<div1>
<div1>fol. 24v (cont.)I</div1>
<head><foreign><hi>Passus Sextus de visione vt sup<expan>ra</expan> . <seg></seg> <seg></seg></hi></foreign> </head>
<lb/>
<lg>
t
<l> <hi><hi>T</hi></hi>his were a wikked way  but ho<seg>-</seg>so hadde a gyde .</l>
<l> Þat wolde folewe vs ech a fote  þus þis folke he<expan>m</expan> mened .</l>
<lb/>
<l> <note>R.6.3: There is no paraph marker here because there was no space for one (the passus initial extends down slightly beyond this line in the left margin).</note> <hi>Q</hi>uatȝ <hi>p</hi>erkyn þe plowma<expan>n</expan>  by seint peter of rome .</l>
R.6.4KD.6.4
<l> I haue an half acre to erie  by þe heyȝ weye .</l>
<l> Hadde I hered þis half acre  and <app><lem>I<seg>-</seg>sowen</lem></app> it after .</l>
<l> I wil<note>R.6.6: Among the other <hi>B</hi> copies, only LCY share R's <hi>wil</hi> (the rest read <hi>wolde</hi>). That the latter form of the verb was original in the <hi>A</hi> version seems obvious (though three of its manuscripts—Ra, U, and La—support a future meaning in place of the conditional); but the reading of <hi>Cx</hi> is more problematic. Most <hi>C</hi> copies agree with the <hi>AB</hi> majorities on <hi>wolde</hi>, but three of the most authoritative X-family witnesses, XYcI, support the RLCY reading.</note> wenden with ȝow  and þe weye teche .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> Þis were a longe lettyng  q<expan>uo</expan>d a lady in a sclayre .</l>
R.6.8KD.6.8
<l> What schuld we wo<expan>m</expan>men  werche <app><lem>þere</lem></app><note>R.6.8: Most beta manuscripts of all other sub-groups read <hi>þe</hi>, but the LM pair agrees with alpha.</note> whiles .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> Su<expan>m</expan>me schal sowe þe sak q<expan>uo</expan>d peres  for scheding of þe whete .</l>
<l> And ȝe loueliche ladyes  with ȝour<expan>e</expan> longe fyngeres .</l>
<l> Þat ȝe haue selke and sendel  to sowe whan tyme is .</l>
R.6.12KD.6.12
<l> Chesibles for chapeleynes  cherches to honoure .</l>
<hi>wyues and wydewes .</hi>
<milestone>fol. 25rI</milestone>
</lg>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> Wyues and wydewes  wolle and flex spynneth .</l>
<l> Maketh cloth I conseile ȝow  <app><lem><sic>ad</sic><corr>a[n]d</corr></lem></app> kenneth so ȝour<expan>e</expan> douȝtres .</l>
<l> Þe nedy and þe naked  nemeth hede how <app><lem>a</lem></app><note>R.6.15: <hi>a</hi>, "they."</note> lyggeth .</l>
R.6.16KD.6.16
<l> And casteth <app><lem>hym</lem></app><note> <hi>hym</hi>, "them." For <a> and <hi>hym</hi> as spellings of "they" and "them," see <title>MED</title>, <hi>s.v.</hi> <hi>he</hi> pron.(3) and <hi>hem</hi> <hi>pron.pl.</hi></note> clothes  for so comaundeth treuthe .</l>
<l> For I schal lene hem lyflode  but if þe londe fayle .</l>
<l> Flesche and brede bothe  to riche an<del>t</del><add>d</add> to pouere .</l>
<l> As longe as I lyue  for þe lordes loue of heuene .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
R.6.20KD.6.19
<l> <hi></hi> And alle maner<expan>e</expan> of men  þat thorȝ mete and drynke libbeth .</l>
<l> Helpeth hym to werche wyȝtliche  þat wynneth ȝour<expan>e</expan> fode .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> By crist q<expan>uo</expan>d a kniȝt þo  he kenneth vs þe beste .</l>
<l> Ac on þe teem treuly  tauȝt was I neuere .</l>
R.6.24KD.6.23
<l> Ac kenne me q<expan>uo</expan>d þe kniȝt  and by crist I wil assay .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> By seint poule q<expan>uo</expan>d perkyn  ȝe p<expan>ro</expan>fre ȝow so faire .</l>
<l> Þat I schal swynke and swete  and sowe for vs bothe .</l>
<l> And other <app><lem>laboreres</lem></app> do for þi loue  al my lif<seg>-</seg>tyme .</l>
R.6.28KD.6.27
<l> In<note>R.6.28: There is a mark above the <I> of <hi>In</hi>. It appears to be a backwards <c> in brown, touched with red.</note> couenau<expan>n</expan>t þat þow kepe  holy cherche and my<seg>-</seg>selue .</l>
<l> Fro wastoures and fro wikked men  þat þis world strueth .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> And go hunte hardiliche  to hares and to foxes .</l>
<l> To bores and to <app><lem>bukkes</lem></app><note>R.6.31: Cf. beta's <hi>brockes</hi>; F rewrites the a-verse. Both <hi>Ax</hi> and <hi>Cx</hi> agree with R's lection.</note>  þat breketh a<seg>-</seg>dou<expan>n</expan> myn hegges .</l>
R.6.32KD.6.31
<l> And go afayte þi faukones  wilde foules to kulle .</l>
<l> For swyche cometh to my crofte  and croppeth my whete .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> Curteiseliche þe kniȝt þanne  comsed þes wordes .</l>
<l> By my power peres q<expan>uo</expan>d he  I pliȝt þe my treuthe .</l>
R.6.36KD.6.35
<l> To fulfille <app><lem>þi</lem></app><note>R.6.36: R's <hi>þi</hi> is unique; <hi>Bx</hi> reads <hi>þis</hi>, which is also the reading of a plurality of <hi>A</hi> witnesses in a very similar rendering of this line.</note> forwarde  þouȝ I fiȝte schulde .</l>
<l> As longe as I lyue  I schal þe meyntene .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> Ȝe and ȝet a poynt q<expan>uo</expan>d peres  I preye ȝow of more .</l>
<l> Loke ȝe tene no tenaunt  but treuthe wil assente .</l>
R.6.40KD.6.39
<l> And þouȝ ȝe mowe am<expan>er</expan>cy <app><lem>men</lem></app><note>R.6.40: Beta reads <hi>hem</hi>. In a slightly revised line, the <hi>C</hi> tradition agrees here with alpha, reading <hi>men</hi>.</note>  lat mercy be taxour<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> And mekenesse <app><lem>ȝour<expan>e</expan></lem></app><note>R.6.41: Both F and beta attest <hi>þi</hi>. The same is true of <hi>Cx</hi>.</note> mayster<expan>e</expan>  maugre <app><lem>mede</lem></app><note>R.6.41: R's uninflected form is unique among the <hi>B</hi> manuscripts; the others have <hi>medes</hi>. However, a majority of <hi>C</hi> witnesses, including the best X-family copies, agree with R's form.</note> chekes .<note>R.6.41: Here the scribe again omits his usual insertion of a blank line to mark a new paragraph, presumably because the next line is the last of the side.</note></l>
</lg>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> And þouȝ pore men profre ȝow  p<expan>re</expan>sentes and ȝiftes .</l>
e j
<milestone>fol. 25vI</milestone>
<l> Nyme it nauȝt an aunter  <app><lem>þow</lem></app><note>R.6.43: R's <hi>aunter þow</hi> is an alpha reading; beta has <hi>auenture ȝe</hi>; however, though five <hi>A</hi> witnesses support <hi>auenture</hi>, it seems clear that the entire phrase, in both <hi>Ax</hi> and <hi>Cx</hi> was rendered as in alpha.</note> mowe it nauȝt deserue</l>
R.6.44KD.6.43
<l> For þow schalt ȝelde it aȝen  at on ȝeres ende .</l>
<l> In a ful periliouse place  purgatorie it hatteth .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> And mysbede nauȝt þi <app><lem>bonde<seg>-</seg>man</lem></app>  þe bett<expan>er</expan>e may þow spede .</l>
<l> Þouȝ he be þin vnderlyng here  wel may happe in heuene .</l>
R.6.48KD.6.47
