An Introduction to Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Don. e. 247. (2024)

On Wednesday, May 21, 2014, a newly discovered manuscript of TheChastising of God's Children that was part of the Marquess ofLondonderry's art collection (in its turn auctioned on May 22 and23, 2014) (2) was sold at Christie's in London. Lot 11, "TheChastysing of Godde's [sic] Children, and other mystical treatises,in Middle English," (3) was acquired by the Bodleian Library. Inthis essay, the manuscript, which is now Oxford, Bodleian Library, MSDon. e. 247, is described in detail, the "other mysticaltreatises" are investigated, and the text of The Chastising in thisnewly discovered attestation is compared to the versions in the elevenknown manuscripts and in Wynkyn de Worde's printed edition.

Description of Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Don. e. 247

Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Don. e. 247 (henceforth D), written onvellum and in a nineteenth-century brown calf-leather binding, measures170 millimeters by 125 millimeters, with a writing area of 130millimeters by 80 to 85 millimeters and twenty-three lines to the pagein one column. (4) The pages have been cropped, as can be seen in theloss of some letters in marginal annotations and the loss of somecomplete annotations of which traces remain in the upper margins offolios 71r, 86r, and 98r. Strips of vellum have been cut away fromfolios 21, 93, 94, and 95. There is a hole in the vellum in thelower-right corner of folio 1, and on folio 32 the text is writtenaround a hole in the page. Holes in the vellum were sewn up on folios 9,13, 14, 71, and 90, probably before the text was written on them. Ineach of these cases the thread has gone, but the tears and needle marksaround them remain. Folio 61 has a cut running down the outer edge ofthe text from line 13 to line 22. This cut seems to have been made at alater stage, possibly during the rebinding process.

D is written in what looks like one hand, in Textura rotunda. Thescribe varies spellings throughout the manuscript, but consistentlyremains within a limited range of varied spellings. The pages have beenruled, and prickings are visible (e.g. on fol. 22), though often theyhave been cropped. D can be roughly dated to the first half of thefifteenth century. It does not have any internal dates in the text normedieval ownership marks that would help the exact dating process. (5) Dis written in a southeast Midlands dialect, but some of the rarer formsin the text also occur in the North. The most likely placings of thetext are west Norfolk or east Suffolk.

D divides into two units. Unit 1, folios 1 to 14v, presents part ofa compilation made up of the final section of the Middle EnglishIXPoyntes (a text that incorporates translated passages of James ofMilan's Stimulus amoris), a passion meditation sequence that alsoderives from Stimulus amoris, and an excerpt of Richard Rolle'sForm of Living, lines 267-486 in S.J. OgilvieThomson's edition.These borrowings are followed by a hortatory conclusion. The compilationlacks its opening, and it is difficult to tell how much of IX Poyntes itoriginally included. Unit 1 at present collates as [l.sup.8] [lacks 1,2] [2.sup.8] and has regular catchwords. Signatures were most likelylost through cropping. The text is divided by infrequent red paraphs andred-slashed capitals and looks plainer than unit 2.

Unit 2 contains The Chastising of God's Children, (6) whichthrough loss of a quire after folio 70 lacks the passage from Chapter 18at 169/21 to Chapter 20 at 180/19 and breaks off incompletely in Chapter27 (the final recapitulatory chapter) at 223/6. (7) This unit collatesas signatures 3-[9.sup.8] [missing quire] 10-[13.sup.8]. As in manyprofessionally produced copies of The Chastising, the text is written inblack ink, divided by red paraphs, with chapter headings and two-fineinitials in red, and biblical and patristic citations underlined in red,yet D lacks the use of blue ink for some paraph marks and lombardsembellished with red penwork common in many of the other manuscripts inwhich the text survives. Again, regular catchwords remain, andsignatures are absent, probably through cropping at the rebinding stage.In its southeast Midlands dialect, D resembles the majority ofChastising [manuscripts.sup.8]

It is hard to tell whether the units were presented in this orderbefore D's nineteenth-century rebinding, and whether the loss ofthe quire between the ninth and tenth quires of D happened at therebinding stage or before it. The darkening of the vellum on foliosl0lvto 102v suggests that the closing quire (and most likely part of thebinding of the manuscript) had been lost for some time before it wasrebound.

D has some drawings, which, apart from the trefoils on folios 3r,8v, 13v, 54v, 62r, 8Sr, 87v, and 88r, do not seem to have been used tomark meaningful passages and seem to be random scribbles rather thanintentional drawings of recognizable objects. (9) All but two of thetrefoils are medieval; on folio 54v two trefoils are added in a laterhand, that is, the hand of postmedieval annotator 1 (see below).

At various stages in D, annotations are written in a sixteenth- orseventeenth-century hand in black ink and with a pen that results in athickly set script. This first hand (postmedieval annotator l) leaves afirst quatrain on folio 14v. The third line of this annotation is hardto read, but this represents what can be deciphered:

The time of youthe soreyere spent membringe homey ?? it so spente geremy lorde god omnypotent.

On folio 25v, in the lower margin, the same hand writes: "Thevi condycion / Of this obligacyon." This annotation is boxed, inhastily drawn lines. On folio 43v, in the lower margin, the annotatorwrites: "The condiecyon." On folio 47v, the phrase written onfolio 25v and--in part--on folio 43v is repeated, "The condiecyoneof thes obliegacion of," with a flourish underneath the phrase. Inthese cases the annotator closed the volume before the ink of theinscription had dried properly, as traces of ink can be found on thefacing pages (see fols. 48r and 55v). On the basis of script and thetraces of ink on the opposite page, Cre believes that this annotator isalso responsible for the marginal annotation on folio 26v:

is in gostli leuyngehe schalwith allemekenesand gladnes of spirit

Though at first this annotation seems contemporary with the scribe,none of the medieval annotations in this manuscript are this long.Moreover, this annotation is not cropped but seems to have been writtenafter the manuscript was cropped. Also, the form of t at the end of theword "spirit" closely resembles the t-form of postmedievalannotator 1, who may here have been imitating medieval script (and doinga good job).

The annotation "Cudes god" in the lower margin of folio34r also seems to have been made by this annotator, as do theannotations on folio 54v, underneath the trefoils that we will arguelater are added in this hand. The same hand also seems responsible forthree words--also on folio 54v--that are hard to read ("per menes?"), followed by Psalm 50 (5l):17:

Domine labia mea aperieset osme meum

This is written next to "bat ferst amendith a man and purgithhym here be scharp chastisyng... from euerlastyng turment" (cf.Bazire-Colledge 148/1214). Again, it is striking that this annotationhas not been cropped, so it must have been made after the manuscript wascropped, and some centuries before it was rebound in the nineteenthcentury.

On folio 46v, again in the lower margin, we find the phrase"The time of ?an" followed by flourishes or initials("IN"?). Though this annotator (postmedieval annotator 2)forms the letter t in the same way as postmedieval annotator 1, thismight be another annotator altogether. The phrase seems written with adifferent pen (one with a fine nib), and in different ink Whoever wrotethis phrase may also have written the pen trials in the lower margin offolio 7r. Yet this hand seems different still from a third sixteenth- orseventeenth-century annotator who identifies himself as "AnthonyeTrolloppe."

The following annotations all seem to be written by this third hand(postmedieval annotator 3), who writes a neat and careful script anduses ink that has faded to brown (or brown ink) and a pen with a finenib. This hand seems responsible for the name "Sampson"written in capital letters in the lower margin of folio 31r. The namewritten underneath (possibly "Trallop") has been lost incropping. On folio 50v, written across in the left-hand margin, the samehand has entered a four-line prayer of which the first line has beencropped, followed by an ownership inscription placed to the right of theprayer written in tercet form, which seems complete:

to speicke to the o lord vouchsayfto heare my dolefull voice withwith vniforme accordeAnthonye Tralloppys my naime and with my handI wrote this saime

On folio 53v, in the lower margin, "Anthonye Trolloppe"signs his name again. The quatrain written at the page foot of folio 55vseems in the same hand:

When hope and healthe and lyfeand welthe ar heyesteThen woe and wracke diseaceand lacke ar neyeste

The first line of this poem on the fickleness of Fortune isrepeated at the foot of folio 56r: "When hope and health andlyf."

Ralph Hanna and Vincent Gillespie have suggested that D came to theMarquesses of Londonderry through Anne Vane-Tempest (1800-1865). Adescendant of the recusant Tempest family, (10) she was the second wifeof Charles William Stewart (1778-1854), the third Marquess ofLondonderry, whom she married on April 3, 1819. It is unclear what therelationship of the Trolloppe gentleman was to the Tempest family and ifor when D came to be owned by the Tempest family. It is a plausiblescenario, however, that a manuscript like D came to be owned by arecusant family after the Act of Supremacy and Dissolution of theMonasteries in Henry VIII's reign or slightly later under ElizabethI. Though any finks between the Tempest family and a man called AnthonyTrolloppe or Trallopp would need to be investigated further, theannotations betray religious interests on the part of the annotators.

