Cap. X.The envious man, who once gnawed upon others, is now himself devoured: he who laughed at the misfortunes of others, laughs now no more; the heart that so much murmured now suffers putrefaction; the sting of envy can pierce no more.
Cap. XI.He who was full of anger, now cannot move his head;he who uttered furious words, now cannot make a sound; he who terrified others by his threats, now does not scare away the worm which eats his heart.
Cap. XII.What can avarice do for him who has served her? He has no chest but his coffin, no land but the seven feet of earth in which he lies. He who preyed upon others, is himself the prey of death; he who closed his purse against the poor, is now himself in want.
Cap. XIII.The slothful man who was given to sleep, has now abundance of it, with the cold earth instead of his soft bed-coverings. He who seldom came to the church, now never leaves it, but his time for prayer is past.
Cap. XIV.Gluttony is no longer a pleasure; the body which delighted in choice food and drink is now full of vileness and horror, the abode of foul reptiles.
Cap. XV.The man who took pleasure in lechery, delights in it now no more. His members are preyed upon by the serpent, and he can no longer use his hands, his eyes, or his tongue in the service of lust. No longer can he commit incest or violate the honour of virginity.
Cap. XVI.Answer, thou sinful man, what will thy pride do for thee then, thy envy, thy anger, thy sloth, thy gluttony, thy lechery, or thy avarice? All the glory of this world perishes and passes away.
Cap. XVII.Everything passes away, wealth, honour, beauty, power, learning, and pleasure. Our flesh grows old as a garment and we perish. He is happy and a true king who rules himself, he is a slave (though called a king) who is subject to his own vices. Our life is so short and death comes so soon, that we ought all to prepare for our journey hence. Death comes when we least expect it, and takes away our wealth and strength, nor can any man redeem himself with gold, or move with gifts the Judge who judges all things justly.
Cap. XVIII.Death is common to all, but to the good it is a cause of joy, to the evil of sorrow. The good will pass by means of death to a place of perfect peace and perfect joy, such as cannot be described or imagined.
Cap. XIX.The evil-doer has a twofold death, the death of the body and the death of the soul. No words can tell the torment of that second death, which is eternal. How terrible will the Judgement be and how direful the sentence! Happy are they who shall escape such punishment.
Cap. XX.Let each man remember what his condition is, and let him repent in time, turning himself to the service of his Creator. Let him submit to punishment in this life, that he may escape that which is eternal: for it is the property of God to forgive and to have mercy.
Cap. XXI.Almost everyone, however, follows the lusts of his flesh and neglects the cause of his soul. The unrighteous have power everywhere, and all vices flourish.
Cap. XXII.The days are coming which Christ foretold, and the signs which he predicted are visible now. God’s sentence is still delayed, in order that the sinner may have room for repentance. Hardly even a few just men are found to save the world from destruction.
Cap. XXIII.Each one of the various degrees of society has departed from its true virtue, and the deadly vices have rule over the whole. Prelates are worldly, priests unchaste, scholars lazy, monks envious and self-indulgent, knights are evil livers, merchants defraud, peasants are disobedient and proud. The enticements of the world have overcome them all.
Cap. XXIV.I love all the realms of Christendom, but most of all I love this land in which I was born. From other lands I stand apart and am not involved in their calamities; but this country of mine, which brought me up from childhood and in which I dwell, cannot suffer evil without affecting me: by its burdens I am weighed down; if it stands, I stand, if it falls, I fall. Therefore it is that I bewail its present divisions.
One thing above all things is needful, and that is justice, with which is associated peace. If in other lands the sins of the flesh prevail, yet there they are to some extent compensated; for there justice prevails and all are equal before the law. Among us, however, not only is there carnal vice, but justice is absent; so that a terrible vengeance is being prepared for us by God.
We, who have always been favoured by fortune, are now brought low; this land, which was once reputed so wealthy, is now poor both in virtue and in possessions; my country, which was so strong, is made feeble by unjust judgements; she who was so fertile, is now sown with salt; she who had Fame for her sister, is now infamous, all her praise is taken away and her glory is departed. Her lords are sunk in sloth, her clergy is dissolute, her cities full of discord, her laws oppressive and without justice, her people discontented.
O land barren of virtue, where is thy past fortune? omens appear which presage thy fate, and all point to thee as an example. It is not by fortune or by chance that this comes about, but by our sins; and the grace of God even now may be found by repentance. I pray that God may show us his mercy and accept our tears. We know that thou, O God, art alone to be worshipped, that thou art the ruler of all things, and not fortune. Show pity therefore, O God!
Cap. XXV.Such were the verses which came to me by inspiration in my sleep. It is not I who speak them, but the common voice of all. Let him who feels himself in fault amend his ways, and he who feels himself free from fault may pass untouched. I accuse no man; let each examine his own conscience.
The world is neither evil nor good: each man may make of it whathe will by his own life.71But this I say, that sin committed and not purged by repentance receives at length its due reward.
The conclusion of theVox Clamantis, as altered from the first version, is doubtless intended as a fitting form of introduction for theCronica Tripertita, which comes in as an appendix added in later years. It will be noted as regards the prose which forms a transition to this, that Gower has in the end brought himself to think that the misfortunes of the earlier part of Richard’s reign were intended as a special warning to the youthful king, whom he formerly relieved from responsibility on account of his tender age, and that the tyranny of his later time sprang naturally out of his disregard of this preliminary chastisement. This change of view is also to be traced in the successive forms assumed by the paragraph relating to theVox Clamantisin the author’s account of his books (‘Quia vnusquisque,’ &c.).
Of the contents of theCronica Tripertitait is unnecessary that more should be said than is contained in the Notes to this edition. Of the remaining pieces theCarmen super multiplici Viciorum Pestilenciais dated by the author as belonging to the twentieth year of Richard II. TheTractatus de Lucis Scrutiniois probably somewhat later, and the poem ‘O deus immense,’ &c., is said in one of the titles prefixed to have been composed near the end of Richard’s reign. Besides these there is a group of Latin poems referring to the accession of Henry IV, ‘Rex celi, deus,’ &c. adapted from theVox Clamantis, ‘H. aquile pullus,’ and ‘O recolende, bone,’ with several short occasional pieces belonging to the last years of the author’s life. One of these has reference to his blindness and to the end of his activity as an author which was caused by it, and in connexion with this we have also the epistle to Archbishop Arundel prefixed to the All Souls MS. of theVox Clamantisand other Latin poems, and apparently meant to accompany the presentation of this particular copy. To Arundel also is addressed the short piece referring to the comet of March 1402, and finally we have the lines in which allusion is made to the short-comings of executors. It is probable also that the four lines which afterwards appeared upon the poet’s tomb, ‘Armigeri scutum,’ &c., and which are given by the Glasgow MS., were written by Gower himself.
Some reference ought perhaps to be made in conclusion to the list of Gower’s works given by Bale and copied by others, with a view to the question whether he was acquainted with any works of Gower which are not known to us. In hisScriptorum Illustrium Catalogus, p. 524 (ed. 1559) he says that Gower wrote
‘Speculum Meditantis, Gallice, Lib. 10.‘Confessionem Amantis, Anglice, Lib. 8, “Eorum qui ante nos scripserunt.”‘Vocem Clamantis, Latine, Lib. 7, “Scripture veteris capiunt exempla.”‘De compunctione cordis, Lib. 1.‘Chronicon Ricardi Secundi, Lib. 3, “Opus humanum est inquirere.”‘Chronicon tripertitum, Lib. 3, “Tolle caput mundi C. ter et sex.”‘Ad Henricum quartum, Lib. 1, “Nobilis ac digne rex Henrice.”‘De eodem rege Henrico, Lib. 1, “Rex celi deus et dominus.”‘De peste vitiorum, Lib. 1, “Non excusatur qui verum non fateatur.”‘Scrutinium lucis, Lib. 1, “Heu quia per crebras humus est.”‘De coniugii dignitate, Lib. 1, “Qualiter creator omnium rerum Deus.”‘De regimine principum, “O deus immense, sub quo dominatur.”‘Epigrammata quaedam, Lib. 1, “Alta petens aquila volat alitque.”‘De amoris varietate, Lib. 1, “Est amor in glosa pax bellica.”‘Carmina diuersa, Lib. 1, et alia plura.’
