fol. 30r (cont.)I
Passus v .
vis
vis
Passus septimus de visione vt
supra .R.7.0: At the extreme right margin, on the same line as the passus
heading, there is the cropped fragment of a rubrication guide, very small and in a light
brown, contemporary hand: Passus v. Below this
fragment is another cropped line, partially obscured by the grain of the membrane: vis.
R.7.8KD.7.8
Pardoun with peres þeR.7.8: Among the other B copies, only the B family (BmBoCot), a textually inferior group, shares
R's þe before plowman; the other beta copies omit any
determiner at this point, apparently reading the reference to Langland's central character as
a full proper name, pieres plowman; F omits everything from the a-verse
after Pers. However, among the C witnesses, the X
family agrees with R (against the P family's support of beta). plowman
treuthe hath I-graunted .
¶ Kynges and kniȝtes þat kepen holy cherches .R.7.9:
R's plural is unique; all other B copies show the singular, cherche, which agrees with the reading of Ax.
fol. 30vI
And[Han]R.7.11:
And is unique error; most other B copies read Han, which agrees with the reading of Ax and Cx. pardoun þorȝ purgatorie to passe
ful liȝtly .
¶¶ Marchauntes in þe margyne hauedR.7.18:
R's verb form here is unique and slightly archaic; most of the other manuscripts of all
versions read hadde(n). No difference in meaning is discernible.
many ȝeres .
Ac noR.7.19:
Alpha construes the opening of this phrase as English and omits the initial Latin
preposition; cf. beta's none a pena. The X family of the C version treats this phrase exactly as alpha does, while the reading of the P family
omits the negative and is obviously corrupt.
pena et a culpa þepopeþe
pope wald hem nauȝtR.7.19:
In place of R's wald hem nauȝt, F has will(e) not
while beta reads nolde hem; no beta copy (nor any A
or C witness) attests the presence of alpha's nauȝt. Beta is likelier to be authorial. In a slightly revised version of this
half-line, the C version reads either nolde hem (P
family) or wolde hem (X family). The same disagreement between wolde and nolde divides the A copies
into two large groups. graunte .
R.7.20KD.7.20
For þei holde nauȝt here
halydayR.7.20:
Although M agrees with alpha on this singular form, most beta witnesses show the plural, halidayes. Most A copies agree with the majority beta
reading, but the C manuscripts divide into two large groups, the X
family (with some P- family support) atetsting alpha's form while the dominant P-family
reading agrees with beta. as holy cherche telleth .R.7.20: R's telleth is unique; Bx has techeth, the same reading found at this point, uniformly, in the other
versions .
R.7.24KD.7.24
Þat þei schulde bugge boldely þat hem best likethR.7.24:
In place of alpha's present-tense form, beta has a preterite, liked; all
but one C witness agrees with beta, but the A
manuscripts are split: a majority agree with beta's preterite, but a significant minority
attest alpha's form. Kane chooses the minority reading for his edition of A, but Kane-Donaldson endorse the beta reading in their edition of B. .
And sitthenus sellen it vsR.7.25:
R's vs is a unique addition to the text of Bx, which
agrees here with that of Ax and Cx.
aȝeyn and sauen þe wynnynges .R.7.25: Beta shows a singular form, wynnyge. The Ax reading agrees with beta's, but the C manuscripts are split, a
majority (including the best witnesses in both major families) agreeing with alpha's plural
while a minority supports beta.
And sette scoleres to scole or toR.7.31: The alpha b-verse lacks an
alliterative stave; beta reads to somme other
craftes. Beta's reading is supported by the analogous verse from A,
which reads to summe skynes craftis.
other craftes .
¶¶ Þanne were
manye marchauntz þat wopenR.7.37:
In place of alpha's manye marchauntz þat wopen, the beta
phrase is Marchauntz mery many wepten. The beta phrase agrees entirely
with the wording of Ax and Cx. for ioye
.
Men of lawe leste pardoun hadde .R.7.39: Here alpha
seems to have mislineated by truncation (as reflected in R's short line), which causes the
authorial b-verse to be cast as a following line (R7.40), fleshed out (uniquely in R) with
for þat craft is schrewed. F attempts an even more extensive smoothing,
rendering the two lines as follows:
But men of Lawe of pardoun / þe leeste part þey haddyn.
For þey for meede pletyn moore / þan mychil for goddis helpe.
