" on fol. 134r col. 1), or words highlighted as guides to the ensuing argument (e.g. fol. 140r foot of col. 2, fol. 142r col. 1-2). The scribe has written names and other significant items in the margin and boxed them in red: e.g. "Ierome" and "Bernard" on fol. 132r.I
The lyric "Crist made to man a fair present" begins a third of the way down the second column of fol. 147r, with a space between it and the end of the Form of Living. It starts with a 2-line flourished initial "C." Coloured capitals in alternating red and blue have been added over the letters in text-ink at lines 5, 11, 15, 19, 23, 27, 31, 33, 37 and 41, and the first letter of each line is touched in red. Rhyming groups are indicated by braces on the right.
Each line of Piers Plowman begins with a littera notabilior, and we have so interpreted those that are not distinct in shape from the small form of the letter. The caesura of Piers is regularly marked with a punctus. Occasionally the punctus is repeated in the line (W11.304), sometimes because the scribe has placed the first too early (e.g. in W19.156 where the first punctus is crossed through). Occasionally, also, the punctus is omitted (e.g. W11.6) or insufficient space is left for it, presumably because the scribe has forgotten it and inserted it afterwards. The same form of punctuation is used for the Latin lines more inconsistently, sometimes with a mid-line punctus and sometimes without (see W1.32-3). The punctus elevatus is occasionally used to punctuate the longer Latin quotations, e.g. W15.40 (fol. 86v). It is only twice used to mark the caesura, once after a boxed Latin quotation, W7.140 (fol. 43v), and once in a wholly English context, W6.146 (fol. 37v). The virgule is occasionally used to punctuate a list, more often in Latin, but sometimes also in English text, e.g. W12.34-5 (fol. 68r). On fol. 1r every line ends with a punctus, but thereafter the final punctus is found only very sporadically.
A nota (shaped like the punctus elevatus without its dot) is possibly used to mark direct speech in W4.67 (fol. 20v).I
In the prose Form of Living the punctus is used for syntactic pauses. There is very occasional use of the virgule (fol. 140v col. 1). The medial punctus is used in some lines of the lyric "Crist made to man a fair present."
A number of different hands contribute marginalia and other additions.
(i) In the right margin of fol. 1r a fifteenth-century scribe has written names which are partly legible, of which "vont" or "bont," "John" and "Rychard" are clear. The same hand has written "Jon Ryc" on fol. 87r between W15.44-5. At least some of the many scribbles at the end of the manuscript (fol. 147v) may be in the same hand, trying out different scripts, some quoting the text on that page, including "Sum be <...> and fyn," "loue thy nebur loue," "And loue in loue shal (or shill) make fyn Amen," "Soo muhe," and finally "low wher y ly my mother ys schilde and lytyll or nothyng y ywe."
(ii) On fol. 4r (against WP.195),I fol. 5v (W1.38),I and fol. 6v (W1.86)I a fifteenth-century hand has written the phrase "a feyrse."
(iii) At the foot of fol. 1v a contemporary hand has written "And heppyd stanys" (smudged),I prompted by the last words on that page. What is probably the same hand writes "haue m(er)cy" at the foot of fol. 28r, repeating the first words of W5.290.I
(iv) On fol. 32r a hand not much later than the text hand has copied W5.494 immediately below that line, in a darker ink that has blotted onto the facing page.I
(v) On fol. 56r a hand perhaps of the later fifteenth century has written an underlined "no(ta)" against W10.274 and 280.I Perhaps the same hand wrote similar notae on fol. 88r (W15.124)I and fol. 92r (W15.348),I and a boxed Latin note, "no(ta) q(uod) a(n)i(m)a h(ab)et ix no(m)i(n)a," in the lower left margin of fol. 86v.I On fol. 132v in the Form of Living is a Latin note probably in the same hand.I
(vi) On fol. 77r (against W13.271) a sixteenth-century hand has written "Stratford" in the right margin,I and on fol. 77v "1350" in the left margin.I
(vii) Other unidentifiable marginalia are on fol. 37v to the left of W6.154 a post-medieval "no(ta),"I on fol. 57r a "no,"I and fol. 59v a faint "no(ta),"I and on fol. 86v a smudged copy of the beginning of W15.22.I
(viii) Also unidentifiable is the hand (or hands) responsible for the numerous notae symbols in the margins usually to the right of the text line. The sign shows considerable variation in shape: it appears as a punctus elevatus without its point, an "n" followed by a horizontal stroke or loop (compare W5.200 with W5.204 on fol. 26v)I or a 7-shaped arrow (fol. 39v).INSee M. B. Parkes, Pause and Effect: An Introduction to the History of Punctuation in the West (Aldershot, 1992), and his comments on the diple, pp. 57-60, 303. Occasionally these mark sententiae, but more often there seems no obvious motivation for these notae. On a few leaves (e.g. fol. 45vI) almost every line is so marked. It seems unlikely that these were written by the main scribe; if so he was using a darker ink and wrote them at a later stage. They are distinct in shape from the main scribe's end-of-line fillers in the boxed Latin lines and the decoration of the red boxes themselves with their "n"-shapes with or without knots. These are in the brown ink of the text or in the red ink of the boxes. Whoever added the notae began on fol. 6v and finally gave up the practice after thus marking six of the first seven lines of fol. 72r (W12.262-7). The few marks on later folios are quite distinct and in the brown ink of the scribal hand (e.g. on fol. 116v against W19.60, on fol. 120v a punctus elevatus without its point against W19.282).
The binding is seventeenth-century leather, with on the front and back the arms of George Willmer, viz. between a chevron three eagles' heads between two wings expanded, surmounted by a crest of an eagle's head as in the arms, and the motto "Expertus Credo." The binding has five stations, with a bookplate of the arms of Trinity College on the inside front cover. The endleaves ii and 147b have a chalice watermark. There is a parchment binding stub inside the front and back cover from a fourteenth-century Latin document mentioning the name "Huysshe" frequently, as well as "Elizabeth vx<..>," "Johannem Eynsshe," and the place-names "Ludwell" and "Gaynsford." On the stubs bound in between fols. 130-1 is a fragment of a fifteenth-century English text in a hand of the late fifteenth/early sixteenth century, of which "towards the said Mr Fellowes & <...>ollen the said Samuell" can be read.
The manuscript was given to the college by George Willmer, JP for Middlesex, a major benefactor to Trinity College, who died in 1626.NMontague Rhodes James, The Western Manuscripts in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1900), i, pp. 480-1 (no. 359). Nothing is known of its earlier history.
I.12 Previous Descriptions:
C. David Benson and Lynne S. Blanchfield, The Manuscripts of Piers Plowman: the B-version (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1997), pp. 57-9, 159-63.
A. I. Doyle, "Remarks on Surviving Manuscripts of Piers Plowman," in Medieval English Religious and Ethical Literature: Essays in Honour of George H. Russell, ed. Gregory Kratzmann and James Simpson (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1986), pp. 35-48.
Montague Rhodes James, The Western Manuscripts in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1900), i, pp. 480-1 (no. 359).
George Kane and E. Talbot Donaldson, eds., Piers Plowman: The B Version (London: Athlone Press, 1975, 2nd impression 1988), pp. 13-14.
S. J. Ogilvie-Thomson (1988), Richard Rolle: Prose and Verse, EETS 293 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988), p. xl (T2).
II. Editorial Method
II.1 Transcription of the Manuscript:
We have expanded the scribe's regular abbreviations and suspensions. Resolved abbreviations appear in italics, or as roman characters where italics are used for Bastard Anglicana script. In English words the scribe uses a superscript <t> in þ(a)tI and w(i)t(h),I and indicates with a superscript vowel the omission of <r> before the vowel, as in c(ri)steneI or t(ra)uaille.INThe superscript for <ra> represents <a> alone in walsyngh(a)m (W5.231).I At the end and within a word, <er> is indicated by a loop, as in þ(er)toI or v(er)tue,I and <ur> by a superscript, as in faito(ur)s.I A bar through the descender of <p> represents either <per> or <par>, as in p(er)ilsI and P(ar)doners;I a loop through the descender indicates <pro>, as in p(ro)phetes,I while <re> is represented by either a backward or a forward loop after the <p>, as in P(re)ntices (W3.226),I and p(re)sent (W4.97).I A slanting line through long <s> represents <ser> as in s(er)uen.I A curved stroke over a vowel represents a nasal as in virtutu(m),I wo(m)men,I or felou(n).I The abbreviation of l(ett)res is indicated by a bar through <l> (W4.134);I the abbreviation of sp(irit)ualte is marked by a tilde over <u> (W5.150).I
It is not always easy to distinguish between meaningful abbreviations and meaningless ornamentation. Loops and curls on final letters are notoriously difficult to interpret. In particular, there are the flourishes on final <-c>,I <-d>,I <-g>,I <-k>,I <-p>,I <-r>,I <-t>,I and the bars through <-h>I and <-ll>.I Each of these needs to be considered separately.
