The Piers Plowman Electronic Archive, Vol. 7: <list><item>London, British Library, MS Lansdowne 398 </item><item>Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Rawlinson Poetry 38</item></list>

The Piers Plowman Electronic Archive, Vol. 7: <list><item>London, British Library, MS Lansdowne 398 </item><item>Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Rawlinson Poetry 38</item></list> – PrologueWilliam LanglandEdited by Robert AdamsAssociate Editors: Patricia R. Bart, M. Gail Duggan and Catherine A. FarleyTechnical Editor: Daniel Pitti Graduate Research AssistantMichael Blum, John Ivor Carlson, Carrie Lindley, Janice McCoy, Ashley Opps, Timothy L. Stinson, and Jordan Taylor. Computer Consultants and ProgrammersRobert Bingler, Shayne Brandon, Cynthia Girard, Chris Jessee, Daniel Pitti, David Seaman, and John Unsworth.The Medieval Academy of America and SEENET by Boydell and Brewer, LTDWoodbridge, SuffolkISBN: (Individual) 9781843840947 (Institutional): 9781843840930

Commercially available:

2006 </titleStmt><editionStmt><edition>Combined facsimile & documentary edition.</edition><respStmt><resp>Identification of hands</resp><name>IRA = Robert Adams</name></respStmt></editionStmt><extent>1 computer optical disk : col. ; 4 3/4 in.</extent><publicationStmt><publisher>The Medieval Academy of America and <hi rend="bold">SEENET</hi>, by Boydell and Brewer, LTD.</publisher><pubPlace>Woodbridge, Suffolk</pubPlace><date> </date><idno type="callNo">Source copy consulted: London, British Library, MS Lansdowne 398 and Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Rawlinson Poetry 38</idno></publicationStmt><seriesStmt>SEENET, A.9 </seriesStmt></biblFull></sourceDesc></fileDesc><encodingDesc><editorialDecl> <list><head>Attribute Values</head><item> <label>br</label> <term>brown ink</term></item><item> <label>ab</label> <term>anglicana bastarda</term></item><item> <label>it</label> <term>italic</term></item><item> <label>lc</label> <term>Lombard Cap</term></item><item> <label>o[number]</label> <term>ornamented capital, N lines high</term></item><item> <label>rb</label> <term>rubricated</term></item><item> <label>tr</label> <term>touched in red</term></item><item> <label>tx</label> <term>textura</term></item><item> <label>ul</label> <term>underlined</term></item><item> <label>ur</label> <term>underlined in red</term></item><item> <label>gr</label> <term>green ink</term></item><item> <label>bl</label> <term>blue ink</term></item></list></editorialDecl></encodingDesc><profileDesc><langUsage><language id="lat">Latin</language><language id="fre">French</language><language id="ger">German</language></langUsage><handList><hand id="hand1"/><hand id="hand2"/><hand id="handsecx"/><hand id="handx"/><hand id="hand15x"/><hand id="handrub2"/><hand id="handrub3"/><hand id="handitalx"/><hand id="hand16x"/><hand id="handmodx"/></handList></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change><date>November 2005 </date><respStmt><resp>revise header, update DTD and ent files </resp><name>Hoyt N. Duggan </name></respStmt><item>New header created </item></change></revisionDesc></teiHeader><text><body><div1 n="R.P" type="passus"><head id="R.P.0.h.1"><supplied reason="lost quire">Prologus de visione Petri Plowman</supplied></head><milestone n="77r" unit="fol." entity="Lan77r"/><note type="codicological" id="R.P.0.n.1"><ref>R.P.0:</ref> Fols. 77r and 80v are both very faded with considerable bleed-through from their opposite sides. In a few cases, the midline punctus elevatus must simply be inferred because the fading makes it indistinct though still visible. Moreover, the bottom and outer margins of all eight sides bound in Lansdowne 398 (77r-80v) are severely cropped. More than one hundred lines at the beginning of the Prologue (= KD Prol.1-124) as well as the end of Passus 1 and the beginning of Passus 2 (= KD1.141 through KD2.40) have been lost from MS R since the early eighteenth century (at the latest). It is likely, but unproveable, that the event behind this loss also accounts for the fact that the surviving first few leaves of MS R (usually referenced as Oxford, Bodleian MS Rawlinson Poetry 38) are now bound into a completely different codex, London, British Library MS Landsowne 398. For more information, see Introduction, <xref doc="RFront" from="id (I.10)">I.10</xref>."