<l> Þat he worth worthier sett  and with more blisse .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Amice ascende superius .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> For in <app><lem>a</lem></app> <app><lem>chanel</lem></app><note>R.6.50: <hi>chanel</hi>, "charnel house." For the spelling, see <title>MED</title>, <hi>s.v.</hi> <hi>charnel</hi> n.(1).</note> at cherche  <app><lem>clerkes</lem></app><note>R.6.50: Beta reads <hi>cherles</hi>, which clearly reflects <hi>Bx</hi> (and agrees with <hi>C</hi>). Alpha's variant (F = <hi>a clerk</hi>) is deficient in alliteration as well as less suitable to the context (levelling of social classes beyond death).</note> ben euel to knowe .</l>
<l> Or a kniȝt fram a knaue þere  knowe þis in þin herte .</l>
R.6.52KD.6.50
<l> And þat þow be trewe of <app><lem>tonge</lem></app><note>R.6.52: Beta reads <hi>of <hi>þi</hi> tonge</hi>. Most <hi>A</hi> witnesses agree on this reading with beta, as does the X family of <hi>C</hi> manuscripts. However, four <hi>A </hi> copies (TDH<hi>2</hi>V) agree with alpha's omission of any determiner. Most of the P family in the <hi>C</hi> tradition attest the presence of <hi>hys</hi> at this point.</note>  and tales þat þow hatie .</l>
<l> But if þei ben of wisdom  or of witt þi werkmen to chastie .</l>
<l> Holde <app><lem>nauȝt</lem></app><note>R.6.54: No beta manuscript attests <hi>nauȝt</hi>. Two <hi>A</hi> copies agree with alpha at this point, but most support beta. By contrast almost all <hi>C</hi> witnesses support alpha's use of the double negative in this a-verse, although the Russell-Kane edition emends this evidence away.</note> with non herlotes  ne here nauȝt here tales .</l>
<l> And nameliche at þe mete  swyche men eschewe .</l>
R.6.56KD.6.54
<l> For it beth þe deueles disoures  I do þe to vnderstonde .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <del></del><supplied></supplied> I assente by seint Iame  seyde þe kniȝt þanne .</l>
<l> For to werch by thy wordes  þe while my lyf dureth .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> And I schal apparaille me q<expan>uo</expan>d perkyn  in pilgrimes wise .</l>
R.6.60KD.6.58
<l> And wende with ȝow I wil  til we fynde treuthe .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <del></del><supplied></supplied> And caste on me<note>R.6.61: Only L agrees with R in attesting <hi>me my</hi>. F and the other beta copies simply show <hi>my</hi>. <hi>Ax</hi> and <hi>Cx</hi> agree against <hi>B</hi> in reading this phrase as third-person description: <hi><hi>He</hi> caste on (<hi>his</hi> = <hi>A</hi>) / (<hi>hym his</hi> = <hi>C</hi>) cloþis</hi>. It is interesting to note that the one difference between the <hi>A</hi> and <hi>C</hi> phrases parallels the grammatical difference between LR and the other <hi>B</hi> witnesses.</note> my clothes  I<seg>-</seg>clouted and <app><lem>I<seg>-</seg>hole</lem></app> .</l>
<l> My cokeres and my cuffes  for colde of my nayles .</l>
<l> And hange myn hoper at myn hals  in stede of a sc<expan>ri</expan>ppe .</l>
R.6.64KD.6.62
<l> A buschel of brede<seg>-</seg>corne  bryng me þer<expan>e</expan><seg>-</seg>Inne .</l>
<l> For I wil sowen it my<seg>-</seg>selue  and sytthen wil I wende .</l>
<l> To pilgrimage as palmeres dou<expan>n</expan>  pardon for to haue .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> Ac ho<seg>-</seg>so helpeth me to erye  or sowen her<expan>e</expan> er<expan>e</expan> I wende .</l>
R.6.68KD.6.66
<l> Schal haue leue be oure lord  to lese here in herueste .</l>
<l> And maken <app><lem>hym</lem></app><note>R.6.69: Beta reads <hi>hem</hi> here, but both <hi>Ax</hi> and <hi>Cx</hi> agree with alpha's <hi>hym</hi>.</note> merie þer<expan>e</expan>myde  maugre ho<seg>-</seg>so <app><lem>it</lem></app> be<seg>-</seg>grucche .<note>R.6.69: Beta transposes the final phrase as <hi>bigruccheth it</hi>. This word order parallels that found in the X family of <hi>C</hi> (the P family omits <hi>it</hi> completely, as do several of the less authoritative copies in the <hi>B</hi> tradition). However, the <hi>A</hi> witnesses strongly support alpha's phrasing at this point.</note></l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <del></del><supplied></supplied> <hi>A</hi>nd alle kynne crafty men  þ<expan>a</expan>t conne lyuen in treuthe .</l>
<l> I schal fynde hem fode  þat feithfullyche libbeth .<note>R.6.71: Here the scribe again omits his usual insertion of a blank line to mark a new paragraph, presumably because the next line is the last of the side.</note></l>
</lg>
<lg>
R.6.72KD.6.70
<l> <hi></hi> <hi>S</hi>aue Iakke þe iogelour  and Ihonete of þe <app><lem>stiues</lem></app> .</l>
<milestone>fol. 26rI</milestone>
<l> And daniel þe dys pleyere  and denote þe bawde .</l>
<l> And frere þe faitoure  and folke of hys ordre .</l>
<l> And robyn þe ribauder  for his rousty wordes .</l>
R.6.76KD.6.74
<l> Treuthe tolde me ones  and badde me tellen it after</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Deleantur de libro viuenciu<expan>m</expan></foreign>  I schulde nauȝt dele with hem .</hi></l>
<l> For holy cherche is hote  of hem no tythe to <app><lem>aske</lem></app> .<note>R.6.78: R's <hi>aske</hi> is unique; both beta and F read <hi>take</hi>. However, both <hi>Ax</hi> and <hi>Cx</hi> agree with R's reading.</note></l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Quia cu<expan>m</expan> iustis non scribantur .</foreign></hi></l>
R.6.80KD.6.77
<l> Þei ben aschaped good auntour  <app><lem>now</lem></app><note>R.6.80: Beta reads <hi>auenture</hi> in place of alpha's <hi>auntour</hi>, but <hi>Ax</hi> and <hi>Cx</hi> agree with alpha's form. Also, most beta copies omit alpha's <hi>now</hi>, but its occurrence in LM clearly attests its authenticity, both in beta and <hi>Bx</hi>. Almost all <hi>C</hi> witnesses—and a majority of <hi>A</hi> copies—attest the presence of this adverb.</note> god hem amende .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> Dame worche whan tyme is  peres wif hyȝte .</l>
<l> His <sic>douȝte</sic><corr>douȝte[r]</corr> hiȝt do riȝt so  or þi dame schal þe bete .</l>
<l> His sone hiȝt suffre  þi souereynes <app><lem>haue</lem></app><note>R.6.83: Beta reads <hi><hi>to</hi> hauen</hi>. A majority of the <hi>A</hi> witnesses supports beta (none supports alpha), but <hi>Cx</hi> clearly agrees with alpha in omitting <hi>to</hi>.</note> here wille .</l>
R.6.84KD.6.81
<l> Deme hem nauȝt for if þow dost  þow schalt it der<expan>e</expan> a<seg>-</seg>bugge .</l>
<l> Lat god I<seg>-</seg>worth with al  for so his worde techeth .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <del></del><supplied></supplied> For now I am holde and hore  and haue of myn owene .</l>
<l> To penaunce and to pilgrimage  I wil passe with þis other<expan>e</expan> .</l>
R.6.88KD.6.85
<l> For<seg>-</seg>thy I wil ar I wende  do write my <app><lem>queste</lem></app> .<note>R.6.88: R's <hi>queste</hi> is unique in form but identical in sense to beta's reading (See <title>MED</title>, <hi>s. v.</hi> <hi>quiste</hi> [n.]); cf. F's <hi>enqweste</hi> and beta's <hi>biqueste</hi>. Both <hi>Ax</hi> and <hi>Cx</hi> agree with beta's form.</note></l>
