Introduction

I. Description of the Manuscript: Cambridge, University Library, MS Ll.4.14 (C2)

I.1 Date:

George Kane and E. Talbot Donaldson,N A. I. Doyle,N and Ralph HannaN agree in dating this manuscript to "late in the first half of the fifteenth century."

I.2 Contents:

Although Cambridge University librarian H. L. Pink believed manuscript Ll.4.14 to be composed of two parts, divided after the ninth gathering, Kane and Donaldson 4n30 point out that the appearance of the same hand in items 1-5 (Piers Plowman, Mum and the Sothsegger, A Treatise on Arithmetic, The Wise Book of Philosophy and Astronomy, and The Book of Physiognomy; see below, I.5 Handwriting) argues against this. However, in their treatment of the manuscript Benson and Blanchfield 46 refer to its contents as Manuscript A and Manuscript B. The manuscript, in quarto, has 160 paper leaves numbered to 174; see below for missing leaves of good quality, with two frontleaves. The first of these is blank; the second contains, at top left, cataloguing information for the manuscript and, at top right, seven lines of Latin verse in praise of the Virgin, followed by five lines in a secretary hand, a fragmentary dedication whose text is reproduced in Benson and Blanchfield 48. The third leaf of the manuscript is a narrow sliver about a third the width of the other leaves, with three lines written lengthwise in a secretary hand setting forth the terms of a lease of land for the text, see Benson and Blanchfield 48. The next leaf is blank, and on the following one, numbered 1 at the top right corner, the text of Piers Plowman begins. There is no title; at the top center of f.1r is written, in modern pencil, Fol. 1, and in the top right margin, in the same hand, Passus 1mm.

The manuscript has a modern binding H. L. Pink, in his notes on the manuscript, gives the date as 1958 of marbled paperboard. The spine is of black leather and contains six divisions. On the first, engraved in gold, are the words Piers Plowman & cetera. Below, at the bottom of the final division, the catalogue number Ll.4.14 is engraved in gold. There are 160 leaves in the manuscript, numbered to 174 see itemization below for missing leaves.

The contents of the manuscript are I borrow from the succinct and accurate account of Kane and Donaldson, p. 4:

• 1. Piers Plowman, ff. 1r-107r.
• 2. Mum and the Sothsegger, ff. 107v-119v.
• 3. missing, ff. 120-124.
• 4. blank except for a note on the missing leaves, in a modern hand, ff. 125-126.
• 5. a prose treatise on arithmetic in English, ff. 127r-148v.
• 6. missing, ff. 149r-152v.
• 7. ff. 153r-156v: a prose treatise in English the wyse boke of philosophie and astronomye.
• 8. ff. 156v-159v: a prose treatise on phisonomye in English.
• 9. f. 160: missing.
• 10. ff. 161r-163r: a Latin verse table of the arguments of the Psalms.
• 11. f. 163v: blank.
• 12. ff. 164r-167r: sayings of the Latin fathers, with translation in English verse.
• 13. f. 167v: blank.
• 14. f. 168: missing.
• 15. f. 169r: blank except for a note on 169r, in a modern hand, that f. 168 is missing.
• 16. ff. 169v-170v: glosses to words from Piers Plowman Skeat prints this in the appendix to his edition.
• 17. ff. 171-172: missing.
• 18. ff. 173r-174v: A doctrine of Fisshing and foulyng.
• 19. ff. 174 r: a quatrain of prayer.

SkeatN writes of the relationship between this manuscript of Piers Plowman and the Oriel manuscript:

The copy of Piers the Plowman in this manuscript seems to be complete. [xxi] It bears so striking a resemblance to the Oriel manuscript as to suggest the notion that it has been copied from it, although in a few places it rightly preserves one or two little words which the Oriel manuscript has dropped; but these words are, for the most part, only such as can be supplied by one's own common sense. There is also a great similarity in the spelling, the most curious alteration being the frequent substitution of the ending -yn for -en in the plural indicative of verbs. However this may be, it is for all practical purposes, a duplicate of the Oriel manuscript, and hence extremely useful for filling up the two gaps mentioned above. It has therefore been collated in Pass xvii ll. 96-340, and in Pass xix 276-355, where the reader may look upon the symbol C2 as occupying the place of the symbol O in the footnotes. It has also been occasionally consulted in other passages, and a few readings from it will be occasionally met with. It agrees, moreover, with the Oriel manuscript in reading Shulden go synge seruyseles with sir Phelip e sparwe xv.119.

After discussing the Oriel manuscript, A. I. Doyle remarks of C2 41: "Cambridge University Library Ll.iv.14, with the same state of text, in a more current hand on paper, about the second quarter of the century, followed by the only known copy of Richard the Redeless, and popular prose Books of Astronomy and Physiognomy, with various English and Latin items added by other hands, is assigned by language to Cambridgeshire. These manuscripts O and C2 could be metropolitan products of differing cost or may represent occurrence of B in East Anglia, where copies of A are also [42] found in the middle and second half of the fifteenth century."

I.3 Physical Description:

Size: Leaves 285x210mm, written area 210x115mm on average. The text of Piers Plowman is arranged in a single column, with an average of 37 lines per page. No title is present. Passus divisions are marked at the beginning of the poem and at Passus 7 through 20, although the first is in a modern hand, in pencil, and placed at the beginning of the prologue, and the seventh, misidentified as octauus, is in the hand of the sixteenth-century annotator rather than that of the main scribe. Marginal rubrics appear at intervals throughout the text. There are occasional glosses and corrections both in the margins and on or above the lines.

This scribe often (some 120 instances between passus 8 and 18) places Latin lines in the right margin, separated from the main column of text and most often underlined in red. Red underlining is also used for most Latin lines placed within the main column of text. Latin lines too long to fit into the margin wrap around to the next and successive lines of the main column. English text is occasionally underlined in red or black.

The manuscript is almost entirely legible, but with fading and discoloration throughout; except for the contributions of the sixteenth-century annotator, the original black ink has faded to brown. There is some isolated staining, spotting, and streaking (ff. 3, 9, 20-21, 23, 34v, 42, 51, 55, 59, 63, 71, 75, 84, 88), but apparently no cropping. The only noticeable bleedthrough occurs on f. 29r. The top outside corners of ff. 1-17, 20-22, and 24-28 have been patched.

I.4 Collation Piers Plowman only:

I.5 Handwriting:

Accounts differ as to the number of hands appearing in the manuscript as a whole. Skeat xx states that "the first three parts are in the same handwriting." Kane and Donaldson 4 find four distinct hands one for the items they designate 1-5, another for 6 and 9, a third for item 7, and a fourththe hand of the annotator of Piers Plowmanfor item 8. H. L. Pink, in his notes on the manuscript preserved at Cambridge University Library, identifies six distinct hands, changing at ff. 127, 161, 164, 170, and 173. Benson and Blanchfield 45 distinguish five hands, in items numbered by Kane and Donaldson 4n30 1-5, 6 and 9, 7, 8, and 10. These accounts, of course, do not include the modern hands mentioned below.

Editors agree that the manuscript of Piers Plowman contains two hands: that of the main scribe, described by Kane and Donaldson 4 as "a small anglicana tending to currency, with some secretary forms," and the "regular, clear, stylish" Benson and Blanchfield 47 hand of a sixteenth-century annotator. Benson and Blanchfield record Thorne's and Uhart's suggestion that this annotator may have been Robert Crowley, the first printer of Piers Plowman. The same hand wrote the glossary to Piers Plowman also contained in this manuscript.

It is possible that the third and fourth lines of f. 9r C2.2.108 and 109 were written in a third hand which has so far not been identified. Evidence for this is the difference in the forms of <h>, <r>, and <s> and perhaps stronger three spellings not used by Hand 1: heven, witnesse, and wheche. However, a strong general resemblance between this hand and Hand 1, and the perfect likeness of the ink, make it impossible to be certain that these lines were written by another.

I.5.1 Hand 1

In addition to the text, the main scribe has written occasional corrections, glosses, and rubrics and the headings of passus 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, and 20 misidentified as 21.

The most prominent peculiarity of the main scribe's hand is that he always joins the indefinite article to the first word of the following noun. We have silently regularized these forms by separating the indefinite article from the following noun. He also places a bar through terminal double <l>, which is apparently otiose and has not been transcribed. A final <r> with superscript hook indicates following <e>. He almost always doubles initial and often medial <f>. We have represented these as capitals only when they appear at the beginning of a line; otherwise, the double <f> is transcribed.

Although capital letters in this scribe's hand are not always easily distinguishable from lower-caseespecially for the letters <A>, <K>, <S>, <V>, <W>, <Y>, <H>, <Þ>, <Ȝ>, and <F>, which he habitually doubles initiallyhe often capitalizes the first letter of the line. Most of the main scribe's capitals are distinguished by barring or double strokes; <B>, <C>, <D>, <E>, <G>, <I>, <L>, <N>, <O>, <Q>, <R>, <S> and <T> have distinctive majuscule forms; capital <M> is distinguished by a leftward-slanting descender from the final minim. The scribe uses a few variant letter forms. He employs three forms of <s>: the sigma form, which when it is larger appears to be intended as a capital letter; the long <s>, his usual form both initially and medially; and, terminally, a reduced form of the sigma <s> with an elongated top stroke. His script exhibits three forms of lower-case <r>, the long <r>; a form without a descender which resembles the modern cursive <r>; and a short form resembling a modern printed <r> to which he attaches a superscript hook as an abbreviation for re. <V> is written as <v> initially, as <u> medially.

The scribe makes liberal use of otiose tildes, which we have marked with paleographic notes. We have transcribed tildes as following nasals only for words in which the nasal most often appears when the scribe writes the word out fully. An unusual feature of this scribe's practice is that, in one instancethe word couude, with its variant kouudethe tilde appears to substitute for <u> instead of a nasal consonant. He writes coud- only once, and koud- only twice; in all other instances of the words, he doubles the <u> or represents it with a tilde.

Hand 1 also often includes a bar through the ascender of word-terminal <h>. It appears that this bar is sometimes otiose, since for some of the words in which it appears the scribe does not include final <e> when he writes them out fully. We have transcribed barred <h> as he only for those words in which the final <e> is most often included when the word is written out fully.

I.5.2 Hand 2

The hand we have designated "Hand 2" is the only other hand, besides the original scribal hand, that appears in Piers Plowman with the possible exception of a hand which appears in two lines only; see I.5 Handwriting. Hand 2 is a bold, stylish 16th-century hand using a broad nib and very black ink, which has not faded to brown like that of the original scribe. Apart from underlining, which will be addressed below, a total of 351 interpolations by Hand 2 appear in or beside 335 lines distributed among the 21 passus as follows: Prologue, 21; Passus 1, 13; Passus 2, 2; Passus 3, 2; Passus 4, 4; Passus 5, 10; Passus 6, 5; Passus 7, 9; Passus 8, 9; Passus 9, 16; Passus 10, 73; Passus 11, 44; Passus 12, 38; Passus 13, 31; Passus 14, 16; Passus 15, 19; Passus 16, 2; Passus 17, 8; Passus 18, 9; Passus 19, 8; and Passus 20, 10. The most prominent additions by Hand 2 are rubrics; this writer adds 146 rubrics, which amount to a running topical outline in the margins, principally the right margin. Most of these simply repeat key words or phrases which appear in the line or summarize its content. Additions in the left margin are few: five rubrics at P.46, P.52, P.58, 12.52, and 20.285; the notation "S" or the word Similitudo at 8.27, 9.39, 11.258, 12.111, 12.160, 12.199, 15.101, and 15.336; and a parasign at 5.531. In addition he makes many changes in spelling, apparently in an attempt to bring the scribal dialect closer to his own; supplies missing graphs and changes some written in error; supplies glosses; and offers more significant editorial changes, some good and some difficult to account for. In isolated instances, he supplies a passus heading (at 7.1, where he erroneously announces Passus 8); an explicit to the visio at 7.206; and two Latin interpolations, one on the three species of pride at 11.12 and one on Edward III at 13.275.