‘Speculum Meditantis, Gallice, Lib. 10.
‘Confessionem Amantis, Anglice, Lib. 8, “Eorum qui ante nos scripserunt.”
‘Vocem Clamantis, Latine, Lib. 7, “Scripture veteris capiunt exempla.”
‘De compunctione cordis, Lib. 1.
‘Chronicon Ricardi Secundi, Lib. 3, “Opus humanum est inquirere.”
‘Chronicon tripertitum, Lib. 3, “Tolle caput mundi C. ter et sex.”
‘Ad Henricum quartum, Lib. 1, “Nobilis ac digne rex Henrice.”
‘De eodem rege Henrico, Lib. 1, “Rex celi deus et dominus.”
‘De peste vitiorum, Lib. 1, “Non excusatur qui verum non fateatur.”
‘Scrutinium lucis, Lib. 1, “Heu quia per crebras humus est.”
‘De coniugii dignitate, Lib. 1, “Qualiter creator omnium rerum Deus.”
‘De regimine principum, “O deus immense, sub quo dominatur.”
‘Epigrammata quaedam, Lib. 1, “Alta petens aquila volat alitque.”
‘De amoris varietate, Lib. 1, “Est amor in glosa pax bellica.”
‘Carmina diuersa, Lib. 1, et alia plura.’
In regard to this list it may be observed first that in the two cases where the beginning of the book or piece in question is not cited, we may safely assume that Bale had not seen it. This applies to theSpeculum Meditantisand the supposed pieceDe compunctione cordis, of which I can give no account. It will be observed that he makes the short prose preface to theCronica Tripertita, ‘Opus humanum est inquirere’ &c., into a separate work in three books. The other items are all recognizable, except ‘Epigrammata quaedam, Lib. 1, “Alta petens aquila volat alitque.”’ Here we may observe that the quotation is fromVox Clamantisvi. 985, ‘Alta petens aquila volat alite celsius omni,’ &c. (a passage taken from theAurora); and on referring to Bale’s unpublished papers72we find the description of this supposed book of epigrams in the following form, ‘Ex suo libro et sanctifidensi chron. Epigrammata edidit, li. 1, “Alta petens aquila volat alite,”’ whence we should gather that the book referred to was a collection of quotations. It is probable that Bale may haveseen in some Gower MS. a selection of sententious passages from theVox Clamantisand other places, such as we actually have on one of the blank leaves of the Digby MS. (f. 160), beginning ‘Vulturis est hominum natura cadauera velle,’ again one of those allegories of bird nature which were borrowed by Gower from theAurora.
It may be noted here that in the same passage of Bale’s unpublished papers we have the following statement:
‘De triplici opere hoc carmen est super eius tumbam editum,Quos viuens legi libro nunc offero regi,Cuius habent legi secula cuncta regi.’
‘De triplici opere hoc carmen est super eius tumbam editum,Quos viuens legi libro nunc offero regi,Cuius habent legi secula cuncta regi.’
‘De triplici opere hoc carmen est super eius tumbam editum,Quos viuens legi libro nunc offero regi,Cuius habent legi secula cuncta regi.’
‘De triplici opere hoc carmen est super eius tumbam editum,
Quos viuens legi libro nunc offero regi,
Cuius habent legi secula cuncta regi.’
Also the following is given as the epitaph of his wife,
‘Quam bonitas, pietas, elemosina, casta voluntas,Sobrietas que fides coluerunt, hic iacet Agnes.Vxor amans, humilis Gower fuit illa Ioannis:Donet ei summus celica regna Deus.’
‘Quam bonitas, pietas, elemosina, casta voluntas,Sobrietas que fides coluerunt, hic iacet Agnes.Vxor amans, humilis Gower fuit illa Ioannis:Donet ei summus celica regna Deus.’
‘Quam bonitas, pietas, elemosina, casta voluntas,Sobrietas que fides coluerunt, hic iacet Agnes.Vxor amans, humilis Gower fuit illa Ioannis:Donet ei summus celica regna Deus.’
‘Quam bonitas, pietas, elemosina, casta voluntas,
Sobrietas que fides coluerunt, hic iacet Agnes.
Vxor amans, humilis Gower fuit illa Ioannis:
Donet ei summus celica regna Deus.’
These statements seem to be given by Bale on the authority of Nicholas Brigham, to whom we owe the tomb of Chaucer in Westminster Abbey.
The Text and the Manuscripts.
Gower’s principal Latin work, theVox Clamantis, is found in ten manuscripts altogether. Of these four are evidently contemporary with the author and contain also theCronica Tripertitaand most of the other Latin poems printed in this volume. Some of these last are found also in other MSS. of theVox Clamantis, some Latin pieces are contained in the Trentham MS. of thePraise of Peaceand theCinkante Balades(described in vol. i. p. lxxix), and theCronica Tripertitaoccurs separately in the Bodleian MS. Hatton 92. Copies of theCarmen de multiplici Viciorum Pestilenciaare contained in some MSS. of theConfessio Amantis, viz. TBAP₂ of the second recension, and FH₂K of the third, and with regard to these the reader is referred to the account given of the manuscripts in the Introduction to the second volume of this edition.
Of the four manuscripts of theVox Clamantiswith other Latin poems, which have been referred to as contemporary with the author, one is at Oxford, in the library of All Souls College, one at Glasgow in the Hunterian Museum, and two in London. Theyare proved to be original copies, not only by the handwriting of the text, which in each case is distinctly of the fourteenth century, but also by the fact that they all have author’s corrections written over erasure, and in several cases the same hand is recognizable throughout. The original text of theVox Clamantisseems to be written in one and the same hand in the All Souls and Glasgow MSS. and this hand is also that of the lines supplied occasionally in the margin of the Harleian: the hand in which the text of theCronica Tripertitais written in the All Souls MS. appears also in all the other three, and the same is the case with some of the correctors’ hands, as will be seen in the detailed accounts which follow. Of the other manuscripts of theVox Clamantistwo, which are not themselves original copies, give the text in its first (unrevised) form, the rest are more or less in agreement with the revised text, but give it at second or third hand, with no alterations made over erasure.
S.All Souls College, Oxf.98. Contains, f. 1 vo, Epistle to Archbishop Arundel, ff. 2-116,Vox Clamantis, ff. 116-126 vo,Cronica Tripertita, ff. 126 vo-127 vo, ‘Rex celi deus,’ ‘H. aquile pullus,’ ‘O recolende bone,’ ff. 127 vo-131,Carmen super multiplici Viciorum Pestilencia, f. 131,Tractatus de Lucis Scrutinio(imperfect at the end owing to the loss of a leaf), ff. 132-135,Traitié pour ensampler les Amantz marietz, (imperfect at the beginning), f. 135 vo, ‘Quia vnusquisque,’ ff. 136, 137, ‘Eneidos Bucolis,’ ‘O deus immense,’ ‘Quicquid homo scribat’ (f. 137 voblank). Parchment, ff. 137 as numbered (and in addition several blank at the beginning and end) measuring 12½ x 8¼ in. Well and regularly written in single column, theVox Clamantis48 lines on a page and the succeeding poems 52. The original first quire begins with f. 2, but before this a quire of four leaves (probably) was inserted, of which the first two are blank, the third is cut away, and the fourth has on its verso the Epistle to the Archbishop. The quire which ends with f. 116 has seven leaves only, and that ending with f. 137 six. After this several leaves have been inserted, which remain blank. The book has on f. 1 an ornamental initial S containing a miniature of Abp. Arundel in his robes and mitre, and there are large coloured and gilt capitals at the beginning of each book of theVox Clamantis, and coloured initials of various sizes for chapters and paragraphs. Original oak binding.