<l> <hi><foreign>In dei no<expan>m</expan>i<expan>n</expan>e amen </foreign></hi> I make it my<seg>-</seg>selue  he schal haue my soule .<note>R.6.89: Here alpha differs from beta by merging the opening phrase from the archetype's next line (= <hi>He shal haue my soule </hi>) with this one, and then truncating the third line by deleting its final phrase (= <hi>for so I bileue</hi>), so that the three lines in Langland's presumptive original are reduced to two non-alliterating ones.</note></l>
<l> Þat best hath I<seg>-</seg>serued it  and fro þe fende <app><lem>I<seg>-</seg>keped it</lem></app><note>R.6.90: R's <hi>I<seg>-</seg>keped</hi> is unique; F rephrases this verse, with his own unique verb phrase (<hi>weyvid fram yt</hi>); the cognate beta reading is <hi>it defende</hi>. Both <hi>Ax</hi> and <hi>Cx</hi> substantially agree with beta's phrasing in this entire passage, where alpha was clearly corrupt (cf. note at R6.89).</note> .</l>
<l> Til I come <app><lem>til</lem></app><note>R.6.91: R's <hi>til</hi> before <hi>his acountes</hi> is unique among the <hi>B</hi> witnesses. <hi>Ax</hi>, like beta and F, shows <hi>to</hi> here, but <hi>Cx</hi> agrees with R.</note> his acountes  as my crede <app><lem>telleth</lem></app><note>R.6.91: Beta adds <hi>me</hi> before <hi>telleth</hi>. A majority of <hi>A</hi> manuscripts agrees with beta on this addition, but a minority (ChHaLaEWaMa) supports alpha's omission of the pronoun. Moreover, <hi>Cx</hi> clearly supports alpha in omitting <hi>me</hi>.</note> .</l>
R.6.92KD.6.90
<l> To haue a reles and a remissiou<expan>n</expan>  on þat rental I leue .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> Þe kyrke schal haue my carayne  and kepe myn bones .</l>
<l> For of my corne and catel  he crauede <app><lem>tithe</lem></app> .<note>R.6.94: R uniquely omits a determiner before <hi>tithe</hi>. Most <hi>B</hi> witnesses agree with <hi>Ax</hi> in attesting <hi>þe</hi> before the noun; however, Cr agrees with <hi>Cx</hi> in reading <hi>my</hi> at this point.</note></l>
<l> I payede it hym prestly  for peryl of my soule .</l>
R.6.96KD.6.94
<l> For<seg>-</seg>thi is he holden I hope  to haue me in his messe .</l>
<l> And mengen in his memorie  amonge alle cristene </l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <del></del><supplied></supplied> My wif schal haue of þat I wan  with treuthe and namore .</l>
<l> And dele amonge my douȝteres  and my der<expan>e</expan> <app><lem>childres</lem></app><note>R.6.99: R's form is unique; all other witnesses in the <hi>B</hi> tradition have <hi>children</hi>. Two <hi>C</hi> manuscripts (XI) agree with R, but most agree with the <hi>B</hi> majority.</note> .</l>
R.6.100KD.6.98
<l> For þouȝ I <app><lem>deyede</lem></app><note>R.6.100: Beta's form agrees with the reading of both <hi>Ax</hi> and <hi>Cx</hi>.</note> to<seg>-</seg>day  my <app><lem>dette</lem></app> <app><lem>is Iquited</lem></app> .<note>R.6.100: R's singular is unique; F shows a plural, <hi>dettys ben alle qwitte</hi>, and beta attests a slightly different plural phrasing, <hi>dettes ar quitte</hi>. The <hi>A</hi> tradition clearly supports the F/beta plural format here, but the <hi>C</hi> tradition is divided, much of the P family concurring with F/beta while the X family (and a few P copies) support R's singular.</note></l>
<l> I bare hom þat I borwede  ar I to bedde ȝede .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> <hi>A</hi>nd with þe residue and þe remenau<expan>n</expan>t  be þe rode of lukes .</l>
<l> <hi>I</hi> wil worschipe þer<expan>e</expan>with  treuthe by my lyue .</l>
e ij
<milestone>fol. 26vI</milestone>
R.6.104KD.6.102
<l> And ben his pilgrime at þe plow  for pore menne sake .</l>
<l> My <app><lem>plow<seg>-</seg>pote</lem></app><note>R.6.105: Beta reads <hi>plow<seg>-</seg>fote</hi>, but <hi>Ax</hi> clearly agrees with the alpha reading.</note> schal be my pyk<seg>-</seg>staf  and picchen <app><lem>at</lem></app><note>R.6.105: Cf. F's <hi>a<seg>-</seg>wey</hi> and beta's <hi>atwo</hi>. Most of the <hi>A</hi> witnesses agree with R.</note> þe rotes .</l>
<l> And helpe my culter to kerue  and <app><lem>clenese</lem></app> þe forewes .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> Now is p<expan>er</expan>kyn and <app><lem>þese</lem></app><note>R.6.107: Beta reads <hi>his</hi>; F has <hi>þe</hi>. Most <hi>A</hi> copies support F's reading. Among the <hi>C</hi> manuscripts, the P family also agrees with F, but the X family reading, <hi>þis</hi>, concurs with R's <hi>þese</hi>.</note> pilgrimes  to þe plow faren .</l>
R.6.108KD.6.106
<l> To herye þis haf hacre  holpen hym manye .</l>
<l> Dikeres and delueres  digged vp þe balkes .</l>
<l> Þer<expan>e</expan>with was p<expan>er</expan>kyn apayd  and preised hem faste .</l>
<l> Other werkmen þer<expan>e</expan> were  þat woruten ful ȝerne .</l>
R.6.112KD.6.110
<l> Vch man in his maner<expan>e</expan>  made hym<seg>-</seg>self to done .</l>
<l> And somme to plese p<expan>er</expan>kyn  piked vp þe wedes .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <del></del><supplied></supplied> At heȝ prime peres  lete þe plow stande .</l>
<l> <app><lem>And ȝeed</lem></app><note>R.6.115: R's <hi>And ȝeed to</hi> is unique; otherwise R reads the line as beta does (which begins the line simply with <hi>To</hi> . F completely rephrases the line, but the fact that F's rewritten line begins <hi>& wente</hi> indicates that R's unique opening probably derives from alpha. Both the <hi>A</hi> and <hi>C</hi> versions begin this line by omitting R's opening (the former reading the phrase exactly as beta does).</note> to ouer<seg>-</seg>sen hem hy<expan>m</expan><seg>-</seg>self  and ho<seg>-</seg>so best wrouȝte .</l>
R.6.116KD.6.114
<l> He schuld be huyred þer<expan>e</expan><seg>-</seg>after  whan heruest<seg>-</seg>tyme come .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> And þanne sete so<expan>m</expan>me  and songen at þe ale .</l>
<l> And <app><lem>ho</lem></app><note>R.6.118: <hi>ho</hi>, "they." See <title>MED</title>, <hi>s. v.</hi> <hi>he</hi> pron.(3).</note> helpen to erye<note>R.6.118: Only G agrees with R's assignment of present tense to this verb; only F agrees with R's inclusion of <hi>to</hi> after the verb. Beta reads <hi>hulpen</hi> (cf. F's <hi>hulpen</hi>). R's <hi>ho</hi> is unique error.</note> his half acre  with how trolly lolly .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <del></del><supplied></supplied> Now be þe perill<expan>e</expan> of my soule q<expan>uo</expan>d peres  alle i<expan>n</expan> puer tene .</l>
R.6.120KD.6.118
<l> But ȝe arise þe rather<expan>e</expan>  and rape ȝow to werche .</l>
<l> Schal no greyn þat groweth  glade ȝow at nede .</l>
<l> And þouȝ ȝe <app><lem>deyede</lem></app><note>R.6.122: R's <hi>deyede</hi> is unique. All other <hi>B</hi> manuscripts show a present-tense form here, as do the <hi>A</hi> and <hi>C</hi> versions.</note> for deul  þe deuel haue þat <app><lem>recche</lem></app> .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> Þo were faitoures aferde  and feyned hem blynde .</l>
R.6.124KD.6.122
<l> So<expan>m</expan>me leyde here legges a<seg>-</seg>lyry  as swiche loseles co<expan>n</expan>neth .</l>
<l> And made here mone to peres  and preyed hym of grace .</l>