D's Envisioned Audience

In its present form, D provides no explicit links to a specificmedieval religious house or contemporary individual, nor are there anycomments by the scribe or compiler explaining the choice of material.The absence of any concrete evidence concerning the manuscript'splace of origin (beyond the results of the dialectal analysis), and theanonymity of the guiding hand(s), commissioner(s), scribe, and targetaudience requires the consideration of relevant clues in the textsthemselves.

The Chastising is the only text in D that is not acephalous, and itretains its address to a "[r]eligiouse sustir" (fol. 18r, 11.1-2; cf. Bazire-Colledge 95/1), which would support the hypothesis thatthe manuscript was originally written as a work of spiritual guidancefor a single religious or for a convent. The Chastising circulatedwidely in religious houses in the fifteenth century. While the"schort pistil" (fol. 18r,l. 2; cf.95/l) enjoyed greatpopularity among a female readership, it also achieved great success inmale monasteries and with lay readers, facilitated by the reference toeither men or men and women throughout the treatise. All but one of thecopies discussed in the Bazire-Colledge edition retain the address to a"sister." (11) Even manuscripts owned by houses of malereligious kept these references, such as Oxford, Bodleian Library, MSRawlinson C57, which was given to the Sheen Carthusians, (12) andOxford, Bodleian Library, MS Bodley 505, which belonged to the LondonCharterhouse of the Salutation of St. Mary the Virgin (13)--although ithas to be taken into consideration that these manuscripts' knownprovenance does not necessarily have to coincide with their initialaudience. Not every readership approved of the female form of address,as customization in the copy of The Chastising in Cambridge, MagdaleneCollege, MS Pepys 2125 exemplifies. In this manuscript,"f(r)end" (14) replaced the original address, which wasscraped off. (15)

We may conclude from these manuscript witnesses that in many casesthe address to a religious sister at the beginning of The Chastisingcame to accommodate any of its readers' gender identities and thusfunctioned as a catchall term that was not perceived as inappropriateenough to warrant contemporary or later modification. At the same time,the female appellation was not treated as sacrosanct and could beadjusted to oblige the preferences of a different audience, as MS Pepys2125 demonstrates. Finally, as Joyce Bazire and Edmund Colledge pointout, the religious sister to whom The Chastising appeals may have beennothing but a literary invention allowing its author to frame the texton other devotional treatises that depicted the spiritual advisor'senlightening of his charge. (16) D's early readership does not seemto have perceived the gendered dedication as a hindrance to theirengagement with the text.

Four further pieces of internal evidence contribute to theillumination of the manuscript's target audience. A segment fromThe Form of Living quoted in Ogilvie-Thomson's edition reads"Men pat comen to be, praise pe, for bei see pi gret abstinence,and for bay se be enclosed" (14,ll.460-461), and Hereford,Cathedral Library, MS P. I. 9 (henceforth Hf), (17) whose close textualconnections to D are explored below, (18) renders this phrase:"[??]ei preisen be for [??]ei seen [??]e enclosed" (fol. 146r,1.34). (19) However, D records: "men and women parauenture preiseth[??]e for [??]ou hast y bounde [??]e to religion" (fol. 13r,1.323). This denotes an alteration of Margaret Kirkby's state oflivingshe was the epistle's original recipient, and her enclosurein the anchorhold of Richmond occasioned Rolle to compose The Form. (20)D's modification extends the intended audience to individuals inreligious orders eager to adhere to monastic laws and devote their livesto their faith, but not necessarily living in enclosure. This phrasingcould also suggest that the manuscript may have been intended to addressa vowess or a community of vowesses.

As discussed below, the major part of D's hortatory conclusionthat is appended to its first part is unique to the manuscript. In it,the narrative voice as the spiritual guide refers to the reader as"my leue frende" (fol. 14r, ll.346-347) and "derefrende" (fol. 14v, 1.358). Even though the latter appears in thepassage that agrees with the final part of The Form in Hf (D, fol. 14v,11.358-361; Hf, fol. 150v, 11.34-38; discussed below), "derefrende" is only recorded in D. These forms of address, embedded inpassages that were either explicitly written for the original audienceor copied from preexisting material directly to appeal to thereader's consciousness, may not shed light on the initialaudience's gender, but they do testify to the discourse ofspiritual friendship that D's scribe or compiler was trying toestablish. When he counsels that his audience not forget the lessonsimparted to them, he is reacting to the preceding collection ofcontemplative material's concern with introducing a beginner on thespiritual path to the contemplative life. The hortatory conclusion givesevidence that the arrangement of texts was presented in this form withthe aim of edifying a spiritual beginner who was not yet perceived asstable in his or her faith: "for diuerse occupacions and lettyngs[??]at [??]ou hast in [??]e worlde, [??]ou fyndest no gret sauoure[??]er in atte [??]e begynnyng" (fol. 14r, 11. 348-349; note thatthe reference to "[??]e worlde" may denote the secular worldor the present life in contrast to the next, and does as such notnecessarily narrow down the target audience beyond the already stated).

Neither do the "spouse" references in the hortatoryconclusion limit the original audience, because they could both alludeto female religious or to the neutral soul spiritually married to God orChrist. In the absence of further evidence that would reveal theirintended referential meaning, they remain gender-neutral expressions oflove, such as when the audience is cautioned to give up "uncleneloue" (fol. 14v, 1. 356) to be granted intimate sponsal bliss:"And panne schalt pou ben his spouse, dwellyng with hym in [??]eblisse of heuen endlich" (fol. 14r, 11. 356-357). Another referenceto spiritual wedlock establishes that the addressee has already chosenGod or Christ as a "spouse [??]at [??]ou hast take [??]e to"(fol. 14v, 1. 361), but future spiritual growth relies solely on the"grace of god," "[??]at is verrai loue and comfort of hisloueris," and may thus "kepe [??]e fro euyl, and bryng [??]eto [??]i spouse... [??]e wich is euerlastyng god" (fol. 14v,11.359-361).

A further noteworthy piece of internal evidence pertaining to theenvisioned readership is a variation in the Stimulus passage. While thecorresponding segment in the Peltier edition (21) appeals to the readersto direct their prayers to God the Father, Christ, the Virgin Mary,"et beati Francisci, et omnium sanctorum merita" (Pt. I, ch.2), D replaces any reference to Saint Francis with "be meritis ofalle holy seintes" (fol. 6v, 1.148). The significance of thisomission is, however, contestable, because, as mentioned above, thereare numerous omissions and several additions throughout the text thatare witnesses to the Stimulus's fluid nature of circulation. Hfdoes not contain a reference to Saint Francis either, even though it isof Franciscan origin. The omission of Saint Francis as an intercessor inD, therefore, does not exclude Franciscan houses from the intendedaudience altogether.

While the only available evidence for D's target audience iswritten into the text, the frame of reference is not defined enough toallow conclusions that would locate D in a specific religious house orin the hands of a particular individual, and it would be unwise tosuggest anything more definite at this point. The results of thedialectal analysis may invite further research, but they are notdiagnostically conclusive at the moment. What can be posited whenweighing the probabilities is that D was intended for circulation inreligious houses or for personal use of a religious not leading anenclosed life.

D's First Unit and Its Relationship to the Second Unit

The following is a list of the texts in D: (22)

Unit 1

[Text 1] fols. lr-lv: final section of IX Poyntes [IPMEP ll; (23)Jolliffe 1.26]; (24) D most probably contained a full copy of IXPoyntes, but the manuscript as it stands lacks the first two folios; thefull text is printed in Horstmann 375-377. (15) IXPoyntes (26)translates and expands passages from the Stimulus amoris maior, Part II,chapter l (27) (but will henceforth still be referred to as IXPoyntesand IXPoyntis in D and Hf respectively).

[Text 2] fols. lv-6v: excerpts from the Stimulus amoris maior PartII, chapter 8 and Part I, chapter l. (28)

[Text 3] fols. 6v-14r: Richard Rolle, The Form of Living, anexcerpt corresponding to 9-15,11. 267-486 in Ogilvie-Thomson'sedition. (29)

Unit 2

[Text 4]: D's second part contains The Chastising ofGod's Children (fols. 18r-102v), preceded on fols. 15r-17v by atable of chapters.