</note><lg type="strophe"><l id="R.P.1" n="KD.P.125"> Crist kepe þe sire kyng<expan>e</expan>  and þi kyngriche .</l><l id="R.P.2" n="KD.P.126"> And lene þe lede þi land  so lewete þe louye .</l><l id="R.P.3" n="KD.P.127"> And fore þi riȝtful rewelyng  be rewarded in heuene .</l></lg><lb/><lg type="strophe"><l id="R.P.4" n="KD.P.128"> <hi rend="bl">¶</hi> And sithen in þe heir an hey  an aungel of heuene .</l><l id="R.P.5" n="KD.P.129"> Lowede to speke in latyne  fore lewede men ne cowede </l><l id="R.P.6" n="KD.P.130"> Iangele ne Iuge  þat iustifie hem schulde .</l><l id="R.P.7" n="KD.P.131"> Bute suffren an seruen for<seg type="shadowHyphen">-</seg>þi seyde þe angel .</l><l id="R.P.8" n="KD.P.132"> <hi rend="BinR"><foreign lang="lat">Su<expan>m</expan> rex su<expan>m</expan> princeps · <app loc="R.P.8"><lem wit="R"><sic>veutru<expan>m</expan></sic><corr>[n]eutru<expan>m</expan></corr></lem><rdg wit="Most other mss">neutrum</rdg></app><note type="textual" id="R.P.8.n.1"><ref>R.P.8:</ref> The form of the <v> in <foreign lang="lat">veutrum</foreign> is slightly blurred, but there is no possibility of transcribing it as <n>. This is a unique error in R.</note> fortasse deinceps .</foreign></hi><note type="codicological" id="R.P.8.n.2"><ref/> A light brown brace in the right margin links RP.8-14. There is also some evidence of light brown underlining of the a-verses in RP.9-14, but it may be merely the ruling, which is quite visible on this side.</note></l><l id="R.P.9" n="KD.P.133"> <foreign lang="lat">O qui iura regis  <expan>christi</expan> specialia regis .</foreign></l><l id="R.P.10" n="KD.P.134"> <foreign lang="lat">Hoc quod agas melius  iustus es esto pius .</foreign></l><l id="R.P.11" n="KD.P.135"> <foreign lang="lat">Nudum <app loc="R.P.11"><lem wit="R F">vis</lem><rdg wit="All other mss">ius</rdg></app><note type="textual" id="R.P.11.n.1"><ref>R.P.11:</ref> Alpha reads <foreign lang="lat">vis</foreign>. All beta family manuscripts read <foreign lang="lat">ius</foreign> with the <hi rend="bold">C</hi> archetype (a few <hi rend="bold">C</hi> copies agree with alpha).</note> a te  <app loc="R.P.11"><lem wit="R H F">vestire</lem><rdg wit="Most beta mss">vestiri</rdg></app><note type="textual" id="R.P.11.n.2"><ref>R.P.11:</ref> Alpha is responsible for <foreign lang="lat">vestire</foreign>, though the reading is shared by H. All authoritative Beta witnesses have <foreign lang="lat">vestiri</foreign>, which is also the reading of the <hi rend="bold">C</hi> version.</note> wlt<note type="lexical" id="R.P.11.n.3"><ref>R.P.11:</ref> R's <foreign lang="lat">wlt</foreign> is a common English scribal spelling for Latin <foreign lang="lat">vult</foreign>; it appears to have resulted from an association between the customary phonetic value assigned to Latin initial <v> (= /w/) and a popular sense of the origin of the <w> graph itself as a "double v." Because many other European languages, as well as Latin, had no <w> graph, and foundries therefore omitted the form from standard typographic templates, English printers often resorted to using the digraph <vv> to represent English <w> till the end of the seventeenth century. Cf. <ref target="R.7.65">R.7.65:</ref> (<foreign lang="lat">wltis</foreign>), <ref target="R.12.71">R.12.71:</ref>, and <ref target="R.15.43">R.15.43:</ref> (both <foreign lang="lat">wlt</foreign>).</note> pietate .</foreign></l><l id="R.P.12" n="KD.P.136"> <foreign lang="lat">Qualia vis metere  talia grana sere .