I.5.2.1 Dialectally motivated spelling changes by Hand 2:

Many of these reflect regional, others temporal changes. Some of them occur repeatedly, as the preposition be to by 12x; the verb leu- "live" to lyu- 15x; and Troianus to Traianus 6x. Others are: P.64, Carite to Charite; P.79, diseyue to disceyue; P.94, stryues to streyuese; P. 157, ond to and; P.227, gresse to greysse; 1.192, ei to ey; 2.187, tom to tome; 3.326, iustise to iustice; 4.53, magry to maugry; 4.54, grys to gryses; 5.287, reffe to riffe; 6.294, percell to percelly; 9.69, scoppe to shope; 9.190, contene to conteyne; 10.18, kymbyn to kembyn; 10.19, contreue to contreyue; 10.24, wilden to welden; 10.98, ffeeler to ffydeler; 10.113, whilez to wyles; 10.122, mysbylyue to mysbyleue; 10.170, lekorouse to lykorouse; 10.173, lekerous to lykorous; 10.186, contreued to contryued; 10.189 and 10.204, teologie to theologie; 10.191, deuyne to dyuyne; 10.218, astromye to astronomye; 10.246, deuyll to deuylls; 10.260, ffyn to ffyne indef. adj.; 10.290, ȝouseluen to ȝourseluen; 10.292, 10.418, and 13.86, godis to goddis; 10.300, Offyn to Offny; 10.318, ho to who; 10.374, sen to sene; 10.379, sleye to slee; 10.381, sle to sley; 10.432, dyde to dydde; 10.434, pete "pity" to pyte; 11.85, beren "child" to barne; 11.166, lordes to lordys; 11.183 and 11.415, blesse "bliss" to blysse; 11.218, mad to made; 11.240, apparale to apparaile; 11.254 and 13.10, out "aught" to ought; 11.300, lenage to lynage; 11.319, salme to psalme; 11.347, boles to bulles; 11.368, steris "stars" to sterris; 12.43, contene to conteyne; 12.112 and 12.189, lettrure to letterature; 12.205, wedowes to wydowes; 12.226, summ to summe; 13.52, drowe pret. to drewe; 13.87, parforne to parforme; 13.414, lawe "laugh" to lawghe; 13.433, 14.2, and 14.14, ysuelid or suyled to soyled; 14.300, vnsellide to vnseyled; 15.210, leon to lyon; 15.404, dowue to dove; 15.439, soe "boiled" to soden; 17.70, wyn to wyne; 17.209, Sere "Sir" to Syre; 17.229, menute to mynute; 20.178, murie to merie.

I.5.2.2 Missing graphs supplied and erroneous graphs corrected:

P.163, wayeyn to wareyn; 1.39, worde to wolde; 1.51 and 1.52, unclear <e> overwritten in Cesari[s]; 1.147, triache to triacle; 2.124, eperrius to operarius; 5.281, demittitur to dimittitur; 5.488, petitencia to penitencia; 5.524, bi to be; 5.528, biati to beati; 5.538, blod to brode; 6.220, he to her; 7.45, princibus to principibus; 7.188, traste to truste; 9.26 and 11.331, creature to creatoure; 9.70, secundu to secundum; 10.6, fflateris to fflatereris; 10.34, Iegolouris to Iogolouris; 10.174, symplite to symplicite; 10.200, dluditur to deluditur, with the <r> overwritten for clarity; 10.206 and 10.264, bidi to biddi; 10.353, berett to bereth; 10.358, i to ei; 10.361, an to arn; 10.395, Aristole to Aristotle; 11.58, pcuniosus to pecuniosus; 11.66, B- to Be; 11.205, leue to loue; 11.306, wordir to wondir; 12.115, tech to teche; 12.163, symme to swymme; 13.12, lede to ledde; 13.48, tomentis to tormentis; 14.199, may to many; 14.314, harder to hardyer; 15.149, mkyn to makyn; 15.157, fforde to ffonde; 15.157, Hand 2 overwrites unclear long <r> in charite with short <r>; 15.306, Hand 2 overwrites unclear <w> in cowde with <w>; 15.350, persoun to persouner evidently intended to suggest prisoner, the correct reading; 16.58, e to ei; 17.157, swewi to shewi; 19.413, avision "Avignon" to avinion; 20.136, devosse to devorsse; 20.386, Dialagus to Dialogus.

I.5.2.3 Glosses:

In the many instances in which Hand 2 does not delete or overwrite the text but merely adds words or phrases on or above the line, he offers no indication whether his additions are intended as glosses or as substitutions for a word or phrase in the text. Only in one instance, at 11.27, has he added the abbreviation for a phrase, i[d est], that indicates clearly that what follows is a gloss. Most often his additions seem unlikely to be glosses, and the sense suggests they are substitutions. Unless their purpose is clear, we have treated them as additions without further characterizing them. Only the following are almost certainly glosses: P.39, hyne appearing above knaue; 5.509, loste appearing above lees; 10.88, weldeth appearing above welt; 10.100, wo begoun appearing in the left margin beside Elenge; 11.27, i[d est] age appearing above elde; 14.144, hyndes appearing above huen.

I.5.2.4 Significant editorial changes:

Some of these provide original readings where Hand 1 has erred, some "correct" a good reading with an unoriginal one, and others merely replace one unoriginal reading with another.

P.14, sauȝt to see all manuscripts except C2 have seiȝ; P.14, reallecle to trikanlie C2 alone has reallecle; most manuscripts have trieliche; P.63, marchin to meten most manuscripts have marchen; H alone has a form of mete; P.190, elenge to aylynge Kane and Donaldson call this a gloss, but that seems unlikely given the gloss at 10.100. Aylynge appears in no other manuscript; 1.116, fforme to in or of fforme all other manuscripts have in; 7.182, preiede to praysed Kane and Donaldson call this a gloss, but that seems unlikely given the dissimilarity in meaning. All other manuscripts have preued; 9.31, schafte to schape most manuscripts have schafte, but Kane and Donaldson adopt shape, the reading of CrCG; 10.100, Elenge to Eylenge note the gloss on this word as well; 10.119, Botton to Be Botton Hm only has Be, by correction; 10.146, de to a dore nayle F alone has the phrase dore nail; 10.146, arere to asyde F alone has on syȝde; most manuscripts have arere; 10.160, techinge to bysekynge only Hand 2 in C2 gives this reading, which Kane and Donaldson adopt; 10.174, shalte to shalte u all other manuscripts include ou; 10.219, geomesie to geomancie Cr alone has geomansye; 10.274, De to Si all other manuscripts have Si; 10.374, bakkis to baggis only G has baggis, by correction; 10.374, mo to molte this addition is hard to account for; all manuscripts have mo; 10.404, hertez to her hertez all other manuscripts except Hm include hir; 11.32, e to the eighe all other manuscripts have eighe; 11.44, e to o neither reading is original; 11.110, Parum to Parce all other manuscripts have Parum; 11.203, name to his name all manuscripts except F include his; 12.257, ledene to lede...is as there is a space before in, it seems likely that Hand 2 erased ne in ledene and inserted is before yliche; 12.260, lere to there all other manuscripts have there; 12.261, auynet to night this correction, or gloss, is inexplicable unless the scribe of Hand 2 had never heard of Avianus; 12.268, ffele to ffyve all manuscripts have fele; 12.273, sortes to Socrates perhaps a gloss; 12.281, wore to to be only M has a form of be in this place; 13.177, conformen to confyrmen CrGF have confirme; all others have conform. Kane and Donaldson emend to parfournen; 13.231, shuld to ne shuld no manuscript has the negative; 13.368, neuere to ever only C2 has neuere; all other manuscripts have euer; 14.1, hool to olde all manuscripts have hool except LRF, which omit the word in this position; 15.407, clerkis to e clerkis all other manuscripts include e; 16.253, on to to all manuscripts have on; 17.70, wyn ne to wyne & C2 alone contains this error, which Hand 2 corrects; 17.83, toune to to toune all manuscripts include to or til; 17.238, seth to faithe all manuscripts have some form of seth; 18.305, two retty to two & retty all other manuscripts include the conjunction; 20.199, olde to elde all other manuscripts have elde.

I.5.2.5 Underlining:

It is likely that all red underlining is the work of Hand 1, as rubricated text is written in that hand. It is impossible to determine which hand is responsible for the black underlining, which appears uniformly darker than the text. It may appear darker because it was all done by Hand 2, or only because it was done in a different ink. Hand 2 does not underline his rubrics or any other text identifiable as written by him. But he does use brackets, and from the similarity of brackets found with his rubrics to other brackets within the text, it seems likely that he is responsible for all of the 45 brackets in the manuscript at P.59, P.67, 6.256, 6.269, 6.282, 7.32, 7.125, 7.190, 9.18, 9.85, 10.89, 10.132, 10.158, 10.169, 10.275, 10.319, 10.410, 11.74, 11.130, 11.166, 12.60, 12.94, 12.112, 12.116, 12.157, 12.158, 12.198, 12.237, 12.252, 15.514, 17.94, 17.155, 17.201, 17.205, 17.255, 17.307, 18.389, 19.420, 19.433, 20.191, 20.266, 20.294, 20.363, 20.378, and 20.384 and their associated underlining.

I.5.2.6 Other Hands:

The only other hands appearing in the manuscript are the modern ones which have supplied cataloguing information, foliation in the top right margins, Passus 1 heading erroneously placed at the beginning of the Prologue, and marginal comments on missing leaves.

I.6 Decoration and Textual Presentation:

The manuscript has no title and no illustrations. The initial letter of each passus is in red, except that the initial of Passus 1 is in blue. Five rubrics are in red (at P.68, P.192, 15.10, and 19.250); others are underlined in red. In one instance, a missing word supplied above the line at 16.84 is written in red. Certain Latin words and phrases within the text are underlined in red. There are only a few red touches; except that the initials of the explicit are touched in red, they seem almost random in their appearance.

Capitals are two lines in height and rubricated, but none are ornamented. The scribe ornaments the ascenders of certain letters within the first line of text with geometric designs or vinets that extend far into the upper margin. This form of ornamentation ceases altogether after f. 43v. Occasionally, a device consisting of a triangle formed by dots, with a wavy line ascending from it, appears in the margins e.g., in the left margin of P.48. Although it resembles the device described by M. E. Parkes 307 as a signe de renvoi, "used to associate matter in the text with material added in the margin," it does not have quite the same form or function here. It is more likely the trefoil described by Denis Muzerelle http://vocabulaire.irht.cnrs.fr/pages/vocab2.htm? as intended "pour attirer l'attention sur un passage du texte."

I.7 Punctuation:

The caesura is marked with a colon from the beginning of the manuscript through f. 86r; unmarked from 86v to 88v; unmarked with the exception of l. 18.28, which is marked with a punctus, on 89r; marked with a virgule, but only occasionally, from 89v to l. 18.167 on 91r; marked consistently with a punctus from the middle of 91r to the lower third of 92r; and marked, again, with a virgule to the end of the poem. No punctuation is used at the end of lines, except that double solidi sometimes divide the end of a line from a Latin line added in the right margin. Double solidi above the affected words are used to indicate transposition. Raised points other than at the caesura are sometimes used, but there is only one parasign, at 5.531. It appears to be the contribution of Hand 2. Carets often, but not always, appear where a word or phrase is added above the line or in the margin.

Where lines are added in the margins, the scribe uses virgules to indicate separation of the text. These virgules have not been transcribed.