We have taken final <r> with a curl to represent <re>, as often in your(e)I (which is elsewhere youre, only once your-self (W2.39)), or in nouns with <-er> suffix which are elsewhere spelt <-ere>, such as leder(e),I lyer(e),I maker(e),I Robber(e).I
Final <g> sometimes has a short horizontal stroke, and sometimes, especially after the ending <-yng>, it has a loop that is often quite pronounced, and even bigger than the <g> itself (e.g. W4.182 on fol. 22vI). But it may be very small (e.g. W4.131 on fol. 22rI) and difficult to distinguish from the simple horizontal stroke that sometimes completes the letter. The evidence on its significance is mixed. Gerunds and present participles may end in <-yng> without loop, but just as often in <-yng> with loop or in <-ynge>. There are two cases where the loop certainly represents <-e>: in brugg(e) (W5.611)I and segg(e) (W20.309),I since <-gg->, whether it represents the plosive or the fricative, is always followed by <-e> (as in the ten other cases of segge both noun and verb, iugge, ligge, sigge, etc.).N Kane-Donaldson who did not expand looped <-g> were obliged to "emend" brugg to brugg(e) (KD5.592), and segg to seg(e) (KD20.310). On this basis we initially determined always to expand looped <-g> to <-g(e)>. However, it became apparent that these two cases are exceptions and in all other cases where the scribe wanted final <-e> after <g>, he wrote it out. The scribe's use of final <-e> is highly patterned.NSee Linguistic Description, 2.1. Thus the adjective and adverb long is never written with looped <-g>. In the indefinite singular declension it is written long;NSee Linguistic Description, 2.4.1. in all other cases it is written longe. Similarly, monosyllabic nouns ending in a consonant may have an inflexional ending <-e> for a dative singular.NSee Linguistic Description, 2.2.3. The usage of the non-inflected form is inconsistent, but the inflected form in such cases always represents a dative. One of the nouns that follows this pattern is kyng. It is written 89x with <-g> without loop, and on several of these occasions it is dependent on a preposition so that a dative <-e> would be an option. There are five examples of kynge with final <-e> (W3.171, 3.189, 4.45, 4.100, 4.187), and on every occasion the ending can be accounted for as a dative. The fifteen examples of kyng with looped <-g> follow exactly the same pattern as if the <-g> were not looped; it is prepositional in six cases (W3.2, 3.121, 3.231, 4.131, 5.12, 7.167), and non-prepositional in nine cases (W1.49, 2.37, 3.105, 3.188, 4.3, 4.46, 4.190, 7.169, 15.455). The spelling of þyng is never with <-e>, 35 times with <-g> without loop, and three times with looped <-g>, two of them explicable as datives (W15.113, 17.287; contrast W10.219). On fol. 18r the name Agag is first written with a final <-g> that has a horizontal stroke rather than a loop (W3.267),I but on the second occasion the name ends in a <-g> with a small loop (W3.291),I where <-e> can hardly be intended. On the basis of these instances we finally decided not to expand looped <-g> except on the two occasions where it is necessary: brugg(e) in W5.611 and segg(e) in W20.309.
We can find no significance in the loops and downward strokes on final <-c>, <-d>, <-k> and <-t>. Looped <-t> often occurs at the end of Latin words, for example in third-person endings of verbs, such as facit on fol. 9r (W2.28) or nutriuit on fol. 81v (W14.85) where it can be nothing other than a flourish to end the line, and expansion is never required when it is used at the end of English words such as Baptist (W10.427). The downward stroke on <-c> is used for Marc on all six occasions; it is used for Luc on three out of five; in neither case, or in other cases where the stroke is used, are there occasions where the scribe has also written <-ce>.
Final <-p> occasionally has a tilde above it,I but its pattern of use suggests the tilde is not significant. For example, its use on the suffix <-ship> (OE scipe) might suggest significance:
felaweshipe: twice <-pe>, twice <-p> with tilde.
lordshipe: 15x <-pe>.
werkmanshipe: thrice <-pe>, once <-p> with tilde.
worshipe (n.): once <-pe>, once <-p> with tilde, once <-p> with no tilde.And yet ship (OE scip) occurs twice with a tilde where it is historically otiose and four times without. Bisshop (OE biscop) is never spelt with <-pe>, but twelve times with a tilde, and three times without. The <-p> with tilde is found once on sharp (W20.305) where the <-e> is not wanted since the adjective is indefinite sg.; of the two appearances of sharpe, the first (W18.41) is adverbial and the second (W18.424) is plural. It seems, therefore, unlikely that the tilde over <-p> was a meaningful sign on any occasion, and so it has not been marked in the text.NThe complete list of instances of <-p> with tilde is as follows: WP.78 Bisshop, WP.80 bisshop, WP.83 Bisshop, W2.209 felawship, W3.333 ship, W3.359 worship, W5.89 warp, W5.301 Bisshop, W5.371 warp, W6.152 bisshop, W10.308 werkmanship, W10.316 Anheep, W10.412 ship, W11.18 yeep, W11.24 felawship, W11.305 bisshop, W11.319 bisshop, W13.132 sop, W15.41 bisshop, W15.143 bisshop, W15.467 bisshop, W20.305 sharp, W20.318 bisshop, W20.326 bisshop.
There are twelve instances of final <-ll>, which is always written with a bar through it.I That might suggest that this is merely a scribal flourish at the end of a word. However, of 362 instances of plural "all," 361 are spelt alle and one all with barred <-ll>, indicating that in this instance at least the bar signifies <-e>; there are three examples of apparaill with barred <-ll>I against five of apparaille, while the other eight instances of barred <-ll> are of words that are not found with <-lle>. We have expanded to <-ll(e)> in all cases.
Barred <-h> is used frequently in the ending <-ssh>,I and sometimes in the endings <-ch>I and <-gh>.I The scribe is highly patterned in his use of <-e>, and so it is significant that there is no occasion where it is necessary to expand to <-h(e)>. For example, the monosyllabic adjective fressh would be expected to end in <-e> in the definite declension, as indeed it does in wiþ þi fresshe blood (W5.507); the three other examples are all of the indefinite adjective, of a fressh ryuer where the <-h> is not barred (W15.342), if it be fressh flessh, where the first <-h> is barred (W6.317), and For fressh flessh ouþer fissh, where the <-h> of fressh is not barred but the other two are (W15.442). The bar on englissh might indicate the old dative in phrases like on englissh(e); however, when the phrase occurs twice in a row: on englissh / In englissh (W14.281-2), the <-h> is barred on the first occasion and unbarred on the second. We conclude that when the scribe needs the <-e> he writes it out; thus all cases of plural "such" and "which" are written as swiche and whiche. We have therefore not expanded barred final <-h>, but medially we have interpreted it as an abbreviation in Ioh(a)n and in the standard brevigraphs for IesuI and Iesus.INIt is worth observing that in his recent edition of Hoccleve, J. A. Burrow argues on metrical grounds that the strokes added to final letters in Hoccleve's holograph are not to be expanded, with the exception of Hoccleve's flourish after <r> and the barred <ll>. See Thomas Hoccleve's Complaint and Dialogue, ed. J. A. Burrow, EETS 313 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999), pp. l-li. Hoccleve's language is London English Type III, and so a little later than W, but scribal practice is the same in this respect. See M. L. Samuels, "Chaucer's Spelling," in Middle English Studies Presented to Norman Davis, ed. Douglas Gray and E. G. Stanley (Oxford, 1983), pp. 17-37. The chapter is reprinted in The English of Chaucer and his Contemporaries, ed. J. J. Smith (Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press, 1989), pp. 23-37.
Common Latin words are often radically abbreviated. Thus Christus,I contra,I dominus,I fratre,I forms of habeo,I omnis,II quod,I quoque,I similisI and others are all abbreviated in the standard forms. For a good range of examples in one line see W10.304.I
For a somewhat fuller and less discursive list of abbreviations and suspensions used by the scribe, click here
We have not distinguished allographic forms, such as the three forms of <s>,III or the rarely used single-lobed <a> (fol. 24r, W5.64 "garte"I) from the double-lobed form. On the other hand, we have distinguished between <u> and <n> although the scribe does not always do so clearly, and we have noted occasions where there is a possibility of a different choice, such as lene instead of leue. The letter <z> has been printed for yogh in words such as artz, baptize and dozeyne, though the scribe has only one form for both values.
Our capitalisation follows the scribal use of litterae notabiliores, although there are some letters, in particular <w> and sigma-shaped <s>, where there is no clear distinction. We have interpreted such letters according to their context: thus they are capitalised at the beginning of the line, but printed as lower case within the line unless their enlarged size suggests otherwise. The use of an initial littera notabilior on some nouns is a feature of manuscripts of the Ellesmere-Hengwrt group.NSee A. I. Doyle, "The Copyist of the Ellesmere Canterbury Tales," in The Ellesmere Chaucer: Essays in Interpretation, ed. Martin Stevens and Daniel Woodward (San Marino, CA: The Huntington Library, and Tokyo: Yoshudo, 1995), p. 54.
We have recorded the marginal notae with a "nota" icon visible in the Scribal style sheet. These need to be distinguished from the main scribe's much more regular "n"-shapes that do not represent "n(ota)" at all, but are purely decorative, as part of the top-of-page decoration and as end-of-line fillers in the boxed Latin lines (in the text ink), and the decoration of the red boxes themselves (in which case they are in the same red ink); good examples of these may be seen on fol. 13r,I and in the passus heading on fol. 8v.I Since these are decoration, we have not recorded them.
The word-division of the manuscript is followed as far as practicable, though no attempt is made to represent the variety of spacing between words and letters. The interpretation of the scribe's word division, though it is generally unambiguous, is occasionally a matter of fine judgment. The scribe has a category of half-way house, in which a single word is written in two sections, with what might be interpreted as a very small space between them. This is usually the case with one-letter prefixes such as <a-> and the <y-> of the past participle. There is an example of this ambiguous division in ywroȝt in the last line of fol. 49r,I contrasting with the same word written three lines previously with an unambiguous space following the <y-> prefix.I The same ambiguity occurs in the writing of dowel, dobet and dobest (see W8.122-4, fol. 47rI). In our transcription we have ignored the tiny space. A hyphen in the transcription indicates a space in the manuscript within a word, or a compound or phrase conventionally hyphenated today; we have consulted OED in doubtful cases. Conversely, some phrases, in particular an heiȝ, at ese and at ones, are written as one word, anheiȝ, atese, atones. The scribal form appears in the Scribal and Diplomatic style sheets, the regularised form in the Critical style sheet.
Scribal punctuation is retained. For the most part this is entirely regular, consisting of a punctus to mark the half-line, with the occasional virgule or punctus elevatus, particularly in Latin lines.
The few insertions are recorded as such (e.g. W10.102, W13.259). Erasures made by scraping the parchment are recorded where they are certain (e.g. W1.27 and W19.445). Annotations by later hands are marked with a codicological note.