</foreign></l><l id="R.P.13" n="KD.P.137"> <foreign lang="lat">Si <app loc="R.P.13"><lem wit="R H F">vis</lem><rdg wit="Most beta mss">ius</rdg></app><note type="textual" id="R.P.13.n.1"><ref>R.P.13:</ref> Alpha reads <foreign lang="lat">vis</foreign>. All beta family manuscripts read <foreign lang="lat">ius</foreign>.</note> nudatur  nudo de iure metatur .</foreign></l><l id="R.P.14" n="KD.P.138"> <foreign lang="lat">Si seritur <app loc="R.P.14"><lem wit="R"><sic>pietur pietas</sic><corr>pietas</corr></lem><rdg wit="All other mss">pietas</rdg></app> de pietate metas .</foreign></l></lg><lb/><lg type="strophe"><l id="R.P.15" n="KD.P.139"> <hi rend="rb">¶</hi> Þanne greuede hym a golyardas  a gloton of wordes .</l><l id="R.P.16" n="KD.P.140"> And to þe angel an heiȝ  <app loc="R.P.16"><lem wit="R L">answeres</lem><rdg wit="All other mss, (Hm M) by correction">answerd</rdg></app><note type="textual" id="R.P.16.n.1"><ref>R.P.16:</ref> Only L agrees with R in this reading; F and all other beta manuscripts agree on the preterite form, <hi rend="it">answerde</hi>.</note> after .</l><l id="R.P.17" n="KD.P.141"> <hi rend="BinR"><foreign lang="lat">Dum rex a regere  dicatur nomen h<expan>ab</expan>ere .</foreign></hi><note type="codicological" id="R.P.17.n.1"><ref/> In both of these cases, the red boxing has been heavily rubbed.</note></l><l id="R.P.18" n="KD.P.142"> <foreign lang="lat">Nomen habet sine re  nisi studet iur<del rend="overwritten" hand="handx" status="unremarkable">e</del><add place="inline" hand="handx">a</add> tenere .</foreign></l></lg><lb/><lg type="strophe"><l id="R.P.19" n="KD.P.143"> <hi rend="bl">¶</hi> And þanne gan alle <app loc="R.P.19"><lem wit="R">a</lem><rdg wit="All other mss">þe</rdg></app><note type="textual" id="R.P.19.n.1"><ref>R.P.19:</ref> R offers two unique readings in this line: (1) where the beta copies have <hi rend="it"><hi rend="bold">þe</hi> comune(s)</hi>, R reads <hi rend="it"><hi rend="bold">a</hi> comoune</hi>; (2) where beta attests <hi rend="it">in vers</hi>, R has <hi rend="it">in <hi rend="bold">a</hi> vers</hi>. F's reading of this line is completely erratic.</note> comoune crie  in <app loc="R.P.19"><lem wit="R">a</lem><rdg wit="All other mss">nil</rdg></app> vers of latyn .<note type="textual" id="R.P.19.n.2"><ref>R.P.19:</ref> Immediately hereafter, alpha omits a line present in beta:<lb/> <hi rend="it">To þe kynges conseille construe ho<seg type="shadowHyphen">-</seg>so wolde</hi>. </note></l><l id="R.P.20" n="KD.P.145"> <hi rend="BinR"><foreign lang="lat">Precepta regis sunt nobis vincula legis .</foreign></hi></l></lg><lb/><lg type="strophe"><l id="R.P.21" n="KD.P.146"> <hi rend="rb">¶</hi> With þat ran þere a route of ratones  at ones .</l><l id="R.P.22" n="KD.P.147"> And smale mys with hem  mo þan a þousand .</l><l id="R.P.23" n="KD.P.148"> And comen to a conseyle  fore here comoune p<expan>ro</expan>fitt<expan>e</expan> .</l><l id="R.P.24" n="KD.P.149"> For a cat of a courte  com whan hym lykede .</l><l id="R.P.25" n="KD.P.150"> And ouer<seg type="shadowHyphen">-</seg>leep<expan>e</expan> hem liȝthliche  and lauȝt hem at his wille .</l><l id="R.P.26" n="KD.P.151"> And pleyed<note type="codicological" id="R.P.26.n.1"><ref>R.P.26:</ref> There is a small hole in the parchment here, causing the <d> of <hi rend="it">pleyed</hi> to be written slightly above the rest of the line.</note> with hem periliousely  and possed hem aboute .</l><l id="R.P.27" n="KD.P.152"> For doute of diuerse dredes  we dare nouȝt wel loke .</l><l id="R.P.28" n="KD.P.153"> And ȝif we grucchen <app loc="R.P.28"><lem wit="R F">his</lem><rdg wit="Most beta mss">of his</rdg></app> ga<expan>m</expan>men<note type="textual" id="R.P.28.n.1"><ref>R.P.28:</ref> R's phrase here is unique; beta and the <hi rend="bold">C</hi> version attest <hi rend="it"><hi rend="bold">of</hi> his game(n)</hi>, while F reads <hi rend="it">his wille</hi>.