But men of Lawe of pardoun / þe leeste part þey haddyn.
For þey for meede pletyn moore / þan mychil for goddis helpe.
fol. 31rI
And nameliche of innocentes þat non euel ne cunneth .R.7.42: Hereafter
beta includes a Latin citation omitted by alpha:
Super innocentem munera non accipies.
Super innocentem munera non accipies.
R.7.48KD.7.47
¶ Ac he þat spenethR.7.48:
R's speneth is a unique reading (the other B
manuscripts read spendeth); however, R's verb derived historically from
spende(n), is synonymous with it, and occurs in free variation with it
throughout R (cf. R10.109). From its sometimes parallel occurrence in L (as at KD10.90), the
form seems likely to be an authorial relict. A majority of C copies
agree with R's form here, as does the text of Bodley 851, but most A
manuscripts agree with beta. his speche and speketh for þe pore .
AndR.7.50:
Beta omits And. The A version attests the same
a-verse and reads it exactly as beta does. conforteth hym in þat cas with-oute coueytise of ȝiftes .
¶ Whan þei drawen in-toR.7.59:
Beta reads on(e) to (LMCrW), followed by deye(n)
(LMCrWCG) . Cx agrees exactly with F's to þe deþ
. deth and indulgences wolde haue .
R.7.60KD.7.58
His pardoun is ful petyt at hisR.7.60:
R's second his in this line is unique; all other B
manuscripts read a plural form like W's hir. However, Cx agrees exactly with R's rendering of this line, including the singular posessive
here. partyng hennes .
Þat medeR.7.61:
R uniquely omits any before mede. F and beta agree with
Ax in attesting the presence of this determiner, but R has the support
of Cx in omitting it. of mene men for her motyng taketh
.
Þe legistres and þeR.7.62:
R's þe is a unique addition to this line. Although R's þ and y tend oftentimes to overlap in form, this word was probably
mistranscribed by Kane and Donaldson, who read it as ye, an error also
implicit in their earlier omission of R from the lemma for witnesses beginning this line with
Þe; that group includes R's sibling F. lawyeres holdeth
þis for treuthe .
R.7.68KD.7.63
And lyuen in loue and in lawe for here lowe
herte .R.7.68: Beta shows the plural hertis. The C
version omits this line, and the A manuscripts are divided, with
slightly more than half supporting alpha's singular and the rest agreeing with beta's
plural.
Haueth þe same absolucion þat sent was to
peres .R.7.69: The scribe omitted the customary space between this line and the new verse
paragraph below, but he often does so when, as here, the new unit begins on the last line of
a side.
fol. 31vI
But ȝif þe sugestion be soth þat schapeth hymR.7.71:
R's hym is unique among the B manuscripts. The others
read hem. Ax agrees with the reading of the B majority, but the C manuscripts are divided by major
groups, the X family supporting R while the P group supports the other B
copies. to begge .
And also he gylethR.7.74:
Both beta and F read bigileth. However, R's unique verb form agrees
exactly with the reading of Ax and Cx. þe
gyuere ageynes his wille .
R.7.80KD.7.75
Sit elemosinaR.7.80: Most beta copies read elemosina tua in manu
tua, but LM support alpha's omission of the first tua. in manu tua donec studes cui des .
¶¶ Ac gregorie is aR.7.81: In place of R's is a, beta reads was a.
F reads þat. good man and badde vs gyuen alle .
For he
ȝiftR.7.87:
F reads the opening of this a-verse as For þe man þat ȝifte; beta has
For he þat ȝiueth. It seems clear from these overlapping agreements
that R is responsible uniquely for omitting þat, that F replaces
archetypal he with þe man, and that the ȝifte / ȝiueth dichotomy reflects an alpha / beta
difference. ȝeldeth and ȝarketh hym to reste .
R.7.88KD.7.81
And he þat bitR.7.88:
R's bit is a unique verb form here. F makes extensive revisions to the
entire line, while most beta copies read biddeth. boreweth
and bryngeth hym-selue in dette
To ȝelden hem þat ȝyueth hem and ȝut vsure
amoreR.7.90:
R alone reads amore; other B witnesses correctly have
more. .