The boxing and enlarged script of a word within an English line is often an indication that the scribe (or, of course, his exemplar) took the word or phrase to be non-English, and we have been able to use this as a guide in the very imprecise process of determining whether to insert a "FOREIGN" tag. But it is only a guide.NTwelve manuscripts of the B Version highlight individual words by boxing, underlining or rubrication; see C. David Benson and Lynne S. Blanchfield, The Manuscripts of Piers Plowman: the B-version (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1997), p. 17. There is considerable variation among the manuscripts in words so treated; see the comparative tables, pp. 238-313. Clearly WP.224 (fol. 4v) Dieu saue dame Emme should be tagged as "foreign", especially as the phrase is in enlarged script and boxed.I But if dame Emme had occurred on its own, even if boxed and enlarged, we would not have described it as "foreign". The boxing of transgressoresI in W1.97 suggests that the word was still regarded as Latin, and MED with citations only from the fifteenth century gives support to this. Rather oddly, MED does not cite Langland's use, presumably on the grounds that it is not English, even though there are many words whose earliest forms are cited by MED from Latin or French documents. The scribe sometimes gives proper names this display treatment, especially if they have a non-English form such as Troianus (e.g. W11.145), or Diues (W17.267), but also thoroughly English names such as Douere (W4.133) are occasionally boxed. English words used as allegorical names may be highlighted in this way; this is particularly the case with Conscience, e.g. in W3.111-21, W3.175-289, but not in e.g. W2.141. The decisions involved in tagging as "FOREIGN" have caused us considerable uncertainty: one initial principle was that a word would be classed as English if given an English inflexion, so that Mnames (W6.248) was declared to be English, with the backing of MED, even though boxed in red and enlarged. But even this principle had to be jettisoned when we came to the two instances of beatus vir with a genitive inflexion, Beatus virres (W10.328, W13.55), which we decided to tag as Latin despite its English ending. Langland's linguistic inventiveness overturns every principle that the solemn editor attempts to establish. In the end we have been obliged to take eclectic decisions in each instance; we have taken account of the treatment in OED and MED, and we have been influenced by the scribal boxing and highlighting, but not bound by it, since that treatment in any case shows up in the textual display. Proper names have been treated as English unless they have a Latin inflexion: thus genitive Cesares is not tagged in W1.52, but both instances of Cesari with a Latin dative ending are marked as Latin in W1.53.
II.2 Presentation of Text: Style Sheets
Using SGML markup and four different style sheets in the Multidoc Pro browser, we offer four different views of the text of W. The Scribal style sheet represents as closely as possible the readings and features of the manuscript text. Changes of script are reflected by changes in font. The Middle English text's Anglicana Formata is represented in roman letters while the Bastard Anglicana of the Latin and emphasized text is printed in italics. Changes of ink color in the original are reflected in the displayed text. We represent the scribe's habit of accentuating various bits of text by enclosing it in a red box by printing the text so enclosed in red ink inside a black box. The browser does not permit us to display the text in black and the box in red. Scribal lapses are noted by means of purple ink. We have used <SIC> tags to indicate those instances in which we take the scribe not to have written what he intended to write, but we have ignored readings the scribe might reasonably be interpreted as having intended. For instance, at W5.264, the scribe wrote nonsensical bu where he intended to write but. We print bu, but flag it with purple. However, the probably erroneous lection, at least in relation to the B archetype, prechede for prayed is not so marked in W5.43, though a textual note calls attention to this unique reading in W. Eccentric word divisions, e. g. atones for at ones, or anhundred for an hundred are spelled out as written but in lime to call attention to them. We have represented the marginal notae added by an unidentified hand with this icon: N.
The Critical style sheet is designed to indicate what we believe the scribe intended to have written. Emendations displayed in the Critical style sheet appear in the conventional square brackets. Since the text displayed in the Critical style sheet is a reconstructed, putative text, it lacks the color features that appear in the more nearly diplomatic transcriptions of the manuscript. We conventionally use italics for Latin and French words and phrases in this style sheet. We have supplied line references to the Athlone B-text both for the convenience of readers and to provide a basis for later machine collation of documentary texts. Eccentric word divisions are silently, at least in the surface display, corrected in this style sheet. That is, atones appears as at ones, though a scholar who wishes to find all such divisions can still search for them in the browser as well as in the underlying SGML text.
In addition to the Scribal and Critical style sheets, we have included a Diplomatic style sheet that suppresses all notes, marginalia, and indications of error or eccentric word division. Its text is otherwise identical to that presented in the Scribal style sheet. The AllTags style sheet, as its name implies, is intended to display the full content of markup in SGML tags. In this style sheet alone, deleted text (where it is legible) appears within curly brackets. The brackets contain a dash for illegible material. In this style sheet alone, deleted text (where it is legible) appears within curly brackets. The brackets contain a dash for illegible material. For a key to our use of color in each style sheet, see Instructions for first-time users.
II.3 Presentation of Text: The Annotations
Three sets of annotations are provided—codicological, paleographic and textual:
(a) Codicological: These draw attention to physical features of the manuscript, especially those which can not be clearly interpreted from the images, and also to later additions in the margins such as names, pointing hands and other drawings. Codicological notes are marked by a red superscripted "C."
(b) Paleographic: These comment on letter forms, in particular ambiguous abbreviations, curls and other features. Paleographic notes are marked by a red superscripted "P."
(c) Textual: These notes recording unique readings in W require more justification and explanation. Since W is a close copy of a good witness of the beta tradition, its unique readings are few, and they are worth recording, firstly to indicate how generally faithful the W scribe is to his exemplar, and secondly as an aid to understanding the text on those relatively rare occasions when W has misread or corrupted it. Formal variants are not misreadings and are therefore not noted. In general the test of a formal variant is that the standard dictionaries recognise the different forms as one word. Thus the reading at WP.24 is degised as against disgised in all other manuscripts, but both forms of the verb are recorded in MED s.v. disgisen, and so the variants are not noted. This is the practice even where there may be a difference in syllabic value, as in WP.154 where W alone reads infinitive clawen against the majority reading clawe, or where, as is quite often the case, W has a past participle with <y-> prefix while other manuscripts are without it, as in W19.1 ydremed versus dremed. On the other hand MED recognises ywar and war as separate words, so this variation is recorded in W10.287. Variation in number or tense is also recorded. It must be emphasised that these notes are no more than an aid to the reader of W's text as it is presented at this stage. They do not in any sense constitute a listing of variant readings or a first step in establishing the relationship of W to other manuscripts. They may imply that W's reading is not that of the B archetype, though whether that is in fact the case in an individual instance and which of the recorded variants best represents Bx are matters that can be firmly established only at a later stage. The notes are, then, an interim statement that will be of no use once the B Archive is complete and the variant listings can be mechanically generated. The information for them is drawn from the listing of variants in the Kane-Donaldson edition (including the list of WS and WCrS agreements on p. 43 and p. 49 note 73), which we have checked against those transcripts that are already available in the Archive. Since it is not at this stage relevant which of the witnesses share the majority reading against W's unique variant, the majority readings are where possible presented in very simplified form, usually with the designation "other B witnesses" or "most other manuscripts" or "all others." It is true that in most cases this means "Bx," but it is important not to prejudge the issue. Readings shared with one or two other witnesses (most commonly Hm and Cr) are often indicative of genetic affiliation, and since this relationship will be tested when the Archive is sufficiently advanced, such group variation is not noted here, except in cases of particular interest, for example where a word or line essential to the sense has been lost. Textual notes are marked with an icon of a gray dog-eared manuscript leaf.
II.4 The Color Facsimile
The digital facsimile images were made from 35mm slides. Using a Nikon LS-3510 Slide Scanner attached to a Macintosh Quadra 800 running Adobe PhotoShop, we experimented with scans at input resolutions varying from 635 to 3175 dpi and output resolutions between 72 and 1000 dpi. The resulting JPEG and TIFF files varied in size from a low of 168 KB to just over 35 megabytes. It should go without saying that the largest of these files are expensive to store and slow to call to the screen and to manipulate. We found that a rational compromise between the highest and lowest grades, producing facsimiles more than adequate for most manuscript leaves, involved input resolutions of 1587 dpi, output resolutions of 500 dpi, and JPEG files of 750-1000KB.
Though the quality of most of our images represents a considerable improvement over microfilm and other traditional means of photoduplication, the images presented here reflect their creation six years ago in the spring of 1994. Readers will perhaps notice some differences in size and quality of various leaves. Some of the 1994 images were less crisp than others, and we rescanned in the fall of 1999 about two dozen slides, producing in each case both crisper images with better contrast and resolution. We considered rescanning the entire set of images, but the expense of doing so is considerable, and since the original slides lacked a means of calibration — we expect with future digital images to provide both Kodak color strips and gray scale references — we have left the original images.
III. Linguistic Description
III.1 Evidence from LALME
A Linguistic Atlas of Late Mediaeval English (LALME) does not map the forms of Cambridge, Trinity College, MS B.15.17 (W), no doubt because the editors thought that the analysis of other texts in the same dialect was sufficient to show the features of its language. M. L. Samuels published in 1963 an analysis of the development of early written standard forms of English.NM. L. Samuels, "Some Applications of Middle English Dialectology," English Studies, 44 (1963), 81-94. The article is reprinted in Angus McIntosh, M. L. Samuels and Margaret Laing, Middle English Dialectology: Essays on Some Principles and Problems, ed. Margaret Laing (Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press, 1989), pp. 64-80, esp. p. 70. He classified the language of the Wycliffite manuscripts, centred on the central midland counties, as Type I, and London English as Types II-IV. The earliest of these is Type II, the language of the main hand in the Auchinleck Manuscript. Type IV is "Chancery Standard," the language of government documents from 1430 onwards. In between the two is Type III, the language of earlier London documents, of Chaucer and of Hoccleve, and also the language of Piers Plowman as recorded in W. In a later study Samuels commented that the language of W is "very similar to that of the Hengwrt and Ellesmere MSS of The Canterbury Tales."NM. L. Samuels, "Langland's Dialect," Medium Ævum, 54 (1985), 232-47, p. 247, note 64. The article is reprinted in The English of Chaucer and his Contemporaries, ed. J. J. Smith (Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press, 1989), pp. 70-85. In a further discussion of the spellings of the scribe of the Hengwrt and Ellesmere manuscripts, Samuels listed "eleven variational criteria" for thirteen texts which he classified as Types II and III, that is to say representing respectively London English up to about 1380 and from about 1380 to 1420.NM. L. Samuels, "Chaucer's Spelling," in Middle English Studies Presented to Norman Davis, ed. Douglas Gray and E. G. Stanley (Oxford, 1983), pp. 17-37. The chapter is reprinted in The English of Chaucer and his Contemporaries, ed. J. J. Smith (Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press, 1989), pp. 23-37. For recent comment see Jeremy J. Smith, "The Language of the Ellesmere Manuscript," in The Ellesmere Chaucer: Essays in Interpretation, ed. Martin Stevens and Daniel Woodward (San Marino, CA: The Huntington Library, and Tokyo: Yoshudo, 1995), pp. 69-86. These are the forms Samuels lists for the Hengwrt-Ellesmere scribe, to which we have supplied the forms in W for comparison:NThroughout this section we have bracketed letters to represent optional elements. When two or more forms of a word occur, Samuels represents the less common variants within parentheses. Thus the spelling "((such(e)))" is very uncommon with or without final <-e>.
|YET||yet||yet (40x), ȝit (13x)NThere is one instance of ȝit in Passus 3; the other twelve are in Passus 14-18.|
|NOT||nat, noght||noȝt(e) (334x)|
|WORK vb.||werken, wirkyng||werch- (55x)|
|SAW pret.||saugh||seiȝ(en) (41x)|
|say, saw(e)||seigh(e) (4x)|
The distributions of the spellings of the first four items are closely parallel in the work of the two scribes, but there are considerable differences in the other seven items. The influence of W's exemplar may have prompted the scribe to use spellings that were not his own preferential forms but were part of his "passive repertoire," that is to say forms that were acceptable to him.NFor the term see Michael Benskin and Margaret Laing, "Translations and Mischsprachen in Middle English Manuscripts," in So Meny People Longages and Tonges, ed. Michael Benskin and M. L. Samuels (Edinburgh, 1981), pp. 55-106, esp. pp. 72-5. Against this, however, it should be noted that the scribe of W was evidently a highly practised and professional scrivener with a remarkably consistent spelling system which he must have been taught to impose upon the language of his exemplars. If he was indeed from the same workshop as the Hengwrt-Ellesmere scribe, then that workshop admitted considerable variety in spelling.