</note>  he will<expan>e</expan> greue vs alle .</l><l id="R.P.29" n="KD.P.154"> Cracche vs or clawe vs  and in his cloches halde .</l><l id="R.P.30" n="KD.P.155"> Þat vs lothes þe lyf  er he lete vs passe .</l><l id="R.P.31" n="KD.P.156"> Miȝt we with any witt  his wille with<seg type="shadowHyphen">-</seg>stonde .</l><l id="R.P.32" n="KD.P.157"> We miȝte be lordes on lofte  and lyuen at oure eese .</l><milestone n="77v" unit="fol." entity="Lan77v"/><l id="R.P.33" n="KD.P.158"> <supplied reason="cropped"><hi rend="tr">A</hi></supplied> raton of renou<expan>n</expan>  moste resonable<note type="textual" id="R.P.33.n.1"><ref>R.P.33:</ref> R shares this reading with Hm and with the <hi rend="bold">C</hi> version; beta and F read <hi rend="it">renable</hi>.</note> of tonge .<note type="codicological" id="R.P.33.n.2"><ref/> The rubricating scribe managed to touch each of the first characters on this side in red, at least so far as cropping permits us to judge. None of the initials survives in whole, but we have marked initials as rubricated where sufficient fragments remain to verify that fact.</note></l><l id="R.P.34" n="KD.P.159"> <supplied reason="cropped"><hi rend="tr">S</hi></supplied>eyde for a souereyne  helpe to <app loc="R.P.34"><lem wit="R F">hem alle</lem><rdg wit="All other mss">hymselue(n)</rdg></app> .<note type="textual" id="R.P.34.n.1"><ref>R.P.34:</ref> In place of alpha's <hi rend="it">hem alle</hi>, beta reads <hi rend="it">hym-selue</hi>.</note></l><l id="R.P.35" n="KD.P.160"> <supplied reason="cropped"><hi rend="tr">I</hi></supplied> haue I<seg type="shadowHyphen">-</seg>seyne segges q<expan>uo</expan>d hee  in þe citee of london .</l><l id="R.P.36" n="KD.P.161"> <supplied reason="cropped"><hi rend="tr">B</hi></supplied>eren beȝes ful bryȝtte  abouten here nekkes .</l><l id="R.P.37" n="KD.P.162"> <supplied reason="cropped"><hi rend="tr">A</hi></supplied>nd somme coleres of crafty werke  vncoupled þei wenden .</l><l id="R.P.38" n="KD.P.163"> <supplied reason="cropped"><hi rend="tr">B</hi></supplied>oþe in warayne and in waste  whar<expan>e</expan> þaym lef lykeþ .<note type="textual" id="R.P.38.n.1"><ref>R.P.38:</ref> There is considerable variation in attestation for the final phrase. F reads <hi rend="it">hem best lykeþ</hi>. Some of the beta copies show <hi rend="it">hem-self liked</hi>; others read <hi rend="it">hem leue liketh</hi>.</note></l><l id="R.P.39" n="KD.P.164"> <supplied reason="cropped"><hi rend="tr">A</hi></supplied>nd other while þei aren elles<seg type="shadowHyphen">-</seg>where  as I here telle .</l><l id="R.P.40" n="KD.P.165"> <supplied reason="cropped"><hi rend="tr">W</hi></supplied>ere þere <orig>abelle</orig><reg>a belle</reg> on here bye  by <app loc="R.P.40"><lem wit="R F">Ihesus</lem><rdg wit="Most beta mss">Ihesu</rdg></app><note type="textual" id="R.P.40.n.1"><ref>R.P.40:</ref> Beta witnesses have <hi rend="it">Ihesu</hi>. The <hi rend="bold">C</hi> manuscripts are divided, a majority reading with beta but a significant minority, in both major branches, agreeing with alpha.</note> as me thenketh .</l><l id="R.P.41" n="KD.P.166"> <supplied reason="cropped"><hi rend="tr">M</hi></supplied>en miȝt wite where þei wente  and away renne .</l></lg><lb/><lg type="strophe"><l id="R.P.42" n="KD.P.167"> <supplied reason="cropped">¶ <hi rend="tr">A</hi></supplied>nd riȝt so q<expan>uo</expan>d þat raton  reson me scheweth .</l><l id="R.P.43" n="KD.P.168"> <supplied reason="cropped"><hi rend="tr">T</hi></supplied>o bugge a belle of bras  or of briȝt siluer .</l><l id="R.P.44" n="KD.P.169"> <supplied reason="cropped"><hi rend="tr">A</hi></supplied>nd knetten it on a coler  for oure comoune p<expan>ro</expan>fitt<expan>e</expan> .</l><l id="R.P.45" n="KD.P.170"> <supplied reason="cropped">A</supplied>nd hangen it vp<seg type="shadowHyphen">-</seg>on þe cattes hals  þan here we mowen .