Five leaves are lost (apart from blanks at the beginning and end), as follows.
After f. 2 one leaf containing chapter-headings ofVox ClamantisLib. ii. cap. ii-Lib. iii. cap. xxii. After f. 5 two leaves, containingchapter-headings Lib. vii. cap. xix to the end, the lines ‘Ad mundum mitto,’ probably with a picture of the author, andVox ClamantisLib. i. Prologus, ll. 1-18. After f. 13 one leaf (Vox Clamantisi. 766-856). After f. 131 one leaf (De Lucis Scrutinio93-103; probably some other short piece, and the FrenchTraitié, to iii. 3).
This MS. was certainly written and corrected under the direction of the author, and remained for some time in his hands, receiving addition from time to time. From theEpistolaat the beginning, which occurs here only and seems to relate to this volume in particular, we may gather that it was eventually presented to Abp. Arundel. It is possible that it passed from him to his successor Chichele, and so to the College of All Souls, where it now is, but there seems to be no definite evidence to confirm this suggestion.
The text of S in theVox Clamantisagrees in the main as regards revised passages with that of the other original manuscripts C, H and G, but in some respects it is peculiar. In Lib. iii. cap. i. S has a rewritten version which differs from that of the other revised copies, and the same is the case with regard to the lines ‘Quicquid homo scribat’ (p. 365). There are also some places, as iv. 1072, 1197-1232, v. 450, where S retains the original text in company with TH_2 or even with H_2 alone. A few possibly right readings are peculiar to S, as in i. 1788, 2073, ii. 300, iii. 380 (margin), 1642, v. 325, vi. 555, while some others are common to S with G alone, some few small mistakes remain uncorrected, as in i. 106, 953, 1212, 1591, 1662, iii. 176, 989, 1214, 1541, 1695, iv. 273, 336 &c., and in some cases, where the headings of chapters have been rewritten, as vi. cap. xviii, xix, the original headings are left standing in the Table of Chapters at the beginning.At least five hands are distinguishable, as follows:(1) the original text of theVox Clamantis.(2) the original text of the succeeding poems, French and Latin, and the rewritten text or corrections on ff. 15 vo(i. 1019), 90 vo(vi. 545), 97 (vi. 1159), 115 vo(vii. 1454 f., 1469 f.), 116 (last lines ofVox Clamantis).(3) the original text and (probably) the corrections of theEpistola, f. i, and the corrections or rewritten text on ff. 36 vo(iii. 2 ff.), 39 (iii. cap. iv. heading), 97 vo(vi. 1189), 98 (vi. 1219 ff.), 115 ro(vii. 1409 ff.), 116 (first lines ofCron. Trip.), 126 vo, 127 vo, and the text of ‘Quicquid homo scribat.’(4) marginal note on f. 40 vo, ‘Nota de bello Cleri’ &c. (iii. 375).(5) marginal note on f. 66, ‘Nota quod Genius’ &c. (iv. 587).In addition there are some marginal notes which are not quite contemporary, as those on ff. 51 vo, 52, 76 vo, 77 (‘Contra rectores Oxon.’ &c., ‘Nota de muliere bona’ &c.), and the heading of the last piece on f. 137 seems to have been rewritten over a hand different from any of the above, of which some words remain. A few corrections are in doubtful hands, as vi. 1208.Of the above hands the first, very regularly written in a fourteenth century character, in brown ink, probably the same as that of theVox Clamantisin G, and the same scribe apparently wrote the lines which are supplied sometimes in the margin of H, having been dropped out of the text by the first copyist. The second (2) is also a very neat and regular hand, but of a somewhat later type. It appears in the French and Latin poems of MS.Fairfax 3, as well as in the substituted leaf at the beginning of theConfessio Amantisin that manuscript. It is also used for theCronica Tripertita,Traitiéand other pieces in the Glasgow MS. (G), for theCron. Tripertitaand other Latin pieces in H, and for some of the rewritten passages of theVox Clamantisin G, H, and C. The third (3) is a rather rough hand, found also occasionally in corrections of G and H. The fourth (4) is that in which the same marginal note is written also in C, H and G.
The text of S in theVox Clamantisagrees in the main as regards revised passages with that of the other original manuscripts C, H and G, but in some respects it is peculiar. In Lib. iii. cap. i. S has a rewritten version which differs from that of the other revised copies, and the same is the case with regard to the lines ‘Quicquid homo scribat’ (p. 365). There are also some places, as iv. 1072, 1197-1232, v. 450, where S retains the original text in company with TH_2 or even with H_2 alone. A few possibly right readings are peculiar to S, as in i. 1788, 2073, ii. 300, iii. 380 (margin), 1642, v. 325, vi. 555, while some others are common to S with G alone, some few small mistakes remain uncorrected, as in i. 106, 953, 1212, 1591, 1662, iii. 176, 989, 1214, 1541, 1695, iv. 273, 336 &c., and in some cases, where the headings of chapters have been rewritten, as vi. cap. xviii, xix, the original headings are left standing in the Table of Chapters at the beginning.
At least five hands are distinguishable, as follows:
(1) the original text of theVox Clamantis.
(2) the original text of the succeeding poems, French and Latin, and the rewritten text or corrections on ff. 15 vo(i. 1019), 90 vo(vi. 545), 97 (vi. 1159), 115 vo(vii. 1454 f., 1469 f.), 116 (last lines ofVox Clamantis).
(3) the original text and (probably) the corrections of theEpistola, f. i, and the corrections or rewritten text on ff. 36 vo(iii. 2 ff.), 39 (iii. cap. iv. heading), 97 vo(vi. 1189), 98 (vi. 1219 ff.), 115 ro(vii. 1409 ff.), 116 (first lines ofCron. Trip.), 126 vo, 127 vo, and the text of ‘Quicquid homo scribat.’
(4) marginal note on f. 40 vo, ‘Nota de bello Cleri’ &c. (iii. 375).
(5) marginal note on f. 66, ‘Nota quod Genius’ &c. (iv. 587).
In addition there are some marginal notes which are not quite contemporary, as those on ff. 51 vo, 52, 76 vo, 77 (‘Contra rectores Oxon.’ &c., ‘Nota de muliere bona’ &c.), and the heading of the last piece on f. 137 seems to have been rewritten over a hand different from any of the above, of which some words remain. A few corrections are in doubtful hands, as vi. 1208.
Of the above hands the first, very regularly written in a fourteenth century character, in brown ink, probably the same as that of theVox Clamantisin G, and the same scribe apparently wrote the lines which are supplied sometimes in the margin of H, having been dropped out of the text by the first copyist. The second (2) is also a very neat and regular hand, but of a somewhat later type. It appears in the French and Latin poems of MS.Fairfax 3, as well as in the substituted leaf at the beginning of theConfessio Amantisin that manuscript. It is also used for theCronica Tripertita,Traitiéand other pieces in the Glasgow MS. (G), for theCron. Tripertitaand other Latin pieces in H, and for some of the rewritten passages of theVox Clamantisin G, H, and C. The third (3) is a rather rough hand, found also occasionally in corrections of G and H. The fourth (4) is that in which the same marginal note is written also in C, H and G.