The main scribe deletes by a number of different means: erasure followed by overwriting, subpunction, and marking through words or lines. In a few instances 5.202, 5.393, 14.340, 18.219 passages are both marked through and subpuncted. Hand 2 deletes most often by overwriting without erasure, even in cases as at 10.374, where he alters bakkis to baggis where to do so risks illegibility. Hand 2 also sometimes uses erasure, insertions above the line with or without carets, and marking through. Hand 2 also commonly provides additions, substitutions or glosses without overwriting, deletion, or pointing, merely adding the letter, word, or phrase on or above the line or in the margin.

The manuscript contains some four dozen brackets, indicated in notes. Judging by the black ink and broad nib, all but a few appear to have been added by Hand 2; that conclusion is strengthened by the presence of identical brackets beside marginal additions clearly by Hand 2.

The scribe sometimes uses a light vertical bar to separate words he has inadvertently joined together. In such cases, we do not transcribe the bar but merely separate the words. We have not transcribed the punctuation indicating additions or corrections, although where it is interesting or puzzling we have mentioned it in notes to the text.

I.8 Abbreviations:

The scribe of C2 makes liberal use of standard abbreviations. And is most often represented by an ampersand, with by a <w> accompanied by a supralinear <t>, that by a thorn accompanied by a supralinear <t>, and thou by a thorn accompanied by a supralinear <u>. A tilde indicates a following nasal or <u>. Tildes are sometimes misplaced, and a few — for example, at P.146, P.175, 4.125, and 11.66 — are apparently otiose. A supralinear curl represents <er> or <re>; a vertical line looped at the top, <us>; a supralinear swirl, <ra> or <a>; a supralinear hook, <ur>; a barred <p>, following <ar> or <er>; a barred <b>, following <er> or <re>; a barred <p> with hook, following <ro>; a barred <h>, following <e>; a terminal <r> with supralinear hook, following <e>; and a double-facing <q> with barred descender, quod. In Latin passages, <r> with barred descender indicates following <um>; a character resembling a yogh substitutes for terminal <us>; and a tilde above the line can substitute for any number of omitted letters. Combinations of letters are often indicated by a single superscript letter suggesting the correct sequence, as <e> for <re> in credentem, <o> for <oc> in hoc, <i> for <ri> or <ui> in trinus or turpiloquium, and <u> for <ua> in qualis. The same device is sometimes used for English as well. A long superscript hook resembling a <c> may stand for <e> or <ec> in words such as nec or peccatum. Common Latin words are routinely abbreviated; examples are quia, represented by a double-facing <q> with an extension on the line, and qua, represented by a <q> with a supralinear swirl.

The words Christi, Christo, and Christum are rendered by the scribe with an <x> together with the final character in superscript. Christus is abbreviated in two ways: as xpc or as xpus. Christe is rendered xpe. The names ihesu and ihesus, of much commoner occurrence, are rendered ihu and ihus, and rarely capitalized. Once only, at 15.594, the scribe writes ihesum, rendering it as ihm.

The scribe makes use of many decorative flourishes which in other manuscripts might have significance, but here appear to have none. Examples are the consistent barring of terminal double <l>, the hooked descender of terminal <d>, and the supralinear curl often seen on terminal <g> and <n>.

I.9 Provenance:

No record of any medieval owner of the manuscript has been discovered. A bookplate bears the name of John Moore, Bishop of Ely d. 1714. See Dictionary of National Biography 38, 359-61.

I.10 Previous Descriptions:

C. David Benson and Lynne S. Blanchfield, The Manuscripts of Piers Plowman: the B-version (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1997), pp. 45-48, 137-49.

A. I. Doyle, "Remarks on Surviving Manuscripts of Piers Plowman," in Medieval English Religious and Ethical Literature: Essays in Honour of George H. Russell, ed. Gregory Kratzmann and James Simpson (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1986), pp. 35-48.

Ralph Hanna, Authors of The Middle Ages, 3: William Langland (Aldershot: Variorum, 1993): 39.

Montague Rhodes James, A Catalogue of the Manuscripts Preserved in the Library of the University of Cambridge, Vol. 4 (Repr. Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag, 1980), pp. 66-68.

George Kane and E. Talbot Donaldson, eds., Piers Plowman: The B Version (London: Athlone Press, 1975, 2nd impression 1988), p. 4.

II. Editorial Method

II.1 Transcription of Corrections and Erasures:

Wherever possible we have attempted to distinguish between the text as originally written and as subsequently corrected by the main scribe or the second hand. Where we are reasonably confident that we can read the erased letters, they are recorded within deletion tags which display in the Diplomatic and AllTags views as deleted letters enclosed in curly brackets. When erased text is illegible, we have indicated this with one punctus per deleted character up to six characters. When longer stretches of text are involved, we indicate deletions with "...?..." and deletions longer than a half line with "...?...?...".

Added text, whether or not written over a deletion, is displayed in dark gray in Scribal and AllTags views.

II.2 Presentation of the Text: Views

Using XML markup, we offer four different views of the text: Scribal, Diplomatic, Critical, and AllTags.

The Scribal view's presentation of the text represents as closely as possible both the readings and features of the manuscript text as well as indicating editorial interventions. Changes of script and style are reflected by changes in the font style. We have represented the scribe's small current anglicana in roman letters. For the Latin quotations, Hand 1 often provided underlining in red, but did not change the size or style of the script. Resolved abbreviations and suspensions appear in italics. Color in this view serves two functions: red and blue indicate the colors of ink used by the scribe, while any other colors — aqua, dark gray, lime, olive, pink, purple and violet — mark editorial functions. For a detailed key to the conventions we have adopted for identifying editorial functions by means of color shifts, see the Instructions for First Time Users.

The Diplomatic view suppresses all notes, marginalia not in the text hands, and indications of error or eccentric word division. Its text is otherwise identical to that presented in the Scribal view.

The Critical view is designed to indicate the text as it was intended by the scribe (and any supervisor) to appear after correction. Since the text displayed is a reconstructed, putative text, it lacks the color features that appear in the more nearly diplomatic transcriptions of the manuscript. We conventionally use italics for Latin and French words and phrases in this view. We have supplied line references to the Athlone B text for the convenience of readers. Eccentric word divisions are silently, at least in the surface display, corrected in this view. That is, apeny appears as a peny. A reader who wishes to find all such divisions can still search for them in the views provided by the Scribal and AllTags views as well as in the underlying XML text.

The AllTags view, as its name implies, is intended to display the full content of markup in XML tags, though the unmediated XML text itself is available by clicking on "Display XML."

An example of the effects of the four views may be offered by the "shadow-hyphen," which we have used to join the elements of compound words that the scribe had left separate. See III.1. In the Scribal view the elements of the compound are joined by a pink hyphen to indicate editorial intervention: so vn-holy, C2.P.3. In the Diplomatic view the two words appear as the scribe wrote them: vn holy. In the Critical view the elements of the compound are joined without a space: vnholy. In the AllTags view the pink hyphen again joins the parts of the compound vn-holy.

II.3 Presentation of the Text: The Annotations

Four sets of annotations are provided—codicological, lexical, paleographic and textual.

  (a) Codicological: These notes draw attention to physical features of the manuscript and to later additions in the margins such as brackets, names, pointing hands and other drawings. Codicological notes are marked by a red superscriptedC.

  (b) Paleographic: These notes comment on letter forms, in particular ambiguous abbreviations, curls and other features. Paleographic notes are marked by a red superscriptedP.

  (c) Lexical or Linguistic: These notes provide brief glosses for unusual, ambiguous, or difficult words, or they comment on items of linguistic interest. Both Lexical and Linguistic notes are marked by a red superscripted LX.

  (d) Textual: These notes call attention to unique or shared readings which shed light on C2's relationship to other manuscripts. In addition to textual notes, we have also supplied in pop-up windows partial listings of manuscript variants of interest. Unique or unusual variants in C2 are identified with white background highlighting in the Critical and AllTags views. The white background is not supplied in either the Scribal or Diplomatic views, though if the cursor is placed over the word, the pop-up window will display. It must be emphasized that these annotations are no more than an aid to the reader of the documentary text of C2. They do not in any sense constitute a complete listing of variant readings nor anything beyond a first step in establishing the relationship of C2 to other manuscripts. They may imply that one of C2's readings is not that of the B archetype, though we reserve all judgments about Bx until a later stage of our work, currently in progress. These annotations are, then, an interim statement that will be of limited or no use once the B archive is complete and the variant listings can be electronically generated. The information for these notes is drawn from the listing of variants in the Kane-Donaldson edition which we have checked against those transcripts that are already available in the archive. Since it is not at this stage relevant which of the witnesses share the majority reading against C2's unique (or just unusual) variant, the majority readings are where possible presented in very simplified form, usually with the designation "other B manuscripts" or "most other manuscripts" or "all other manuscripts." It is true that in most cases this means Bx, but it is important not to prejudge the issue. Textual notes are marked with an icon of a superscripted red T.

III. Relationship to the Oriel College Manuscript

The work of Kane and Donaldson 21 revealed that manuscripts O and C2the Oriel manuscript and Cambridge MS Ll.4.14share some 330 agreements in error, more than any other pair of manuscripts except RF, with 504. But there are also some 213 disagreements between the two manuscripts prior to the lacuna in O at 17.99, after which the close likeness of the two ceases, excluding the C2 scribe's habitual substitution of and for ac. Although M. R. James, H. L. Pink, and W. W. Skeat I, lxix believed C2 to be a copy of the Oriel manuscript, made at a time when Oriel was complete, both Kane-Donaldson 24n23 and A. V. C. Schmidt lvii believe that the two were copied from a common exemplar. Kane and Donaldson remark:

O is defective in XVII 99-346 and XIX 281-358; this and the fact that C2 is the later manuscript might suggest that C2 was copied from O to XVII 98, and thereafter from a complete manuscript. But the existence of some 30 unoriginal readings peculiar to O makes this seem unlikely. For if C2 were a copy of O they would presuppose a corrector of C2 more intelligent than the character of that manuscript otherwise leads one to suspect. 24n23

Although certainty in this matter is probably not achievable, close examination of the readings to which Kane and Donaldson refer, and to others, seems to vindicate their judgment.

The 30 unoriginal readings peculiar to O mentioned by Kane and Donaldson do not, of course, constitute proof that the scribe of C2 could not have been using O as copy text. There are certainly some instances in which he might easily have corrected unoriginal readings appearing in O. Examples are at P.230, where he supplies the article that is missing in O e rochell; 1.14, where C2 has the copula in the phrase he is ffader missing in O; 2.100, where C2 has the correct spelling sleep in place of O's sleelp; 2.120, where C2 has muliere instead of the form mulirie, peculiar to O; 2.222, where C2 has ey wasshed, O e wasshed; 3.74, where C2 has late ne rae in place of O's late no rae; 3.269, where C2 has the infinitive marker in the phrase to ffullfille, missing in O; perhaps 5.125, where C2 has the correct form diapenidion in place of O's diapendion; 5.260, where C2 has the singular form coueytise in place of O's plural; 5.409, where C2 includes the preposition in the phrase of oure lady, missing in O; 5.473, where C2 has the definite article omitted by O in the phrase e resedue; 5.588, where C2 has the correct form i-selue in place of O's e-selue; 5.665, where C2 has the word lettres, mostly erased in O but still partially legible, and easily conjecturable; 6.9, where C2 has the correct participle scheddinge in place of the odd form schedynd in O; 6.145, where the scribe of O writes the words or deluen twice, C2 only once; 7.19, where C2 has the a in the Latin phrase a culpa, missing in O; 7.80, where C2 has the correct form Sit in place of O's Si in the Latin phrase Sit Elemosina tua; 8.13, where C2 has wyde in place of O's wijlde; 11.96, where C2 has Falsenesse in place of O's Falnesse; 11.202, where C2 has the correct possessive form adamys in place of O's adamis; 11.238, where C2 has the correct singular form speche in place of O's plural; 11.363, where C2 has the correct form bille in place of O's bible; 13.76, where C2 has the more obviously alliterating pistle in place of O's epistle; 13.77, where C2 adds the necessary preposition in the Latin phrase in ffalsis fratribus; 14.87, where C2 has the correct form deedli in place of O's dely; 14.232, where C2 has the parallel construction in e man in place of in man, peculiar to O; 14.344, where C2 has were in place of werere; 16.217, where C2 has the definite article in the phrase e wedowe, missing in O; 16.226, where C2 has muliere in place of mulerer; and 17.1, where C2 has the correct form quod in place of quo.