<note type="textual" id="R.P.45.n.1"><ref>R.P.45:</ref> Alpha lacks the following two lines attested by beta witnesses and by <hi rend="bold">Cx</hi>: <lb/><hi rend="it">Where he ritt or rest or renneth to playe <lb/>And ȝif him list for to laike þenne loke we mowen.</hi></note></l><l id="R.P.46" n="KD.P.173"> <supplied reason="cropped">A</supplied>nd peren in his presens  þere while hym plei lyketh .</l><l id="R.P.47" n="KD.P.174"> <supplied reason="cropped">A</supplied>nd ȝif hym wraþheth ben y<seg type="shadowHyphen">-</seg>war  and hys wey shonye .</l></lg><lb/><lg type="strophe"><l id="R.P.48" n="KD.P.175"> <supplied reason="cropped">¶ A</supplied>lle <app loc="R.P.48"><lem wit="R F">þe</lem><rdg wit="All other mss">þis</rdg></app> route of <app loc="R.P.48"><lem wit="R">þe</lem><rdg wit="All other mss">nil</rdg></app><note type="textual" id="R.P.48.n.1"><ref>R.P.48:</ref> The second <hi rend="it">þe</hi> in this line is R's unique addition. The first <hi rend="it">þe</hi> is an alpha variant (beta has <hi rend="it">þis</hi>). The <hi rend="bold">C</hi> manuscripts are divided on this reading, a majority of the X family agreeing with beta, while a majority of the P family agrees with alpha.</note> ratones  to þis resou<expan>n</expan> þei assented .</l><l id="R.P.49" n="KD.P.176"> <supplied reason="cropped">A</supplied>c þo þe belle was I<seg type="shadowHyphen">-</seg>bouȝt<expan>e</expan>  and on þe bey <app loc="R.P.49"><lem wit="R">I<seg type="shadowHyphen">-</seg>hanged</lem><rdg wit="All other mss">hanged</rdg></app> .</l><l id="R.P.50" n="KD.P.177"> <supplied reason="cropped">Þ</supplied>ere ne was raton in alle <app loc="R.P.50"><lem wit="R">route</lem><rdg wit="All other mss">þe route</rdg></app>  for alle þe reme of france .</l><l id="R.P.51" n="KD.P.178"> <supplied reason="cropped">Þ</supplied>at durste haue I<seg type="shadowHyphen">-</seg>bounde þe belle  aboute þe cattes nekke .</l><l id="R.P.52" n="KD.P.179"> <supplied reason="cropped">N</supplied>e hangen it aboute <app loc="R.P.52"><lem wit="R F">his</lem><rdg wit="Most beta mss">þe cattes</rdg></app> hals<note type="textual" id="R.P.52.n.1"><ref>R.P.52:</ref> Beta reads <hi rend="it">þe cattes hals</hi>. Alpha's <hi rend="it">his hals</hi> is also the reading of the <hi rend="bold">C</hi> version.</note>  alle englond to wynne .</l><l id="R.P.53" n="KD.P.180"> <supplied reason="cropped">A</supplied>nd helden hem vn<seg type="shadowHyphen">-</seg>hardy  and here conseyll<expan>e</expan> feble .</l><l id="R.P.54" n="KD.P.181"> <supplied reason="cropped">A</supplied>nd letu<expan>n</expan> here labour <app loc="R.P.54"><lem wit="R">I<seg type="shadowHyphen">-</seg>lost</lem><rdg wit="All beta mss">lost</rdg></app>  and alle here longe studie .</l></lg><lb/><lg type="strophe"><l id="R.P.55" n="KD.P.182"> <supplied reason="cropped">¶ A</supplied> mous þat muche goed  couthe as me thouȝte .</l><l id="R.P.56" n="KD.P.183"> <supplied reason="cropped">St</supplied>rok forth sternely  and stod by<seg type="shadowHyphen">-</seg>forn hem alle .</l><l id="R.P.57" n="KD.P.184"> <supplied reason="cropped">An</supplied>d to þe route of ratou<expan>n</expan>s  rehersed þis wordes .</l></lg><lb/><lg type="strophe"><l id="R.P.58" n="KD.P.185"> <supplied reason="cropped">¶ Þo</supplied>uȝ we <app loc="R.P.58"><lem wit="R F">had</lem><rdg wit="All beta mss">nil</rdg></app> <app loc="R.P.58"><lem wit="R">I<seg type="shadowHyphen">-</seg>culled</lem><rdg wit="Most other mss">culled(en)</rdg></app><note type="textual" id="R.P.58.n.1"><ref>R.P.58:</ref> In place of alpha's (<hi rend="it">had I<seg type="shadowHyphen">-</seg>culled</hi>), beta witnesses read either <hi rend="it">kulled</hi> (LMCO) or <hi rend="it">killen</hi> (CrWHmG). The <hi rend="bold">C</hi> version agrees on this reading with alpha.