The text of Piers is thoroughly "translated" into London English, with few obvious relict forms. Those that indicate a Western dialect representing Langland's own are as follows: NSee M. L. Samuels, "Langland's Dialect," Medium Ævum, 54 (1985), 232-47; reprinted in The English of Chaucer and his Contemporaries, ed. J. J. Smith (Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press, 1989), pp. 70-85. See also M. L. Samuels, "Dialect and Grammar," in A Companion to Piers Plowman, ed. John A. Alford (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1988), pp. 201-21.
- (a) The form heo for "she" occurs twice, both in alliterating positions. See below, Linguistic Description III.3.3.1
- (b) The form hij for "they" occurs three times in alliterating positions. See below, Linguistic Description III.3.3.4
- (c) The occasional spelling <u> for OE /y/ and /y:/ in words such as fuyr, fust, hulles, huyre. See below, Linguistic Description III.220.127.116.11 and III.18.104.22.168
- (d) The retention of rounding for OE /eo/ and /ēo/ in a few words. See below, Linguistic Description III.22.214.171.124
- (e) The ending <-eþ> of the present indicative plural. See below, Linguistic Description III.126.96.36.199
III.2.1 Vowels in Tonic Syllables:
Vowel length of <a>, <e> and <o> is often marked by doubling in closed syllables. Final <-e> and <-es> are alternative signs of length.
|For /a:/:||<aa> ~ <a>:|
caas (3x) ~ cas (1x); debaat (1x) ~ debate (1x); made (83x) ~ maad (16x); saaf (9x); waast (1x) ~ waste (1x).
|For /e:/ and /ε:/:||<ee> ~ <e>|
breed (26x) ~ bred (1x); deeþ (52x) ~ deþe (8x); feet (8x); heed "head" (17x)NThere is one instance of hed (5.554); the plural has /e/: heddes 6.334, 20.186.; kepe (34x) ~ keep (1x); preest (25x) ~ preestes (30x).
|For /o:/ and /ɔ/:||<oo> ~ <o>|
blood (23x); flood (8x) ~ flodes (1x); foode (10x); goon (7x).
|1. OE, ON /a/:||<a>|
caste; hap; lappe.
|2. OE, ON /a/ before a nasal:||<a> ~ (<o>)|
fram (13x) ~ from (20x); kan (67x); man (198x); wan 5.466.
|3. OE, ON /a/ before lengthening consonant groups:||<a> ~ <o>|
hand(e) (19x) ~ hond (4x); handes (6x) ~ hondes (5x); hange (6x) ~ honge 17.6; long(e) (58x) ~ lang (only in the technical expression lang cart) 2.184; lomb 5.570 ~ pl. lambren 15.214; stande (3x) ~ stonde (11x).
|4. OE, ON /a/ + <-nk>:||<a> ~ (<o>)|
bank P.8; drank 13.64Ndronke 20.19 is pa. t. sg. subjunctive (OE drunke); Kane-Donaldson's emendation of the line involves an impossible switch of tense.; sank 18.69; stank; þanked (1x) 17.88 ~ þonked (1x) 8.108; þonkyng 2.151.
The spelling is always <a> except in þonk-.
|5. OE, ON /a:/:||<o> ~ <oo>|
abrood 2.179; foo 9.214; fro (61x); hole "whole" 6.61; hoot 17.208 ~ hote P.225; lore 10.116; lowe 20.36; Ropere 5.326; soore 5.98 ~ sore 18.51; stoon 15.567 ~ stones 2.16; wroot 10.179.
|6. OE, ON /a:/ + w:||<ow> ~ <ou>|
blowyng 16.27; knowe (54x); soule (85x).
|7. OE, ON, OF /o/:||<o>|
box; cros (25x)NThe one instance of croos (18.75) perhaps indicates lengthening. For the complex history of the word see OED s.v. cross sb.; folk; god ~ goddes "God" (never gode); lok "lock" 1.204; mosse; pecokkes; spottes.
|8. OE, ON /o/ + lengthening consonant group:||<o> ~ <oo>|
bold(e) (8x) ~ boold (3x); borde; gold(e); molde (6x) ~ moolde (8x); word ~ wordes.
|9. OE, ON /o:/:||<o> ~ <oo>|
book (29x) ~ boke (3x) ~ bokes (22x); broþer 5.475; coom(e); doom (8x) ~ doome (1x) ~ dome (8x) ~ domes (6x); dooþ (37x); foot 5.6 ~ foote 17.106 (not fote); good(e) "good" (135x) (never gode); roote (10x) ~ rootes (1x) ~ rotes (1x); tooles 10.187; tooþaches 20.81.
The spelling <oo> is usual in closed syllables; with <o> before stems followed by <-e> and <-es>.
|10. OE, ON, OF /u/:||<u> ~ <o>|
biswonke pa. t. pl. 20.292; buttre 5.446; dronke (pa. t. pl.) 14.86; flux 5.180; ful (93x); fulle (n.) (3x); pulle 16.76; sonne "sun" (22x); þoruȝ / Thoruȝ (156x); wolle "wool" (2x).
The <o> spelling is used predominantly in proximity to minims.
|11. OE, ON, OF /u/ with lengthening:||<ou> ~ <oo> ~ <o> ~ <u>|
dombe (1x) ~ doumb(e) (2x); dore (8x); ground(e) (16x); hound (3x); mourne (1x) ~ moorne (1x) ~ morned; torne (2x) ~ turne (8x); wode (3x).
The <ou> spelling is an indication of length, as below.
|12. OE, ON /u:/:||<ou> ~ <ow> (mostly in final position)|
aboute (49x); adoun (14x) ~ adown (4x); cloude 3.194; how (90x); mous (2x); now (84x); þow (231x) ~ Thow (22x) ~ þou (2x) ~ Thou (1x).
|13. OE, ON /y/:||<i> ~ <y> ~ <u>|
bigge(n) "buy" (2x) ~ bugge(n) (8x) ~ buggere (1x) ~ buggynge (1x); brugges; dide; filled; Nfullen 10.60 is perhaps from ful adj., as MED suggests s.v. fullen v.(1). fulle (n.) 16.11; gilt; hilles (4x) ~ hulles (2x); kyn; murie; synne.
The <y> spellings replace <i> in the proximity of minims. The <u> ~ <uy> spellings are Western and did not survive before nasals.NSee M. L. Samuels, "Langland's Dialect," Medium Ævum, 54 (1985), 241, 243; reprinted in The English of Chaucer and his Contemporaries, ed. J. J. Smith (Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press, 1989), pp. 70-85.
|14. OE, ON /y/ before lengthening clusters:||<y> ~ <u>|
burde 3.14; kynde (115x); mynde (11x).
|15. OE, ON /y:/:||<i> ~ <y> ~ <u> ~ <uy>|
fir (11x) ~ fuyr (1x); fust (10x) (never fist);N Often shortened in Middle English. hyre (3x) ~ huyre (1x); kyen "kine" 6.143; wisshe 5.112.
The <u> ~ <uy> spellings are Western.NSee M. L. Samuels, "Langland's Dialect," Medium Ævum, 54 (1985), 241, 243; reprinted in The English of Chaucer and his Contemporaries, ed. J. J. Smith (Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press, 1989), pp. 70-85.
|16. OE, ON /i/:||<i> ~ <y>|
bitter; nyme; widewe; wight.
|17. OE, ON /i:/:||<i> ~ <y>|
blithe; chide; knyf; lif (99x + compounds) ~ lyf (7x); ryde(n) (9x) ~ ride(n) (5x); wis(e) (36x) ~ wys (3x); wyn "wine" (13x).NThe verb "win" is always spelt wynne.
|18. OE, ON, OF /e/:||<e>|
dowel; feþere; rekene; web(be); wrecched.
|19. OE, ON, OF /e/ before lengthening clusters:||<e> ~ <ee>|
beest (6x) ~ beestes (33x) ~ bestes (3x); elde; feeste (4x) ~ feste (3x) ~ festes (3x); feld (6x) ~ feeld (2x); selde.
|20. OE, ON, OF /e:/:||<e> ~ <ee>|
bedeman; beches; contree (12x) ~ contre (1x); deme; fede (9x) ~ feede (1x); feet; grene; hede "heed"; kene; kepe (34x) ~ keep (1x); mede; swete.
|21. OE /æ/:||<a>|
apples; bak; blak; hadde; masse; wasshen; water.
|22. OE /æ:/ (1) & (2):||<e> ~ <ee>|
breeþ; clene; drede; er; leet (11x) ~ lete (12x); neddres (with shortening of the vowel); slepe ~ sleep; seed ~ sedes; teche.
|23. OE /ēa/:||<ee> ~ <e>|
breed (26x) ~ bred (1x); deed (8x) ~ ded (2x) "dead"; deef; leef; rede ~ reed "red."
|24. OE /eo/, /ēo/ (and OF /ue/):||<e> ~ <ee> ~ (<eo>) ~ (<u>) ~ (<uy>)|
burn "man" 11.366 ~ buyrn 16.188, 16.276 ~ Burnes 3.272, 12.70; cherl; crepe; depe (8x) ~ deep (2x); frend; heo "she" (2x); herte; leode (7x) ~ lede (1x) "man"; leme; swerd; tree; þef (4x) ~ þeef (3x).
