X2.P.1: We transcribe
somer. Nonetheless, we do detect an ambiguous mark which could be a suspension for -
es, which would render
someres, witnessed in
B manuscripts HmG and
C manuscripts QSc. The lack of any other word-terminal <r> in the fragment makes it impossible to determine with certainty whether the scribe had a habit of adding an otiose flourish to the letter.
↩ X2.P.2: In explaining the "shrub" variant in this line, which is the majority reading in
C, Schmidt understands
schop here in
MED shapen, sense 6, "to betake oneself," as do we.
↩ X2.P.2: This corrupt variant, which is the dominant reading in the
C manuscripts, also appears in the
A tradition.
Schmidt (2011) attributes its presence in
A to contanmination "from a copy of the
C family
p (and also in
B-Cr)" (p. 305, n. to line 2). One of the
A witnesses to a form of "shrub" (K), is an
AC splice, suggesting that Schmidt's assertion of C-text
p branch contamination is more than speculation.
↩ X2.P.4: The reading
forth appears only in
C version manuscripts—strong evidence that this fragment belongs to the
C tradition.
↩ 