A single scribe (30) wrote D's two units in a hand of greatregularity, but the absence of a linking catchword raises the questionof whether they were intended to circulate together or whether they werej oined at a later date. An accidental combination seems unlikely forthe following reasons: they share the same master plan--the same script,scale of the writing area, size of ruling, and a regular collation. Theunits' mise-en-page displays a substantial degree of similarity,and, therefore, formal relations compensate for the missing catchword.The sequence of the units' production, however, cannot readily beestablished: they were most likely written over a relatively narrowperiod of time with the intention to complement one another. However,the lack of consecutive quiring could also indicate separate campaignsof copying.

On a textual level, the two units are related as well. Literaryanalysis (31) demonstrates that the segments forming D's first partwere combined to reinforce each other. The first unit's omission ofthe emotive and imaginary apexes of contemplative longing (expounded inthe excluded parts of the Stimulus and The Form's "Amorelangueo" section) established a shared argumentative foundationbetween the first part and the more selfdisciplined and austereChastising, creating fluid connections between texts whose argumentationwould otherwise at times run the risk of reversing each another. Thusthere is compelling reason to suggest that the two parts of themanuscript were always intended to circulate together in their time.

Quite apart from shared formal features, it is D's thematicconsistency that distinguishes the codex from a haphazard and morerandomly organized miscellany (32) and identifies it as a carefullyselected and purposefully coordinated collection of contemplativematerial. (33)

In terms of taxonomy, the first part of the codex thereforeclassifies as a compilation: a quarrying of texts from unacknowledgedauthors, with only minimal distinctions between them, which form a newtext and condition a different reading experience. (34) Thecategorization of the whole manuscript, however, is far from a simpleissue, especially because the missing folios at the beginning may havecomprised an index, a table of contents, or an attribution to authors:indeed, these missing pages may have given some information on theguiding principle behind D.

A Comparison of D's First Unit with the Text in Hereford,Cathedral Library, MS P. 1.9

D's first part is intimately connected to the secondmanuscript bound into Hf. The Linguistic Atlas of Late Medieval English(LALME) locates the latter's dialect to Worcestershire, (35) and itis written in Anglicana formata, in contrast to D's southeastMidlands dialect and Textura rotunda script.

Hf was owned by the Franciscan brethren of Oxford and has variouslybeen dated to the second half of the fourteenth (36) or to the fifteenthcentury. (37) It is the only other known manuscript that contains thesame texts as D's first unit, albeit in a different ordinatio, andwith complete copies of The Form and IXPoyntis where D has extracts.

The following fist summarizes the contents of Hf:

[Text 1] fols. 141r-150v: The Form of Living, complete copy.[Text 2] fols. 150v-151v: IXPoyntis, complete copy.[Text 3] fols. 151v-153r: excerpts from the Stimulus amoris maiorPart II, chapter 8 and Part I, chapter 1.

Previous scholarship maintained that Hf s as yet unassignedexcerpts on folios 151vto 153r were a single treatise unique to themanuscript. (38) These passages, however, were actually quarried fromthe Stimulus amoris, a highly influential guide to the contemplativelife. (39)

An important witness to D's textual transmission history, Hfmay be the older manuscript according to paleographical analysis, butcannot have been D's direct source. Although much of the evidence(including the temporal sequence, Hf s inclusion of complete texts whereD has extracts or acephalous texts, and the fact that the samecombination of texts is found in both manuscripts and nowhere else) seemto suggest that Hf is D's direct ancestor, the pattern of variants(40) reveals a more complicated history of transmission.

The most significant evidence that irrevocably refutes thepossibility of D directly deriving from Hf is found in D'sIXPoyntes, which in addition to Hf is also recorded in complete copiesin British Library, MS Harley 1706 (henceforth Har) (41) and Cambridge,Trinity College, MS B. 15.39 (henceforth Tr). (42) D's IXPoyntescontains a passage that Hf omits but Har and Tr retain (fol. 153r,col.1,1.14-col. 2,1.6, and fol. 171v,ll. 12-15, respectively):

For godis loue take hede. [??]if [??]ou art aschamid for to do a dedlysynne be fore thyn euencn'sten, [??]e wich is frele and sinful as[??]ou art and may no[??]t greue but [??]i bodi, moche more scholdest[??]ou be agast to synne bi fore thi god [??]at neuere trespased andschal be [??]i domesman at [??]e dai of dome. (fol. lr, 11.4-7) (43)

The analysis of the variants reveals neither Har nor Tr to bedirect derivatives of D or Hf, and indicates that the opposite isunlikely too. (44) Har and Tr are closer to each other than to thelatter two manuscripts. For example, they omit "and how he hathtaken thi kynde and suffred for thi loue despites deth," which D(fol. lr, 11.11-12) and Hf (fol. 152v, 11.21-22-minor variations) record(see Appendix B). Where D reads "he lieth on the auter attemasse" (fol. lv, 1.19, also present in Hf, fol. 152v, 11.29-30),Har's renderingis "[??]ou seeste [??]e holy sacramente ofCrystys body at [??]e masse or on [??]e auter" (fol. 154r,col.1,1.17-col.2,l. l), and Tr's version is "[??]ou seest [??]eholy sacrament of cristis bodi at masse or on [??]e autir" (fol.171v, 11.26-27). On the basis of these data, the following hypothesescan be proposed:

1. There is no direct lineage from Hf to D.

2. The manuscripts were copied from a close ancestor or ancestors,no longer extant.

3. D and Hf must be cognate copies. They are horizontally relatedat some degree.

4. There must also have been separate and more complicated strandsof transmission for IXPoyntes, which strongly indicates the existence ofmore than the four surviving copies.

While D and Hf are undoubtedly related at some remove, D'serroneous readings in the form of omissions of letters (and confusion ofletters with ascenders), words, and phrases result in severaldeficiencies in the first part (see Appendix A), in contrast with Hf smore accurate text, most of whose very few errors have been corrected.Examples of these patterns are when D reads "whom" (fol. 6r,1. 132) instead of "wisdom" (Hf, fol. 153r, 1. 18), or when Drecords "and pe mende for hym euermore he dwellyng fresch in myherte" (fol. 6v, 1.156) instead of Hf s "and be munde of hameuer be dwelling freschliche in myn herte" (fol. 153r, ll.43-44).Moreover, D breaks off the following sentence "And forbermore hitschal quike [??]i saule [??]e more able to parfeccion and trauail andmake pe holde litel be [??]i self, and in thynkyng worchyng schal make[??]e parfit in [??]e loue of (fol. 9r, 11.84-87; Hf lets it end with"god" (fol. 152v, 1.13). Erroneous readings in Hf are few, andthe scribe supplied missing letters, short words (such as [??]at,[??]if, in, or [??]e), and phrases from above the line or in themanuscript's margin (e.g., "[??]if," fol. 144r, 1.11,"sorewe," fol. 145v, 1. 7, or "mete and drinke,"fol. 146r, 1. 15).

Moreover, Hf s Stimulus extract is closer to the Latin because itcontains material that D omits, as discussed below. Further points atwhich the two manuscripts diverge are the transposition of phrases anddoublets, the addition of material in both manuscripts (and additions inD not attested elsewhere), the substitution of some items in TheForm's lists, and D's occasional use of the singular ininstances where Hf uses plural variants. The sum of these featuresleaves no doubt as to the derivative character of the texts assembled inD, and the fact that most of these idiolectal scribal features inD's first unit are similar to those found in the second unitstrongly suggests that they were introduced by the scribe at the time ofcopying. The somewhat less convincing counterhypothesis one couldentertain would be that in addition to IX Poyntes, the Stimulusextracts, and The Form, D's lost exemplar could also have containedThe Chastising, whereby D's scribe copied his exemplar somewhatfaithfully.

In addition to issues of scribal competence, D invites questions ofintention and accident. Uncorrected errors constitute only one aspect ofits first unit, and its pertinently inserted additions, which are notfound in Hf, could have been introduced as editorial playing on itsancestor at the time of copying--penned by the scribe or compiler orborrowed from other sources--or may have already existed in the parentmanuscript.

In terms of ordinatio, the placement of red paraphs, red-slashedcapitals, and two-line unflourished lombards of the same color thatdivide D's first unit into parts does not correspond in mostinstances to Hf s division of the text through its program ofdecoration. In the segment in Hf corresponding to D's text, thedecoration consists of blue initials with red flourishings and paraphsalternating in red and blue. D's two-line red lombards are the onlyfeatures of design that indicate the beginnings of the segments thatwere quarried from different sources (and various parts of theStimulus). Conversely, Hf refers to the (supposed) authors at thebeginning of the texts ascribed to them: The Form is glossed as"informacio sancti ricardi de hampull scripta margarete incluse dehampull" (fol. 141r), (45) and an inscription next to a maniculethat signals the beginning of IXPoyntis announces: "hie incipitdoctrina ffratris henrici Chambernoun magistri in uiamperfeccionis" (fol. 150v). Henry Chambernoun was a Franciscan,"associated with Oxford in 1382"; (46) six of his sermons areextant in other manuscripts. (47) Reflecting upon the addition ofreferences to Chambernoun (as evidence for his alleged authorship) inthe context of other manuscripts, Wenzel suggests that he was "awell-known preacher whose name became easily attached to sermons ofdifferent origin." (48) The fact that the Stimulus was a Franciscantext may have caused the attribution to Chambernoun. Little more thanthis speculative hypothesis can be proposed as to why Hf ascribed IXPoyntis to him.