</note> þe cat  yut schulde þer<expan>e</expan> cu<expan>m</expan> an<seg type="shadowHyphen">-</seg>other<expan>e</expan> .</l><l id="R.P.59" n="KD.P.186"> <supplied reason="cropped">To</supplied> crachy vs and alle our<expan>e</expan> kynde  þouȝ we crope vnder benches .</l><l id="R.P.60" n="KD.P.187"> <supplied reason="cropped">Fo</supplied>r<seg type="shadowHyphen">-</seg>þi I conseill<expan>e</expan> alle þe comoune  to late þe catt <app loc="R.P.60"><lem wit="R">I<seg type="shadowHyphen">-</seg>worthe</lem><rdg wit="Most beta mss">worthe</rdg></app> .</l><l id="R.P.61" n="KD.P.188"> <supplied reason="cropped">An</supplied>d be we neuer so bolde  þe belle hym to schewe .<note type="textual" id="R.P.61.n.1"><ref>R.P.61:</ref> See note at RP.66.</note></l><l id="R.P.62" n="KD.P.193"> <supplied reason="cropped">Fo</supplied>r I herde my sire seyen  is seuen ȝere I<seg type="shadowHyphen">-</seg>passed .</l><l id="R.P.63" n="KD.P.194"> <supplied reason="cropped">Þer</supplied>e þe cat ys a kytou<expan>n</expan>  þe court is ful elyng<expan>e</expan> .</l><l id="R.P.64" n="KD.P.195"> <supplied reason="cropped">Þa</supplied>t witnesseth holy writt  who<seg type="shadowHyphen">-</seg>so wile it rede .</l><milestone n="78r" unit="fol." entity="Lan78r"/><l id="R.P.65" n="KD.P.196-KD.P.197"> <hi rend="BinR"><foreign lang="lat"><hi rend="tr">V</hi>e terre vbi puer <app loc="R.P.65"><lem wit="R Cr Hm F">est rex</lem><rdg wit="Most beta mss">rex est &c</rdg></app> .</foreign></hi> For may no renk <app loc="R.P.65"><lem wit="R">no</lem><rdg wit="Most beta mss">þer</rdg></app><note type="textual" id="R.P.65.n.1"><ref>R.P.65:</ref> F omits R's double negative and beta reads <hi rend="it"><hi rend="bold">þer</hi> reste</hi> in place of R's <hi rend="it"><hi rend="bold">no</hi> reste</hi>.</note> reste haue  </l><l id="R.P.66" n="KD.P.197"> <hi rend="tr">f</hi>or ratones by nyȝte . <seg type="lineFiller">—</seg> <note type="textual" id="R.P.66.n.1"><ref/> It is unclear why the scribe's lineation went wrong here (running together the Latin quotation with half the following English line, so that the b-verse ended up relegated to a line of its own). It seems likely that the problem is related to a larger problem of textual order between KDProl.188 and 197 in <hi rend="bold">Bx</hi> (See Kane-Donaldson, p. 176, for their editorial reasoning on re-ordering this passage). However, there is no evidence that the R scribe had any clue about the source of the problem. The <f> at the head of RP.66 is not capitalized, but it is touched in red, and the small + in the left margin is probably irrelevant; similar marks are found beside most lines that were to have been boxed in red (unnoted in this edition).</note></l></lg><lb/><lg type="strophe"><l id="R.P.67" n="KD.P.189"> <hi rend="rb">¶</hi> <hi rend="tr">Þ</hi>e while he caccheth conynges  he coueyteth nauȝt our<expan>e</expan> caray<supplied reason="cropped">ne</supplied> </l><l id="R.P.68" n="KD.P.190"> <hi rend="tr">B</hi>ut fet hym alle wyth veneson  defame we hym neuere .</l><l id="R.P.69" n="KD.P.191"> <hi rend="ul"><hi rend="tr">F</hi>or better is a litel los  þen a longe sorwe .</hi></l><l id="R.P.70" n="KD.P.192"> <hi rend="tr">Þ</hi>e mase a<seg type="shadowHyphen">-</seg>monge vs alle  þeiȝ we misse a schrewe .</l><l id="R.P.71" n="KD.P.198"> <hi rend="tr">F</hi>or many mann<expan>us</expan> malt<expan>e</expan>  we muys wolde destruye .</l><l id="R.P.72" n="KD.P.199"> <hi rend="tr">A</hi>nd also ȝe route of ratones  rende mennes clothes .</l><l id="R.P.73" n="KD.P.200"> <hi rend="tr">N</hi>ere þat cat of þe courte  þat can ȝow ouer<expan>e</expan><seg type="shadowHyphen">-</seg>lepe .