All these would have been easy to correct if the scribe of C2 were copying from O and were inclined to make corrections. But it is also true that, of those 330 agreements in error with O, some which might have been just as easy to correct in context do not appear correctly in C2. Examples are at 2.5, where C2 agrees with O in writing sche although the context suggests the correct reading he; 3.131, where C2 agrees with O in writing the incorrectly alliterating fekill for tikil; 3.221, where both C2 and O have the form mene for men; 5.63, where both have rehered for reherced; 6.233, where both have go for god; 10.188, where both have incorrectly alliterating kenned for lerned; 10.421, where both have cause for clause; 11.261, where both inelegantly repeat pacience for penaunce; 11.363, where both have bredinge for breyng; very strikingly, 12.163, where both have symme for swymme in C2, the <w> is supplied by a later hand; and 14.342, where both have larde for lordshipe.

Even more damaging to the theory of transmission directly from O to C2 are the "corrections" made by C2 in cases where no correction would have been indicated, because the reading of O is not, apparently, erroneous. Such an instance occurs at P.198, where C2 has mannys in agreement with LMCYHR, against O's mennys; both make perfect sense, so it is not apparent why the scribe of C2, if he were copying from O, would have made such a change. Similar instances occur at P.200, where C2 has e court in place of O's at court; 1.174, where C2 has on e pore in place of O's of e pore; 2.105, where C2 has pyne of helle in place of O's pyne in helle; 2.118, where C2 has swych weddinge in place of O's swich weddinges; 3.259, where C2 has lewde in agreement with HmHRF, but O has lowe in agreement with LWCr1CGYB; 3.275, where C2 has For mede ne ffor mony in place of O's For Mede nor for money; 4.102, where C2 has mercy on in place of O's mercy of; 4.196, where C2 has ȝoure conceill in place of O's oure counceyl; 5.102, where C2 has hated in place of O's hate; 5.155, where C2 has an abbesse in place of O's abbesse; 5.218, where C2 has the relative pronoun in the phrase at she payd by where O omits it; 5.480, where C2 has mercy on in place of O's mercy of; 6.188, where C2 has Faytouris in place of O's Fawtours the two forms were used interchangeably 10.101, where C2 has the infinitive marker to sitte omitted by O; 10.430, where C2 has I-raumsomed, O raumsomed; 14.79, where C2 has wordis in place of O's word, where both give equally good sense; 15.128, where C2 has the indefinite article in the phrase a ballok-knyf, which O omits; and 17.87, where C2 has the possessive pronoun in the phrase i ffellew that is missing in O. Some of these examples seem to point to a tendency of the O scribe to omit "little" words such as articles, relatives, infinitive markers and possessive pronouns, but that does not explain why the scribe of C2 might have supplied them where they were not needed either for metrics or for sense.

There are also, of course, a significant number of agreements noted by Kane and Donaldson of C2 with manuscripts G, F, and S against O. In a smaller number of instances, C2 shares readings not found in O with other manuscripts as well. Some of these may well be coincidental, but others suggest that the scribe of C2 had access to other manuscripts besides, or in addition to, O or an exemplar nearly identical to O. Some examples:

• P.14 C2 reallecle; H ryaly; CM rieliche; HmCr12 rychely; O trikanlie
• 1.101 C2CrHmH lackynge; O lacchyng
• 1.194 C2 And schewen; Hm schewen; H ei schewe; O Chewen
• 1.206 C2 grette; Hm grete; O grei
• 2.30 C2Cr23HmC grace; O graces
• 2.45 C2H shall be; O wor
• 2.215 C2HF settyn; O bischetten
• 3.102 C2 after sente; CrH sent for; F sente after; O ofsente
• 3.259 C2F laboris; G laboren; O laboreris
• 3.299 C2Y sergeantz; O seriaunt
• 5.3 C2F was I; O was
• 5.99 C2G greved; O greuen
• 5.102 C2H hated; O hate
• 5.114 C2BH lesyngis; O leesyng
• 5.323 C2MG Tomme; O Tymme
• 5.369 C2Hm smakkyd; Bm smachetyd; Bo smacchid; O smauȝten
• 6.15 C2G take; C takes; O nyme
• 6.51 C2Cr23CYB and in; O &
• 6.149 C2G ones; O nones
• 6.162 C2HmCGBm with; O myd
• 8.27 C2Bo ensample; Cot example; O forbisen
• 8.61 C2CrWCGYB wodes; O wode
• 9.20 C2CrHm23BoCot ende; O hende
• 9.129 C2F Conceyued in; O Conceyued been in
• 10.101 C2 to; F in to; O omission
• 10.219 C2B synfull; O gynful
• 10.283 C2M bett; O boot
• 10.427 C2LHm Iohan baptiste; O Ion e baptist
• 11.41 C2MW but if; O but
• 11.109 C2 not ffor non; G not for; F for no; O for
• 11.319 C2Cr psalme; O salmes
• 11.413 C2F at his; O at
• 12.95 C2 coupled; C coupile; B couple; O coupable
• 12.232 C2 ornz; Cr thornes; O orn
• 12.286 C2 sei, all other manuscripts saaf, O omits
• 14.297 C2Cr23G commaundementis C2 in fact has comaumdementis, O comaundement
• 14.314 C2Cr1CG hardyer; O hardier
• 15.69 C2CB and his; O & of hise
• 15.80 C2Y ffoliche; Cr3 folish; O foliliche
• 15.211 C2F ei; O it
• 15.435 C2G bedis; O heedis
• 16.106 C2G hys; O hir
• 16.127 C2HmYBoCot clerkes; O cherlis
• 17.30 C2GF byleeue; O beleuede
• 17.38 C2Cr1 gret; O gretter

Certainly the resemblance between manuscripts O and C2 is very striking, up to the point 17.99 of the lacuna in O; after that point they diverge, and it is obvious that the portion of C2 after 17.99 could not have been copied from O. After that point, the resemblance between G and C2 increases. Kane and Donaldson write:

If then we can accept that the dozen GC2 agreements in Prologue-XVI and the OC2 agreement in XVIII are coincidental, the evidence of these two variational groups is that OC2 had an exclusive common ancestor to some point in XVII, and that thereafter C2 derives from a different exemplar. Whether this exemplar was also the ancestor of G, and GC2 a genetic pair in XVIII-XX, is not however immediately indicated, for G also forms a variational group with F.... 24.

IV. Linguistic Description

IV.1. Phonology:

IV.1.1 Vowels in Tonic Syllables:

IV.1.1.1 Quantity:

Vowel length of <a>, <e>, <i>, and <o> is sometimes marked by doubling in closed syllables. Final <-e> and <-es> after a single consonant are alternative signs of length.

caas 3 (3.284); ȝaf 15 (1.15) ~ ȝaff 13 (1.107) ~ gaff 4 (2.70) ~ gaf 3 (2.224) ~ gaaf 1 (15.229) ~ gaffe 1 (14.10) ~ ȝaue 1 (13.373); hast- 5 (460) ~ haste 3 (6.178); made 98 (P.113) ~ maaky 1 (14.81); saaf 1 (12.166); taste 1 (13.345) ~ taastis 1(12.127), etc.

There are only ten instances of <aa> in the text.

ffeeld(e) 4 (5.10); ffeer(e) 3 (2.211); beldinge 1 (15.332); bem 2 (10.280); bred 20 (P.41); brede 8 (5.175) ~ breed 1 (13.266); deth 34 (18.29) ~ detth 1 (20.351); ffeet 8 (2.169); "head" heed 9 (1.163) ~ hed(e) 8 (2.203); "heed" hede 5 (6.15) ~ heed(e) 4 (10.90); "leve" leef 4 (2.34) ~ leue 4 (1.37) ~ leffe 1 (9.59) ~ leffee 1 (P.163); "leaf" leef 8 (1.155); "priest" prest 13 (P.68) ~ preste 11 (P.81); weenge 1 (12.267), etc.

The spelling <ee> is not very common, with only about 375 instances in the manuscript.

actijf 6 (6.256) ~ actiff 1 (16.2) ~ actiif 1 (13.241); caytif 3 (5.201) ~ caytijf 1 (11.299); lijf 31 (1.70) (+6 compounds) ~ lyff 37 (1.205) (+1 compound) ~ lyf 25 (3.197) (+5 compounds) ~ lif 4 (18.32) (+2 compounds) ~ lyffe 3 (P.120) ~ liff 1 (18.58) ~ lyfe ~ liif 2 (10.362) 1 (8.35) ~ lyflode 6 (1.18) ~ lyfflode 2 (P.30) ~ liiflode 3 (14.43) ~ loflode (error) 1 (14.77); pijk 2 (5.488) ~ pike 1 (8.95); wyff(e) 18 (2.154) ~ wijf(f) 9 (6.82) ~ wyf(f)(e) 21 (2.154); "wind" wynd(e) 10 (3.337) ~ wijnd 1 (7.55); wyse(r) 23 (P.48) ~ wise 16 (5.274) (+3 compounds), etc.

The spelling <ij> appears 75x in the text, usually in tonic syllables or where secondary stress is probable. A few (4) spellings appear with <iy> (griys, liynge, riyll, wriyt) to indicate vowel length.

blood 9 (1.154) ~ bloode 2 (17.94) ~ blode 12 (3.205); ffloode 1 (14.72) ~ fflode 7 (9.145) ~ ffode 13 (P.42); agoon 1 (9.114); hool 1 (14.1) ~ hoole 1 (20.43); honde 5 (12.122); lomb(e) 3 (5.574); scorne 2 (2.83), etc.

The spelling <oo> occurs about 400x in the manuscript.