Applying Ralph Hanna's suggestion that the inscriptionmentioning Chambernoun in Hf s second part is possibly in the same handas a table of St. Francis's miracles on folio 140v, the last folioof the first part, (49) all indications are that the pseudo-BonaventuranMeditatio vitae Christi on folios lr to 93r and Bonaventura's Vitaet miracula Francisci (legenda maior) on folios 93v to 140v (S0) wereread alongside Hf s complete copy of The Form (including the "Amorelangueo" passage), IXPoyntis, and the Stimulus excerpts from thetime of annotation.

There remains the possibility that the wanting pages at D'sbeginning contained a reference to authors and sources too, or offered arationale for the selection and arrangement of the material. As the onlyformal divisions in D's first unit, the two-line red lombards markthe beginning of the sections that originated from various source texts,and the constituent parts were thus combined to form a single text whosecomposite origins were obscured. The need to introduce and distinguishthe segments could have diminished if the manuscript were intended forcirculation within a restricted milieu that would have been able tooffer oral instruction as to the codex's perusal (see"D's Envisioned Audience" above). (51)

Marginal finding aids and annotations in English and Latin appearas structuring and mnemonic devices in Hf, as do the numbers added nextto The Form's comprehensive lists to promote memorization of theirvarious items (see Appendix B). Folio 145r, for example, contains thefollowing marginal annotations that correspond to The Form'sstructure: "synnes of moup" (1.8) "synnes of dede"(1.22), and "synnes of omission" (1.37). These finding aidsdisplay an eagerness to render the text more accessible, facilitatequick reference, and help readers to learn its contents by rote.Annotations of this kind can also be read as the report of thetext's close analysis and projected readerly engagement, wherebythe internalization of the sins and their parent categories qualifiesthe readers to discern their transgressions.

In its present state, there is no evidence that D's first unitwas furnished with annotations comparable to those in Hf, but it ispossible that they were cut off when the pages were trimmed from theiroriginal size. The first part of D as it now stands contains a nota onfolio 3r and two short marginal annotations that insert missing text onfolio lOr, one of which is partially cut off (see Appendix A, note 10,and "Signposting, Corrections and Annotations in D"), and alater annotation on folio 14v (see "Description of Oxford, BodleianLibrary, MS Don. e. 247").

In what follows below, the individual segments that make upD's first unit are discussed in further depth, exploring thesignificance of its variations when compared to other witnesses.

The IX Poyntes Segment

The Middle English text known as IXPoyntes is actually a reworkingof selected passages from Part II, chapter 1 of the Stimulus amoris (Allreferences to the Stimulus in the IXPoyntes segment refer to Part II,chapter 1). IX Poyntes expands on the Latin extracts, and instead of theLatin third-person present subjunctive employs a second-person presentindicative. Coupled with the addition of second-person personal andpossessive pronouns (so highly recurrent that they will not beenumerated in the list below), this alteration integrates the readermore fully into the text and heightens the text's subjectiveimmediacy.

As it now stands, D opens halfway through the eighth of the ninepoints with an elaboration on the Stimulus that is also attested, withminor modifications, in Hf, Har, and Tr (fol. 151v, 11. 13-16; fol.153v, col. 1,11.4-14, and fol. 171v, ll. 9-12 respectively):

For godisseruant scholde neuer more thenke, ne speke, ne do bote as hewolde in be presence of his lorde. For certenli al pat pou spekest anddost god seye as ueralich as bou wer in his presence [??]er oure ladisit in heue[n]. (fol. lr, 11. 1-4).Cf. The Stimulus: Deum tamen semper actu in corde habeat, et nihilaliud quam honorem suum in omnibus actualiter, seu habitualiterintendat: ac ad hoc praecipue nitatur, ut sic semper praesentem Deumintelligat, ac si ipsum qui ubique est praesens in sua videretsubstantia et essentia.

D elaborates on the Stimulus's "actu,""actualiter," and "habitualiter" with"thenke," "speke," and "do," and alsointroduces the image of the Virgin.

This is followed by the passage "For godis loue," whichin addition to D and the Stimulus is attested only in Har and Tr (quotedin full on p. 146). Intriguingly, D reinterprets the Stimulus's"eum [Deum] timeat, et revereatur, et immenso amore in ipsumferatur," which is an exhortation to relate to God with acombination of reverent dread and boundless love, as "For godisloue take hede," and in the ensuing lines recasts love and holydread as profound terror and shame to be experienced if sinning againstthe fellow faithful, but, most significantly, against God--to whom thereader will be held accountable on Judgement Day (fol. lr, 11.4-7).

IXPoyntes's ninth point translates the Stimulus's tenth,with the following pertinent variations and additions:

fol. 1r, ll. 7-8: D's "in cas [??]at [??]ou my[??]t cometo [??]e parfeccion of [??]is poyntes" rewrites the Stimulus's"ut si praedicta assequi potest"; Hf speaks of perfection aswell (fol. 151v, 11.16-17).

fol. 1r, ll. 8-10: D expands on the Stimulus's "essemagna Dei beneficia recognoscat" with another reference toperfection that is achieved through the donum gratia gratis data:"[??]ou knowlech [??]at hit is a grete grace of godis goudnesse[??]at he wil woch saue to [??]eue [??]e so muche grace ofparfeccion"; also recorded, with minor modifications, in Hf(fol.151v,1. 18).

fol. 1r, 1.10: D's "oft be thenke [??]e" (cf. Hf,fol. 151v, 1. 19) exhorts the reader to call to mind divine gracerepeatedly, while the Stimulus's "secundum quod potestreminisci" is more vague.

fol. 1 r, 11.10-11: Where the Stimulus reads "quod sua eumvoluit imagine insigniri," D gives weight to God's love forthe soul by rendering "voluit" as "worschiped[??]isoule": "how [he] hathworschi [??]edpisoule beenpreyntyng of his owene ymage"; cf. Hf (fol. 151v, 11.20-21).

fol. lr, 1. 12: Compared to the Stimulus's "et se proipso morti tradere," D's "suffred for thi loue despitesdeth" again appends a reference to love and further emphasizesChrist's sacrifice by adding "despites"; Hf speaks of"despitous de[??]" (fol. 151v, 1.22).

fol. lr, 1. 13: D's "wil be [??]i ioie and thi blisse inan o[??]er lif' emphasizes future gifts, whereas the Latin modelreferences Christ's selfsacrifice: "[voluit] in gloria inpraemium tribuere semetipsum"; Hf expands on the Latin (fol. 151v,1. 23).

fols. lr-lv, 11. 14-15: "[??]at [??]ou my[??]t not [MS:"now," see discussion below] sen hem in his godhed whiles[??]ou art in [??]is worlde" rewrites the Stimulus's "Etquia nondum assecutus est eum in praemium" to ensure consistencywith the arguments made before about divine grace bestowed freely; Hfadvances the same argument in another phrasing (fol. 151v, 11. 24-25).

fol. lv, 1.15: D adds "hongyng for [??]e" to theStimulus's "aspiciat eum in patibulo," which identifiesthe reader as the cause for Christ's agony; Hf reads "hongingin [??]e cros" (fol. 151v, 11. 25-26).

fol. lv, 11. 16-21: D's "haue sorwe and conpassion"expands on the Stimulus's "compatiatur," and severallines down another doubling, "fede me and fulfille me -with[??]e," further develops the Stimulus's "ita me de tesatiare dignare" (Hf, fol. 151v, 11.26-32).

fol. lv, 11.16-17: D's appeal to feel "his [Cristes]wondes and his paynes in [??]i bodi" (cf. Hf, fol. 15 lv, 1. 27)centers on physical pain where the Stimulus privileges spiritual agonyas a result of compassion: "omnia ejus vulnera in suo cordesustineret."

fol. lv, 11.17-18: D references the sinner's individualinterior sorrow- "be inward sori [??]at [??]ou mi[??]t not fele in[??]e be [??]e paynes [??]at he suffred for [??]e, synful wrecche"(cf. Hf, fol. 15 lv, 11. 27-29-with minor variations), but the Stimulusposits the reader's distress as a result of seeing his fellowsbeing deprived of God's grace: "praecipue dolere debet, quodtot videt frustrari beneficio tam immense."