</l><l id="R.P.74" n="KD.P.201"> <hi rend="tr">F</hi>or hadde ȝe ratones ȝour<expan>e</expan> wille  ȝe couthe nouȝt rewele ȝour<expan>e</expan><supplied reason="cropped"><seg type="shadowHyphen">-</seg>selue</supplied></l><l id="R.P.75" n="KD.P.202"> <hi rend="tr">I</hi> seye <app loc="R.P.75"><lem wit="R">it</lem><rdg wit="All beta mss">nil</rdg></app><note type="textual" id="R.P.75.n.1"><ref>R.P.75:</ref> R's <hi rend="it">it</hi> is a unique addition to the line as read by the beta witnesses (at this same point, F uniquely adds <hi rend="it">þis</hi>). However, <hi rend="bold">Cx</hi> agrees on this reading with R.</note> for <app loc="R.P.75"><lem wit="R H F">my<seg type="shadowHyphen">-</seg>self</lem><rdg wit="Most beta mss">me</rdg></app><note type="textual" id="R.P.75.n.2"><ref>R.P.75:</ref> Beta reads <hi rend="it">me</hi>, a lection also supported by the <hi rend="bold">C</hi> version.</note> q<expan>uo</expan>d þe mous  I see so muchel after .</l><l id="R.P.76" n="KD.P.203"> <hi rend="tr">S</hi>chal neuere þe cat ne þe kyton  by my conseil be greued .</l><l id="R.P.77" n="KD.P.204"> <hi rend="tr">N</hi>e carpyng of þis colere  þat costed me neuere .</l><l id="R.P.78" n="KD.P.205"> <hi rend="tr">A</hi>nd þouȝ it <app loc="R.P.78"><lem wit="R G F">costed</lem><rdg wit="Most beta mss">had cost(n)e(d)</rdg></app> me<note type="textual" id="R.P.78.n.1"><ref>R.P.78:</ref> R's <hi rend="it">it costed me</hi> agrees in substance with FG, which also read a simple preterite. Beta has <hi rend="it">it had cost(n)e(d) me</hi>. The alpha reading is also that of the <hi rend="bold">C</hi> version.</note> catel  beknowen it <orig>Inolde</orig><reg>I nolde</reg> .</l><l id="R.P.79" n="KD.P.206"> <hi rend="tr">B</hi>ut suffre as hym<seg type="shadowHyphen">-</seg>self<note type="paleographic" id="R.P.79.n.1"><ref>R.P.79:</ref> There is an ink dot (smaller than a punctus) immediately after <hi rend="it">hym-self</hi>. From the lack of spacing, it appears to be accidental.</note> wolde  to do as hym liketh .</l><l id="R.P.80" n="KD.P.207"> <hi rend="tr">C</hi>oupled and vn<seg type="shadowHyphen">-</seg>coupled  to cacche what þei mowe .</l><l id="R.P.81" n="KD.P.208"> <app loc="R.P.81"><lem wit="R"><hi rend="tr">F</hi>or</lem><rdg wit="All beta mss">Forþi</rdg></app><note type="textual" id="R.P.81.n.1"><ref>R.P.81:</ref> R's <hi rend="it">For</hi> is unique; F has <hi rend="it">&</hi> while beta reads <hi rend="it">For-þi</hi>.</note> vche a wyse man<note type="textual" id="R.P.81.n.2"><ref>R.P.81:</ref> Cf. beta's <hi rend="it">wiȝte</hi> and F's <hi rend="it">Mows</hi>.</note> I warne wite wel hys owene .</l></lg><lb/><lg type="strophe"><l id="R.P.82" n="KD.P.209"> <hi rend="bl">¶</hi> <hi rend="tr">W</hi>hat þis meteles by<seg type="shadowHyphen">-</seg>mene  <app loc="R.P.82"><lem wit="R">þe</lem><rdg wit="All other mss">ȝe</rdg></app><note type="textual" id="R.P.82.n.1"><ref>R.P.82:</ref> Unfortunately, R's hand often fails to distinguish <hi rend="it">þ</hi> from <hi rend="it">y</hi>. As was the judgment of Kane-Donaldson, our guess here, judging by proximate renderings of both characters, is that R intended <hi rend="it">þe</hi>; if that was, in fact, the scribe's intention, the resulting reading is unique error; the other <hi rend="bold">B</hi> copies read <hi rend="it">ȝe</hi>.</note> men þat ben myrie .</l><l id="R.P.83" n="KD.P.210"> <hi rend="tr">D</hi>euyne ye <app loc="R.P.83"><lem wit="R">ne dar I nouȝt</lem><rdg wit="Most beta mss">for I ne dar</rdg></app><note type="textual" id="R.P.83.n.1"><ref>R.P.83:</ref> F rephrases this a-verse extensively; in place of R's <hi rend="it">ne dar I nouȝt</hi>, beta reads <hi rend="it">for I ne dar</hi>, a phrase that agrees completely with the reading of the <hi rend="bold">C</hi> version.</note>  by dere god in heuene </l></lg><lb/><lg type="strophe"><l id="R.P.84" n="KD.P.211"> <hi rend="rb"><damage type="erasure">¶</damage></hi><note type="codicological" id="R.P.84.n.1"><ref>R.P.84:</ref> The paraph marker for this strophe was either partially erased or badly rubbed.