<l> For we haue no lymes to labore with  lord graced be ȝe .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <del></del><supplied></supplied> Ac we preye for ȝow peres  and for ȝour<expan>e</expan> plow bothe .</l>
R.6.128KD.6.126
<l> Þat god of his grace  ȝoure greyne multiplye .</l>
<l> And ȝelde ȝow of ȝour<expan>e</expan> almesse  þat ȝe ȝiuen vs here .</l>
<l> For we may nouȝt swynk ne swete  suche seknesse vs ayleth .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> If it be soth q<expan>uo</expan>d peres þ<expan>a</expan>t ȝe seyne  I schal it sone aspie .</l>
R.6.132KD.6.130
<l> <app><lem>Þo</lem></app><note>R.6.132: R's reading is unique and clearly defective; beta has <hi>Ȝe</hi> and F reads <hi>Þat ȝee</hi>. Both the <hi>A</hi> and <hi>C</hi> versions confirm the correctness of beta's reading.</note> ben wastoures I wot wel  <app><lem>treuthe</lem></app><note>R.6.132: R's omission of <hi>and</hi> at the beginning of the b-verse is unique. The <hi>A</hi> version confirms the presence and location of this conjunction, as found in beta and F.</note> wot <app><lem>wel</lem></app><note>R.6.132: R's redundancy (reiterated <hi>wel</hi> in the b-verse) is unique.</note> þe sothe .</l>
<milestone>fol. 27rI</milestone>
<l> And I am his olde hyne  and hiȝte hym to warne .</l>
<l> Whiche þei weren in þis world  his werkemen <app><lem>apayreth</lem></app> .<note>R.6.134: Beta reads <hi>appeyred</hi>. F has <hi>a-peyre</hi>. </note></l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <del></del><supplied></supplied> Ȝe wasten þat men wynnen  with trauayle and with tene .</l>
R.6.136KD.6.134
<l> Ac treuthe schal teche ȝow  his teme to driue .</l>
<l> Or ȝe schal ete barly brede  and of þe broke drynke .</l>
<l> But if he <app><lem>blynde</lem></app><note>R.6.138: R's omission of the verb here is unique; cf. F's <hi>he þat is blynd</hi> and beta's <hi>he be blynde</hi>.</note> or brokelegged  or bolted with yrenes . .</l>
<l> He schal ete whete brede  and drinke with me<seg>-</seg>selue .</l>
R.6.140KD.6.138
<l> Til god of his goednesse  amendement hym sende .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <del></del><supplied></supplied> Ac ȝe miȝt trauaile as treuthe wolde  & take mete & huyre .</l>
<l> To kepe ken in þe felde  þe corne fro þe bestes .</l>
<l> Diken or deluen  or dyngen vppon scheues .</l>
R.6.144KD.6.142
<l> Or helpe make morter  or bere muk a<seg>-</seg>felde .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <del></del><supplied></supplied> In lecherie and in losyngrie  <app><lem><sic>lyue</sic><corr>[ȝe] lyue</corr></lem></app> and in sleuthe .<note>R.6.145: There is an ink blot, probably the result of offset, that has the appearance of a second punctus far to the right of the intended line terminal punctus and just inside the ruling margin.</note></l>
<l> And al is thorȝ suffraunce  þ<expan>a</expan>t vengance ȝow ne taketh .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <del></del><supplied></supplied> Ac ancres and heremites  þat eten but at nones .</l>
R.6.148KD.6.146
<l> And namore ar morewe  myn almesse schul þei haue .</l>
<l> And of <app><lem>my</lem></app> catel to cope hem with  þat haue cloystres <app><lem>i<expan>n</expan> kerkes</lem></app><note>R.6.149: R's <hi>in kerkes</hi> is unique; the other <hi>B</hi> witnesses read <hi>and cherche(s)</hi>.</note> .</l>
<l> Ac robert renneaboute  schal nauȝt haue of myne .</l>
<l> Ne postles but þei p<expan>re</expan>che co<expan>n</expan>ne  and <app><lem>ȝut</lem></app><note>R.6.151: R's <hi>ȝut</hi> is a unique addition to the text of <hi>Bx</hi>.</note> haue pouer of þe bisshopp<expan>e</expan> .</l>
R.6.152KD.6.150
<l> Þei schal haue payn and potage  and make hem<seg>-</seg>self at ese .</l>
<l> For it is an vnresonable religion  þat hath riȝt nauȝt of certeyne .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <del></del><supplied></supplied> And þanne gan a wastour to wra<del>.</del><add>t</add>he hy<expan>m</expan>  & wold haue I<seg>-</seg>fouȝte .</l>
<l> And to peres þe plowman  he profered his gloue .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
R.6.156KD.6.154
<l> <del></del><supplied></supplied> A bretoner<expan>e</expan> a braggere  <orig>abosted</orig><reg>a bosted</reg><note>R.6.156: <hi>A</hi>, "he."</note> peres alse .</l>
<l> And bad hym go pissen <app><lem>on</lem></app><note>R.6.157: Beta reads <hi>with</hi>. Both <hi>Ax</hi> and <hi>Cx</hi> agree with beta.</note> his plow  forpyned schrewe .</l>
<l> Wil þow or nell<expan>e</expan> þow  we wil haue oure wille .</l>
<l> <app><lem>And</lem></app> of<note>R.6.159: R's <hi>And of</hi> is an alpha phrase (F omits <hi>of</hi>). The X family of <hi>C</hi> also begins the line with <hi>And</hi>. Though two <hi>A</hi> manuscripts (KMa) also begin the line exactly as R does, <hi>Ax</hi>, like beta, omits <hi>And</hi>.</note> þi flour<expan>e</expan> and of þi flesch<expan>e</expan>  fecche whanne vs liketh .</l>
R.6.160KD.6.158
<l> And make vs merie þer<expan>e</expan><seg>-</seg>myde  maugre þi chekes .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <del></del><supplied></supplied> Þanne peres þe plowman  pleyned hym to þe kniȝte . </l>
eiij
<milestone>fol. 27vI</milestone>
<l> To kepe hym as couenant was  fram cursed schrewes .</l>
<l> And fram þes wastoures wolues<seg>-</seg>kynnes  þat maketh þis<note>R.6.163: Although G agrees with R, beta reads <hi>þe</hi>; F omits the entire line. <hi>Cx</hi> supports the RG reading.</note> world der<expan>e</expan> .</l>
R.6.164KD.6.162
<l> For þo waste and wynnen nauȝt  and þat ilke while .</l>
<l> Worth neuer plente amonge <app><lem>poeple</lem></app><note>R.6.165: R uniquely omits <hi>þe</hi> before <hi>poeple</hi>.</note>  þe while my plow liggeth .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> Corteyseliche þe kniȝt þanne  as his kende wolde .</l>
<l> Warned wastour  and wissede hym bettere .</l>
R.6.168KD.6.166
<l> Or þow schalt abugge <app><lem>with</lem></app><note>R.6.168: R's <hi>with</hi> is unique. The other <hi>B</hi> manuscripts read <hi>by</hi>.</note> þe lawe  by þe ordre þ<expan>a</expan>t I bere .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <del></del><supplied></supplied> I was nouȝt <app><lem>wone</lem></app><note>R.6.169: R's form here is unique; <hi>Bx</hi> reads <hi>wont</hi>.</note> to werche q<expan>uo</expan>d wastour  & now wil I nouȝt bygynne .</l>
<l> And leet <app><lem>liȝtly</lem></app> of þe lawe  and lasse of þe knyȝt .<note> There is a brown paraph sign entered at the end of this line, presumably to mark the presence of <hi>bygynne</hi>, which is carried over from the end of the previous line and written after the paraph.</note></l>
<l> And sette peres at a pese  and his plow bothe .</l>
R.6.172KD.6.170
<l> And manseyd peres and his men  if þei mette efte<seg>-</seg>sone .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> <note>R.6.173: Beta begins this line with <hi>Now by</hi>. The same phrase as beta's occurs in <hi>Ax</hi> and opens a revised version of the line in <hi>Cx</hi></note> Be þe perel of my soule q<expan>uo</expan>d peres  I schal apeyre ȝow alle .</l>
<l> And houped after honger  þat herde hym at þe furste .</l>