IV.1.1.2 Quality:

caste 14 (3.19) ~ cast 3 (16.77); happe 5 (vb and sb) (3.290) ~ lape 1 (vb) (20.18) ~ lappe 8 (sb) (2.36), etc.

ffrom 31 (P.56); can 61 (P.111) ~ kan 2 (12.162); man 205 (P.122); wan 5 (5.470), etc.

hand(e) 18 (15.461) ~ honde 5 (12.122); handis 9 (5.299) ~ hondis 1 (10.443); hang(e) 8 (P.170) ~ hongyn 2 (1.173); long 32 (P.55) ~ longe 30 (4.198); lomb(e) 3 (5.574); stond- 16 (1.50) ~ stande 2 (6.116) ~ stant 2 (15.511), etc.

ffader 29 (1.14) ~ fader(e) 2 (1.64); game 2 (5.419) ~ gamez 1 (P.153); lape 1 (20.18); schame 6 (5.126), etc.

bank 2 (P.8) ~ bankis 1 (5.535); drank 2 (13.66) ~ dronke 2 (18.192); sank 1 (18.69); stanke 1 (15.575); þankid(e) 2 (8.106), etc.

abrode 2 (5.142) ~ abrood 1 (2.178); ffoo 1 (9.214) ~ ffo 1 (11.62); ffro 51 (1.113) ~ fro 9 (5.547); "whole" hole 2 (6.62); "hot" hote 3 (P.226) ~ hoot 2 (5.317); "called" hote 8 (2.201) ~ hate 1 (17.108); lore 17 (5.38); roper 2 (5.329); sore 18 (5.99); stones 3 (2.16), stonye 1 (12.82); wrote 1 (15.563), etc.

blowe 5 (16.33) ~ blowinge 2 (16.27) ~ blowyn (p ppl) 1 (5.18); knowe 55 (P.122) ~ know 1 (6.52); soule 83 (1.37) ~ soulle 1 (5.606), etc.

box 3 (5.665); crosse 21 (5.12);N ffolk 68 (P.17) ~ folk 1 (5.10); "God" god 240 (P.43) (never gode); "lock" lokke 1 (1.203); mosse 1 (15.292); "peacock" potok 3 (error) (12.233) ~ pekoccis 1 (11.364); spottis 1 (13.313), etc.

bolde 11 (P.188) ~ balder 2 (4.110) ~ baldeste 1 (13.300); bordis 2 (9.142); gold 24 (P.34); molde 12 (1.44) ~ mold 2 (2.38); word 26 (1.13), etc.

book 29 (P.101) ~ boke 6 (7.144); bokis 19 (1.185) ~ bokys 1 (5.149); broþer(s) 2 (5.524); dom 13 (2.207) ~ domes 2 (11.150); dooþ 5 (3.246) ~ dooþ 5 (3.246) ~ doþ(e) 25 (2.213); ffote 4 (5.6) ~ ffoot(e) 2 (5.6); "good" good(e) 135 (P.60) (never gode); rote 10 (12.61); tooles 1 (10.186); totheaches 1 (20.81), etc.

biswonke (pt. ppl) 1 (20.291); butter 1 (5.449); drunken (pt. ppl) 3 (11.423); fflyx 1 (5.180) ~ ffluxes 1 (20.80) ~ ffluxus 1 (19.44); fful(l) 85 (P.17) ~ full 4 (13.417) ~ ffulle 2 (5.551); pulle 2 (16.31); "sun" sonne 10 (5.84) ~ sunne 9 (P.1); þoruȝ 105 (1.32) ~ þoru 38 (1.32) ~ þorugh 2 (18.161); "wool" wolle 2 (6.13); "woolen" wollen 4 (1.18) ~ wullen 2 (P.220), etc.

dombe 3 (10.146); ground(e) 15 (1.90); hound 3 (5.262); morne 2 (3.16); turne 13 (3.42), etc.

The <ou> spelling is an indication of length, as below.

aboute 3 (4.84); adoun 15 (1.95); cloude 1 (3.193); how 91 (P.102); mous(e) 2 (P.202); now 87 (1.209); þou 311 (P.215) ~ thow 1 (19.168), etc.

"buy" biggen 2 (3.82) ~ bye 1 (P.168); "buyer" biggere 1 (10.314); "buying" beynge 1 (19.224); brigge(s) 2 (5.616); chirche 61 (P.66) ~ cherche 1 (10.241) ~ chyrche 1 (10.422); dyde 1 (1.28) ~ diden 1 (15.515); ffylled 1 (15.341); gylt 1 (5.461) ~ gilt 1 (5.487) ~ gulten 1 (15.396); hilles 1 (P.5); kyn 14 (1.193); merie 7 (P.10) ~ murie 2 (20.178); synne 66 (1.143), etc.

blynde 17 (5.192) ~ blind 1 (12.113) ~ blindeþ 1 (10.280); mynde 11 (5.291), etc.

"bird" bred 1 (3.14) ~ breddes 1 (19.129); ffire(s) 8 (17.206); ffyst(e) 3 (17.184); "hire" hire 10 (2.124) ~ hyre 5 (5.571) ~ hired 1 (6.118) ~ hiride 1 (6.319); "kine" kyne 1 (6.144); wisshen 2 (17.351) ~ wisshed(e) 3 (5.113) ~ wischede 1 (5.357) ~ wisshede 1 (13.89); etc.

bitter 9 (5.121) ~ bittre 1 (20.27); nyme- 8 (6.43); schrefte 7 (3.37) ~ schrifte 4 (5.310); wedowes 4 (3.125) ~ wedow(e) 4 (9.175) ~ wedowers 1 (9.187) ~ wydowez 1 (3.272) ~ wedowehod 1 (16.78) ~ wedowhod 1 (16.207); wyght 5 (18.210) ~ wyȝt 5 (5.534) ~ wiȝt 3 (12.29) ~ wiȝte 3 (5.118) ~ wiȝtt 3 (3.227) ~ wyghte 2 (17.285) ~ wyȝte 3 (9.21) ~ wyȝtliche 2 (2.210) ~ wiȝtliche 1 (6.21) ~ wyȝtt 1 (1.63), etc.

child(e) 9 (1.180); wynd(e) (sb) 10 (3.337) ~ wijnd 1 (7.55) ~ wyndis 2 (5.539) ~ wyndes 1 (8.39); liynge 1 (13.321), etc.

blithe 1 (2.159) ~ blyþe 1 (3.27); chide(n) 8 (1.194) ~ chidinge 2 (5.90) ~ chiders 1 (16.44) ~ chyde 1 (18.205); knyf 1 (5.82); lijf 31 (1.78) (+20 compounds) ~ lyff 37 (1.205) ~ lyf 25 (3.197) ~ lyffe 3 (P.120) ~ lyfe 1 (8.35) ~ liff 1 (18.58); lyflode 6 (1.18) ~ lyfflode 2 (P.30) ~ loflode 1 (14.77)(error); ride 10 (3.214) ~ riden 3 (1.95) ~ ryden 1 (15.233) ~ ridere 1 (10.313) ~ ridinge 1 (17.51); wyn 8 (P.229); wyse 20 (P.48) ~ wise 16 (5.274); wisely 2 (9.191) ~ wisili 1 (10.438) ~ wysily 1 (4.49), etc.

do well 62 (7.182); feþerid 1 (20.115); rekene 8 (1.22) ~ rekenynge 4 (5.306) ~ reckeþ 1 (15.182); webbe 1 (5.113); wrecche 2 (17.349) ~ wrecchis 4 (2.196) ~ wrechid 2 (1.39) ~ wrechednesse 1 (11.45), etc.

"beast" best 3 (12.228) ~ beste 3 (11.367) ~ bestis 35 (3.271) ~ beestis 2 (9.147); elde 18 (5.194); ende 32 (1.97); ffeld(e) 3 (P.17) ~ ffeeld(e) 4 (5.10); ffeste 6 (2.125); hende 3 (5.262) ~ hendeliche 3 (3.29) ~ hendenesse 2 (19.29); seldom 8 (5.417) ~ selde(n) 6 (5.129) ~ seldon 3 (10.410) ~ seeld 1 (P.20), etc.

bedemen 2 (15.211); Beches 1 (5.18); cler 2 (5.609); contre 6 (13.226) ~ cuntre 6 (P.29); deme 10 (1.86); ffede 9 (P.90); ffeet 8 (2.169); hede "heed" 5 (6.15); kepe n. and v. 36 (P.76); mede 89 (2.20); swete 13 (P.86), etc.

appell 1 (16.75); bakke 1 (13.315) ~ bak 5 (3.196) ~ backis 1 (2.173); blac 1 (10.447); had 132 (P.100) ~ hadde 27 (P.201) ~ hade 9 (5.105) ~, hadd 1 (20.326); messe 11 (P.97) ~ masse 4 (5.2); messis 2 (3.256) ~ masses 1 (11.286) ~ massis 1 (11.294); wasshen 5 (13.435) ~ wasshe 2 (5.592) ~ wasshed 2 (2.222); water(s) 29 (5.64) ~ watris 1 (2.226) ~ watrye 1 (18.428) ~ wattred 1 (6.179), etc.

breþ(e) 2 (14.66) ~ breth 1 (18.329); clene 16 (2.51); dred(e) 26 (P.98) ~ dredffull 4 (P.16) ~ dredeffulli 1 (17.64) ~ drediþ 3 (9.99) ~ dredest 1 (3.193); er 61 (1.73) ~ or 11 (P.155); "let" late 33 (P.187) ~ lete 26 (P.155) ~ leten 5 (5.471) ~ lat 1 (20.359); edder(e) 2 (18.343) ~ eddris 1 (5.89); slepe 10 (2.98) ~ sleep 1 (P.45) ~ slepinge 7 (P.10) ~ slepede 1 (5.4); seed 14 (3.281); teche 21 (1.83) ~ techen 6 (3.222), etc.

"child" barn 15 (2.3) ~ barnes 5 (3.152) ~ beren 1 (11.85) ~ baron 1 (15.462); fflex 1 (6.13), etc.

"bread" bred 21 (P.41) ~ brede 7 (5.175) ~ breed 1 (13.266) ~ bredde 1 (19.375); "deed" dede 21 (2.114); "dead" deed 13 (1.187) ~ dede 2 (18.64); deef 2 (10.139); "leaf" leef 8 (1.155); "red" reed 6 (P.229) ~ rede 2 (19.9), etc.

cherl 2 (5.366) ~ cherle 1 (20.143) ~ cherlis 6 (1.33) ~ cheerlis 1 (9.119); crepe 1 (20.43) ~ crepeth 1 (18.448) ~ crepen 1 (13.18) ~ crepinge 1 (5.198); depe 9 (P.15) ~ depere 1 (10.191); ffrende 14 (3.52) ~ ffrendis 13 (5.98) ~ frendes 1 (13.183) ~ ffrendid 1 (5.605) ~ ffrendeleker 1 (10.236); herte 48 (1.41) ~ hertis 7 (3.199) ~ hertez 1 (10.404); "man" lede 2 (3.32) ~ leodes 1 (16.186); leeme 2 (18.128); swerde 2 (1.103); tre 9 (16.4) ~ tree 2 (18.144) ~ tres 3 (11.361); þeef 6 (12.193) ~ þeffes 1 (18.74) ~ þeeffes 1 (18.77) ~ theffliche 1 (18.346), etc.

IV.1.2 Atonic Vowels

In each case alliteration clearly indicates the tonic syllable: angres 3 (18.346); banere 2 (20.68); baptem 1 (11.85); beawpere 1 (18.235); cete 2 (P.160); myscheff 5 (6.210) ~ myschef 3 (P.67); paradice 7 (5.514); persone(s) 14 (9.122) ~ persoune(s) 3 (3.179) ~ person 1 (14.275) ~ persouns 1 (11.101), etc.

IV.1.3 Consonants:

The spelling <wh-> is common for reflexes of OE /hw/. An instance of "wylom" (15.364) as well as 39 instances of inverted spellings (where for "wear", 3.299; whayle for "wail," 5.115; whare for "ware, beware," 5.458 and 18.282; whanope, 5.458; whilde, 7.101; whete for "wet," 14.46; whichecraft, 16.125; whyde, 16.138; whiȝtliche, 16.283; whedir for "weather," 18.428; whas for "was," 19.178; whire for "wire," 2.11; whern for "weren," 5.520; and 33 instances of where for "were"), suggest that at some point in the tradition a scribe, possibly the immediate one, had lost aspiration in these words.

The scribe uses <þ> for both the small letter and for the littera notabilior. The scribe begins a line with <Th> hundreds of times; but there are 1500+ instances of þat to 135 of that and 2000+ instances of the definite article þe to 92 of the. Although the scribe uses the thorn far more often, there are scores of words with variants in <th>. Word-terminal <-th> is relatively common, occurring 500+ times.