G.Glasgow Hunterian Museum T.2, 17. Contains, ff. 1-108,Vox Clamantispreceded by the Table of Chapters, ff. 109-119,Cronica Tripertita, ff. 119, 120, ‘H. aquile pullus,’ ‘O recolende,’ ‘Quia vnusquisque,’ ‘Eneidos Bucolis,’ ff. 120 vo-122,Carmen super multiplici Viciorum Pestilencia, ff. 123, 124,Tractatus de Lucis Scrutinio, f. 124 vo,Traitié pour ensampler les Amantz marietzfollowed byCarmen de variis in amore passionibus, f. 129, ‘Orantibus pro anima,’ with shield of arms and the lines ‘Armigeri scutum,’ and below this a bier with candle at head and foot, f. 129 vo, ‘Epistola quam Iohannes Gower in laudem ... Henrici quarti statim post coronacionem ... deuote composuit,’ f. 130 vo, ‘O deus immense,’ f. 131 vo, ‘Henrici regis,’ ‘Vnanimes esse,’ f. 132, ‘Presul, ouile regis,’ ‘Cultor in ecclesia,’ ‘Dicunt scripture,’ f. 132 voblank.
Parchment, ff. 132 in quires of eight leaves (except the first, which has six) with catchwords, measuring 11¾ x 7¾ in., 53 lines to the page in theVox Clamantis, then 52 or 51, regularly and well written with passages erased and rewritten as in CH. On f. 6 vois a painting like that in the Cotton MS. of a man in a brown hat, a blue coat with brown lining, and with three arrows in his belt, shooting an arrow at the globe (which has a threefold division corresponding to the three elements of air, earth, and water), with the lines ‘Ad mundum mitto mea iacula’ &c. There is a floreated page at the beginning of Lib. i. (after the Prologue) and illuminated initials with decoration at the beginning of the other books; large and small coloured capitals for chapters and paragraphs.
I have to thank Dr. Young the Librarian of the Hunterian Museum, for facilities given to me in using this MS. and for his kind help in collating and describing it.
The text of G has, as might be expected, a close affinity with that of S, but the peculiarities of S as regards revision in certain passages, e.g. iii. 1 ff., iv. 1197 ff., are not shared by this MS., which goes here with the other revised copies, C and H. In one place at least G has a further touch of revision, viz. in the heading of vi. cap. vii., where its reading is shared by D. In a good many instances, however, G stands with S (sometimes in company with D or L) in support of a probably true reading which is not given by other MSS., as i. 465, 468, 979, 1454, iv. 72, v. 789, vii. 684, 1342, or of an error, as i. 1525, 1870, iii. 1863, iv. 799. It may be noted that sometimes in G an erasure has been made without the correction being supplied.The following are some of the hands that may be distinguished in this manuscript:(1) Text of theVox Clamantis. This seems to be the same as S (1), H (2).(2) Text of theCronica Tripertitaand succeeding pieces to f. 131 ro., passages rewritten over erasure in vi. 545 ff., 1159 ff. and in the conclusion of theVox Clamantis. This is the same as S (2), C (3), H (3).(3) Corrections in vi. cap. xix., vii. cap. iii. and xxiv, rewritten lines at the beginning and near the end of theCronica Tripertita, text of the poem ‘Henrici Regis’ with its heading, f. 131. Perhaps the same as S (3).(4) The marginal note at iii. 375: the same as S (4), C (6), H (6).(5) The text of ‘Vnanimes esse’ and the succeeding poems on ff. 131 vo, 132.
The text of G has, as might be expected, a close affinity with that of S, but the peculiarities of S as regards revision in certain passages, e.g. iii. 1 ff., iv. 1197 ff., are not shared by this MS., which goes here with the other revised copies, C and H. In one place at least G has a further touch of revision, viz. in the heading of vi. cap. vii., where its reading is shared by D. In a good many instances, however, G stands with S (sometimes in company with D or L) in support of a probably true reading which is not given by other MSS., as i. 465, 468, 979, 1454, iv. 72, v. 789, vii. 684, 1342, or of an error, as i. 1525, 1870, iii. 1863, iv. 799. It may be noted that sometimes in G an erasure has been made without the correction being supplied.
The following are some of the hands that may be distinguished in this manuscript:
(1) Text of theVox Clamantis. This seems to be the same as S (1), H (2).
(2) Text of theCronica Tripertitaand succeeding pieces to f. 131 ro., passages rewritten over erasure in vi. 545 ff., 1159 ff. and in the conclusion of theVox Clamantis. This is the same as S (2), C (3), H (3).
(3) Corrections in vi. cap. xix., vii. cap. iii. and xxiv, rewritten lines at the beginning and near the end of theCronica Tripertita, text of the poem ‘Henrici Regis’ with its heading, f. 131. Perhaps the same as S (3).
(4) The marginal note at iii. 375: the same as S (4), C (6), H (6).
(5) The text of ‘Vnanimes esse’ and the succeeding poems on ff. 131 vo, 132.
C.Cotton. Tib.A. iv, British Museum. Contains, ff. 2-152vo,Vox Clamantis, ff. 153-167 ro, ‘Explicit libellus’ &c. andCronica Tripertita, f. 167, ‘Rex celi deus,’ ‘H. aquile pullus,’ ‘O recolende bone,’ ff. 168-172,Carmen super multiplici Viciorum Pestilencia, ff. 172 vo-174,Tractatus de Lucis Scrutinio, ff. 174 vo, 175, ‘Quia vnusquisque,’ ‘Eneidos Bucolis,’ ‘Orate pro anima,’ ‘O deus immense,’ ff. 176, 177, ‘Henrici regis,’ ‘Vnanimes esse,’ ‘Presul, ouile regis,’ ‘Cultor in ecclesia,’ ‘Dicunt scripture.’ Ends on 177 ro. Parchment, ff. 178, that is, 176 leaves of original text, preceded by two blanks, on the second of which is Sir Robert Cotton’s Table of Contents, ending ‘Liber vt videtur ipsius autoris,’ the first leaf of the text being now numbered f. 2. In quires of eight with catchwords, signeda,b,c, &c. from f. 10 (where the text of theVox Clamantisbegins) the first quire, containing the chapter-headings &c., written in a hand different from that of the main part of the text. Leaves measure about 10 x 6½ in. Written in single column, 38 lines to the page in theVox Clamantis, 40 or more in theCronica Tripertita. The MS. has been carefully corrected, and revised passages appear written over erasure as in SGH. Capitals coloured and gilded at the beginning of the books, coloured blue and red at the beginning of chapters and paragraphs. On f. 9, the last of the first quire, a picture like that in the Glasgow MS., of the author shooting at the world, as shown in the frontispiece of this volume.
On f. 2 is written ‘Roberti Cotton liber ex dono doctissimi Patricii Youngi generosi.’ The book suffered somewhat in the fire of 1731, but it has been carefully and skilfully repaired, and though the writing at the top of each page shows traces of the heat, no part of it is illegible. The effect produced is clearly visible on the page of which a facsimile is given.
The text of C is a very good one and unquestionably independent. In regard to spelling it may be observed that the copyist of theVox Clamantisfrequently gives ‘u’ for ‘v’ at the beginning of words, he writes ‘sed’ almost always for ‘set,’ and often ‘ti’ for ‘ci’ in words like ‘etiam,’ ‘ratio,’ ‘patiens’ and even ‘fatie’ (ii. 57), but also ‘eciam,’ ‘ambicio,’ ‘precium,’ &c.The following are the hands, so far as they can be distinguished:(1) Text of theVox Clamantis, a small and somewhat irregular but clear hand, of the fourteenth century.(2) The eight leaves preceding this (containing the chapter-headings), and also ff. 96, 97 and part of 140. This hand has made corrections throughout, not revising the text, as the author might, but setting right the mistakes of the scribe.The (3) following passages as rewritten over erasure: i. 1019 ff., vi. 545-554, and also the prose heading of the first part of theCronica Tripertita. This is the ‘second hand’ of the Fairfax MS., the same as S (2), G (2), H (3).(4) The passage rewritten over erasure in iii. 1 ff., also the heading of iii, cap. iv., corrections in iv. 1198 ff., and iv. 1221*-1232* rewritten over erasure. This is a neat round hand used also in the same places of the Harleian MS.(5) The passage ‘Rex puer,’ &c., vi. 555-580, and vi. cap. xviii, with the heading of cap. xix., over erasure, a hand which resembles (3), but does not seem to be identical with it.(6) The marginal note at iii. 375 and perhaps also iv. 587, and the marginal note at the end of theCronica Tripertita; also f. 176 ‘Nota hic in fine—intendo,’ and the lines ‘Henrici regis,’ &c. This is the same as S (4), G (4), H (6).(7) Corrections in vi. 1208, 1210: the same as H (7), and the correction of vi. 1210 in S.(8) Corrections in vi. 1219 ff., and vii. 187 ff.(9) Text ofCronica Tripertitaand the succeeding pieces to f. 168: a rather rough and irregular hand in faded ink.(10) Marginal notes ofCronica Tripertitaand text ofCarmen super multiplici&c. from f. 169, ‘Ad fidei dampnum’ to the end of ‘O deus immense,’ f. 176.(11) The four smaller poems at the end (possibly with the exception of ‘Cultor in ecclesia’). The same as H (9).(12) The lines at the beginning and near the end of theCronica Tripertita(over erasure).Some other corrections are doubtful, as the concluding lines of theVox Clamantis.