R.7.96KD.7.86α
Satis diues est qui indiget[non] indigetR.7.96: R's omission of non before indiget is unique. pane .
fol. 32rI
R.7.104KD.7.94
Or þe bak or þeR.7.104:
Both beta and F read some bone. This agrees with the
reading of Cx. Ax had read his bon. bone þeiR.7.104:
Beta manuscripts have he breketh for alpha's þei
breken. The A manuscripts are divided, some attesting a singular
and others a plural, but Cx agrees with alpha, treating the phrase as a
plural. breken in here ȝouthe .
And sitthen gon faiten with hereR.7.105:
Although OC2 support alpha's reading, beta has ȝoure for alpha's here. Both Ax and Cx agree with alpha. fauntes for euere-more after .
R.7.108KD.7.98
ÞoR.7.108:
In place of alpha's Þo or For þo (= F), beta reads And þei. Both Ax and Cx agree with
R's version of the entire a-verse. þat lyueth þus here lif mowe lothe þe tyme
.
R.7.112KD.7.102
Blynde and bederede and broken inR.7.112:
R's in is a unique reading; this preposition is omitted by the other B witnesses but is attested in two of the A copies (Ma
and H) and in Cx. here membres .
R.7.116KD.7.106
Here penance and here purgatorie here vponR.7.116:
F garbles the entire b-verse; beta reads here on in place of R's here vpon. The reading of A for this half-line seems
uncertain, but six A witnesses attest the presence of here at the beginning of this phrase and five read here vpon . C omits B's here from the phrase;
the full Cx reading is vppon this puyre erthe.
þis erthe .
For I schalR.7.118:
Beta reads wil. Ax agrees with alpha. construe
vche clause and kenne it þe an englys .
¶ And peres at his preyere þe pardon heR.7.119:
R's he is a unique addition to the text as witnessed by the other B copies. Both Ax and Cx agree
with the B majority. vnfoldeth .
R.7.128KD.7.118
ÞatR.7.128:
R's Þat is an alpha variant supported by LM. Most other beta copies read
But. Y reads And. Ax agrees with
the RFLM reading. after þi deth-day þe deuel
schal haue þi soule .
Non timebo mala quoniam tu mecum es
.R.7.131: Here the scribe omits the customary space between strophes,
presumably because the next verse paragraph begins on the last line of this side.
fol. 32vI
Of preyeres and of penauncesR.7.134:
Beta shows the singular penaunce. Although two A
witnesses (DMa) agree with alpha, it is clear that Ax read the same
singular form as beta. my plow schal ben here-after .
R.7.144KD.7.133
Þe foules ofR.7.144:
R's of is unique; F and most beta copies read in. LM
have on. The A version reads the key phrase of this
half-line as foulis in þe firmament. þe felde
ho fynt hem mete at wynter .
R.7.148KD.7.138
¶¶
AbstinenceR.7.148:
After Abstinence, beta adds þe abbesse. The passage
does not appear in C but is phrased in A exactly as
in beta. quod peres myn a b c me tauȝte .
R.7.152KD.7.142
¶¶ Lewed lorel quod peres
litel lokestow on þiR.7.152: Both F and beta read þe, which is also the
reading of Ax. bible .
AndR.7.153: Beta reads On; F rephrases the entire
a-verse, beginning it with Þere. salamounes sawes selden
þow beholdest .
EcceR.7.154: Many B manuscripts
read Eice, including F and numerous beta copies; however, the
most authoritative beta copies (including LMCrW) all agree with R on Ecce. The latter variant is clearly erroneous with regard to the original
Vulgate text, but it probably already existed as a Vulgate variant long before Langland's
day since the same paleographic factors that would have induced multiple independent errors
in both directions among Piers Plowman scribes already were in place. Even
Kane-Donaldson fall into this pit, mistranscribing R's Ecce
as Eice because it is barely possible to construe
(generously) the <cc> as <ic> joined at the top by a ligature—until one
notices, in the preceding tag at R7.142, that the R scribe does not avail himself of a
ligature when writing the <ic> of solliciti. There is
no way to know which word Langland himself wrote, but since all A
manuscripts attest Ecce, the odds are, as Rigg and Brewer
theorize in Piers Plowman: The Z Version (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of
Mediaeval Studies, 1983): 111, that various B scribes attempted to do
for Langland what Kane-Donaldson unconsciously do for R: repair the damage quietly. See
John A. Alford, Piers Plowman: A Guide to the Quotations
(Binghamton: MRTS, 1992), p. 57, for discussion of this tag.
derisores &cetera .R.7.154: R omits the end of this citation, which in
beta reads: iurgia cum eis ne crescant &c. F's version of
the rest of the citation is, typically, unique: & exibit cum eo
iurgium cessabitque cause & contumelie.