Both <sh> and <sch> are common initially, occurring 297 and 300 times respectively. <sh> occurs medially 130x (usually in the collocation <ssh>), twice finally, both in the word flessh. <sch> never occurs in medial or final position. <ssh> (99x) occurs only medially. <ssch> occurs once initially (in sschyld, meaning "should," at 5.658, perhaps written in error), 13x medially, never in final position. All these combinations have variants ending in -e. Excluding the word she in all its forms (as well as initial occurrences of the variants in -e), <she> occurs finally 16x; <sche> occurs medially 38x, finally 8x; <sshe> occurs medially 36x, finally 45x; and <ssche> occurs medially twice (in the word mysscheff, 3.282 and 14.83) and finally once (in englissche 5.41).

bisschop 1 (15.141) ~ bisshop 1 (11.317); childishe 1 (15.153); englishe 2 (7.117) ~ englissche 1 (5.41) ~ englissh(e) 9 (5.288); ffisshe 6 (5.178); ffleisshe 9 (5.69) ffleishe 3 (1.154) ~ ffleissh 1 (12.247); punnysshen 2 (3.79) ~ punnysshe 1 (14.295) ~ punnyshen 1 (3.83) ~ punyshe 1 (14.200) ~ punysshe 1 (10.382); schame 6 (5.126); shal(l)(e) 200+ (1.2) ~ schal(l)(e) 20 (P.203); scheep 2 (P.2); schip(e) 5 (9.142); sholde 5 (18.20) (never scholde).

ask- 30 (P.19) ~ axe- 19 (5.313); buskis 1 (11.350); scole 5 (7.31); skylle 4 (12.219); skipped 1 (11.111); skynnes 1 (5.260).

Initial <sk> occurs 10x, initial <sc> (without following <h>) 6x.

almyȝti 5 (5.135); briȝth 3 (P.161) ~ briȝt 2 (12.224) ~ bright 1 (19.424); lyght 10 (17.214) ~ liȝt(e) 8 (5.509) ~ light(e) 2 (17.208); nouȝt 52 (1.110) ~ nouȝth 2 (17.263); riȝt(e) 54 (5.455) ~ right 2 (18.94).

IV.2. Morphology:

IV.2.1 Metrical Considerations: The Status of Final <-e> and <-en>

Since the inflectional final <-e> carrying the distinction between definite and indefinite singular adjectives was lost last in most dialects, this scribe's near complete indifference to it suggests strongly that the forms retaining the traditional inflectional <-e> are relicts of the conservative usage of the B archetype and not a feature of the scribal dialect. The scribe's monosyllabic adjectives with and without <-e> appear in free variation. See section IV.2.4 below. Similar patternless free variation appears among verb inflections.

In nouns, scribal <-e> is usually, but not always, retained where the OE noun ended in a vowel; e.g. church (OE curice) chirche 61 ~ kirke 2 ~ chyrche 1; earth (OE eorþe) ~ erthe 41; "heart" (OE heorte) herte 48 ~ hert 1; "tongue" (OE tunge) tunge 29; "wrath" (OE wraeþþu) wraþe 11, wrathe 10 ~ wrath 2. It is not consistently retained as a dative singular ending (see below section IV.2.3).

Some remnants of Langland's practice in regard to the reflexive forms of pronouns can be seen in the manuscript. Of 92 instances of "self" (-selfe does not occur), 63 occur initially or medially, 29 terminally. Self occurs alone 4 times, always medially; -selue occurs medially 23x, terminally 44x. Selue occurs alone once, medially, at 20.42. Dissyllabic -seluen occurs initially or medially 6x, terminally 16x. It occurs alone once, terminally, at 1.205. For all the compounded forms, the commonest medial occurrence is as the final element in the a-verse.

ȝoure is the only spelling for the second person plural possessive, and it modifies both singular and plural nouns. Hir modifies both singular and plural nouns. Hire occurs only once, at 1.10, modifying a singular noun; the <e> is indicated by a brevigraph. His modifies both singular and plural nouns. Hise occurs only once, at 13.97, modifying a plural noun. Hys occurs once, modifying a singular noun. Myn occurs 56x, in 9 of which it modifies a plural. Myne occurs 3x, once with a plural. Oure occurs 148x, 13x with a plural; our does not occur. þin modifies both singular and plural; þine does not occur.

IV.2.2 Nouns:

abrahamis 1 (20.7); adamys 2 (11.202); eddris 1 (5.89); broþers 1 (10.279); caymys 1 (9.135); disouris 1 (13.175); do wellis 2 (9.12); ffadris 2 (9.123); gabrielis 1 (16.92); Ihesus 1 (18.103); mannys 21 (P.198); pharaones 1 (7.178); soulis 3 (5.552) (Cf. soule 5.271).

With <-e>: heuene 2 (P.106); soule 3 (5.271) (Cf. soulis 5.552). Given that final <e> seems to have no significance for this scribe, these may well be without inflection.

Without inflection: ffader 1 (16.90); lady 1 (18.345); Marie 1 (2.2); Peers 1 (6.82); preoresse 1 (5.159).

Though some spellings with <-e> reflect spellings of the scribe's exemplar, the forms are in free variation for this scribe.

abbottis 1 (10.284); artis 2 (10.159); beggers 26 (P.40); bodies 2 (1.196); brawlers 1 (16.44); cardenals 1 (P.107) ~ cardinalis 2 (19.408); clerkis 60 (P.114); colouris 3 (11.335) ~ colours 3 (19.11); experimentis 1 (10.223); eyris 3 (8.86) ~ eyres 1 (8.74); ffadris 2 (5.590); ffooles 1 (20.61) ~ ffoolis 1 (20.60) ~ foolys 1 (9.71); ffoos 3 (5.605); guttus 3 (5.353); hermytes 3 (P.53) ~ hermytez 1 (P.57); land-lepers 1 (15.219); schoes 1 (20.216) ~ schoune 1 (14.345); science 2 (10.225); werkis 43 (P.3) ~ werkys 1 (10.408); wordis 68 (P.72); ȝeris 6 (P.65), etc.

With <-en> ~ <-in> ~ <-n> <-ne>: childrin 20 (P.35); yen 3 (5.486) ~ eyen 3 (10.295) ~ eyne 2 (17.346); ffon 1 (5.98); huen 2 (14.3) ~ hewen 2 (4.58); lambron 1 (15.212); oxen 2 (19.250); eyren 1 (11.357); schoune 1 (14.345); sistrin 1 (5.643); breþerem 7 (5.615).

Mutated: gees 2 (P.227); men 308 (P.18); teeþ 1 (15.13) ~ teethe 1 (20.188), etc.

beggers 1 (4.127) ~ beggerez 1 (9.94); losellis 1 (10.52); harlottis 2 (4.121).

With <-en> ~ <-ne> ~ <-in>: childrin 1 (4.120); Iewen(e) 2 (18.262); wyuen 1 (5.29).

IV.2.3 Pronouns

The commonest form by far is I, with well over one thousand occurrences. Ich occurs once (5.571), and iche 4x (11.429). In this manuscript, ich and iche more commonly mean "each." Archetypal ik (rendered <ek> by this scribe) occurs in the phrase so þe ek (5.229), where Langland's joke is at the expense of the Norfolk dialect of Sir Hervey, as in Chaucer's Reeve's Tale.

The predominant form is þou (300+), with five instances of thou and one instance of thow.

My is the commonest form, occurring more than 300x. Myn (56x) occurs as a dependent possessive, 10x with plural nouns (e.g. 4.58, 4.149, 5.423), but more often with singular nouns before vowels or <h> and disjunctively at 5.113 and 13.364. It is used as an absolute meaning "my possessions" at 6.152 and as "my people" at 18.360. The form myne (3x) is used twice disjunctively (18.285, 18.337) and once before <h> (18.388).

The standard spelling is <þi> (196x), with only one instance of <þy> (3.17) and three instances of <thi> (2.123). <þi> modifies both singular and plural nouns. The form <þin> (31x) occurs as a dependent possessive for both singular and plural nouns before vowels or <h> and disjunctively. þin is used as an absolute meaning "thy possessions" at 13.159.

The general form is his (700+), used with both singular and plural nouns. The single instance of hys (5.376) modifies a singular noun, and the single instance of hise (13.97) a plural noun. His is used disjunctively at 5.472 and 15.163.

The single occurrence of hire at 1.10 modifies a singular noun: hire fface. The final <e> is indicated by a brevigraph, and the unique instance may have resulted from a slip of the pen.

Forms are: my-self 22, -selue 10, -seluen 2; þi-self 13, -selue 9, -seluen 2, -selluen 1; him-self 35, -selue 34, -seluen 7, hym-selue 2, hym-self 1; hir-self 3 ~ -silf 1; oure-selue 1, -seluen 1; ȝoure-self 3, -seluen 3, ȝou-seluen 1, ȝour-seluen 1. Though there is a significant tendency to write the <-en> forms in the line-terminal or verse-terminal position (of the 24 forms in -seluen, 17 are line terminal), forms in -self and -selue appear far more often in those positions than forms in -seluen. See IV.2.1, Metrical Considerations, for details. The forms appear to be in free variation for number and case. That is, the common forms (those for which there are enough instances to be indicative) appear for both nominative and oblique cases and both plural and singular.

IV.2.4 Adjectives and Adverbs

Distinctions between definite and indefinite adjectives, inconsistently maintained in the earlier, closely related manuscript O, are even less visible in C2. Whereas in O monosyllabic adjectives ending in a consonant preserve vestiges of the original distinctions the spelling gret, for instance, uniformly appears for the plural or weak singular forms, and the majority of the greet forms are singular and strongin C2 the forms grett and grette indiscriminately follow possessive pronouns, demonstratives, and the definite article (19.250, 2.30, 18.101, 2.70, 13.237, etc.) The forms gret (2x) and grete (2x) occur rarely, only once (19.250) following a determiner. Note the following phrases in which a definite adjective is given an indefinite form or an indefinite adjective is given a final <-e>:

Of the adjectives cited above, blynde, half, and bolde exhibit only the single form.

The forms of monosyllabic adjectives and adverbs ending in a consonant are in free variation; no distinction is maintained between adjective and adverb in forms such as hard/harde, fast/faste and long/longe.

Polysyllabic adjectives of French derivation ending in <-ous> display few vestiges of the original inflectional pattern: leccherous (pl. 2.126), likerouse (sg. P.30), leccherus (sg. 6.274); precious (sg. 10.12, pl. 19.92), preciouse (sg. 16.269)

The pattern is somewhat better preserved in "all." Of 173 instances of al or all as adjectives, 76 modify plurals; however, of 182 instances of alle as adjective, only 28 modify a singular noun. "Both" as an adjective appears as boþe (41x), bothe (6x), or boþ (1x), with gen. boþer 2x (2.67, 16.171). The form bothen appears once adverbially (5.387).

auorousere 1 (1.192); balder 2 (4.110); better 55 (P.31) ~ bett(e) 4 (5.616); blessidere 1 (11.256); clenner 1 (19.240); douȝtiere 1 (5.104); ffairere 2 (14.28); giltiere 1 (12.86); hiere 1 (2.29); prestiere 1 (10.309); swettere 1 (15.189); worþiere 1 (15.508), etc.

best(e) 28 (P.103); boldest 1 (18.420); brouneste 1 (6.314); clenneste 2 (14.48); douȝtiest 2 (10.464); heiest 1 (10.465); leeste 1 (10.30). A large majority of forms have final -e.

The ending <-li> (61x) varies with <-lich> (6x), <-liche> (144x), and <-ly> (142x) (there are no examples of <-lye> or <-lie>). There is no consistent pattern of usage.

besiloker 1 (13.342); ffrendeleker 1 (10.236); liȝtliere 1 (12.157) ~ lyȝtelyer 1 (5.593) ~ lyȝtlyere 1 (15.445).

The single instance of <-lokest> appears as hastlokest (19.460) The form <-est> appears once adverbially, in wikedest (10.437).