The text of C is a very good one and unquestionably independent. In regard to spelling it may be observed that the copyist of theVox Clamantisfrequently gives ‘u’ for ‘v’ at the beginning of words, he writes ‘sed’ almost always for ‘set,’ and often ‘ti’ for ‘ci’ in words like ‘etiam,’ ‘ratio,’ ‘patiens’ and even ‘fatie’ (ii. 57), but also ‘eciam,’ ‘ambicio,’ ‘precium,’ &c.
The following are the hands, so far as they can be distinguished:
(1) Text of theVox Clamantis, a small and somewhat irregular but clear hand, of the fourteenth century.
(2) The eight leaves preceding this (containing the chapter-headings), and also ff. 96, 97 and part of 140. This hand has made corrections throughout, not revising the text, as the author might, but setting right the mistakes of the scribe.
The (3) following passages as rewritten over erasure: i. 1019 ff., vi. 545-554, and also the prose heading of the first part of theCronica Tripertita. This is the ‘second hand’ of the Fairfax MS., the same as S (2), G (2), H (3).
(4) The passage rewritten over erasure in iii. 1 ff., also the heading of iii, cap. iv., corrections in iv. 1198 ff., and iv. 1221*-1232* rewritten over erasure. This is a neat round hand used also in the same places of the Harleian MS.
(5) The passage ‘Rex puer,’ &c., vi. 555-580, and vi. cap. xviii, with the heading of cap. xix., over erasure, a hand which resembles (3), but does not seem to be identical with it.
(6) The marginal note at iii. 375 and perhaps also iv. 587, and the marginal note at the end of theCronica Tripertita; also f. 176 ‘Nota hic in fine—intendo,’ and the lines ‘Henrici regis,’ &c. This is the same as S (4), G (4), H (6).
(7) Corrections in vi. 1208, 1210: the same as H (7), and the correction of vi. 1210 in S.
(8) Corrections in vi. 1219 ff., and vii. 187 ff.
(9) Text ofCronica Tripertitaand the succeeding pieces to f. 168: a rather rough and irregular hand in faded ink.
(10) Marginal notes ofCronica Tripertitaand text ofCarmen super multiplici&c. from f. 169, ‘Ad fidei dampnum’ to the end of ‘O deus immense,’ f. 176.
(11) The four smaller poems at the end (possibly with the exception of ‘Cultor in ecclesia’). The same as H (9).
(12) The lines at the beginning and near the end of theCronica Tripertita(over erasure).
Some other corrections are doubtful, as the concluding lines of theVox Clamantis.
H. Harleian 6291, British Museum. Contains the same as C, except where deficient from loss of leaves, with the addition of a second copy of the last three poems. Parchment ff. 164, measuring 9 x 6 in., in quires of eight with catchwords, 37 lines to the page, regularly and neatly written. No decoration except coloured initials. Has lost probably two whole quires, 16 leaves, at the beginning, and begins withVox Clamantis, i. 502. The first existing quire is lettered ‘b,’ and this is also the lettering of the third quire of the Cotton MS., the first, which has the Table of Chapters, not being counted in the lettering. In addition to these, one leaf is lost after f. 1 (containingVox Clamantis, i. 571-644), two after f. 58 (iii. 1716-1854), one after f. 108 (vi. 951-1021), one after f. 133 (vii. 1399-1466). This last leaf formed part of a quire of 12, which followed f. 124, at the end of theVox Clamantis. Of these the last three have been cut away, but only one leaf of text is lost, f. 134 continuing at 1467, and the concluding lines of theVox Clamantisbeing here given in the hand which copied theCronicaTripertita, &c. The last quire of that book, ff. 158-164 (one leaf lost at the end), has several blanks (162, 163, 164 vo).
In a good many instances passages of from two to six lines are omitted in the text and inserted in the margin, either across or at the bottom of the page, in a hand which seems not to be that of the text, though very similar, and is probably identical with S (1). This occurs on ff. 41, 74, 76, 78, &c.
The text of H is very correct, and in forms of spelling, &c. it closely resembles that of S. There is little punctuation at first, but more afterwards. In form of text it agrees nearly with C, but (1) the marginal note at iv. 587 is omitted, (2) as regards revision H parts company with C at vi. 1219, from which point H has the unrevised text in agreement with EDTH₂ except in the concluding lines of theVox Clamantison f. 134, which, as already remarked, are rewritten in a new hand.The hands of H may be thus distinguished:(1) Text of theVox Clamantis, a good and regular fourteenth-century hand.(2) Passages added in the margin, probably the same as S (1).(3) Rewritten text of i. 1019 ff., vi. 545-580, vi. cap. xviii and heading of xix, last lines ofVox Clamantis, text ofCronica Tripertitaand succeeding pieces to the end of ‘O deus immense’ f. 159 vo. This is the same as S (2), G (2), C (3).(4) Rewritten text of iii. 1 ff., corrections of iv. 1212, 1214, and rewritten text of 1221*-1232*; also f. 160, ‘Nota hic in fine’ &c. to end of f. 161 ro. This is the same as C (4).(5) Correction of the heading of iii. cap. iv, the same as S (3).(6) Marginal note at iii. 375, the same as S (4), G (4), C (6).(7) Corrections of vi. 1208, 1210, and ofCronica Tripertitai. 55 f. and some other places: the same as C (7).(8) Rewritten passages at the beginning and near the end of theCronica Tripertita, the same as C (12).(9) Second copy of the last poems (on f. 164), the same hand as C (11).
The text of H is very correct, and in forms of spelling, &c. it closely resembles that of S. There is little punctuation at first, but more afterwards. In form of text it agrees nearly with C, but (1) the marginal note at iv. 587 is omitted, (2) as regards revision H parts company with C at vi. 1219, from which point H has the unrevised text in agreement with EDTH₂ except in the concluding lines of theVox Clamantison f. 134, which, as already remarked, are rewritten in a new hand.
The hands of H may be thus distinguished:
(1) Text of theVox Clamantis, a good and regular fourteenth-century hand.
(2) Passages added in the margin, probably the same as S (1).
(3) Rewritten text of i. 1019 ff., vi. 545-580, vi. cap. xviii and heading of xix, last lines ofVox Clamantis, text ofCronica Tripertitaand succeeding pieces to the end of ‘O deus immense’ f. 159 vo. This is the same as S (2), G (2), C (3).
(4) Rewritten text of iii. 1 ff., corrections of iv. 1212, 1214, and rewritten text of 1221*-1232*; also f. 160, ‘Nota hic in fine’ &c. to end of f. 161 ro. This is the same as C (4).
(5) Correction of the heading of iii. cap. iv, the same as S (3).
(6) Marginal note at iii. 375, the same as S (4), G (4), C (6).