fol. lv, 1. 18: D prepends "[??]e thoghtes ofte haue inmynde" to "Cernat eum denique," thereby endorsingcontinual reaccessing of the exhortations to come; so does Hf (fol. 15lv, 1. 29).

fol. lv, 1.19: D adds "arte masse" to the Stimulus's"Cernat eum denique in altari exhibitum"; so does Hf (fol. 15lv, 1. 30).

fol. 1v, 1. 19: D streamlines "in ipso toto affectu delectatusclamet, et cheat" as "say to hym in this manere"; cf. Hf(fol. 151v, 1. 30).

fol. lv, 1.20: to the Stimulus's "qui es panisvitae" D appends "pat cometh out of heuene"; see Hf (fol.15 lv, 1.31).

fol. lv, 1.22: D adds "with [??]i bloude and of thi loue"to the Stimulus's "ita me de te inebriare digneris"; seeHf (fol. 151v, 1.33).

fol. lv, 11.22-24: The final lines of D's IXPoyntes segmentcondense its message: "Lorde hold so faste my soule and my loue to[??]e [??]at for non o[??]ere loue ne for synne ne be neuere departidfro me"--cf. the Stimulus's "Tene, Domine, mentem meam,ne interveniente umbra terrae."

Fittingly, the substitution of "soule and my loue" forthe Stimulus's "mentem" as well as the concrete menace ofa rivaling love and spiritually destructive sins--which are the ultimatefailure to love-replace the poetically threatening (but vague)"umbra terrae"; see Hf (fol. 151v, 11.33-35).

Leading right into beatific-vision territory, what can beclassified as one of the most blatant errors in D's first unitoccurs on folios lr-lv (11.14-15 in Appendix A): "And for encheison[??]at [??]ou my[??]t now sen hem in his godhed whiles [??]ou art in bisworlde." Both Har and Tr record "no" instead of"now," and Hf negates the possibility of direct perception ofGod in this life too (fol. 154r, col. 1,1. 3; fol. 171v, 1. 21; and fol.151v, 1. 24 respectively; cf. the Stimulus: "nondum," Part II,chapter l). Such a grave mistake in D was no doubt caused by an innocentmemorial slip, but it is an exemplary case for the first unit in that itis not only evidence of haste in production but also illustrative of alack of recension. Much like the occasional confusion of s/1 and h/brespectively, such an obvious error betrays the fact that there was alack of time, care, or expertise in production, since otherwise thesemisspellings could have been spotted easily and corrected or would nothave occurred in the first place. Some further conspicuous errors inD's first part include "For encheson [??]at loue may alle dowith any mysdo" (fol. lv, 11. 25-26, which Hf renders as"withoute," fol. 151v, 1. 36) or "[??]if [??]ou loue manymetys [??]at men vsen... [??]ou dost wel" (fol. 12v, 1.308; Hfreads "leue" instead of "loue," fol. 146r, 1.17).D's "Alias [??]e folly of men [??]at chesep for to dwel in peworde, in [??]e flesch, and in [??]e places [??]at ben vnclene"(fol. 6r, 11.135-136) is recorded as "in [??]e world" in Hf(fol. 153r, 1.22). Apart from two further problematic renderings onfolio 4v (1.101) and fol 12r (1. 300), other errors in D's firstpart are restricted to grammar and spelling and stay clear of doctrinalcontroversies.

The Stimulus amoris Segment

Falk Eisermann's comprehensive study of the Stimulus draws onClaire Kirchberger's and Ian Doyle's previous scholarship toelucidate the ways in which restructuring, extraction, abridgement,addition of further material, and vernacular translations shaped theStimulus in fourteenth- and fifteenthcentury England. (52) The extractsin D do not derive from The Prickynge of Love, a Middle Englishtranslation of the Stimulus, but from an independent translation ofextracts from the Stimulus amoris maior's Part II, chapter 8 andPart I, chapter 1. Some pertinent longer discrepancies between D and Hfinclude:

fol. 2r, 1. 32: Where D gives "Loue makeb man, for he makethfrende and be seruant child," Hf presents the following additionafter D's "man": "god and god man. [??]e hei[??]esthe maki[??] lowist and [??]e lowest hei[??]est" (fol. 151v, 1.43-fol. 152r, 1. l). Omitted in D, Hfs fines are a direct translation ofthe Stimulus's "Deum facit hominem, et hominem facit Deum...et imum excelsum constituit" (Pt, II, ch. 8).

fol. 4r, 11. 86-87: D's "in thynkyng worchyng schal make[??]e parfit in pe loue of rewrites "affectus tuos tarn incogitatione, quam in locutione, ac etiam operatione regulabit" (Pt.I, ch. l). Thus, whereas the Stimulus speaks of regulating the affectus,D posits the perfection of love as the final goal. Hf s reading is againcloser to the Latin. It adds "and spekynge and" after"benkinge" (fol. 152v, 11. 12-13).

fol. 5r, 11.114-116: D appends "and speke" to a list ofactivities performed when in communion with God: "[??]ere I wilreste, and slepe, and ete, and drinke, rede, and synge, and praye, andalle my nedes tret and speke." "And speke" is probably aslip that occurred by jumping ahead to the next sentence, which beginswith "[??]ere I schal speke" (1. 116). Compare the Latin"ubi volo quiescere, dormire, videre, bibere, comedere, legere,orare, et omnia mea negotia pertractare. Ibi loquar," whichcontains a reference to seeing but omits singing (Pt. I, ch. l). Notealso the change from "negotia" (matters, troubles) to"nedes," which is more in tune with the series of precedinginfinitives. Hf alters the Latin text by adding "and speke"and "singe," while omitting "videre," too (see fol.152v, 11. 44-45), which means that these alterations must have beenpresent in D and Hf s exemplar(s).

fol. 5r, 1.116: D modifies the Stimulus's reference tospeaking to Christ's heart ("Ibi loquar ad cor ejus," Pt.I, ch. l) as the narrative voice speaking "with swete hert";Hf, on the other hand, stays faithful to the Latin (fol. 152v,l. 45).

fol. 5v, 11. 121-122: It is a short omission, but when D fails torecord "non"/"nou[??]ht," Hf is again closer to theLatin: while the text in D reads "onlich I wil apeere I crucifiedwith hir son," Hf gives it as "nou[??]ht onli I wolapeer" (fol. 153r, 11. 5-6); cf. the Stimulus's: "Et nonsolum apparebo" (Pt. I, ch. l).

fol. 5v, 1. 122: D's, "I wil go to chirche" is moreremoved from the Stimulus's "ad praesepe [crib] rediens"(Pt. I, ch. l) than Hfs "I wol gon to [??]e crache" (fol.153r, 1. 6).

Additional examples of how D's text is further detached fromthe Latin Stimulus than Hf: where the Stimulus reads: "passioignominiosa glorificat," Hf retains "[??]e passion schamefulmakep vs gloriouse" (fol. 152v, 11. 18-19), whereas D stops after"passion" (fol. 4v, 1. 92). The Stimulus's "et mihifaciam unam dulcissimam potionem" is present in Hf s "and makeme a noble drinke" (fol. 153r, 1. 8) but not in D (f. 5v, 1.124;references to the Stimulus are to Pt. I, ch. l).

There is a curious case of translation in D and Hf where the twomanuscripts reference different parts of the Stimulus, which is anotherindication that D cannot derive from Hf directly: D rephrases theStimulus's "tamen hoc lenius, suavius, delectabilius, seuopportunius" as "[??]e wiche were more bettre and moredelettable" (fol. 3v, 1. 78), whereas Hf records: "albehit[??]at [??]is wer li[??]ter and esier"; see Hf (fol. 152v, 11.3-4).

Some longer additions and alterations in D when compared to theStimulus include:

fols. lv-2r, 11. 25-29: D adds:

For encheson [??]at loue may alle do with any mysdo, and loue is [??]erote of parfeccion of alle vertues, and [??]e more [??]ou hast of godloue, [??]e betre [??]ou art, and [??]e more liche to god, and nere toblisse. For all be mesure of goud loue schalle [??]eue [??]e mesure ofblisse in heuen, and [??]ere fore [??]er is non bettre to man o[??]erwoman [??]an for to studie how he may in god loue.