The three words of Western distribution, bu(y)rn, leode and heo, retain Western rounding at least in spelling, presumably because there was no London spelling convention for them. For the <eo> forms see Samuels, "Langland's Dialect," 241-3.NM. L. Samuels, "Langland's Dialect," Medium Ævum, 54 (1985); reprinted in The English of Chaucer and his Contemporaries, ed. J. J. Smith (Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press, 1989), pp. 70-85. Before dentals and <l> the short /e/ arising from various OE sources including /ēo/ goes to /i/ in fille "fell" (14.197, 16.111), ȝit (13x) vs. yet (40x), togid(e)re(s) (50x), etc. This is a feature of London English.
OF /ue/ gives rise to a few <oe> spellings:
doel (4x); moebles (2x) ~ mebles (9.87); meue (6x) ~ moeue (19.287) ~ moeuen (15.75); peple (91x) poeple (1x).
|1. OE /hw/:||<wh>|
The spelling is consistent: whan, what, where, while, etc. There are no examples of <qu> or <w>. Two examples of <wh> for <w>, where "were" 12.81,NSee the textual note to this line. and whasshen "wash" 13.436, are therefore likely to be errors rather than reverse spellings.
|2. OE, ON <þ> and <ð>:||<þ> ~ <Th> ~ <th>|
The scribe uses <þ> for the small letter and <Th> for the littera notabilior. There are only two examples of <Þ>, both on fol. 61v (W11.103 and 112). There are only a few cases of <th>, for example: fryth (3x); hath (1x); north (1x); othere (1x); south (1x); with (5x); and in proper names of foreign origin: Astroth; Makometh; Nazareth.
|3. OE /š/:||<sh> ~ <ssh>|
The spelling is <sh>, with <ssh> medially and finally after a short vowel: bisshop; childissh; englissh; fissh; flessh; punysshe; shame; shaft; sheep; ship; sholde (never scholde).
|4. OE, ON /sk/:||<sk> ~ (<x>) ~ (<sc>)|
asked (11x) ~ axed (1x); buskes; scole; skipte; skile; skynnes.
Spellings with initial <sc> are mainly from OF; e.g. scorne; scrippe.
|5. OE /xt/:||<ȝt> ~ <ght>|
The spelling with <ȝt> predominates: almyȝty (12x) ~ almyghty (4x); briȝt(e) (3x) ~ bright(e) (3x); fiȝte (5x) ~ fight(e) (5x); noȝt(e) (334x) ~ noght (1x); riȝt(e) (76x) ~ right(e) (31x).
As a general rule the scribe prefers <ȝ> to <gh> for the velar spirant: eiȝen (20x) ~ eighen (6x); heiȝ(e) (32x) ~ heigh(e) (10x); seiȝ(e) (36x) ~ seigh(e) (4x).
III.3.1 Metrical Considerations: The Status of Final <-e> and <-en>:
The scribe's writing of final <-e> is not random, but in words that are spelt with or without it the usage is motivated by etymology or analogical developments. So final <-e> can be used to mark the dative singular noun (III.3.2.3), the plural of the possessive pronouns myne, thyne, hise (III.3.3.3), and the definite and plural inflection of adjectives (III.3.4).NGeorge Kane and E. Talbot Donaldson remark on W's "careful handling of final -e," in Piers Plowman: The B Version (London: Athlone Press, 1975, 2nd impression 1988), pp. 214-16, note 184, though in note 179 (p. 215) they overstate W's consistency. The infinitive verb ending varies between <-e> and <-en>; the covered form offers the option of preventing the assimilation of <-e> before a following vowel or <h>. Both these phenomena resulting in <-e> or <-en> therefore have metrical consequences which have been analysed by Duggan, who discusses to what extent these features of the scribal language are also features of Langland's dialect.NHoyt N. Duggan, "Langland's Dialect and Final -e," Studies in the Age of Chaucer 12 (1990), 157-91. And see the two studies by M. L. Samuels, "Langland's Dialect," Medium Ævum, 54 (1985), especially 243-4; reprinted in The English of Chaucer and his Contemporaries, ed. J. J. Smith (Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press, 1989), pp. 70-85; and "Dialect and Grammar," in A Companion to Piers Plowman, ed. John A. Alford (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1988), pp. 217-18.
III.3.2.1 Nominative/Accusative Singular:
III.3.2.2 Genitive Singular:
|Genitive Singular:||<-es> ~ <-s> ~ (<-is>) ~ (<-e>) ~ (nil)|
Abrahames 16.185; Adames 11.201; broþeres 10.279; Caymes 9.137; disours 13.174; doweles 9.12 ~ dowelis 14.335; fadres 9.123 (cf. fader 16.91); Gabrielis 16.93; Hostilers 17.116; Iustices 16.95;NThe form with <-es> is noteworthy here since it is followed by a word beginning with <s>. Nine B manuscripts read Iustice son. ladies 20.344 (cf. lady 18.344); mannes; Pharaoes 7.179.
The usual ending is <-es>; the <-is> spelling is only after <l> and <r>.
With <-e>: heuene 14.165; soule 11.226.
Without ending: fader 16.91; lady 18.344; Marie 2.2;NThe form is ascribed to the influence of Latin feminine genitives by Tauno F. Mustanoja, A Middle English Syntax, Part 1: Parts of Speech (Helsinki: Société Néophilologique, 1960), p. 72. moder 19.121.
With apocope: Iesus 18.103; 19.121; Piers 6.81 etc.; Prioresse 5.158.
III.3.2.3 Dative Singular:
|Dative Singular:||nil ~ <-e>|
to bedde (vs. bed elsewhere) 6.102; wiþ childe (vs. child) 7.110; at home (vs. hom) 7.5; in-to house (vs. hous) 2.221; by my lyue (vs. lif) 6.104; bi his firste wyue (vs. wif) 9.19.
The ten examples of grounde all follow the prepositions a, aboue, by, of, on, to. Only in 10.236 is the uninflected form used with a preposition: vp-on þis ground. This illustrates the following general pattern: when a noun has alternative spellings, one without final <-e> and the other with, the former is the general form used in all circumstances except as a genitive, while the latter is used only after prepositions. Other nouns that follow this pattern are, for example: boke, breste, daye, hande, kynge.
III.3.2.4 Nominative/Accusative Plural:
|Nominative/Accusative Plural:||<-es> ~ <-s> ~ (<-is>) ~ (<-z>) ~ <-en> ~ <-n>|
abbotes; artz (2x); beggeris (17x); bodies; brawleris; cardinals; clerkes; colours; eiȝes (6x) (cf. eighen and eiȝen); eris; Experimentz 10.224; foes 13.326 (cf. foon); lolleris; lond-leperis heremytes 15.221; Monyals 10.326; Religiouses 10.324; shoes 20.218 (cf. shoon); sustres 18.206 (cf. sustren); werkes, wordes; yeres.
The <-is> plural is used only after <r> and three times after <l>; thus gerlis 18.8 (beside gerles 1.35); foolis 10.41, 20.61.
With <-en> ~ <-n>: children; eighen and eiȝen (26x); foon 5.97; lambren 15.214; shoon 14.344; sustren 5.638.
Mutated: gees P.226; men; teeþ 15.13.
III.3.2.5 Genitive Plural:
|Genitive Plural:||<-es> ~ <-s> ~ (<-is>) ~ (<-ene>) ~ (<-en>)|
beggeris 4.126; losels 10.52; mennes; harlottes.
With <-ene> ~ <-en>: childrene 4.119; clerkene 4.121; Iewene 18.263; kyngene 1.106; wyuen 5.29.
III.3.3.1 Nominative Singular:
|1st Person:||I ~ ich|
The form ich occurs 15x, always before <h->, vowel or semivowel (e.g. ich yede 7.157). Archetypal ik occurs in the phrase so thee ik (5.229), where Langland's joke is at the expense of the Norfolk dialect of Sir Hervey, as in Chaucer's Reeve's Tale.
|2nd Person:||þow ~ þou ~ Thow ~ Thou|
The predominant forms are þow (231x) and Thow (22x); the spelling is þou in 7.148 (twice), and Thou in 14.195.
|Feminine:||she ~ heo|
The two occurrences of heo (3.29, 5.644) are in alliterating positions.NSee M. L. Samuels, "Langland's Dialect," Medium Ævum, 54 (1985), 232-47; reprinted in The English of Chaucer and his Contemporaries, ed. J. J. Smith (Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press, 1989), pp. 70-85. Kane-Donaldson emend he to he[o] twice in W18.170, where the Bx reading must represent a form of "she" since it refers to Rightwisnesse.
III.3.3.2 Accusative and Dative Singular:
|2nd Person:||þee ~ Thee once (3.270)|
|Feminine:||hire ~ hir|
III.3.3.3 Genitive Singular:
|1st Person:||my ~ myn ~ myne|
Myn (42x) occurs as a dependent possessive with singular nouns before vowel or <h>, or disjunctively in 13.365. Its plural form is myne (16x), used before vowel or <h>, disjunctively in 18.285, 18.336, or in absolute use to mean "my possessions" (6.151) or "my people" (18.359).
|2nd Person:||þi ~ þy ~ Thi ~ þyn ~ Thyn ~ þin ~ þyne|
The standard spelling is þi, with þy 5x. Thi is found at 2.124 only. The usage of the forms ending in <-n(e)> is as with the 1st person: þyn (21x) ~ Thyn (3x) ~ þin (1.42 only) occurs as a dependent possessive with singular nouns before vowel or <h>, or disjunctively. Its plural form is þyne (7x), used before vowel or <h>, or in absolute use to mean "thy possessions" in 13.158.
|Masculine:||his ~ hise|
The general form is his used with singular and plural nouns: his cofres 11.192. The inflected form hise, developed by analogy with myne and þyne, is used only with plural nouns and also 4x in absolute use to mean "his people" (13.255, 17.271, 19.218, 20.60).
|Feminine:||hire ~ hir|
As in the accusative and dative, the forms with and without <-e> are used in free variation.
The form is is found in 17.248 (perhaps in error for his).
III.3.3.4 Nominative Plural:
|3rd Person:||þei ~ Thei ~ They ~ hij|
The three occurrences of hij (P.66, 1.58, 1.193) are in alliterating positions.NAt 18.338 W shares the reading he with Hm, where all other manuscripts have plural þei. This is likely to be an error in the subarchetype; there is no reason to suppose that the reading is an archetypal form of "they." At 10.479 and 13.222 the scribe has written þe for þei, presumably in error.