<l> Awreke me of þis wastoures q<expan>uo</expan>d he  þat þis world schenden .<note>R.6.175: Though manuscripts O and G agree with R's terminal inflection for this verb, ( a feature also mirrored by several <hi>A</hi> witnesses), beta itself, as with <hi>Ax</hi>, presumably read <hi>schendeth</hi>. F has <hi>shende</hi>.</note></l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
R.6.176KD.6.174
<l> <del></del><supplied></supplied> Honger in haste þo  hente wastour<expan>e</expan> by þe mawe .</l>
<l> And wronge hym so by þe wombe  þat <app><lem>al watred his eyȝes</lem></app> .<note>R.6.177: R's b-verse is unique; F and beta agree in reading <hi>þat bothe his eyen wattered</hi>. However, R's b-verse agrees exactly with the same phrase in both <hi>Ax</hi> and <hi>Cx</hi>; it is, therefore, presumably the original reading in <hi>B</hi>.</note></l>
<l> He <app><lem>boffette</lem></app> þe bretoner  aboute þe chekes .</l>
<l> Þat he loked like a lanterne  al his lif after .</l>
R.6.180KD.6.178
<l> He bette hem so bothe  he braste nere her guttes .</l>
<l> Ne hadde peres with a pese lofe  preyed honger <app><lem>sese</lem></app> .<note>R.6.181: Cf. beta's <hi>hunger <hi>to</hi> cesse</hi>. Both <hi>Ax</hi> and <hi>Cx</hi> agree on a different phrase, with a less obvious verb, for this line's ending: <hi>hym byleue</hi>.</note></l>
<l> Þei hadde be dolue bothe  ne deme þow non other .</l>
<l> Suffre hem lyue he seyde  and late hem ete with hogges .</l>
R.6.184KD.6.182
<l> Or elles benes and bren  I<seg>-</seg>bake to<seg>-</seg>gyderes .</l>
<l> Or elles melke and meyne ale  þus preyed peres for hem .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> Faytoures for fere hereof  flowen <app><lem>in</lem></app><note>R.6.186: All other <hi>B</hi> witnesses read <hi>into</hi>; both <hi>Ax</hi> and <hi>Cx</hi> agree with them against R.</note> bernes .</l>
<l> And flapten on with flailes  fram morwen til euen .</l>
R.6.188KD.6.185
<l> Þat hu<expan>n</expan>ger was nouȝt <app><lem>hardy</lem></app><note>R.6.188: Although G agrees here with alpha, beta itself reads <hi>so hardy</hi>, a reading also attested by half of the <hi>A</hi> manuscripts (RaUHaJEWaMaH). On the other hand, <hi>Cx</hi> clearly agrees with alpha's reading (i.e., the omission of <hi>so</hi>).</note>  on hem for to loke .</l>
<l> For a potful of peses  þat peres hadde I<seg>-</seg>maked .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <del></del><supplied></supplied> An hepe of heremites hent hem spades .</l>
<l> And ketten here copes  and curtebies hem made .</l>
<milestone>fol. 28rI</milestone>
R.6.192KD.6.189
<l> And wenten as werkmen  with spades and with schoueles .</l>
<l> And doluen and dikeden  to driue awey honger .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> Blynde and bedredene  were botened a thousend .</l>
<l> Þat seten to begge seluer  sone were þei heled .</l>
R.6.196KD.6.193
<l> For þat was bake for bayarde  was bote <app><lem>to</lem></app> many<note>R.6.196: Beta reads <hi>for many</hi>, the same phrase as in <hi>Cx</hi>. F substitutes <hi>þe</hi> for the phrases found here in R and beta.</note> hungri .</l>
<l> And many a begger<expan>e</expan> for benes  <app><lem>fayne</lem></app><note>R.6.197: R's <hi>fayne</hi> is unique; cf. F's <hi>ful bown</hi> and beta's <hi>buxome</hi>.</note> was to swynke .</l>
<l> And ech a pore man wel apayde  to haue pesen for his huyr<expan>e</expan> .</l>
<l> And what peres preyed hem <app><lem>for to</lem></app><note>R.6.199: R's <hi>for</hi> is not attested by any other B manuscript.</note> do  as prest as a sparhauke .</l>
ye be so wanton so p<expan>ro</expan><unclear>.</unclear>e so
R.6.200KD.6.197
<l> And þere<seg>-</seg>of was peres proude  and putte hem to werke .</l>
<l> And ȝaf hem mete as he miȝt a<seg>-</seg>forth  and mesurable huyre .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <del></del><supplied></supplied> Þanne hadde peres pyte  and preyed honger to wende .</l>
<l> Home in<seg>-</seg>to his owene erd<expan>e</expan>  and holden hym þere .</l>
R.6.204KD.6.201
<l> For I am wel awreke now  of wastoures þorȝ þi miȝte .</l>
<l> Ac I preye þe ar þow passe  q<expan>uo</expan>d peres <app><lem>þo</lem></app><note>R.6.205: Beta omits <hi>þo</hi>.</note> to honger .</l>
<l> Of beggeres and of bydderes  what best <app><lem>is</lem></app> to done<note>R.6.206: R's <hi>is</hi> in this b-verse is shared only with F and Y; the entire phrase shows considerable minor variation among the <hi>B</hi> witnesses, but the original reading of beta is probably that of the majority of beta copies, <hi>what best be to done</hi>. This agrees with the reading of <hi>Cx</hi>. By contrast, R's b-verse agrees exactly with Kane's reconstruction of the phrase in <hi>Ax</hi> (though a majority of <hi>A</hi> manuscripts reverse the key phrase to <hi>is best</hi>).</note> .</l>
<l> For I wote wel be þow wente  þei wil werche ful ille .</l>
R.6.208KD.6.205
<l> For meschef it maketh  þei beth so meke nouthe .</l>
<l> And for defaute of here fode  þis folk is at my wille .</l>
<l> <app><lem>It</lem></app><note>R.6.210: R's <hi>It</hi> is unique among the <hi>B</hi> manuscripts; most, including F, read <hi>Þey</hi>. However, R's reading agrees with that found in <hi>Ax</hi> and <hi>Cx</hi>, both of which begin the line <hi>And (h)it</hi>.</note> <app><lem><sic>aren aren</sic><corr>aren</corr></lem></app> my blody bretheren q<expan>uo</expan>d peres  <app><lem>&</lem></app><note>R.6.210: Both F and beta have <hi>for</hi> where R reads <hi>&</hi>. <hi>Ax</hi> and <hi>Cx</hi> agree with F/beta here.</note> god bouȝte vs alle .<note> The parchment here was torn long ago and repaired by stitching. The tear extended the length of these nine lines and is approximately 6 cm. long from its beginning at the page edge, running diagonally inwards and downwards. At its bottom it is approximately 2.5 cm. in from the page margin.</note></l>
<l> Treuthe tauȝte me ones  to louye hem vch one .</l>
R.6.212KD.6.209
<l> And to helpen hem of alle thynge  ay as hem nedeth .</l>
<l> And now wolde I witen of þe  what were þe beste .</l>
<l> And how I miȝt amaystrien hem  & maken hem to werche .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> <app><lem>I</lem></app> here now<note>R.6.215: R's <hi>I here now</hi> is unique; cf. F's <hi>Now here wel me</hi> and beta's <hi>Here now</hi>. The beta variant is identical with that found in <hi>Ax</hi>.</note> q<expan>uo</expan>d hunger  and holde it for a wisdome .</l>
R.6.216KD.6.213
<l> Bolde beggeres and bigge  þat mowen here brede by<seg>-</seg>swynken .</l>
<l> With houndes bred and hors<seg>-</seg>bred  holde vpp<expan>e</expan> here hertes .</l>
<l> Abate hem with benes  for bollyng of here <del>..</del><add>wo</add>mbe .</l>
<l> And if þe gomes grucche  bydde hem go <app><lem>and</lem></app><note>R.6.219: Beta here omits <hi>and</hi>, a feature also found in half of the <hi>A</hi> manuscripts and in a majority of the P family of the <hi>C</hi> version.</note> swynke .<note>R.6.219: Alpha omitted the following line attested by beta manuscripts (and by both of the other versions of the poem):<lb/>
<hi>And he shal soupe swettere whan he it hath deseruid</hi>.