R.7.156KD.7.145
¶¶ And I thorȝ her wordes R.7.156: R alone
misplaces the caesura indicator. a-woke and wayted
aboute .
of þat I seyȝ slepyng
fol. 33rI
How daniel diuined þe dremeR.7.169: F and most beta witnesses
attest the plural dremes. of a kyng .
R.7.172KD.7.161
Þat vnkouth kniȝtes schul come þi kyngdom to reue .R.7.172: In place of alpha's reue, beta witnesses are divided
between cleyme (CrWHmC) and cleue (LMGOC2). Ax reads cleyme, but the stemmatic array
of the two variants from beta actually suggests that its form was somewhat likelier to have
been cleue.
It byfel as his fader tolde his frendes hym þere souȝteR.7.183: Reversing R's hym þere souȝte, beta reads þere hym souȝte; F has sowtyn þere. .
And nempnedR.7.186:
R's nempned is a unique error, failing in alliteration; F and beta agree
on demed, which is also the reading of Cx and of some
of the A manuscripts (most of the others read various forms of another
alliterating verb, e.g., manuscript A's deuyned). þat dowel
indulgence passed
And passeth alle pardounR.7.189:
R uniquely omits þe before pardoun. Only one A manuscript duplicates this error (the others all agree with Bx). of seinte petres chercheR.7.189: Here the scribe omits the
customary space between strophes, presumably because the next verse paragraph begins on the
last line of this side.
f j
fol. 33vI
R.7.192KD.7.181
Þis oureÞis [is] oureR.7.192:
R uniquely omits is before beleue. beleue
as lettred men vs techeth .
It isR.7.198: Beta omits It and begins the line with Is. Seven A witnesses (UDVJAWaN) agree with beta in this
omission, but the others agree with alpha. Among the C copies, it seems
likely that the progenitor of the P family agreed with beta's omission, but the X family
clearly supports the inclusion of Hit at the head of this line.
nauȝt so siker for þe soule certes as is dowel .
¶ For-thi I rede ȝow thenkeR.7.199:
Alpha was corrupt here and R presumably mirrors its reading with ȝow
thenke; cf. beta's presumptively authentic ȝow renkes. F offers
a typical job of smoothing alpha's error: ȝow alle. Cx agrees with beta. þat riche ben on þis erthe .
And comen alle byfore criste and acountesR.7.206: Alpha adds and at the head of this b-verse; although
several A manuscripts do the same, it is obvious that both Ax and Cx agree with beta in omitting this
conjunction. to ȝelde .
R.7.208KD.7.196
And how þow dostR.7.208:
Beta has dedest; F reads a present form, don. Ax agrees with beta. day by day þe dome wil reherce .
A pouhȝ-fulR.7.209:
This unusual form appears only in R. The word pouhȝ, "sack, bag," is
synonymous with poke, the form attested by other manuscripts. This form is
possibly original, since it appears in A's Vernon manuscript, and
Kane-Russell have adopted it for their critical text of C of
pardoun þere ne prouinciales lettres
.
Þowe ȝe be founde in þe fraternite of
alle þe fyueR.7.210:
R's fyue is a unique variant among the B witnesses;
beta and F read foure. Ax agrees with the B majority, but Cx agrees with R. ordres .
And haue indulgences dubblefolde but dowel wil ȝowR.7.211: Beta has the unmetrical reading but if dowel ȝow. R's
wil is a unique addition. helpe .
¶
Forthi I conseile alle cristene to crie god mercy
.R.7.213: Although he left the job of ornamenting R far from complete, the rubricator
usually took care to alternate blue with red paraph markers. However, on this page the
pattern is broken (two red parasigns in a row), presumably through inadvertency. The verse
strophe preceding this one is fairly long, but there is no evidence that a paragraph division
was overlooked by the copyist. Only one of the older B manuscripts shows
any division between KD7.187 and KD7.201 (Hm, at KD7.193); the rest agree with R in marking
none.
R.7.216KD.7.204
Suche werkes to werche þeR.7.216:
Beta omits þe. Ax agrees with beta, as does the P
family of C witnesses; however, the X family agrees with alpha.
while we ben here .