Also found in Hf (fol. 15 lv, 11.36-41), with the addition of"and fruit and [??]e" after "rote." (The followingreferences to the Stimulus pertain to Pt. II, ch. 8 until indicatedotherwise.)

fol. 2r, 1. 33: An addition in D reads: "and [??]e soriioious"; also attested in Hf(fol. 152r,ll. 2-3).

fol. 2r, 11. 35-36: D adds: "As witnesseth [??]e deuout saulein [??]e boke of loue spekyng to god in [??]is manere"; alsoattested in Hf (fol. 152r, 11. 3-4). Where the Stimulus in the followinggives "anima mea liquefacta est, etc," D and Hf supply thefull quotation from the Song of Songs: "An[y] saule meltib atte[??]e speche of hym [??]at I loue" (D, fol. 2r, 1.36; Hf, fol.152r, 1. 5).

fol. 2r, 1.38: D's "how am y so muche loued of[??]e" (see also Hf, fol. 152r, 1.7) modifies the Stimulus's"tibi tantae charitatis vinculo colligatus" and therebyemphasizes the narrative voice's amazement caused by the fortunatebestowal of divine love.

fols. 2v-2r, 1. 39: "O brennyng of trewe loue, moche is [??]imi[??]th," also recorded in Hf (fol. 152r, 1.8), alters theStimulus's "O ardor amoris, qui intima mentis in Deuminfundis," again prioritizing affective wonder.

fol. 2v, 11. 40-41: "O goud loue, what may I [??]eue the[??]at [??]ou woldest euere more dwelle with me?" (see also Hf,fol. 152r, 11. 10-11) renders the Stimulus's "O amor, quidtibi tribuam, qui me fecisti divinum?" with a stress on theprocess- and future-oriented character of the bond with divine love.

fol. 2v, 11.41-42: D's "Ffor wondurful is [??]i uertu[??]at turnest me in to god and god in to me," also found in Hf(fol. 152r, 11. 11-12), appends five words to the Stimulus's"Inenarrabilis est virtus tua, o amor, qui lutum in Deumtransfiguras!" The change from "lutum" [dirt, mud] to"me" makes the addition possible and emphasizes the reciprocalnature of love,

fol. 2v, 11.43-48: D adds:

Certis no thyng. [??]ou bindest god to [??]e piler. [??]ou puttest[??]e croune of thorne vp on his hede. [??]ou heng hym opon [??]e croisand nailedest hym [??]er to. [??]ou opinidest his blissed hert with[??]e scharpe spere, out of [??]e wich com water and bloude inremission of mannys trespas. Wasch wel thi saule in [??]at bathe and[??]anne schalt [??]ou haue with [??]e vertu of brennyng loue.

This is not attested in Hf, nor in the Stimulus, though Hf retains"Certis noping" (fol. 152r,l. 13.)

folio 2v, 1. 51: D adds: "For at a louelich worde of [??]e mysaule is molt in me" to the Stimulus; also attested in Hf (fol.152r, 11. 15-16).

folios 2v-3r, 11. 53-62: A longer extract is added in D that urgesthe reader to cultivate the fire of love by thinking about the Passionof Christ, divine love, and human malice:

Certes no tonge may telle, and bere fore, [??]if [??]ou wilt beparfite, lerne for [??]e quike to feer in thyn herte, and ther forethou schalt vnderstonde [??]at aman [??]at is colde becomyth hoot indiuers maneris: be clothyng of many clothis, be goyng to [??]e fier, betrauaillyng of body, hoot spices, and strong drynke. So gostlich,[??]if [??]ou wilt wer hoot in [??]e loue of god, do on many clothes ofvertu, for vertu is clothes to mannys saule. Ho so lakkep o vertu, hissaule is naked in o partie, and [??]er fore [??]if [??]ou wilt be hoot,alle a boute clothe thi saule with many vertues, so [??]at non lakke to[??]e. And sit ofte bi [??]e brennyng fier of loue [??]at crist aquekedin his brennynge and betir passion, and thenke ofte on [??]e loue ofgod and charite toward man, and of blyndnesse and [??]e malice of mantoward god.

Also attested in Hf (fol. 152r, 11. 18-29). This addition seems tohave been inspired by two passages in D's Stimulus segment on folio4v: "he naked eloped vs with vertues" (1.93; see also Hf, fol.152v, 1.20), which loosely translates the Stimulus's "nudensexistens virtutum vestimentis ornat" (Pt. I, ch. l) and "Hedesireth to hange naked on [??]e croce with his lorde, and in [??]at heis clothed with clothyng of vertues" (11. 102-103; see also Hf,fol. 152v, 11. 30-31), which rephrases "Vult secum in ligno sinevestimentis frigescere; et nimio amoris ardore accenditur"(quotations from the Stimulus henceforth refer to Pt. I, ch. l).

folio 3v, 11. 67-69: "What wodnesse is in [??]at man [??]atmake[??] hym cloose his herte to god, and openeth hit to wrecchidnesse,likyng to [??]e deuille, to [??]e worlde, and to [??]e flesch" (cf.Hf, fol. 152r, 11. 33-36) adds to the Stimulus's "Quae vesaniaanimae, quod hoc negligit et potius vult stercoribus adhaerere," byexpounding "vesania" (madness, frenzy) and"stercoribus" (filth, manure) and paraphrasing the latter.

folio 3v, 1.73: D's "euere haue his saule to god bi loueand contemplacion" is a rendering of the Stimulus's "etsemper se exigat ad divina" that localizes the place of human lovein the soul and elucidates the methods of communion with the divine; Hfrecords this phrase with minor modifications (fol. 152r, 11. 38-39).

folios 3v-4r, 1.79: DVCertes bey a saule were worse panne abest" (see also Hf, fol. 152v, 11.4-5) modifies the Stimulus's"Certe si anima non esset pejor omni animali" and thus paintsthe human soul in a more negative light. D's sentence continues inmuch the same tone: "[??]it he scholde loue god to whom he isliche, for eche thyng loue[??] kendlich [??]at is liche to hym"(fol. 4r, 11. 79-80; cf. Hf, fol. 152v, 11. 5-6) and slightly reworksthe Stimulus's "Deum, cui similis est, deberet super omniadiligere." In D and Hf s version, the soul is ennobled throughdivine love and love that it directs towards the divine.

folio 4r, 1. 82: D adds "and payned wrt/ioute mesuregreuouslich"; cf. Hf(fol. 152v,l. 8).

folio 4r, 11. 83-84: D records "for [??]e meditacion ofcristes passion rerith manys saule and his mende to heuene, and techipwhat he schal do, and he schal [??]enke, and speke" (see also Hf,fol. 152v, 11. 9-11), adding "saule and his mende to heuene"and substituting "speke" for the Stimulus's"sciendum et sentiendum."

folio 4r, 1.85: D's "quike [??]i saule [??]e more able toparfeccion and trauail," also given, with variations, in Hf (fol.152v, 11. 11-12), renders the Stimulus's "te demum ad arduainflammabit" with an emphasis on the soul as the place from whichlove springs and pertinently paraphrases "ardua" as"parfeccion and trauail."

folio 4r, 11.85-86: "make pe holde litel be [??]i self (seeHf, fol. 152v, 1.12) is a shortening of the Stimulus's "tevilificari, et contemni, et affligi faciet" that lessens the demandto debase onself.

folio 4r, 11. 89-90: D adds: "sorwe [??]at glade[??]";also found in Hf (fol. 152v, 1.16).

folio 4r, 1. 90: As a fine example of the affective heighteningthat the translation of the Stimulus effects, D's "[??]eopenynge of his syde heuyth oure herte to his hert" (cf. Hf, fol.152v, 1.16) adds possessive pronouns to "apertio lateris cor cordiconjugat."

folios 4r-4v, 1.92: D adds "[??]e well dried more welleth[??]e passion"; also found in Hf (fol. 152v, 1.18).

folio 4v, 1.95: D adds "to hym. Be [??]e way of loue and goudewerkes and"; also recorded in Hf (fol. 152v, 11.22-23).

folio 4v, 11. 95-96: D's "he enspireth gostli lif in tooure soule" (cf. Hf, fol. 152v, 11. 22-23) emphasizes the soul yetanother time when compared to the Stimulus's "emittensspiritum vitam inspirat."

folio 4v, 11. 97-98: After "O passion meruaillous [??]atmakest hym [??]at thenky[??] oft on [??]e no[??]t onlich euen withangeles," which corresponds to the Stimulus, D adds "bot passeangeles," thereby augmenting the meditant's kinetic energy;see also Hf (fol. 152v, 1. 25).

folio 4v, 11. lOOff.: A string of alterations and additionsaccentuates Christ as the reader's envisioned target of love: Dreads "with his lorde" (1. 100) instead of the Stimulus's"secum," adds "as his lorde" (1.101), appends theadjective "endless" to the phrase "ioie endless" (l.102), adds "with his lorde" (1.103), "with crist"(11.103-104), "and crist" (1.104); these insertions are alsofound with minor variations in Hf (fol. 152v,U. 27-31).