</note>
</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
R.6.220KD.6.218
<l> <del></del><supplied></supplied> <app><lem>Ac</lem></app><note>R.6.220: Both F and beta have <hi>And</hi>, which is also the reading of seven <hi>A</hi> and of seven <hi>C</hi> copies; R's <hi>Ac</hi> is probably archetypal in the <hi>C</hi> version but may not be original in <hi>A</hi>.</note> if þow fynde any freke  þat <app><lem>falshed</lem></app><note>R.6.220: R's <hi>falshed</hi> is unique; cf. F's <hi>False</hi> and beta's <hi>fortune</hi>. The <hi>Ax</hi> reading is <hi>fortune</hi>, but the <hi>Cx</hi> variant, in a slightly revised line, is <hi>fals men</hi>.</note> hath apayred .</l>
<l> Or eny maner fals men  fond þow suche to knowe .</l>
<l> Conforte hem with þi catel  for cristes loue of heuene .</l>
<l> Loue hem and lene hem  so lawe of god techeth .</l>
e iiij
<milestone>fol. 28vI</milestone>
R.6.224KD.6.221α
<l> <hi><foreign>Alter alterius honera portate </foreign></hi></l>
<l> And alle maner<expan>e</expan> men  þat þow miȝt aspie</l>
<l> Þat nedy ben and nauȝti  helpe hem with þi godes .</l>
<l> Loue hem and lak hem nauȝt  late god take þe veniaunce .</l>
R.6.228KD.6.226
<l> Þeyȝ þei don euel  lat þow<note>R.6.228: Only L supports R's attestation of <hi>þow</hi> here; all other <hi>B</hi> copies omit it.</note> god a<seg>-</seg>worthe .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Michi vindictam et ego retribuam .</foreign></hi></l>
<l> And if þow <app><lem>be</lem></app><note>R.6.230: R uniquely omits the modal <hi>wilt</hi> before <hi>be</hi>.</note> gracious to god  do as þe gospel techeth .</l>
<l> And by<seg>-</seg>lowe<note>R.6.231: Most beta manuscripts read <hi>biloue</hi>, but LM support the alpha reading, which is clearly the subtler, harder word.</note> þe amonges lowe men  so schaltow lacche g<expan>ra</expan>ce .</l>
R.6.232KD.6.228α
<l> <hi><foreign>Facite vobis amicos de mamona iniquitatis .</foreign></hi><note>R.6.232: Here the R scribe fails to insert his customary blank line between verse strophes; no reason for this omission is apparent.</note></l>
</lg>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> I wald nauȝt greue god q<expan>uo</expan>d peres  for alle þe good on grounde .</l>
<l> Miȝte I synneles do as þow seyste  seyde peres þanne .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <del></del><supplied></supplied> Ȝe I be<seg>-</seg>hote <app><lem>god</lem></app><note>R.6.235: Beta reads <hi>þe</hi>. Both <hi>Ax</hi> and <hi>Cx</hi> agree with beta's reading.</note> q<expan>uo</expan>d hunger  or elles þe bible lyeth .</l>
R.6.236KD.6.232
<l> Go to genesis þe geaunt  þe engendrour of vs alle .</l>
<l> <foreign>In sudore</foreign> and in swynke  þow schalt þi mete tilye .</l>
<l> And labore for thi lyflode  and so oure lord hiȝte .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> And sapience seith þe same  I <app><lem>seyȝ</lem></app><note>R.6.239: R uniquely omits a word in this phrase; beta reads <hi>seigh <hi>it</hi> in</hi>. <hi>Ax</hi> agrees with beta.</note> in þe bible .</l>
R.6.240KD.6.236
<l> <hi><foreign><app><lem><sic>Pige</sic><corr>Pige[r]</corr></lem></app> pro frigore</foreign>  non feld <app><lem>wolde</lem></app> tylie .</hi></l>
<l> And þere<seg>-</seg>for he schal begge and bydde . & noma<expan>n</expan> bete his hunger .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <del></del><supplied></supplied> Matheu with ma<expan>n</expan>nes face  <app><lem>moutheth</lem></app><note>R.6.242: Beta reads a past-tense form of the same verb: <hi>mouthed</hi>. Though <hi>A</hi> manuscripts offer a striking variety of possibilities at this point , Kane chose the alpha form as likeliest to represent Langland's original. But the alpha form may not, in fact, signify any real difference from beta anyway (i.e., the alpha scribe may not be intending a present-tense inflection with his "-eth" suffix. See the Introduction <xref>III.2.2.10</xref> for a complete discussion.</note> þis wordes .</l>
<l> Þat <foreign>s<expan>er</expan>uus neq<expan>ua</expan>m</foreign> had a <app><lem>man</lem></app><note>R.6.243: Although <title>MED</title>, <hi>s. v.</hi> <hi>mnam</hi>, lists <hi>man</hi> as a possible form taken by <hi>mnam</hi>, it seems clear that this spelling is merely a scribal error (Langland is the only source cited by the dictionary for the word itself) evoked by an unfamiliar foreign term. Alpha passed this error to R and F, which share it with BoCot (and with AH of the <hi>A</hi> tradition).</note>  & for he wolde nouȝt chaffar<expan>e</expan> .</l>
R.6.244KD.6.240
<l> He hadde maugre of his meystre  for euermore after .</l>
<l> And by<seg>-</seg>nam hym his napm<note> This word is foreign in origin and quite rare, and spellings of it vary considerably on that account. <title>OED2</title> and <title>MED</title> identify the headword as <hi>mnam</hi>. <title>OED2</title> lists <hi>nam</hi> as the only recognized variant and Langland as the only citation. However, among the <hi>A</hi> copies, Vernon shows another presumably valid spelling variation, rendering the word at 7.225 (Kane) as <hi>npnam</hi>. <title>MED</title> also cites <title>Piers Plowman</title> as the only source but lists a wider variety of forms, including <hi>mnamme</hi>, <hi>namp</hi>, <hi>mam</hi>, and <hi>man</hi>. In light of the fact that Langland is the only source cited, however, it seems probable that several of these "variant forms" are merely scribal errors.</note>  for he ne wold werche .</l>
<l> And ȝaf þat nam til hym  þat ten napmes hadde .</l>
<l> And with þat he seyde  þat holy cherche it herde .</l>
R.6.248KD.6.244
<l> He þat hath schal haue  and helpe þer<expan>e</expan> it nedeth .</l>
<l> And he þat nauȝt hath schal nauȝt haue  & no ma<expan>n</expan> hy<expan>m</expan> helpe .</l>
<l> And þat he weneth <app><lem>for</lem></app> to<note>R.6.250: Beta reads <hi>wel to</hi>, which is also the reading of both <hi>Ax</hi> and the X family of <hi>C</hi> (most of the P family simply omit the phrase).</note> haue  I wil it hym bi<seg>-</seg>reue .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> Kende witt wolde  þat vche a wiȝt wrouȝte .</l>
R.6.252KD.6.248
<l> Or in <app><lem>dichyng</lem></app> or in deluynge  or trauaylyng in preyeres .</l>
<l> Contemplatif lyf or actif lyf  crist wolde men wrouȝte .</l>
<l> Þe sauter seith in <app><lem>a</lem></app> psalme  of <foreign>beati om<expan>n</expan>es</foreign> .</l>