IV.2.5 Verbs

kepe 24 (P.76) ~ kepen 1 (8.103); knowe 26 (P.122); laste 4 (9.46); rule 1 (17.3); see 1 (11.20) ~ seen 2 (4.89); teche 17 (1.144) ~ techen 1 (17.42); vndertake 3 (10.161).

Endings derived from OE <-ian> verbs are quite well preserved; thus the following infinitive forms with <-i> or <-y>: erie 5 (6.4); tilie 5 (6.243); wanye 1 (7.58); wony(e) 2 (2.108). This is a feature of southwestern dialects.

In both the gerund and the pres. ppl. the ending is <-inge> (150+) in free variation with <-ynge> (100+). The form <-ing> appears 5 times, in bidding, ffalling, rewling, spending, and þanking; the form <-yng>, four times, in closyng, likyng, lykyng, and whystelyng; and the form <-enge> twice, in buryenge and seggenge.

biringe 1 (11.80); biddynge 1 (15.234) ~ bidinge 1 (20.139); deynge 2 (11.171) ~ dyeynge 1 (18.218); ffestinge 1 (11.189); howsinge 1 (15.81); Ianglynge 3 (4.183); liynge 2 (13.321); lykyng 1 (P.30) ~ likynge 11 (10.312) ~ likyng 1 (P.62); lowȝringe 1 (5.350); pledinge 1 (3.300); techynge 2 (10.264).

biddynge 1 (15.234); ffleynge 1 (8.52); ffullynge 3 (15.457); knelinge 4 (P.124); hangynge 2 (5.137); lakkinge 1 (13.291); lorkynge 1 (2.218); pleynge 2 (16.264); semynge 2 (13.345); wagginge 1 (8.29); wyndinge 1 (11.5), etc.

There are three forms, all of them unique to C2, which may represent present participles in <-end(e)>. They are lyuende (P.26), Faydend (P.42), and struydend (15.579), although the last may be a slip of the pen where the preterite was intended. All occur in positions where other manuscripts in the tradition have a preterite form. If they are present participles, they are the only ones of that form in C2. They are perhaps more likely to have been written in error.

abasshid 1 (20.47) ~ abasshed 2 (10.305); Ibete 1 (4.96); i-blessid 1 (19.375) ~ i-blesside 1 (15.42); acombrid 1 (1.204); ascaped 1 (6.81); callid 15 (11.14) ~ callide 1 (15.22) ~ y-callid 1 (15.236); cloþid 3 (5.81) ~ cloþed 1 (2.8) ~ ycloþid 1 (15.237) ~ ycloþed 1 (15.502) ~ i-cloþed 1 (2.8) ~ i-cloþid 1 (1.3) ~ clothed 1 (18.176) ~ clothid 1 (18.172); demed 2 (3.311); deademed 2 (3.292); y-entrid 1 (10.387); glosid 1 (17.11); hatid 2 (5.73); made 14 (2.73) ~ i-made 1 (5.519) ~ i-maked 1 (9.41) ~ y-maked 1 (9.53) ~ y-makyd 2 (P.14); spered 1 (19.161); tried 2 (15.173); vsid 2 (16.153); y-wasshid 1 (13.313) (cf. wasshen below); went 2 (3.286).

bakon 5 (6.186), ybake 1 (15.439) ~ y-bake 1 (15.469) ~ y-baken 1 (6.291); i-born 1 (2.132); y-bouȝte 1 (P.176); y-broken 1 (P.71); comen 3 (4.192); drunken 3 (11.423) ~ drunkyn 2 (14.86) ~ i-drunke 1 (6.287); ffounde 2 (3.348); getten 3 (5.300) ~ geten 1 (15.136) ~ gette 1 (19.115) ~ gettyn 1 (18.101); gyue 2 (2.150); y-grounde 1 (18.81) ~ y-groundyn 1 (13.44); holdyn 8 (3.212) ~ holden 4 (5.283) ~ I-holden 1 (1.84) ~ yholde 1 (20.260); holpen 3 (4.172) ~ holpyn 1 (7.76) ~ I-holpyn 1 (17.62); knowen 4 (4.167) ~ y-knowe 3 (11.230) ~ knowe 2 (5.182) ~ knowin 1 (P.56) ~ I-knowen 1 (11.402); yseyn 1 (11.429) ~ i-seiȝ 2 (5.4); "seethed" soþe 1 (15.439); taken 5 (4.51) ~ takyn 3 (16.166) ~ ytake 1 (11.261); y-wasshid 1 (13.313), y-wasshyn 1 (9.145); wonnen 3 (5.268) ~ wonne 3 (11.196) ~ I-wonne 1 (5.95), etc.

halse 1 (5.103); holde 3 (5.425); leue 25 (P.34); schone 1 (5.171); sey 3 (P.202); swere 1 (5.229); walke 1 (5.149); warne 2 (P.208); wisse 2 (1.42).

As in OE, stems ending in a vowel have no inflection: do 12 (1.86); sey 3 (P.202).

The most common forms are with <-est> (28), <-ist> (21), <-st> (17) (after vowels, /r/ and nasals), <este> (16), and <-iste> (12). <-yst> and <-xt> both occur twice; in one line, <-xt> is a relict from Bx. May appears with no inflection at 5.616 and 19.470; shall appears with no inflection at 5.631. Similar instances are myȝth (3.28) and myȝte (17.301).

best 1 (5.613); boruȝwest 1 (5.301); coueytiste 1 (11.11); greuest 1 (14.121); lerneste 1 (4.12); leuest 2 (14.64); lyxt 2 (5.165); may 3 (5.616); myȝtist 6 (5.641) ~ myȝtest 3 (P.215) ~ myȝteste 2 (2.46) ~ myȝtiste 2 (5.641); auȝteste 1 (1.75); seest 4 (1.5); sueste 1 (11.380); waytist 1 (16.265); wilneste 1 (6.267); worchest 1 (3.75), etc.

The most common forms for both third person singular indicative and the present plural are with <-eþ> (400+) and <-iþ> (350+). <-ith> occurs 60 times, and the minority forms <-yþ> and <-yth> only 10 and 16 times respectively.

akeþ 1 (6.264) ~ aketh 1 (5.114); beggiþ 1 (7.72) ~ beggeþ 1 (15.261); bereþ 15 (7.53) ~ bereth 4 (4.60) ~ beriþ 5 (7.93) ~ beritth 1 (7.165); bit (<bidden>) 1 (7.72) ~ bitt 1 (18.267) ~ bitte 1 (3.76); brekeþ 1 (4.60) ~ brekiþ 1 (7.103); ffalliþ 3 (1.165) ~ ffalleþ 1 (11.390); ffareþ 6 (12.203) ~ ffareth 3 (2.185); ffyndiþ 2 (15.183) ~ ffynte 2 (7.141) ~ ffynt 1 (17.334); ffor-freteþ 1 (16.30); gooþ 1 (5.320); halt 2 (3.245) ~ halte 1 (17.106) ~ holdiþ 1 (13.404); puttiþ 3 (3.234) ~ putteþ 2 (4.50); resteth 1 (P.171); rith 1 (4.25); seiþ 50+ (1.41) ~ seith 2 (18.30), seithe 1 (20.372); smyte 1 (11.430) ~ smyteth 1 (17.327); standiþ 1 (2.5) ~ stant 2 (15.511); wanyeþ 1 (8.37), etc.

OE preterite-present verbs without inflection in the present 1st and 3rd sg. are, e.g.: can 50+ (P.111); dar 13 (P.210); may 90+ (P.193); shall 150+ (1.2); woot 14 (P.43), etc.

abide 1 (15.316); "bite" abite 1 (16.27); arn 33 (P.164) ~ arne 1 (7.16) ~ ar 25 (P.98); asken 3 (3.220); borwen 1 (20.284); borjounen 1 (15.78); crauen 3 (3.222); ffecchyn 1 (4.54); ffyndyn 5 (11.159) ~ ffynden 2 (5.147) ~ ffynde 2 (6.61); ffollewen 1 (17.125) ~ ffollwen 1 (1.187) ~ ffolowen 1 (1.40); holdyn 5 (1.44) ~ holden 3 (P.28); taken 7 (2.37) ~ takyn 5 (3.256) ~ take 1 (11.293); techen 5 (3.222); written 1 (14.208) ~ writtyn 1 (14.211), etc.

The minority form <-eþ>, with the variants listed above, is not uncommon (cf. beretth 10.353; beþ 8.13; bigynneth 19.307; bilieþ 10.22; comeþ 12.69; deuyneþ 15.588, ffareth 2.185, etc.). Samuels N points out that this plural form is very rare in the London English of Chaucer, but is retained in Southern and Southwestern areas until after Langland's death. He also comments on the form <arn> in alliterating position as evidence for Langland's west midland dialect. Some of the <-e> and <-en> forms will historically be subjunctives since they occur in contexts where a subjunctive is to be expected.

The plural forms of preterite-present verbs are, for example: con, may, mowe, mowen, mown, shul, shall.

do (3.311); rise (18.259); ffollowe (3.7); gyue (9.212); like (11.24); rede (4.5); werche (3.7), etc.

The forms are the same as those of the 1st indic. sg.

axe (5.436); carpyn (10.54); coueityn (20.250); grucche (6.221); haue (14.156); like (13.189); leuen (5.46); mette (6.174); reuerence (18.263); ffollwen (1.187); were (11.285); etc.

be (6.53); blame (10.273); Deme (6.85); do (6.233); Drede (9.102); ete (6.269); Excuse (3.173); ffonde (6.224); go (1.46); holde (18.150); kepe (6.271); knowe (2.48); late (3.74); Loke (1.145); make (3.16); Misbede (6.46); morne (3.16); werke (9.194); worche (1.146), etc.

be (2.139); casteþ (6.16); claweþ (10.302); cometh (20.73); corectiþ (10.302); ffareþ (13.183); holdeth (20.243); kenne (6.14); makeþ (6.14); take (6.15); spynneþ (6.13); wadeþ (5.592), etc.

The form with <-e> (without ending in stems in <-e>) is often, though not always, used before a subject pronoun:

be (3.87); Deuyne (P.210); loke (19.242); stynte (5.600); wasshe (5.592), etc.

awakid 4 (11.401) ~ awakide 1 (19.473) ~ awakyd 1 (14.347); bablid 1 (5.8); boldid 1 (3.199); circumciside 1 (16.241); courbed 1 (1.79) ~ courbede 1 (2.1); ffrayned 2 (1.58); loked 3 (2.7) ~ lokede 2 (P.9); makede 1 (9.139); paid 1 (6.97); rendrid 1 (5.212); spilte 1 (5.386); wayted 2 (7.153) ~ waytide 1 (16.175); wente 8 (P.4), etc.

Minority forms are <-te> (60+x); <-ede> (34x), <-id> (21x), <-ide> (18x), and <-yd> (9x).

aresondest 1 (12.222); browȝteste 1 (1.77); dedist 1 (7.196); ffelediste 1 (5.506); gredist 1 (19.416); leddiste 1 (7.195); lakkedest 1 (11.417); madiste 2 (5.233) ~ madeste 1 (5.495) ~ madist 1 (18.375); repentiste 2 (5.233); robbedest 1 (18.346); schamedist 1 (3.190); suffridist 1 (5.517); tauȝtiste 1 (14.195).

abostede 1 (6.158); armed 2 (20.120); asked 1 (1.49); baptisid 1 (16.257); cessid 1 (20.106); coueytid 1 (3.277); deyed 3 (10.365); demede 1 (10.394) ~ demed 1 (7.183); dremed 1 (8.67); ffolwyd 3 (11.47) ~ ffolwid 2 (11.26); hated 2 (3.283); "lived" leued 8 (5.376) ~ lyuede 1 (14.131) ~ leuede 1 (14.95); loked 13 (P.123); mamelede 1 (11.414); mouþed 1 (6.245); payd 3 (5.218) ~ paied 1 (4.78); plukkid 1 (11.117); prechede 2 (13.72) ~ preched 4 (P.68) ~ prechid 1 (20.124); rewardid 1 (14.167) ~ rewardyde 1 (11.375); waylid 1 (14.338); wente 15 (2.210); wepte 8 (5.476) ~ wepe 1 (2.238), etc.