folio 4v, 1.103: D's "he is clothed with clothyng ofvertues" (see Hf, fol. 152v, 1.31) refers to clothing imagery,where the Stimulus reads "et nimio amoris ardore ascenditur."This potent change reflects the first part of the sentence, whichillustrates the desire of the individual who meditates on Christ'sPassion to "hange naked" (1.102; see also Hf, 1.30) with him,where the Stimulus records "frigescere" instead. Moreover,this alteration provides a link to D's previous addition, whichcompares virtues to clothing for the faithfuls' souls (fols. 2v-3r,11.53-62, quoted above).

folio 5r, 11.106-107: D adds "The sorwe of cristes in manother woman torneth hym to gladnesse and be payne to ese"; alsofound with slight alterations in Hf (fol. 152v, 11.34-35).

folio 5r, 1. 108: An addition in D reads "and suffre [??]at hesuffred"; see also Hf (fol. 152v, 11.36-37).

folio 5r, 1.109: D adds "and clippeth [MS: clipprth] as hisowene brother and childe"; Hf adds these lines, too (fol. 152v, 11.37-38).

folio 5r, 1.111: D's text excises reference to "Joseph abArimathia" and privileges the relationship between the narrativevoice and Christ: "[??]anne mi[??]tlhauedeydwithhym"; see alsoHf (fol. 152v, 11.40-41).

folio 5r, 1. 113: D adds "and entre in to hym"; cf. Hf(fol. 152v, 1.42).

folio 5r, 1. 114: to better anchor the affective stirrings it triesto elicit, D's text alters the Stimulus's reference toChrist's side ("latere") and substitutes "hert"instead; Hf adapts the Stimulus in the same way (fol. 152v,l. 43).

folio 5r, 1. 115: D's list of activities performed whencontemplating Christ's Passion transposes two items and adds thereference to singing: "reste, and slepe, and ete, and drinke, rede,and synge, and praye." The Stimulus reads: "quiescere,dormire, videre, bibere, comedere, legere, orare; see also Hf (fol.152v, 1.44).

folio 5r, 11. 116-117: D represents a more pragmatic viewpoint whenit reads "alle [??]at me nedi[??]" (cf. also Hf, fol. 153r,1.1) instead of the Stimulus's "quod voluero." Dfurthermore appends "alone" to the end of the sentence, whichnow reads "y schal purchace of hym alone"; see Hf(fol. 153r,l.l).

folios 5r-5v, 11. 117-118: D adds "[??]er may non enemy megreue ne disese, and [??]er fore wil I abide and dwelle for euermore" to the Stimulus. This is an addition also found in Hf (fol.153r, 11.1-2).

folio 5v, 1.123: D adds "meke and innocent as a lombe,"as does Hf (fol. 153r,1.7).

folio 6r, 1. 130: "and in frut" is another addition tothe Stimulus that D shares with Hf (fol. 153r,l. 16).

folio 6r, 11.135-136: "Alias be folly of men [??]at cheseb forto dwel in [??]e wor[l]de, in [??]e flesch, and in be [??]laces [??]atben vnclene, wrecchid, and sinful" is a less poetic but moretheologically precise paraphrase of "O stulti et tardi corde, quiad possidendum aliquod vanum per incerta foramina introitis"; thiscorresponds to Hf (fol. 153r, 11. 21-23).

folio 6r, 1. 138: D's addition "hauyngge inwardlich mendebere on" to the text of the Stimulus is not attested in Hf (fol.153r, 1.25). folios 6r-6v, 11.142-145: D adds the following passage tothe Stimulus:

Be holde [??]e wondes of hym [??]at hangyth, [??]e bloude of [??]einnocent, [??]e pris of [??]e diggere. His hed he hath enclined [??]efor to kysse, his armes he hath spred [??]e for to clippe, his syde heopened [??]e for to loue, and alle [??]is for to drawe mannys saule forto loue hym.

Also attested in Hf, though instead of the last part of the secondsentence in D (from "and alle" to "hym"), Hfrecords: "so [??]at he al be fichid faste in [??]in herte [??]atfor [??]e was nayled to [??]e cros" (fol. 153r, 1. 31).

folio 6v, 1. 146: D adds "And for to come to bi desire"to the Stimulus's text; also found in Hf (fol. 153r, 1. 32).

folio 6v, 11. 149-150: the phrase "myn hert be euermorebrennyng in [??]e fuer of loue" adds "myn hert" to theStimulus and modifies "tuo amore semper sitiam," presumably tofollow the recurrent previous references to the conceptualization andexperience of divine love as fire and burning; this quote is alsoattested in Hf (fol. 153r, 11. 36-37).

folio 6v, 1. 150: D adds "in alle [??]yng and alle my workesdesire [??]i worschippe" to the Stimulus; see also Hf (fol. 153r,11. 37-38).

folio 6v, 11. 152-153: Another addition in D is "In nothyngbemy ioie bot in [??]e and for [??]e, and with alle myn herte I beseche[??]e"; see also Hf(fol. 153r,ll. 39-50).

folio 6v, 11. 153-156: The following passage was added to theStimulus: "ffor [??]e wich [??]e sonne suffred painful deth anddespitous. Louelich lorde and spouse ihesu crist, write in myn hert so[??]at I mowe rede [??]i loue towar[d] me and [??]i sorwe for me, and[??]e mende for hym euermore he dwellyng fresch in my herte"; seealso Hf (fol. 153r, 11.41-44).

The above list demonstrates that an accurate and faithfultranslation of extracts from the Stimulus was coupled with pertinentadditions in D. Some of these must have already been present in D'sancestor, because they agree with Hf (more on this below). The modusagendi of the additions to the Stimulus is one of adaptation of theLatin text, and many of the alterations are evidence of an affectiveheightening that prioritizes meditation on the Passion. In theireffective operation, the modifications evoke the reciprocal love betweenthe reader and God.

The Form of Living Segment

Most variations between D's first unit and Hf occur in theForm segment, and they are all listed in Appendix B, so a few examplesquoted here should suffice. D, for instance, reads: "ffor [??]aischul be bre[??]eren and felawes in his maieste" (fol. 8r, 1. 186),whereas Hf adds after "felawes": "wi[??] angeles and holimen, preising, seinge and hauyng [??]e kyng of ioye in his fairhede andschinyng" (fol. 144v, 11.4-5). Where D reads "werinesse andsorynesse of lif" (fol. 7r, 11. 165-166), the doublet in Hf isreversed: "sorynesse and werynes of [??]i lif (fol. 144r, 1.22). Asimilar transposition occurs between D's "vncertayne andvnknowe" (fol. 7v, 1.174) and Hf s "vnknowe andvncerteyn" (fol. 144r, 1. 30). Not only does the length of the Formextract give rise to most additions, transposition of words, andomissions, but the text's lists of sins repeatedly lend themselvesto adaptation and are as such particularly malleable (53)--see, forinstance, D's "for pride, for aray of oure body, o[??]er forany o[??]er vanite" (fol. lOr, 1. 244), which Hf omits.

Concrete textual evidence demonstrates that D's targetaudience was either a house of religious or an individual not living anenclosed life. The text consequently ensures that the sins on which theForm extract elaborates are compatible with the daily practices andneeds of this spiritual milieu, while at the same time exhibiting greatcaution not to overwhelm its audience by engaging them in mattersevidently considered too worldly and unfitting. An example of suchprocesses of thought is D's (or its parent manuscript's)omission (fol. 10r, 1.237) of "defendyng of synne, creiyng inlau[??]tre, mowe makyng on any man, to singe seculer songes and loueham," found in Hf (fol. 145r, 11. 19-21), which is also recorded inOgilvie-Thomson's edition (12,11. 361-362). More conspicuous stillis Hf s "to hurte any man in his bodi, or in his good..., pefte,rauyn, vsur, deseyt..., [??]iue to harlotes" (fol. 145r, 11.25-27,also recorded by Ogilvie-Thomson, 12,11.367-369), which is not mentionedin D (fol. lOr, 11.242-244). Processes of careful adaptation to theaudience's needs and/or requests may have governed the choice ofmaterial in this section--assuming the selection was not alreadypredefined in D's exemplar.