<l> Þe freke þat fedeth hym<seg>-</seg>selue  with his faythful laboure .</l>
<milestone>fol. 29rI</milestone>
R.6.256KD.6.252
<l> He is blissed by þe book  in body and in soule .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Labores manuu<expan>m</expan> tuar<expan>um</expan> &c<expan>etera</expan> .</foreign></hi></l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> Ȝet I prey ȝow q<expan>uo</expan>d peres  <foreign>par charite</foreign> and ȝe kunne .</l>
<l> Eny lef of leche<seg>-</seg>craft  lere it me my dere .</l>
R.6.260KD.6.255
<l> For so<expan>m</expan>me of my s<expan>er</expan>uantes  and my<seg>-</seg>self bothe </l>
<l> Of alle a woke<note>R.6.261: <hi>Woke</hi>, "week."</note> werche nauȝt  so oure wombe aketh .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <del></del><supplied></supplied> I wot wel q<expan>uo</expan>d hunger  what seknesse ȝow eyleth .</l>
<l> Ȝe haue manged ouer<seg>-</seg>muche  and þat maketh ȝow grone .</l>
R.6.264KD.6.259
<l> Ac I hote þe q<expan>uo</expan>d hunger  as þow þin hele wilneste .</l>
<l> <hi>Þat þow drynke no day  ar þow dyne su<expan>m</expan>what .</hi></l>
<l> <hi>Ete nouȝt I <app><lem>hote</lem></app></hi><note>R.6.266: Among <hi>B</hi> copies, R uniquely omits <hi>þee</hi> in the phrase, <hi>hote <hi>þe</hi> er</hi>. Though four <hi>A</hi> manuscripts (JLaAMa) share this omission, it seems clear that <hi>Ax</hi> read as beta does, including <hi>þee</hi>. However, <hi>Cx</hi> omits the pronoun and renders this phrase exactly as R does.</note> <hi>er hunger þe take .</hi></l>
<l> <hi>And sende þe of his sauce  to sauour<expan>e</expan> with þi lippes .</hi></l>
R.6.268KD.6.263
<l> <hi>And kepe su<expan>m</expan>me to soper tyme  and sitte nauȝt to longe .</hi></l>
<l> <hi>Arise vpp<expan>e</expan> ar apetit  haue <app><lem>I<seg>-</seg>ete</lem></app> his fille .</hi></l>
<l> <hi>Late nauȝt sire surfet  sitten at þi borde .</hi></l>
<l> <hi>Leue hym nauȝt for he is lecherous  and likerous of tonge .</hi></l>
R.6.272KD.6.267
<l> <hi>And after many maner met<expan>us</expan>  his mawe is affyngred .</hi></l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> <hi>And if þow diete þe þus  I dar legge myn eres</hi></l>
<l> <hi>Þat fisik schal his furred hodes  for his fode selle .</hi></l>
<l> <hi>And his cloke of calabre  with alle <app><lem>knappes</lem></app><note>R.6.275: F reads <hi>with knoppis</hi>, while beta has <hi>alle þe knappes</hi>. <hi>Ax</hi> appears to read this b-verse as <hi>& þe knoppis of gold</hi>.</note> of golde .</hi></l>
R.6.276KD.6.271
<l> <hi>And be fayne by my faith  his fisik to lete .</hi></l>
<l> <hi>And lerne to labori with londe  for liflode is swete .</hi></l>
<l> <app><lem>Þer aren mo morareres þan</lem></app><note>R.6.278: R's <hi>morareres</hi> is a nonce word, apparently meaning "killers, murderers." The presence of <hi>moraynerys</hi> in F suggests that some version of the reading was in alpha. Most beta witnesses have <hi>For morthereres aren mony leches</hi> as their a-verse. The defective alliteration of both sub-archetypes suggests that <hi>Bx</hi> itself was corrupt here. The likeliest authorial reading for <hi>B</hi> is that of <hi>A</hi>: <hi>Þere arn mo liȝeris þan lechis</hi>.</note> leches  lord hem amende .</l>
<l> Þei don men deye þorȝ her<expan>e</expan> drinkes  ar destine it wolde . </l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
R.6.280KD.6.275
<l> <del></del><supplied></supplied> By seint poule q<expan>uo</expan>d peres  þis aren p<expan>ro</expan>fitable wordes .</l>
<l> Wend now hunger whan þow wilt  þat wel <app><lem>þow be</lem></app> eu<expan>er</expan>e .<note>R.6.281: Cf. F's <hi>þe betyȝde</hi> and beta's <hi>be þow euere</hi>. In his parallel-text edition of <title>Piers</title>, A. V. C. Schmidt errs by listing R's reading here as a dittography, <hi>yow yow</hi>. Apparently, this error stems not from R itself, which is quite clear, but from Schmidt's reliance on the apparatus of Kane-Donaldson, which here displays a rare mistake. In any event, the correct reading is probably that of beta since it matches the reading of <hi>Ax</hi> and of a majority of <hi>C</hi> witnesses for this phrase. However, key X family witnesses (XIUcDc) reverse the crucial phrase, reading <hi>thow be</hi> and thus agreeing with the <hi>B</hi>-version's manuscript R against beta.</note></l>
<l> For þis is a louely lesson  lord it þe forȝelde .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> By<seg>-</seg>hote god q<expan>uo</expan>d hunger  hennes ne wil I wende .</l>
R.6.284KD.6.279
<l> Til I haue dyned by þis day  and I<seg>-</seg>dronke bothe .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <del></del><supplied></supplied> I haue no peny q<expan>uo</expan>d peres  polettes forto bugge .</l>
<milestone>fol. 29vI</milestone>
<l> Ne noyther gees ne gris  but to grene cheses .</l>
<l> A fewe cruddes and creme  and an hauer<seg>-</seg>cake .</l>
R.6.288KD.6.283
<l> And to loues of benes and bren  I<seg>-</seg>bake for my fauntes .</l>
<l> And ȝet I sey by my soule  I haue no salt bakun .</l>
<l> Ne no cokenay by crist  coloppes for to make .</l>
<l> Ac I haue percyle and porett  and many <app><lem>queynte herbes</lem></app> .<note>R.6.291:R's <hi>queynte herbes</hi> is unique. Cf. F's <hi>propre herbys</hi> and beta's <hi>kole plantes</hi>. Most <hi>A</hi> witnesses agree with beta's reading (albeit non-alliterating), but Kane has changed his mind since 1960 and in the revised Athlone edition of <hi>A</hi> opines that the metrically appropriate reading of manuscripts AMaH (<hi>plante colis</hi>) is likelier to be original (461).</note></l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
R.6.292KD.6.287
<l> <del></del><supplied></supplied> And eke a kow and a kalf  and a carte mare .</l>
<l> To drawe a<seg>-</seg>felde my donge  þe while þe drouȝthe lasteth .</l>
<l> And by þis lyflode we mote lyue  til lammasse tyme .</l>
<l> And by þat I hope to haue  heruest in my crofte .</l>
R.6.296KD.6.291
<l> And þanne may I diȝte þi diner  as me dere liketh .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> Alle þe pore poeple þo  pesecoddes fetten .</l>
<l> Benes and baken apples  þei brouȝten in here <app><lem>lappe</lem></app> .<note>R.6.298: R's singular is unique among the <hi>B</hi> copies; the others read <hi>lappes</hi>. However, R's reading is supported by <hi>Cx</hi> and by three important <hi>A</hi> witnesses (TDCh). The other <hi>A</hi> manuscripts agree with the <hi>B</hi> majority.</note></l>