III.3.3.5 Accusative and Dative Plural:
III.3.3.6 Genitive Plural:
The form is never found without <-e>.
The form without <-e> is found only once, in your-self (2.39).
|3rd Person:||hir ~ hire|
The forms with and without <-e> are used in free variation. There are no oblique plural forms beginning with <þ->.
III.3.3.7 Personal pronoun with "self":
Forms are: my-self (-selue); þi-selue (-self, -seluen); hym-self (-selfe, -selue, -seluen); hir-selue ~ hire-self (-selue); oure-selue 13.36 ~ vs-selue 7.141; ye-self (subject) 16.128 ~ yow-self (object) 16.129 ~ yow-selue (object and prepositional) P.200, 5.44, 10.290, 10.302 ~ your-self 2.39. Lines 16.128-9 offer an instructive example. For line-terminal position the -selue(n) forms are always used. There are no -sulf forms.
III.3.4 Adjectives and Adverbs:
Monosyllabic adjectives ending in a consonant follow definite and indefinite inflexions; i.e. <-e> is added in the plural, and also in the singular when used with the definite article, a demonstrative adjective or a possessive pronoun. The practice may be observed by looking at examples of "great":
|III.3.4.1 Indefinite Singular:||nil|
- 11.261 a gret wille
- 12.74 of greet loue
- 12.292 þe bileue is gret
- 12.296 a greet mede
- 13.363 a greet wit
- 14.57 ne gret lordes wraþeNHence lordes is gen. sg.; cf. the reading of L with pl. grete lordes.
- 14.138 And greet likynge
- 14.246 of ful greet lengþe
- 18.134 weex greet wiþ childe
- 18.314 with gret light
- 19.196 to greet Ioye
- 19.338 a greet Oost
- 20.20 at gret nede
The only exception is 8.9 men of grete witte, perhaps influenced by the preceding plural noun.
|III.3.4.2 Definite Singular:||<-e>|
- 12.268 Aristotle þe grete clerk
- 15.545 In þe holy grete god
- 18.101 for al his grete wounde
- 13.84 wiþ hise grete chekes
- 13.236 of þise grete lordes
- 13.399 hise grete helpes
- 14.42 Vitailles of grete vertues
- 15.70 of hise grete myȝtes
- 15.88 ye grete clerkes
- 16.83 boþe grete and smale
- 20.214 wiþ seuene grete geauntz
Polysyllabic adjectives of French derivation ending in <-ous> generally follow the same pattern: lecherous (sg.) 6.273 ~ lecherouse (pl.) 2.127; likerous (2x) ~ likerouse (pl.) 10.174 (though it is sg. in 10.171); precious (3x) ~ preciouse (pl.) 19.93. As a noun used adjectivally, religious observes the same pattern, with <-e> always indicating the plural. However, no such regular pattern accounts for the alternation between cristen and cristene.
"All" has the following inflexions: sg. al, pl. alle, gen. pl. aller (16.213). "Both" as an adjective is always boþe, with gen. boþer (2.68) and boþeres (18.39). As a correlative conjunction, "both ... and," it is once Boþ (5.446).
|III.3.4.4 Comparative:||<-er(e)> ~ <-re>|
bettre 11.255; blesseder 11.255; bolder 7.199; clenner 19.251; douȝtier 5.103; hyere 2.29.
Boldest 13.299 ~ boldeste 18.418; brunneste 6.313; clennest 14.48; douȝtieste 10.464; hyeste 12.142.
|III.3.4.6 Adjectives in <-ly>:|
The ending <-ly> varies with <-lich> and <-liche> (there are no examples of <-lye> or <-lie>). There seems to be no clear pattern of usage. The spelling louely (8x) is always used for the attributive adjective, and loueliche (3x), louelich (1x), vnlovelich (1x), vnloveliche (1x) indiscriminately with or without <-e> for the predicative before of: cf. 5.570 with 11.237. But dedliche and dedly are both used before pl. synnes (9.220, 14.97). While flesshliche precedes herte (19.168), comely and comly are also used attributively.
|III.3.4.7 Adverbs in <-ly>:|
The same endings <-ly>, <-lich> and <-liche> are used as in adjectives, and are equally unpatterned.NSee Hoyt N. Duggan, "Langland's Dialect and Final -e," Studies in the Age of Chaucer 12 (1990), 157-91. Comparative endings are <-lier> and <-loker>: frendlier 10.237; lightlier 15.501; liȝtloker 5.588; rapelier 17.69; wisloker 13.343. Superlatives end in <-lokest>: hastilokest 19.474; wikkedlokest 10.437.
|Infinitive:||<-e> ~ <-en>|
to kepe 17.5; knowe 17.9; laste 17.8; to louye 17.129; To rule 17.3; see 17.4; siggen 17.31; to techen 17.42; vndertaken 17.17.
When the infinitive verb is followed by a vowel or <h->, the <-en> is common; thus all examples of kepen (8x), sitten (3x), and reden (2x) precede vowels or <h->. However there are many exceptions to this. (Sometimes W has the ending against all other manuscripts; e.g. W18.416 abyen it vs. abye it.)
Endings derived from OE <-ian> verbs are quite well preserved; thus the following infinitive forms with <-i-> or <-y->: erie 6.4; hatien 10.100; louyen 19.111; prikye 18.11; swerye 14.39; tilien 7.2; wanye 7.58; werien 14.343; wonye 2.109. This is a feature of southwestern dialects.NSee M. L. Samuels, "Dialect and Grammar," in A Companion to Piers Plowman, ed. John A. Alford (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1988), p. 217.
|Gerund:||<-yng(e)> ~ (<-ing(e)>)|
In both the gerund and the pres. ppl. the ending is <-yng> with or without final <-e> or looped <g> (on which see II.1 Transcription of the Manuscript above). The forms appear in free variation.
drynkynge 11.340; etynge 14.60; laughynge 18.429; slepyng P.10; slepynge 5.6; Wenynge 20.33.
There are the following examples of the ending of the verbal noun with the spelling <-ing(e)> after <y>:
buryinge 11.80; deyinge 11.170, 13.418; deying 7.34, 18.219; Lyinge 13.321; seying 8.109; tulying 14.71.
The only other example of <-ing> is ingoing 5.649.
III.3.5.3 Present participle:
|Present participle:||<-yng(e)> ~ (<-inge>)|
abidynge 19.295; dryuynge 20.99; etynge 10.108; hangyng 5.136; hippynge 17.61; Lurkynge 2.218; sittynge 3.352; slepynge 7.159; waggyng 8.31.
The only example of pres. ppl. <-inge> is after <y> in pleyinge 16.269, 18.172. There are no examples of other forms such as <-ande>, <-ende>, <-inde> or <-enge>.
|III.3.5.4. Imperative Singular:||nil ~ (<-e>)|
be 2.140; com 18.57 ~ come 5.591; Coueite 5.592; et 14.55 ~ Ete 6.268; Go 1.47; hold 18.150; keep 6.270; lakke 2.49; Lat 6.272; rys 6.271 sitte 6.270; Tak 12.158; tel 1.46.
III.3.5.4 Imperative Plural:
|Imperative Plural:||<-(e)þ> ~ <-e>|
Beþ 10.457; claweþ 10.302; comeþ 20.73; correcteþ 10.302; fareþ 13.182; gyueþ 17.270; hareweþ 19.318; Holdeþ 20.245; kenneþ 6.14; Makeþ 6.14; spynneþ 6.13; Wadeþ 5.587.
The form with <-e> (without ending in stems in <-e>) is used before a subject pronoun:
be 3.87; Deuyne P.209; Loke 5.594; stynte 5.595;NIn these lines 5.594-5 (KD5.575-6) Kane-Donaldson emend the second person plural pronouns to singular to match the singular pronouns of the surrounding passage. wasshe 5.587.
III.3.5.5 Present Indicative:
|III.188.8.131.52 1st Person Singular:||<-e> ~ (nil)|
hailse 5.102; holde 5.421; leeue P.34; seye P.201; shonye 5.170; swere 5.229; walke 5.148; warne P.207; wisse 1.43.
As in OE, stems ending in a vowel have no inflexion: do 5.115; se P.201.
|III.184.108.40.206 2nd Person Singular:||<-est> ~ <-st> ~ (<-ist>) ~ (<-xt>)|
beest 5.608; coueitest 11.11; Getest 18.364; greuest 14.121; lernest 4.11; lyuest 2.127; lixt 5.164;N The form derives from a contracted present of OE lēogan. mayst 19.484; myȝtest P.214; myȝt 6.227; seest 12.174; woost 3.181.
The usual ending is <-(e)st>. The only example of <-ist> is seist 6.236, 18.435.
|III.220.127.116.11 Present 3rd Singular:||<-eþ> ~ <-þ> ~ (<-eth>) ~ (<-th>) ~ <-t>|
akeþ 6.263; bereþ 11.160; bit (< bidden) 7.72; brekeþ 4.59; falleþ 8.38; fareþ 13.53; fyndeþ 15.185 ~ fynt (6x); forfreteþ 16.30; gooþ 17.38; halt 17.106 ~ holdeþ 13.405; pleieþ 19.296; putteþ 12.229; rest P.170; ryt (< ryden) 4.13; seiþ 18.32 ~ seith 7.135; sheweth 17.157; smyt 11.429; smyþeþ 3.330; stant 18.45; strengþeþ 8.47; wanyeþ 8.39.N Contracted forms on stems ending in a dental consonant (e.g. bit, fynt, halt, etc.) are used in southern texts.
For "tells lies" (OE lȳhþ) the forms are lieþ and lyeþ (1.70, 10.116); for "lies down" (OE līþ) the forms are lith, liþ, and lyþ (12.258, 1.126, 4.61).
OE preterite-present verbs without inflexion in the present 1st and 3rd sg. are, e.g.: dar P.209; kan P.199; May 1.63; Shal 2.34; woot 5.182.
|III.18.104.22.168 Present Plural:||<-e> ~ <-en> ~ <-eþ>|
abiden 15.317; abite "bite" 16.27; aren (7x) ~ arn (29x) ~ beþ (16x); aske (1x) ~ asken (3x) ~ askeþ (1x); borweþ 20.285; burioneþ 15.79; crauen (2x) ~ craueþ (1x); dwelle (3x) ~ dwelleþ (1x); fecche 9.182; fynde (2x) ~ fynden (4x) ~ fyndeþ (3x); folweþ 3.355; holdeþ 1.45; smyteþ 17.327; teche (2x) ~ techen (2x) ~ techeþ (2x); writeþ 14.211.