</note> <hi rend="tr">Ȝ</hi>eet houed þere an hundreth  in houues of silke </l><l id="R.P.85" n="KD.P.212"> <hi rend="tr">S</hi>eriauntz it semede  <app loc="R.P.85"><lem wit="R">at</lem><rdg wit="All other mss">þat</rdg></app><note type="lexical" id="R.P.85.n.1"><ref>R.P.85:</ref> R's <hi rend="it">at</hi> (cf. R2.11) is formally unique among the <hi rend="bold">B</hi> witnesses, which uniformly attest the expected <hi rend="it">þat</hi>; one <hi rend="bold">C</hi> manuscript (Dc) shows the same clipped form as R's. Otherwise all agree with <hi rend="bold">Bx</hi>.</note> s<expan>er</expan>ueden at þe barre .</l><l id="R.P.86" n="KD.P.213"> <hi rend="tr">P</hi>letedden for penies  and <app loc="R.P.86"><lem wit="R">pondres</lem><rdg wit="Most beta mss">poundes</rdg></app><note type="textual" id="R.P.86.n.1"><ref>R.P.86:</ref> Beta reads <hi rend="it">poundes</hi> (which is also the reading of <hi rend="bold">Ax</hi> and <hi rend="bold">Cx</hi>) while F has <hi rend="it">pownded</hi>. R's reading, which was misconstrued by Kane-Donaldson and Schmidt as <hi rend="it">poudres</hi>, is unique among the <hi rend="bold">B</hi> witnesses (manuscript E in the <hi rend="bold">A</hi> tradition also attests <hi rend="it">ponderys</hi>). <title>MED, s. v. ponder, defines pondres as "balance scales" or "weights," but the variant is almost certainly scribal. þe lawe . And nouȝt for loue of oure lorde  vnlese here lippes ones . Þow miȝteste better mete miste  on maluerne hulles . Þan gete a mumme of here mouth  herbut mony hem bywereR.P.89: In place of alpha's er, beta copies read til or but. Only R adds hem after mony. Later in this half-line, most B witnesses read be, but LMCY attest were. Among the C manuscripts, most P family witnesses agree with beta's til, while a majority of the X family agrees with alpha's er. However, at the end of the half-line, the C families fragment their allegiances, most of the P group (and four of the X group — P2CotLcBo) now aligning with the more widely attested B reading, be, while some of the best X witnesses read wer(e), agreeing with LMCY. Both sets of variants were already attested in various A copies. I-shewed ¶ Barons and burgeis  and bonde-men alse . I seiȝ in þis assemble  as ȝe schul here after Baxsteres and brewsteres  and bocheres manye . Wolle websteres  and weueres of lynnen . Taillours and tynkeres  and tolleres in marketes . Masons and mynours  and many other craftes . Of allealkin libbyngeR.P.96: Beta reads alkin libbyng. The entire line is missing from the A and C versions, but it is witnessed in Z (MS Bodley 851), where the phrasing in question is identical to that found in alpha. laboreres  lopen forthe somme . As dikares and deluares  þat doth here dedes ille . The entire outer margin is cropped, but as far down as the passus division, all initials are visible and all are touched in red. After the rubricated heading for Passus 1, the cropping becomes severe. And dryueth forth here dayes hereþe longe dayR.P.98: Cf. R's here dayes here with F's þe fayre day and beta's þe longe day. Beta's reading agrees with that of the A version, while the reading of R closely parallels that of Cx (= here days). . with deu vous saue dam emme . ¶ Kokes and here knaues  cryeden hote pies hote . Gode gris and gees  gowego we dyne gowego we . ¶ Tauerneres vntil hem  tolde þe same . Whitt wyne of osey  and of gascoynered wyn of GascoigneR.P.102: R's of gascoyne is deficient in length and alliteration to complete a full half-line, but it is substantively the same as the reading of the P family of C manuscripts. F has wyn of Gaskoyne, which essentially agrees with both the X family reading in the C tradition and with Ax. Beta reads, more explicitly, red wyn of Gascoigne. . Of þe ryn and þe rochelR.P.103: Beta reads and of þe Rochel. This is also the reading of Ax and Cx.  þe rost to defye . Al þis seyȝIseyȝ I slepynge  and seuen sithes more .