(7) Corrections of vi. 1208, 1210, and ofCronica Tripertitai. 55 f. and some other places: the same as C (7).
(8) Rewritten passages at the beginning and near the end of theCronica Tripertita, the same as C (12).
(9) Second copy of the last poems (on f. 164), the same hand as C (11).
E. AtEcton, near Northampton, in the possession of General Sotheby, who very kindly sent it to the Bodleian Library for my use. ContainsVox Clamantis,Carmen super multiplici Viciorum Pestilencia,Tractatus de Lucis Scrutinio, ‘O deus immense,’ ‘Cultor in ecclesia,’ ‘Vnanimes esse,’ ‘Dicunt scripture.’ Parchment, ff. 191, measuring about 9 x 6¼ in., in quires of eight with catch-words, the last quire of seven leaves only (two blank). Neatly written in a good hand of the end of the fourteenth century, in single column, 32 lines to a page. On f. 10 a brightly coloured picture of an archer drawing a bow to shoot at the world, with the lines ‘Ad mundum mitto,’ &c., as in the Cotton and Glasgow MSS., but the figure and features are different, and evidently the picture has less claim to be considered an authentic portrait than those of the two MSS. above named. The headings of pages and chapters are in red, and there are colouredinitials and other decorations throughout. The whole is written in one hand, and there are no corrections or erasures such as might indicate that the book had been in the hands of the author.
The manuscript seems to have been in the possession of the Sotheby family since 1702, when it was ‘bought at Lord Burgley’s sale for £1 2s.0d.’ No leaves are lost, but two are transposed at the end of the fourth and beginning of the fifth books.
The text is very fairly correct, and the MS. is closely related to C both in text and spelling (for which see i. Prol. 37 f., i. 21, 95, 447, 1706, 1776, 2017, ii. 174, 311 &c.), but not derived from it (see i. 41, 1626, 2094, iii. 1760 f., v. 785 f.). The passages which in C and the other original copies are rewritten over erasure, as iii. 1 ff., vi. 1161 ff., are usually given by E in the revised form, but the marginal notes at iii. 375 and iv. 587 are omitted. Occasionally too, where C has a correction, E gives the original reading in company with H, as iii. 840, v. 785 f., and especially in the passages vi. 1219 ff. and vii. 182 ff., where H no longer agrees with SCG in corrections, we find that E goes with H. In the final poems E shows some independence as regards marginal notes, e.g. in the last piece, where instead of ‘Nota contra mortuorum executores,’ we find the much more pointed, though doubtfully grammatical, remark, ‘Nota quod bonum est vnicuique esse executor sui ipsius.’ This is the only MS. except CHG which contains the short pieces at the end, and the omission from these of ‘Presul, ouile regis’ may be an indication that the MS. was written before 1402.As regards the picture in this MS., the features of the archer are quite different from those represented in the Cotton MS. He has a prominent pointed nose and a light-coloured moustache and beard; the arrow, held between the fore-finger and the second and aimed upwards, covers the mouth. The dress consists of a grey fur cap with a hood under it of light crimson, covering also the upper part of the body: below this a blue surcoat with brown lining and wide sleeves thrown back so as to leave the arms bare: a red belt with buckle and pendant, and red hose. The globe is at a higher level and smaller in proportion than in the other pictures. Like them it is divided into three, the left hand upper division having a crescent moon and four stars: a red cross with a banner stands at the summit of the globe.
The text is very fairly correct, and the MS. is closely related to C both in text and spelling (for which see i. Prol. 37 f., i. 21, 95, 447, 1706, 1776, 2017, ii. 174, 311 &c.), but not derived from it (see i. 41, 1626, 2094, iii. 1760 f., v. 785 f.). The passages which in C and the other original copies are rewritten over erasure, as iii. 1 ff., vi. 1161 ff., are usually given by E in the revised form, but the marginal notes at iii. 375 and iv. 587 are omitted. Occasionally too, where C has a correction, E gives the original reading in company with H, as iii. 840, v. 785 f., and especially in the passages vi. 1219 ff. and vii. 182 ff., where H no longer agrees with SCG in corrections, we find that E goes with H. In the final poems E shows some independence as regards marginal notes, e.g. in the last piece, where instead of ‘Nota contra mortuorum executores,’ we find the much more pointed, though doubtfully grammatical, remark, ‘Nota quod bonum est vnicuique esse executor sui ipsius.’ This is the only MS. except CHG which contains the short pieces at the end, and the omission from these of ‘Presul, ouile regis’ may be an indication that the MS. was written before 1402.
As regards the picture in this MS., the features of the archer are quite different from those represented in the Cotton MS. He has a prominent pointed nose and a light-coloured moustache and beard; the arrow, held between the fore-finger and the second and aimed upwards, covers the mouth. The dress consists of a grey fur cap with a hood under it of light crimson, covering also the upper part of the body: below this a blue surcoat with brown lining and wide sleeves thrown back so as to leave the arms bare: a red belt with buckle and pendant, and red hose. The globe is at a higher level and smaller in proportion than in the other pictures. Like them it is divided into three, the left hand upper division having a crescent moon and four stars: a red cross with a banner stands at the summit of the globe.
D. Digby 138, Bodleian Library, Oxford. ContainsVox Clamantisonly, preceded by the Table of Chapter-headings. Parchment and paper, ff. 158 originally, with other leaves inserted at the beginning and end in the sixteenth century; about 10½ x 7¼ in., in quires of eight with catchwords; neat writing of the second quarter of the fifteenth century, about 37 lines to the page. No decoration except red and blue initials, numbering of chapters in red, &c. The rubricator has introduced some corrections here and there, but there are no passages rewritten over erasure. There is some transposition of leaves in the fourteenth quire, dating from before the rubricator’s numbering of chapters. The name of a sixteenth-centuryowner, Roger Waller, occurs on f. 158 vo. and Kenelm Digby’s device, ‘Vindica te tibi, Kenelme Digby,’ on f. 1.
The text of D is of a mixed character. Sometimes, in company with TH₂ it reproduces the original form of a passage, as i. 1029 ff., vi. cap. xviii and xix, vii. 189 f., 1409 ff., 1454 ff., 1479 ff. In other places, as iii. 1 ff., vi. 545, and elsewhere, the readings of D are those of the revised MSS. It is peculiar in the addition after vi. 522, where eight lines are introduced from the original text of the altered passage which follows at the end of the chapter. The text of D generally is much less correct than that of the older copies, and it is derived from a MS. which had lines missing here and there, as indicated by the ‘deficit versus in copia,’ which occurs sometimes in the margin. In the numbering of the chapters the Prologues of Libb. ii. and iii. are reckoned as cap. i. in each case. The corrections and notes of the rubricator are not always sound, and sometimes we find in the margin attempts to improve the author’s metre, in a seventeenth-century hand, as ‘Et qui pauca tenet’ for ‘Qui tenet et pauca’ (ii. 70), ‘Causa tamen credo’ for ‘Credo tamen causa’ (ii. 84). Some of these late alterations have been admitted (strange to say) into Mr. Coxe’s text (e.g. ii. 70).The book is made up of parchment and paper in equal proportions, the outer and inner leaves of each quire being of parchment. Sixteen leaves of paper have been inserted at the beginning and twelve at the end of the book, easily distinguished by the water-mark and chain-lines from the paper originally used in the book itself. Most of these are blank, but some have writing, mostly in sixteenth-century hands. There are medical prescriptions and cooking recipes in English, selections of gnomic and other passages from theVox Clamantis, among which are the lines ‘Ad mundum mitto,’ &c., which do not occur in the Digby text, four Latin lines on the merits of the papal court beginning ‘Pauperibus sua dat gratis,’ which when read backwards convey an opposite sense, the stanzas by Queen Elizabeth ‘The dowte of future force (corr.foes) Exiles my presente ioye, And wytt me warnes to shonne suche snares As threten myne annoye’ (eight four-line stanzas).With regard to the connexion between D and L see below on the Laud MS.