The minority form is <-eþ>, yet it is not uncommon. Samuels points out that this plural form is very rare in the London English of Chaucer, but is retained in Southern and Southwestern areas until after Langland's death. He also comments on the form aren in alliterating position as evidence for Langland's west midland dialect.NM. L. Samuels, "Dialect and Grammar," in A Companion to Piers Plowman, ed. John A. Alford (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1988), pp. 209, 216. Some of the <-e> ~ <-en> forms will historically be subjunctives since they occur in contexts where a subjunctive is to be expected.
The plural forms of preterite-present verbs are, for example: kan ~ konne ~ konneþ; may ~ mowe ~ mowen; shul; wite.
III.3.5.6 Present Subjunctive:
|Subjunctive Singular:||<-e> ~ (nil)|
carpe 17.136; do 3.312; gladie 18.261; Iangle 4.157; folwe 3.7; gyue 2.123; like 11.24; rede 4.5; werche 3.7.
The forms are the same as those of the 1st indic. sg.
III.3.5.7 Preterite Indicative:
|III.22.214.171.124 Weak Preterite Verbs:|
|Preterite 1st Singular:||<-ed> ~ <-ede> ~ <-de> ~ <-te>|
affrayned 16.287; awakede 14.346; bablede 5.8; boldede 3.200; courbed 1.80; deide 18.375; dwelde 20.343; lokede 14.53; makede 9.139; paide 6.96; waitede 13.343; Wente P.4.
The forms with <-ed> and <-ede> are in free variation. The endings <-id(e)> ~ <-yd> do not occur.
|Preterite 2nd Singular:||<-dest> ~ <-edest> ~ <-test>|
a-resonedest 12.220; brouȝtest 1.78; conseiledest 3.207; deidest 19.172; graddest 19.430; laddest 7.205; Lakkedest 11.416; madest 5.233; robbedest 18.345; tauȝtest 14.195.
|Preterite 3rd Singular:||<-ed> ~ <-ede> ~ <-de> ~ <-te>|
abosted 6.157; armede 20.115; asked 5.310 ~ askede 20.330; baptised 16.262; beknede 10.426; blessede 11.233; deide 10.364; demed 10.393; dremed 8.69; folwede 11.26; mamelede 11.413; paied 5.218; wailede 14.346; wente 13.222; wepte 2.238.
The forms are of course the same as those for the 1st singular.
|Preterite Plural:||<-ed> ~ <-ede> ~ <-eden> ~ <-de> ~ <-den> ~ <-t> ~ <-ten>|
amendeden 15.115; amortisede 15.325; apposede 1.48; awaiteden 16.145; blustreden 5.531; cared 2.164; cryden P.225; deyden 18.367; demede 19.145; digged 6.110; eriede 19.268; hateden 18.308; herde (1x) ~ herden (3x); made 20.300 ~ maden 10.420 ~ maked 6.192; parceyued 18.248; pleiden P.20; sente (2x) ~ senten (1x); tendeden 18.245; vsede 20.65 ~ vseden 12.127; went (9x) ~ wenten (10x); wepten 7.37; woundede 20.301.
III.3.5.8 Weak Past Participles:
|Weak Past Participles:||<-ed> ~ <-t> (with or without <y-> prefix)|
abasshed 10.305; acombred 1.34; ascaped 6.80; ybarred 19.164; called (13x) ~ ycalled (3x); cloþed (1x) ~ ycloþed (6x);NIn 1.3 the <y-> prefix ycloþed is necessary for the metre of the b-verse, as most of the scribes recognise; in 13.277 (where it is again line-end) it is not, and seven manuscripts read clothed. demed 3.312; diademed 3.293; yentred 10.386; yglosed 17.11; yhated 9.107; maked 5.405 ~ ymaked 6.190 ~ maad 5.279; vsed 18.389 ~ yvsed 16.155; went 3.287.
The W scribe is more conservative than others in the preservation of the <y-> prefix, retaining it even on verb-stems of more than one syllable; e.g.: yherberwed 5.234 (against all other manuscripts); yperissed 17.190; even yrebuked 14.173 (where it is necessary for the metre, but against all other manuscripts).
III.3.5.9 Strong Verbs:
|Preterite 1st Singular:||nil|
cam 15.14 ~ com 13.24; gat 4.81; knew 19.418; song 19.210; sauȝ 5.9 ~ seiȝ "saw" P.50; spak 19.377.
|Preterite 2nd Singular:||<-e> (often with vowel gradation)|
breke 18.293; gete 18.341; knewe 11.32; leighe "lied" 18.415; speke 19.77; toke 20.7.
|Preterite 3rd Singular:||nil|
brak 1.113; cam P.114 ~ com 2.192 ~ Coom 20.343; gaf 2.71; gat 1.35; knew 2.228; song 18.438; spak 5.217; stood P.182.
The forms are of course the same as those for the 1st singular.
|Preterite Plural:||<-e> ~ <-en> ~ nil|
cam 13.34 ~ come 4.45 ~ coome 19.343 ~ comen P.24; dronke 14.86; geten 20.156; knew 12.227 ~ knewe 11.235 ~ knewen 12.151; seiȝe "saw" 17.50; stode 18.86 ~ stoode 14.256; Songen 18.331; toke 19.39 ~ token 4.79.
III.3.5.10: Preterite Subjunctive
|Preterite Subjunctive Singular:||<-e> (often with vowel gradation)NIt is sometimes maintained that Middle English has a preterite subjunctive plural, but the form which was sometimes distinct from the indicative in Old English had become indistinguishable in Middle English, and the use of the subjunctive in Middle English is in any case unsystematic.|
come 5.542 ~ coome 19.425; dronke 20.19; stode 19.366.
The forms are the same as the 2nd singular.
III.3.5.11 Strong Past Participle:
|Past Participle:||<-e> ~ <-en> (with and without <y-> prefix)|
bake (1x) ~ ybake (4x) ~ ybaken (1x); comen 16.96; dronke (1x) ~ dronken (3x, twice attributively) ~ ydronke (3x); founde (4x) ~ yfound (2x) ~ yfounden (1x); geten 5.298; gyuen (1x) ~ ygyue (1x); holden (14x) ~ yholde (2x) ~ yholden (2x); yholpe 17.62; knowen P.56 ~ yknowe 11.229 ~ yknowen 11.401; taken 1.155 ~ ytake 11.260; wonne (4x) ~ ywonne (3x).
For comments on the retention of the <y-> prefix, see weak verbs, paragraph III.3.5.8.
IV. List of Manuscript Sigils
The following list of sigils of the manuscripts of Piers Plowman differs in some respects from the traditional sigils used since Skeat's edition. To a degree the inconsistencies in the sigils reflect the sequence of discovery of the relationships among them. If we were to use the traditional sigils, we would court ambiguity in an electronic text with identical sigils representing different manuscripts and different sigils identifying single manuscripts. British Library Additional 10574, for instance, has no sigil for A, is B's Bm, and C's L. We have, therefore, chosen to represent each manuscript with a unique sigil.
For descriptions of the B manuscripts see George Kane and E. Talbot Donaldson, eds., Piers Plowman: The B Version, Will's Visions of Piers Plowman, Do-Well, Do-Better and Do-Best: An Edition in the Form of Trinity College Cambridge MS B.15.17, Corrected and Restored from the Known Evidence, with Variant Readings., rev. ed. (London, Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1988), 1-15; A. I. Doyle, "Remarks on Surviving Manuscripts of Piers Plowman," in Medieval English Religious and Ethical Literature: Essays in Honour of G. H. Russell, ed. G. Kratzmann and James Simpson (Cambridge, 1986), 35-48; and C. David Benson and Lynne Blanchfield, The Manuscripts of Piers Plowman: The B-Version (Cambridge, 1997).