<l> Chibolles and chiruilles  and ripe chiries manye .</l>
R.6.300KD.6.295
<l> And profered peres þis p<expan>re</expan>sent  to plese with hunger .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <del></del><supplied></supplied> Alle hunger ete in haste  and asked after more .</l>
<l> Þanne pore folke for fere  fedde hunger ȝerne .</l>
<l> With grene poret and peses<note>R.6.303: R's plural is the same alpha form attested in F (<hi>pesis</hi>); the beta plural, also found in a majority of <hi>A</hi> copies, reads <hi>pesen</hi>.</note>  to poyson hunger þei thouȝte .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
R.6.304KD.6.299
<l> <hi></hi> By þat it neyed ner<expan>e</expan> heruest  newe corn come to chepyng .</l>
<l> Þanne was folke fayne  and fedden hunger with þe beste .</l>
<l> With good ale as glotou<expan>n</expan> tauȝte  and gerte hunger go slepe .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <del></del><supplied></supplied> And þo <app><lem>ne wolde no wastour</lem></app><note>R.6.307: R's <hi>ne</hi> is a unique addition to this phrase. F has <hi>þan wolde no</hi> while beta reads <hi>þo wolde wastour noȝt</hi>. Beta's phrase is identical to the wording of <hi>Cx</hi> and probably to that of <hi>Ax</hi> (some <hi>A</hi> copies attest <hi>nolde</hi> for <hi>wolde</hi>).</note> werche  but wandren aboute .</l>
R.6.308KD.6.303
<l> Ne no begger<expan>e</expan> ete brede  þat benes inne were .</l>
<l> But of coket or <app><lem>of</lem></app><note>R.6.309: R's <hi>of</hi> is a unique addition to this line.</note> clerematyn  or elles of clene whete .</l>
<l> Ne non halpeni ale  in <orig>nonewyse</orig><reg>none wyse</reg> drinke .</l>
<l> But of þe best and of þe brounest  þ<expan>a</expan>t in borewe is to selle .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
R.6.312KD.6.307
<l> <hi></hi> Laboreres þat haue no londe  to lyue on but her<expan>e</expan> handes .</l>
<l> <app><lem>Deyned</lem></app><note>R.6.313: Beta reads <hi>Deyned <hi>nouȝt</hi> to dyne</hi>. F completely rewrites the line. Though <hi>Ax</hi> clearly agrees with beta, most <hi>C</hi> manuscripts omit <hi>noȝt</hi> in this phrase, but three (IP<hi>2</hi>Ac) include it and X has it added by another hand.</note> to dyne o<seg>-</seg>day  niȝte<seg>-</seg>olde wortes .<note>R.6.313: There is an apparently random ink blot (having the appearance of a second punctus) approximately 1.3 cm. to the right of the intended punctus.</note></l>
<l> May no peny<seg>-</seg>ale hem paye  ne no pece of bakun .</l>
<l> But if it be fresch<expan>e</expan> flesche other fische  for chillyng of <app><lem>his</lem></app> mawe .<note>R.6.315: R and F run this line of archetypal <hi>B</hi> together with the next by splicing this a-verse, <hi>But . . . other fische</hi> (= KD6.310) to the b-verse of the next line (= KD6.311), <hi>for chillyng of here mawe</hi>. In fact, R is the only <hi>B</hi> witness (despite its conflation of two lines) to read <hi>for chillyng of <hi>his</hi> mawe</hi>—the reading of the X family of <hi>C</hi> and of four <hi>A</hi> manuscripts (including Kane's copytext, T). Most of the other <hi>B</hi> witnesses attest <hi>hir(e)</hi>, the predominant reading in the <hi>A</hi>-version copies and in the P family of <hi>C</hi>.</note></l>
<milestone>fol. 30rI</milestone>
R.6.316KD.6.312
<l> And but if he be hylyche huyred  elles wil he chide .</l>
<l> And þat he was werkeman wrouȝte  waile þe tyme .</l>
<l> Aȝeynes catones conseile  comseth he to iangle .</l>
<l> <hi><foreign>Paupertatis onus  pacienter ferre memento .</foreign></hi></l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
R.6.320KD.6.316
<l> ¶ He greueth hym aȝeynes god  and gruccheth aȝeynes reson .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> <hi></hi> <app><lem>Þanne</lem></app><note>R.6.321: F begins this line with <hi>& þus</hi>; beta begins it <hi>And þanne</hi>. Both <hi>Ax</hi> and <hi>Cx</hi> agree with beta.</note> curseth he þe kyng  and alle his conseyll<expan>e</expan> after .</l>
<l> Suche lawes to loke  laboreres to greue .</l>
<l> Ac whiles hunger was here maistre  þer<expan>e</expan> wolde no<expan>n</expan> of hem chyde .</l>
R.6.324KD.6.320
<l> Ne <app><lem><sic>strue</sic><corr>str[i]ue</corr></lem></app> aȝeynes his statute  so sterneliche he lokede .</l>
</lg>
<lb/>
<lg>
<l> ¶ Ac I warne ȝow werkemen  wynneth while ȝe mowe .</l>
<l> For hunger hiderward  hasteth hym <app><lem>ful</lem></app><note>R.6.326: No beta manuscript attests <hi>ful</hi>. Both <hi>Ax</hi> and <hi>Cx</hi> also omit it.</note> faste .</l>
<l> He schal a<seg>-</seg>wake with <app><lem>wat</lem></app><note>R.6.327: R's reading here (<hi>wat</hi>) makes no sense, but as usual is closer to the presumptive original reflected in beta (<hi>water</hi>) than is F's reading (<hi>what</hi>), which, typically, looks like a smoothed rationalization of irreparable error. Apparently alpha left off the final loop from <hi>wat<expan>er</expan></hi>.</note>  wastoures to chaste .</l>
R.6.328KD.6.324
<l> Ar fyue ȝere be fulfilled  swich famyn schal arise .</l>
<l> Thorȝ <app><lem>flod</lem></app><note>R.6.329: R uniquely reads a singular form here. All other <hi>B</hi> manuscripts show a plural, e.g., <hi>flodes</hi>. F actually reverses the entire phrase, reading <hi>þorhȝ fowle wederys & floodis</hi>. <hi>Cx</hi> agrees with the <hi>B</hi> majority in attesting a plural, <hi>flodes</hi>, but a clear majority of <hi>A</hi> witnesses agrees with R on the singular form.</note> and foule wederes  fruytes schullen fayle .</l>
<l> And so seyde saturne  and sent ȝow to warne .</l>
<l> <hi>Whanne ȝe se þe sonne amys  and to monkes hedes .</hi></l>
R.6.332KD.6.328
<l> <hi>And a mayde haue þe maystrie  and <app><lem>multiplied</lem></app></hi><note>R.6.332: Both L and M confirm this alpha reading (M with an <ed> added in a different ink over an erasure), but all other beta manuscripts read <hi>multiplie</hi>.</note><hi> be eyghte</hi></l>
<l> <hi>Þanne schal deth withdrawe  and derth be iustice .</hi></l>
<l> <hi>And dauwe þe dikere  deye for hunger .</hi></l>
<l> <hi><app><lem><del>A</del>nd</lem></app><note>R.6.335: The erasure of the line initial is very old though clearly not original.</note><note>R.6.335: R's <hi>[A]nd</hi> is unique; all other manuscripts read <hi>But</hi>, which agrees with the reading of the <hi>C</hi> version. </note> if god of his goodnesse  graunte vs a trewe .</hi></l>
</lg>
</div1>
MED