The text of D is of a mixed character. Sometimes, in company with TH₂ it reproduces the original form of a passage, as i. 1029 ff., vi. cap. xviii and xix, vii. 189 f., 1409 ff., 1454 ff., 1479 ff. In other places, as iii. 1 ff., vi. 545, and elsewhere, the readings of D are those of the revised MSS. It is peculiar in the addition after vi. 522, where eight lines are introduced from the original text of the altered passage which follows at the end of the chapter. The text of D generally is much less correct than that of the older copies, and it is derived from a MS. which had lines missing here and there, as indicated by the ‘deficit versus in copia,’ which occurs sometimes in the margin. In the numbering of the chapters the Prologues of Libb. ii. and iii. are reckoned as cap. i. in each case. The corrections and notes of the rubricator are not always sound, and sometimes we find in the margin attempts to improve the author’s metre, in a seventeenth-century hand, as ‘Et qui pauca tenet’ for ‘Qui tenet et pauca’ (ii. 70), ‘Causa tamen credo’ for ‘Credo tamen causa’ (ii. 84). Some of these late alterations have been admitted (strange to say) into Mr. Coxe’s text (e.g. ii. 70).
The book is made up of parchment and paper in equal proportions, the outer and inner leaves of each quire being of parchment. Sixteen leaves of paper have been inserted at the beginning and twelve at the end of the book, easily distinguished by the water-mark and chain-lines from the paper originally used in the book itself. Most of these are blank, but some have writing, mostly in sixteenth-century hands. There are medical prescriptions and cooking recipes in English, selections of gnomic and other passages from theVox Clamantis, among which are the lines ‘Ad mundum mitto,’ &c., which do not occur in the Digby text, four Latin lines on the merits of the papal court beginning ‘Pauperibus sua dat gratis,’ which when read backwards convey an opposite sense, the stanzas by Queen Elizabeth ‘The dowte of future force (corr.foes) Exiles my presente ioye, And wytt me warnes to shonne suche snares As threten myne annoye’ (eight four-line stanzas).
With regard to the connexion between D and L see below on the Laud MS.
L. Laud 719, Bodleian Library, Oxford. ContainsVox Clamantis(without Table of Chapters and with omission of Lib. i. 165-2150),Carmen super multiplici Viciorum Pestilencia,Tractatus de Lucis Scrutinio,Carmen de variis in amore passionibus, ‘Lex docet auctorum,’ ‘Quis sit vel qualis,’ ‘H. aquile pullus,’ and seven more Latin lines of obscure meaning (‘Inter saxosum montem,’ &c.), which are not found in other Gower MSS. Parchment and paper, ff. 170 (not including four original blank leaves at the beginning and several miscellaneous leaves at the end), in quires usually of fourteen leaves, but the first of twelve and the second of six, measuring about 8½ x 5¾ in., about 27 lines to the page, moderately well written with a good many contractions, in the same hand throughout with no corrections, of the second quarter of the fifteenth century. There is a roughly drawnpicture of an archer aiming at the globe on f. 21, and the chapters have red initial letters. Original oak binding.
The names ‘Thomas Eymis’ and ‘William Turner’ occur as those of sixteenth-century owners. The note on the inside of the binding, ‘Henry Beauchamp lyeing in St. John strete at the iii. Cuppes,’ can hardly be taken to indicate ownership.
The most noticeable fact about the text of this MS. is one to which no attention has hitherto been called, viz. the omission of the whole history of the Peasants’ Revolt. After Lib. i. cap. i. the whole of the remainder of the first book (nearly 2,000 lines) is omitted without any note of deficiency, and we pass on to the Prologue of Lib. ii, not so named here, but standing as the second chapter of Lib. i. (the chapters not being numbered however in this MS.). After what we commonly call the second book follows the heading of the Prologue of Lib. iii, but without any indication that a new book is begun. Lib. iv. is marked by the rubricator as ‘liber iiius,’ Lib. v. as ‘liber iiiius,’ and so on to the end, making six books instead of seven; but there are traces of another numbering, apparently by the scribe who wrote the text, according to which Lib. v. was reckoned as ‘liber iiius,’ Lib. iv. as ‘liber iiiius,’ and Lib. vii. as ‘liber vus.’ It has been already observed that there is internal evidence to show that this arrangement in five (or six) books may have been the original form of the text of theVox Clamantis. At the same time it must be noted that this form is given by no other MS. except the Lincoln book, which is certainly copied from L, and that the nature of the connexion between L and D seems to indicate that these two MSS. are ultimately derived from the same source. This connexion, established by a complete collation of the two MSS., extends apparently throughout the whole of the text of L. We have, for example, in both, i. Prol. 27, laudes, 58 Huius ergo, ii. 94 et ibi, 312 causat, 614 Ingenuitque, iii. 4 mundus, 296 ei, 407 amor (formaior), 536 Hec, 750 timidus, 758 curremus, 882 iuris, 1026 Nil, 1223 mundus, 1228 bona, 1491 egras, 1584 racio, 1655 Inde vola, 1777 ibi, 1868 timet, 1906 seruet, 2075, 2080 qui, iv. 52 vrbe, 99 tegit, and so on. The common source was not an immediate one, for words omitted by D with a blank or ‘deficit’ as iii. 641, vii. 487 are found in L, and the words ‘nescit,’ ‘deus,’ which are omitted with a blank left in L at iii. 1574 and vi. 349 are found in D. If we suppose a common source, we must assume either that the first book was found in it entire and deliberately omitted, with alteration of the numbering of the books, by the copyist of the MS. from which L is more immediately derived, or that it was not found, and that the copyist of the original of D supplied it from another source.It should be noted that the MS. from which L is ultimately derived must have had alternative versions of some of the revised passages, for in vi. cap. xviii. and also vi. l. 1208 L gives both the revised and the unrevised form. As a rule in the matter of revision L agrees with D, but not in the corrections of vi. 1208-1226, where D has the uncorrected form and L the other. We may note especially the reading of L in vi. 1224.The following are the Latin lines which occur on f. 170 after ‘[H.] Aquile pullus,’ &c.‘Inter saxosum montem campumque nodosumPeriit Anglica gens fraude sua propria.Homo dicitur, Cristus, virgo, Sathan, non iniustus fragilisque,Est peccator homo simpliciterque notat.Vlcio, mandatum, cetus, tutela, potestas,Pars incarnatus, presencia, vis memorandi,Ista manus seruat infallax voce sub vna.’The second of the parchment blanks at the beginning has a note in the original hand of the MS. on the marriage of the devil and the birth of his nine daughters, who were assigned to various classes of human society, Simony to the prelates, Hypocrisy to the religious orders, and so on. At the end of the book there are two leaves with theological and other notes in the same hand, and two cut for purposes of binding from leaves of an older MS. of Latin hymns, &c. with music.