The forms are of course the same as those for the 1st singular.

adreynten 1 (10.420); aposede 1 (1.47); awaytide 1 (16.143); blustred 1 (5.535); cared 1 (2.163); cried 1 (P.226) ~ crieden 1 (5.532); deied 1 (18.368); demed 1 (19.142); diggeden 1 (6.111); durst 1 (18.420) ~ dursten 1 (13.118); ffolleweden 1 (15.112) ~ ffollewid 1 (15.470) ~ ffollowed 1 (20.57) ~ folwed 1 (4.28); harmed 1 (13.115); hateden 1 (18.308); herden 1 (16.134); loked 1 (3.351); maden 4 (8.64) ~ made 2 (6.193) ~ madyn 1 (2.214); mortyseden 1 (15.324); pleyed 1 (P.20) ~ pleyeden 1 (12.28); pleyned 2 (P.83); seiden 2 (1.51) ~ sayden 1 (P.50) ~ saydyn 1 (16.122); senten 2 (2.225); tentedyn 1 (18.244); þirlid 1 (1.173); vsid 1 (20.65) ~ vseden 1 (12.128); wenten 11 (P.48) ~ wente 6 (1.123) ~ wentyn 1 (17.49); weppeten 1 (7.37) ~ wepte 1 (13.46); writyn (10.438) ~ written 1 (14.208), etc.

cam 4 (2.29); come 4 (10.23); gate 1 (4.82); knewe 4 (13.308); songe 1 (19.207); "saw" sauȝt 1 (P.14); seye 2 (P.50) ~ sawȝ 4 (5.9) ~ saw 2 (5.9) ~ sawe 2 (P.231); spake 1 (19.363); spynte (5.448); wepte 2 (11.4); wrouȝte 2 (10.401), etc.

breke 1 (18.292); gete 1 (18.292); knewe 1 (11.32); "lied" leighe 1 (18.417); speke 1 (19.75); toke 1 (3.107), etc.

brake 2 (1.112) ~ brak 2 (11.234); cam 35 (P.112); come 36 (1.4) ~ Came 1 (P.114); ȝaf 13 (19.250) ~ ȝaff 13 (1.107) ~ gaff 4 (2.70) ~ gaf 2 (12.252) ~ gaffe 1 (14.10); gatte 1 (1.33); knewe 8 (2.228); songe 1 (18.441); spake 9 (1.49); stode 4 (P.183); toke 23 (4.15), etc.

The forms are of course the same as those for the 1st singular.

cam 1 (19.68) ~ comen 9 (P.24) ~ come 7s (9.132); dronken 1 (14.72) ~ drunkyn 1 (14.86); getten 1 (20.154); helden 6 (P.180) ~ hyldyn 1 (2.230); knewen 2 (10.477) ~ knewe 1 (11.236) ~ knew 1 (12.152); seie 1 (17.50) ~ saw 1 (2.67), seiȝen 1 (15.570) ~ seyen 1 (16.121) ~ seyn 1 (12.129) ~ seyne 1 (16.122); solden 1 (15.298); spokyn 1 (2.227); stode 1 (18.86), stoden 1 (14.257); songen 6 (12.151) ~ songe 2 (19.68) ~ songon 1 (14.69); toke 3 (3.25) ~ token 4 (11.339); etc.

come (18.393); dronke (20.19); knewe (15.200); stonde (19.352); were (3.352); where (20.138); etc.

The forms are the same as the 2nd singular.

V. List of Manuscript Sigils

The following list of sigils of the manuscripts of Piers Plowman differs in some respects from the traditional sigils used since Skeat's edition. To a degree the inconsistencies in the sigils reflect the sequence of discovery of the relationships among them. If we were to use the traditional sigils, we would court ambiguity in an electronic text with identical sigils representing different manuscripts and different sigils identifying single manuscripts. British Library Additional 10574, for instance, has no sigil for A, is B's Bm, and C's L. We have, therefore, chosen to represent each manuscript with its unique identifying sigil.

For descriptions of the B manuscripts see George Kane and E. Talbot Donaldson, eds., Piers Plowman: The B-Version, 2d ed. (London: Athlone; Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1988), 1-14; A. I. Doyle, "Remarks on Surviving Manuscripts of Piers Plowman," in Medieval English Religious and Ethical Literature: Essays in Honour of G. H. Russell, ed. G. Kratzmann and James Simpson (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1986); 35-48, and C. David Benson and Lynne Blanchfield, The Manuscripts of Piers Plowman: The B-Version (Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1997).

B Manuscripts

A Manuscripts

C Manuscripts

AB Splices

AC Splices

ABC Splices

VI. Bibliography

Editions

Allen, Hope Emily. Writings Ascribed to Richard Rolle. London: Oxford University Press, 1927. Reprinted Gloucester: Sutton, 1988.

Brewer, Charlotte, and A. G. Rigg, eds. Piers Plowman: A Facsimile of the Z-Text of Bodleian Library, Oxford, MS Bodley 851. Cambridge: D.S. Brewer, 1994.

Brown, Carleton. Religious Lyrics of the XIVth Century. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1924.

Kane, George, ed. Piers Plowman: The A Version: Will's Visions of Piers Plowman and Do-Wel, An Edition in the Form of Trinity College Cambridge MS R.3.14 Corrected from Other Manuscripts, with Variant Readings. London: Athlone Press, 1960, rev. ed., 1988.

Kane, George, and E. Talbot Donaldson, eds. Piers Plowman: The B Version, 2d ed. London: Athlone Press; Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1988.

Kane, George, and George Russell, eds. Piers Plowman: The C Version. London: Athlone Press; Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1997.

Morris, Richard, ed. The Pricke of Conscience (Stimulus Conscientiae): A Northern Poem by Richard Rolle de Hampole. Berlin: Asher, 1863.

Ogilvie-Thomson, S. J., ed. Richard Rolle: Prose and Verse. EETS 293. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988.

Pearsall, Derek, ed. William Langland: Piers Plowman. The C-Text. 2d ed., Exeter Medieval English Texts and Studies. Exeter: University of Exeter Press, 1994.

Rigg, A. G., and Charlotte Brewer, eds. William Langland: Piers Plowman: The Z Version. Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1983.

Schmidt, A. V. C., ed. William Langland, The Vision of Piers Plowman. A Critical Edition of the B-Text Based on Trinity College Cambridge MS B.15.17 with selected variant readings, an Introduction, glosses, and a Textual and Literary Commentary. London, Melbourne, and Toronto: J. M. Dent & Sons Ltd.; New York: E. P. Dutton & Co., 1978, 2d ed.; London: J. M. Dent & Sons, Ltd.; Rutland, Vermont: Charles E. Tuttle Co., 1995.

, ed. William Langland, Piers Plowman: A Parallel-Text Edition of the A, B, C and Z Versions: Vol. 1. Text. London and New York: Longman, 1995.

Skeat, W. W., ed. The Vision concerning Piers the Plowman together with Vita de Dowel, Dobet, et Dobest secundum Wit and Resoun by William Langland: Part 2. The "Crowley" Text: or Text B. EETS OS 38. London: Oxford University Press, 1869.

, ed. The Vision of William Concerning Piers the Plowman, in Three Parallel Texts. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1886.

Wright, Thomas, ed. The Vision and the Creed of Piers Ploughman. London: Pickering, 1842; revised ed 1856.

Studies

Adams, Robert. "The Reliability of the Rubrics in the B-Text of Piers Plowman." Medium vum 54 (1985): 208-31.

Benskin, Michael, and Margaret Laing. "Translations and Mischsprachen in Middle English Manuscripts." In So Meny People Longages and Tonges, ed. Michael Benskin and M. L. Samuels. Edinburgh: Middle English Dialect Project, 1981, pp. 55-106.

Benson, C. David, and Lynne S. Blanchfield. The Manuscripts of Piers Plowman: the B-version. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1997.

Brewer, Charlotte. Editing Piers Plowman: The Evolution of the Text. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.

Doyle, A. I. "Remarks on Surviving Manuscripts of Piers Plowman." In Medieval English Religious and Ethical Literature: Essays in Honour of George H. Russell, ed. Gregory Kratzmann and James Simpson. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1986, pp. 35-48.

Doyle A. I., and M. B. Parkes. "The Production of Copies of the Canterbury Tales and the Confessio Amantis in the Early Fifteenth Century." In Medieval Scribes, Manuscripts and Libraries: Essays Presented to N. R. Ker, ed. M. B. Parkes and Andrew G. Watson. London: Scolar Press, 1978, pp. 163-210.

. "The Copyist of the Ellesmere Canterbury Tales." In The Ellesmere Chaucer: Essays in Interpretation, ed. Martin Stevens and Daniel Woodward. San Marino, CA: The Huntington Library, and Tokyo: Yoshudo, 1995, pp. 49-67.

. "A Paleographical Introduction." In The Canterbury Tales. Geoffrey Chaucer. A Facsimile and Transcription of the Hengwrt Manuscript, with Variants from the Ellesmere Manuscript, A Variorum Edition of the Works of Geoffrey Chaucer, vol. 1, ed. Paul G. Ruggiers. Norman, Okla.: Pilgrim Press, 1979, pp. xix-xlix.

Duggan, Hoyt N. "Langland's Dialect and Final -e." Studies in the Age of Chaucer 12 (1990): 157-91.

Hanna III, Ralph. Authors of The Middle Ages, 3: William Langland. Aldershot: Variorum, 1993.

. Index of Middle English Prose, Handlist 1, A Handlist of Manuscripts in the Henry E. Huntington Library. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer, 1984.

. "Notes toward a Future History of Middle English Literature: Two Copies of Richard Rolle's Form of Living." In Chaucer in Perspective, ed. Geoffrey Lester. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999, pp. 279-300.

James, Montague Rhodes. A Catalogue of the Manuscripts Preserved in the Library of the University of Cambridge, Vol. IV. Repr. Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag, 1980, pp. 66-68.

Mustanoja, Tauno F. A Middle English Syntax: Part I: Parts of Speech. Mmoires de la Socit Nophilologique de Helsinki, no. 23. Helsinki: Socit Nophilologique, 1960.

Parkes, M. B. Pause and Effect: An Introduction to the History of Punctuation in the West. Aldershot: Scolar, 1992.

Samuels, M. L. "Some Applications of Middle English Dialectology." English Studies 44 (1963), 81-94. Reprinted in Middle English Dialectology: Essays on Some Principles and Problems by Angus McIntosh, M. L. Samuels and Margaret Laing, edited and introduced by Margaret Laing. Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press, 1989, pp. 64-80.

"Chaucer's Spelling." In Middle English Studies Presented to Norman Davis, ed. Douglas Gray and E. G. Stanley. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1983, pp. 17-37. Reprinted in The English of Chaucer and his contemporaries, ed. J. J. Smith. Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press, 1989, pp. 23-37.

"Langland's Dialect." Medium vum 54 (1985): 232-47. Reprinted in The English of Chaucer and his Contemporaries, ed. J. J. Smith. Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press, 1989, pp. 70-85.

. "Dialect and Grammar." In A Companion to Piers Plowman, ed. John A. Alford. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1988.

Smith, Jeremy J. "The Language of the Ellesmere Manuscript." In The Ellesmere Chaucer: Essays in Interpretation, ed. Martin Stevens and Daniel Woodward. San Marino, CA: The Huntington Library, and Tokyo: Yoshudo, 1995, pp. 69-86.