IV.1 B Manuscripts
|C||Cambridge, Cambridge University Library, MS Dd.1.17|
|C2||Cambridge, Cambridge University Library, MS Ll.4.14|
|Cr1||THE VISION / of Pierce Plowman, now / fyrste imprynted by Roberte / Crowley, dwellyng in Ely / rentes in Holburne (London, 1505 ). STC 19906.|
|Cr2||The vision of / Pierce Plowman, nowe the seconde time imprinted / by Roberte Crowley dwellynge in Elye rentes in Holburne. / Whereunto are added certayne notes and cotations in the / mergyne, geuynge light to the Reader. . . . (London, 1550). STC 19907a.N Robert Carter Hailey (personal communication) informs us that the Short Title Catalogue designations are confused. Cr2 is actually 19907a and 19907 is Cr3. See his unpublished dissertation, "Giving light to the reader: Robert Crowley's editions of Piers Plowman (1550)," (University of Virginia, 2001).|
|Cr3||The vision of / Pierce Plowman, nowe the seconde tyme imprinted / by Roberte Crowley dwellynge in Elye rentes in Holburne / Whereunto are added certayne notes and cotations in the / mergyne, geuyng light to the Reader. . . . (London, 1550). STC 19907|
|F||Oxford, Corpus Christi College, MS 201|
|G||Cambridge, Cambridge University Library, MS Gg.4.31|
|Hm, Hm2||San Marino, Huntington Library, MS 128 (olim Ashburnham 130)|
|JbN This manuscript, like Sb and Wb below, is not described in the above sources, but they are listed by Ralph Hanna, III in William Langland, Authors of the Middle Ages, 3 (Aldershot, Hants., 1993), p. 40.||Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS James 2, part 1|
|L||Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Laud Misc. 581 (S. C. 987)|
|M||London, British Library, MS Additional 35287|
|O||Oxford, Oriel College, MS 79|
|R||London, British Library, MS Lansdowne 398; Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Rawlinson Poetry 38 (S. C. 15563)|
|S||Tokyo, Toshiyuki Takamiya, MS 23 (olim London, Sion College MS Arc. L.40 2/E)|
|SbN This manuscript is not described in the above sources, but it is listed by Ralph Hanna, III in William Langland, Authors of the Middle Ages, 3 (Aldershot, Hants., 1993), p. 40.||London, British Library, MS Sloane 2578|
|W||Cambridge, Trinity College, MS B.15.17|
|WbN This manuscript is not described in the above sources, but it is listed by Ralph Hanna, III in William Langland, Authors of the Middle Ages, 3 (Aldershot, Hants., 1993), p. 40.||Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Wood donat. 7|
|Y||Cambridge, Newnham College, MS 4 (the Yates-Thompson manuscript)|
IV.2 A Manuscripts
|A||Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Ashmole 1468 (S. C. 7004)|
|D||Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Douce 323|
|E||Dublin, Trinity College, MS 213, D.4.12|
|Ha||London, British Library, MS Harley 875, (olim A's H)|
|J||New York, Pierpont Morgan Library, MS M 818 (the Ingilby manuscript)|
|La||London, Lincoln's Inn, MS Hale 150, (olim A's L)|
|Ma||London, Society of Antiquaries, MS 687, (olim A's M)|
|Pa||Cambridge, Pembroke College fragment, MS 312 C/6, (olim A's P)|
|Ra||Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Rawlinson Poetry 137, (olim A's R)|
|U||Oxford, University College, MS 45|
|V||Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Eng. poet. a.1 (the Vernon MS)|
IV.3 C Manuscripts
|Ac||London, University of London Library, MS S.L. V.17, (olim C's A)|
|Ca||Cambridge, Gonville and Caius College 669/646, fol. 210|
|Dc||Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Douce 104, (olim C's D)|
|Ec||Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Laud Misc. 656, (olim C's E)|
|Fc||Cambridge, University Library, MS Ff.5.35, (olim C's F)|
|Gc||Cambridge, University Library, MS Dd.3.13, (olim C's G)|
|Hc||New Haven, Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library, MS Osborn fa45, a damaged bifolium, (olim C's H), the Holloway fragment|
|I||London, University of London Library, MS S.L. V.88 (the Ilchester manuscript)|
|Kc||Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Digby 171, olim C's K|
|Mc||London, British Library, MS Cotton Vespasian B.xvi, (olim C's M)|
|Nc||London, British Library, MS Harley 2376, (olim C's N)|
|P||San Marino, Huntington Library, MS Hm 137 (olim Phillipps 8231)|
|P2||London, British Library, MS Additional 34779 (olim Phillipps 9056)|
|Q||Cambridge, University Library, MS Additional 4325|
|Rc||London, British Library, MS Royal 18.B.xvii, (olim C's R)|
|Sc||Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, MS 293, (olim C's S)|
|Uc||London, British Library, MS Additional 35157, (olim C's U)|
|Vc||Dublin, Trinity College, MS 212, D.4.1|
|X||San Marino, Huntington Library, MS Hm 143|
|Yc||Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Digby 102, (olim C's Y)|
IV.4 AB Splices
|H||London, British Library, MS Harley 3954, olim A's H3 and B's H|
IV.5 AC Splices
|Ch||Liverpool, University Library, MS F.4.8 (the Chaderton manuscript)|
|H2||London, British Library, MS Harley 6041|
|K||Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Digby 145, olim A's K and C's D2|
|N||Aberystwyth, National Library of Wales, MS 733B, olim A's N and C's N2|
|T||Cambridge, Trinity College, MS R.3.14|
|Wa||olim the Duke of Westminster's manuscript. Sold at Sotheby's, London, 11 July 1966, lot 233, to Quaritch for a British private collector.N Ralph Hanna III, William Langland, Authors of the Middle Ages 3: English Writers of the Late Middle Ages (Aldershot, 1993), p. 39. It is presently on loan to the Borthwick Institute for Historical Research in York. (olim A's W and C's W)|
|Z||Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Bodley 851|
IV.6 ABC Splices
|Bm||London, British Library, MS Additional 10574, olim C's L|
|Bo||Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Bodley 814 (S. C. 2683), olim C's B|
|Cot||London, British Library, MS Cotton Caligula A.xi, olim C's O|
|Ht||San Marino, Huntington Library, MS Hm114 (olim Phillipps 8252)|
Allen, Hope Emily. Writings Ascribed to Richard Rolle. London: Oxford University Press, 1927. Reprinted Gloucester: Sutton, 1988.
Brewer, Charlotte, and A. G. Rigg, eds. Piers Plowman: A Facsimile of the Z-Text of Bodleian Library, Oxford, MS Bodley 851. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1994.
Brown, Carleton. Religious Lyrics of the XIVth Century. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1924.
Kane, George, ed. Piers Plowman: The A Version: Will's Visions of Piers Plowman and Do-Wel, An Edition in the Form of Trinity College Cambridge MS R.3.14 Corrected from Other Manuscripts, with Variant Readings. London: Athlone Press, 1960, rev. ed., 1988.
Kane, George, and E. Talbot Donaldson, eds. Piers Plowman: The B Version, 2d ed. London: Athlone Press; Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1988.
Kane, George, and George Russell, eds. Piers Plowman: The C Version. London: Athlone Press; Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1997.
Morris, Richard, ed. The Pricke of Conscience (Stimulus Conscientiae): A Northern Poem by Richard Rolle de Hampole. Berlin, 1863.
Ogilvie-Thomson, S. J., ed. Richard Rolle: Prose and Verse. EETS 293. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988.
Pearsall, Derek, ed. William Langland: Piers Plowman. The C-Text. 2d ed., Exeter Medieval English Texts and Studies. Exeter: University of Exeter Press, 1994.
Rigg, A. G., and Charlotte Brewer, eds. William Langland: Piers Plowman: The Z Version. Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1983.
Schmidt, A. V. C., ed. William Langland, The Vision of Piers Plowman. A Critical Edition of the B-Text Based on Trinity College Cambridge MS B.15.17 with selected variant readings, an Introduction, glosses, and a Textual and Literary Commentary. London, Melbourne, and Toronto: J. M. Dent & Sons Ltd.; New York: E. P. Dutton & Co., 1978, 2d ed.; London: J. M. Dent & Sons, Ltd.; Rutland Vermont: Charles E. Tuttle Co., 1995.
—, ed. William Langland, Piers Plowman: A Parallel-Text Edition of the A, B, C and Z Versions: Vol. 1. Text. London and New York: Longman, 1995.
Skeat, W. W., ed. The Vision concerning Piers the Plowman together with Vita de Dowel, Dobet, et Dobest secundum Wit and Resoun by William Langland: Part 2. The "Crowley" Text: or Text B. EETS OS 38. London: Oxford University Press, 1869.
—, ed. The Vision of William Concerning Piers the Plowman, in Three Parallel Texts. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1886.
Wright, Thomas, ed. The Vision and the Creed of Piers Ploughman. London: Pickering, 1842; revised ed 1856.
Adams, Robert. "The Reliability of the Rubrics in the B-Text of Piers Plowman." Medium Ævum 54 (1985): 208-31.
Benskin, Michael, and Margaret Laing. "Translations and Mischsprachen in Middle English Manuscripts." In So Meny People Longages and Tonges, ed. Michael Benskin and M. L. Samuels. Edinburgh: Middle English Dialect Project, 1981, pp. 55-106.
Benson, C. David, and Lynne S. Blanchfield. The Manuscripts of Piers Plowman: the B-version. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1997.
Brewer, Charlotte. Editing Piers Plowman: The Evolution of the Text. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.
Doyle, A. I. "Remarks on Surviving Manuscripts of Piers Plowman." in Medieval English Religious and Ethical Literature: Essays in Honour of George H. Russell. Ed. Gregory Kratzmann and James Simpson. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1986, pp. 35-48.
Doyle A. I., and M. B. Parkes. "The Production of Copies of the Canterbury Tales and the Confessio Amantis in the Early Fifteenth Century." In Medieval Scribes, Manuscripts and Libraries: Essays Presented to N. R. Ker, ed. M. B. Parkes and Andrew G. Watson. London: Scolar Press, 1978, pp. 163-210.
—. "The Copyist of the Ellesmere Canterbury Tales." in The Ellesmere Chaucer: Essays in Interpretation. Ed. Martin Stevens and Daniel Woodward. San Marino, CA: The Huntington Library, and Tokyo: Yoshudo, 1995, pp. 49-67.
Doyle, A. I., and M. B. Parkes. "A Paleographical Introduction." in The Canterbury Tales. Geoffrey Chaucer. A Facsimile and Transcription of the Hengwrt Manuscript, with Variants from the Ellesmere Manuscript, A Variorum Edition of the Works of Geoffrey Chaucer, vol. 1. ed. Paul G. Ruggiers. Norman, Okla.: Pilgrim Press, 1979, pp. xix-xlix.
Duggan, Hoyt N. "Langland's Dialect and Final -e." Studies in the Age of Chaucer 12 (1990): 157-91.
Hanna III, Ralph. Authors of The Middle Ages, 3: William Langland. Aldershot: Variorum, 1993.
—. Index of Middle English Prose, Handlist 1, A Handlist of Manuscripts in the Henry E. Huntington Library. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1984.
—. "Notes toward a Future History of Middle English Literature: Two Copies of Richard Rolle's Form of Living." in Chaucer in Perspective. ed. Geoffrey Lester. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999, pp. 279-300.
James, Montague Rhodes. The Western Manuscripts in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1900.
Mustanoja, Tauno F. A Middle English Syntax: Part I: Parts of Speech. Mémoires de la Société Néophilologique de Helsinki, no. 23. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique, 1960.
Parkes, M. B. Pause and Effect: An Introduction to the History of Punctuation in the West. Aldershot: Scolar, 1992.
Samuels, M. L. "Some Applications of Middle English Dialectology." English Studies 44 (1963), 81-94. Reprinted in Middle English Dialectology: Essays on Some Principles and Problems by Angus McIntosh, M. L. Samuels and Margaret Laing, edited and introduced by Margaret Laing. Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press, 1989, pp. 64-80.
— "Chaucer's Spelling." In Middle English Studies Presented to Norman Davis, ed. Douglas Gray and E. G. Stanley. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1983, pp. 17-37. Reprinted in The English of Chaucer and his contemporaries, ed. J. J. Smith. Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press, 1989, pp. 23-37.
— "Langland's Dialect." Medium Ævum 54 (1985): 232-47. Reprinted in The English of Chaucer and his Contemporaries, ed. J. J. Smith. Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press, 1989, pp. 70-85.
—. "Dialect and Grammar." In A Companion to Piers Plowman, ed. John A. Alford. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1988.
Smith, Jeremy J. "The Language of the Ellesmere Manuscript." In The Ellesmere Chaucer: Essays in Interpretation, ed. Martin Stevens and Daniel Woodward. San Marino, CA: The Huntington Library, and Tokyo: Yoshudo, 1995, pp. 69-86.