The most noticeable fact about the text of this MS. is one to which no attention has hitherto been called, viz. the omission of the whole history of the Peasants’ Revolt. After Lib. i. cap. i. the whole of the remainder of the first book (nearly 2,000 lines) is omitted without any note of deficiency, and we pass on to the Prologue of Lib. ii, not so named here, but standing as the second chapter of Lib. i. (the chapters not being numbered however in this MS.). After what we commonly call the second book follows the heading of the Prologue of Lib. iii, but without any indication that a new book is begun. Lib. iv. is marked by the rubricator as ‘liber iiius,’ Lib. v. as ‘liber iiiius,’ and so on to the end, making six books instead of seven; but there are traces of another numbering, apparently by the scribe who wrote the text, according to which Lib. v. was reckoned as ‘liber iiius,’ Lib. iv. as ‘liber iiiius,’ and Lib. vii. as ‘liber vus.’ It has been already observed that there is internal evidence to show that this arrangement in five (or six) books may have been the original form of the text of theVox Clamantis. At the same time it must be noted that this form is given by no other MS. except the Lincoln book, which is certainly copied from L, and that the nature of the connexion between L and D seems to indicate that these two MSS. are ultimately derived from the same source. This connexion, established by a complete collation of the two MSS., extends apparently throughout the whole of the text of L. We have, for example, in both, i. Prol. 27, laudes, 58 Huius ergo, ii. 94 et ibi, 312 causat, 614 Ingenuitque, iii. 4 mundus, 296 ei, 407 amor (formaior), 536 Hec, 750 timidus, 758 curremus, 882 iuris, 1026 Nil, 1223 mundus, 1228 bona, 1491 egras, 1584 racio, 1655 Inde vola, 1777 ibi, 1868 timet, 1906 seruet, 2075, 2080 qui, iv. 52 vrbe, 99 tegit, and so on. The common source was not an immediate one, for words omitted by D with a blank or ‘deficit’ as iii. 641, vii. 487 are found in L, and the words ‘nescit,’ ‘deus,’ which are omitted with a blank left in L at iii. 1574 and vi. 349 are found in D. If we suppose a common source, we must assume either that the first book was found in it entire and deliberately omitted, with alteration of the numbering of the books, by the copyist of the MS. from which L is more immediately derived, or that it was not found, and that the copyist of the original of D supplied it from another source.
It should be noted that the MS. from which L is ultimately derived must have had alternative versions of some of the revised passages, for in vi. cap. xviii. and also vi. l. 1208 L gives both the revised and the unrevised form. As a rule in the matter of revision L agrees with D, but not in the corrections of vi. 1208-1226, where D has the uncorrected form and L the other. We may note especially the reading of L in vi. 1224.
The following are the Latin lines which occur on f. 170 after ‘[H.] Aquile pullus,’ &c.
‘Inter saxosum montem campumque nodosumPeriit Anglica gens fraude sua propria.Homo dicitur, Cristus, virgo, Sathan, non iniustus fragilisque,Est peccator homo simpliciterque notat.Vlcio, mandatum, cetus, tutela, potestas,Pars incarnatus, presencia, vis memorandi,Ista manus seruat infallax voce sub vna.’
‘Inter saxosum montem campumque nodosumPeriit Anglica gens fraude sua propria.Homo dicitur, Cristus, virgo, Sathan, non iniustus fragilisque,Est peccator homo simpliciterque notat.Vlcio, mandatum, cetus, tutela, potestas,Pars incarnatus, presencia, vis memorandi,Ista manus seruat infallax voce sub vna.’
‘Inter saxosum montem campumque nodosumPeriit Anglica gens fraude sua propria.Homo dicitur, Cristus, virgo, Sathan, non iniustus fragilisque,Est peccator homo simpliciterque notat.Vlcio, mandatum, cetus, tutela, potestas,Pars incarnatus, presencia, vis memorandi,Ista manus seruat infallax voce sub vna.’
‘Inter saxosum montem campumque nodosum
Periit Anglica gens fraude sua propria.
Homo dicitur, Cristus, virgo, Sathan, non iniustus fragilisque,
Est peccator homo simpliciterque notat.
Vlcio, mandatum, cetus, tutela, potestas,
Pars incarnatus, presencia, vis memorandi,
Ista manus seruat infallax voce sub vna.’
The second of the parchment blanks at the beginning has a note in the original hand of the MS. on the marriage of the devil and the birth of his nine daughters, who were assigned to various classes of human society, Simony to the prelates, Hypocrisy to the religious orders, and so on. At the end of the book there are two leaves with theological and other notes in the same hand, and two cut for purposes of binding from leaves of an older MS. of Latin hymns, &c. with music.
L₂.Lincoln Cathedral Library, A. 72, very obligingly placed at my disposal in the Bodleian by the Librarian, with authority from the Dean and Chapter. Contains the same as L, including the enigmatical lines above quoted. Paper, ff. 184, measuring about 8 x 6 in. neatly written in an early sixteenth-century hand, about 26 lines to the page. No coloured initials, but space left for them and on f. 21 for a picture corresponding to that on f. 21 of the Laud MS. Neither books nor chapters numbered. Marked in pencil as ‘one of Dean Honywood’s, No. 53.’
Certainly copied from L, giving a precisely similar form of text and agreeing almost always in the minutest details.
Certainly copied from L, giving a precisely similar form of text and agreeing almost always in the minutest details.
T.Trinity College, Dublin, D. 4, 6, kindly sent to the Bodleian for my use by the Librarian, with the authority of the Provost and Fellows. ContainsVox Clamantiswithout Table of Chapters, followed by the account of the author’s books, ‘Quia vnusquisque,’ &c. Parchment, ff. 144 (two blank) in seventeen quires, usually of eight leaves, but the first and sixteenth of ten and the last of twelve; written in an early fifteenth-century hand, 36-39 lines to the page, no passages erased or rewritten. Coloured initials.
This, in agreement with the Hatfield book (H₂), gives the original form of all the passages which were revised or rewritten. It is apparently a careless copy of a good text, with many mistakes, some of which are corrected. The scribe either did not understand what he was writing or did not attend to the meaning, and a good many lines and couplets have been carelessly dropped out, as i. 873, 1360, 1749, 1800, ii. Prol. 24 f., ii. 561 f., iii. 281, 394 f., 943 f., 1154, 1767-1770, 1830, iv. 516 f., 684, v. 142-145, 528-530, vi. 829 f., vii. 688 f., 1099 f.The blank leaf at the beginning, which is partly cut away, has in an early hand the lines‘In Kent alle car by gan, ibi pauci sunt sapientes,In a Route thise Rebaudis ran sua trepida arma gerentes,’for which cp. Wright’sPolitical Poems, Rolls Series, 14, vol. i. p. 225.
This, in agreement with the Hatfield book (H₂), gives the original form of all the passages which were revised or rewritten. It is apparently a careless copy of a good text, with many mistakes, some of which are corrected. The scribe either did not understand what he was writing or did not attend to the meaning, and a good many lines and couplets have been carelessly dropped out, as i. 873, 1360, 1749, 1800, ii. Prol. 24 f., ii. 561 f., iii. 281, 394 f., 943 f., 1154, 1767-1770, 1830, iv. 516 f., 684, v. 142-145, 528-530, vi. 829 f., vii. 688 f., 1099 f.
The blank leaf at the beginning, which is partly cut away, has in an early hand the lines
‘In Kent alle car by gan, ibi pauci sunt sapientes,In a Route thise Rebaudis ran sua trepida arma gerentes,’
‘In Kent alle car by gan, ibi pauci sunt sapientes,In a Route thise Rebaudis ran sua trepida arma gerentes,’
‘In Kent alle car by gan, ibi pauci sunt sapientes,In a Route thise Rebaudis ran sua trepida arma gerentes,’
‘In Kent alle car by gan, ibi pauci sunt sapientes,
In a Route thise Rebaudis ran sua trepida arma gerentes,’
for which cp. Wright’sPolitical Poems, Rolls Series, 14, vol. i. p. 225.
H₂.Hatfield Hall, in the possession of the Marquess of Salisbury, by whose kind permission I was allowed to examine it. Contains theVox Clamantis, preceded by the Table of Chapters. Parchment, ff. 144 (not counting blanks), about 9½ x 6¼ in., in eighteen quires of eight with catchwords; neatly written in a hand of the first half of the fifteenth century, 40 lines to the page. There is a richly illuminated border round three sides of the page where the Prologue of theVox Clamantisbegins, and also on the next, at the beginning of the first book, and floreated decorations at the beginning of each succeeding book, with illuminated capitals throughout. The catchwords are sometimes ornamented with neat drawings.
The book has a certain additional interest derived from the fact that it belonged to the celebrated Lord Burleigh, and was evidently read by him with some interest, as is indicated by various notes.