The final part of D rises to a hortatory conclusion that isattested neither in Hf nor in Ogilvie-Thomson:

and as saith seynt James, "hit were bettre no[??]th for to knowe [??]elawe of god [??]enne knowe hit and do no[??]t [??]ere after." And[??]er fore, my leue frende, y consaille [??]e [??]at [??]ou forsakeno[??]th and dispise li[??]tlich pis lore and doctrine, alle be hit[??]at parauenture for diuerse occupacions and lettyngs [??]at [??]ouhast in [??]e worlde, [??]ou fyndest no gret sauoure [??]er in atte[??]e begynnyng. For as ich haue saide afore, hertlich loue of god andgoudnesse of lif wil no[??]t be geten with oute grete trauail and longcontinuaunce, bot whanne hit is hadde, hit is fill of lykyng ofswetnesse. And bere fore, whanne [??]e holi gost sende[??] [??]e enysauour to loue god, forsake hit no[??]t, bot kepe hit stille. And after[??]e grace [??]at he [??]eue[??] [??]e, parforme hit and encrece hit,and [??]if [??]ou dost [??]us, I drede no[??]t [??]at [??]ou schaltforsake alle unclene loue [??]at is no[??]th to his worschippe for hisloue. And [??]anne schalt [??]ou ben his spouse, dwellyng with hym in[??]e blisse of heuen endlich. (fol. 14r, 11. 345-357)

However, the final lines of the added hortatory conclusion to theForm extract in D also largely correspond to the closing lines added tothe complete version of The Form in Hf:

And if hit be so, dere frende, [??]at [??]is schort lesson do [??]egoud, [??]anke god [??]ere of and [??]ray for me. The grace of godalmy[??]tti, ihesu verrai god and man [??]at is verrai loue and comfortof his loueris be with [??]e, and kepe [??]e fro euyl, and bryng [??]eto [??]i spouse [??]at [??]ou hast take [??]e to, [??]e wich iseuerlastyng god. Amen. (D, fol. 14v, 11. 358-361; see also Hf, fol.150v,ll. 34-38)

Conclusions

Based on the preceding comparison between D's first unit andHf, the following hypotheses can be proposed:

1. The longer sections in D that do not correspond to Hf eithercould have been added by D's scribe or compiler (penned by him orsourced from elsewhere) or may have been inherited from D'sexemplar.

2. If these passages were already present in D's parentmanuscript, this would indicate that either:

a) D and Hf did not share the same source but are related at someremove; or

b) Hf excised these passages.

The variations in D exemplify the ways in which the scribe (or hismodel) altered the text creatively. A genuine interest in catering tothe needs of audience members who were at the beginning of theirspiritual careers and eager to intensify their relationship to thedivine underlies the longer added passages that are unique to D (thegraphic Passion meditation on fol. 2v [11. 43-48] and the conclusion onfol. 14r [11. 345-357]), as well as the omissions in The Form'slist of sins. See, for example, the narrative voice's adoption of aspiritual advisor's earnest tone of exhortation in the conclusion:"hertlich loue of god and goudnesse of lif wil no[??]t be getenwith oute grete trauail and long continuaunce, bot whanne hit is hadde,hit is ful of lykyng of swetnesse" (fol. 14r, 11. 350-352).

The guiding hand(s) behind D's production seem(s) to have hada fairly clear idea of the kind of work they wanted. ComplementingIXPoyntes, the passages from The Stimulus, and the extract from TheForm, the longer additions in the manuscript's first part oscillatebetween the poles that these texts embrace: they instruct the readers inGod's love and the love of God and to this end provide a templateon how to cultivate meekness and extensive scrutiny of the self in theface of their sinful past, present inadequacy, and inevitableinclination to sin again.

The hortatory conclusion references the scope of D's entirefirst part and expresses a carefully considered commentary on theensuing spiritual efforts expected of its audience. As an exhortationappended to the other texts, it betrays a deliberate effort to produce amore accessible and effective work.

D's Second Unit: A New Copy of The Chastising of God'sChildren

The Chastising of God's Children is a treatise in twenty-sevenchapters on how to deal with temptations in the advanced religious life,most likely written between 1391 and 1408. (54) The text is a devotionalcompilation: it is composed by the placing together of fragments fromexisting texts, including Quandoque tribularis, a Latin compilation ofmaterial from Ancrene Wisse, Henry Suso's Horologium sapientiae,John Ruusbroec's Spiritual Espousals, James of Milan'sStimulus amoris, and Alphonse of Pecha's Epistola solitarii adreges, which are interspersed with the compiler's own comments andbiblical and patristic references. (55) The Chastising compilertranslates his sources from Latin source texts and addresses thetreatise, which he calls "a short pistle," to a"religious sister" (Bazire-Colledge 95/1), who is presented inthe text as a woman responsible for her own spiritual life and that ofothers. It is a remarkably cerebral text that places great stress onknowing and knowledge, teaching the sister about the various guises inwhich temptations can manifest themselves so that she can recognize andremedy them in herself and others. This instruction is combined withperformative passages and occasional, quite beautifully translateddescriptions of the joys experienced when the contemplative feelsGod's presence in the soul.

The manuscripts and an early printed edition in which TheChastising of God's Children survives are the following:

A: Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Ashmole 41 (second half fifteenthcentury)

Add: London, British Library, MS Additional 33971 (middle or secondhalf fifteenth century)

B: Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Bodley 505 (Sheen Charterhouse,first half fifteenth century)

D: Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Don. e. 247 (first half fifteenthcentury)

H: London, British Library, MS Harley 6615 (second half fifteenthcentury)

Ha: London, British Library, MS Harley 2218 (middle or second halffifteenth century; chapters 24 and 25)

He: Yale, Beinecke Library, MS Osborn fa46 (olim Taunton, SomersetRecord Office, MS Heneage 3084; first half fifteenth century)

J: Cambridge, St. John's College, MS E.25 (fifteenth century,probably not before 1450)

L: Liverpool, University Library, MS folio 4.10 (second halffifteenth century)

P: Cambridge, Magdalene College, MS Pepys 2125 (first halffifteenth century)

R: Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Rawlinson C. 57 (given to SheenCharterhouse by John Kingslow, the first Sheen recluse, early fifteenthcentury)

T: Cambridge, Trinity College, MS B.14.19 (first unit first quarterfifteenth century)

W: Wynkyn de Worde's printed edition (ca. 1493)

Sixteen of The Chastising s twenty-seven chapters have beenborrowed in the compilation Disce mori, which survives in twomanuscripts: (56)

Je: Oxford, Jesus College, MS 39 (between 1453 and 1464)

La: Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Laud. Misc. 99 (after 1470, around1500?)

Disce mori, in its turn, was one of the sources for the compilationknown as Ignorancia sacerdotum, extant in one manuscript:

E: Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Eng. th. c. 57 (between 1453 and1464)

Though all manuscripts but one keep the address to the religioussister, (57) the text also seems to have been read in houses of malereligious--B, He, R, and T have links to the Carthusians. On the whole,the instruction in the text is not gendered, as its advice is relevantto both male and female religious and laypeople who want to devote theirlives to God. It is unknown who wrote the text and for whom. ThoughOxford, Bodleian Library, MS Bodley 923, a manuscript owned by Sibillade Felton, abbess of Barking from 1394 to 1419, mentions The Chastisingas a text known at Barking, none of the manuscripts in which TheChastising survives has been linked to the abbey. (58)

D's Place in the Manuscript Tradition of The Chastising

D has been compared against the text and variants offered in Bazireand Colledge's edition as well as the variants of He, a manuscriptunknown at the time of the Bazire-Colledge edition. (59) In addition tovariant readings occurring in the manuscripts and early printed editionlisted above, variants by the correctors of He (Hec), P (Pc) and T (Tc)have also at times been recorded. (60) Rather than readings fromBazire-Colledge, which was based on a manuscript in a different group(BHeJeLaTc) from the one D belongs to, the variants were transcribedfrom D, with the corresponding reading from the edition given betweenbrackets. (61) Readings from the BHeJeLaTc group occur only occasionallyin what follows, as D only occasionally shares variant readings withthem.

In the stemma codicum offered by Bazire and Colledge, D belongs inthe group AddJP. Whenever Add, J, and P (J and P in the chapters thatAdd lacks at its beginning) (62) share the same reading, D coincideswith these readings. In forty-one instances, Add, J, D, and P (J, D, andP where Add lacks the beginning) agree against all other manuscripts. Ina first group of variant readings, the AddDJP manuscripts lack words orphrases present in the other manuscripts, but without greatly affectingthe meaning:

DJP: is more delitable to the soule (cf. Bazire-Colledge 102/22-23:is more delitable to [??]e body and be soule);

AddDJP: [??]ei be most traueylid [??]at do her besynes (cf. 117/17:[??]ei bien most traueiled bat most do her besynes)

AddDJP: so it semyth whan a man wielfulli gruchchi[??] (cf. 118/23:so it seme[??] wele [??]at whan a man wilfulli grucche[??])

AddDJP: his gostli childryn whiche haue forsaken hem self (cf.122/14-15: his goostli children whiche vttirly han forsaken hem self)

AddDJP: of eche leuyng and comyne of eche matier (cf. 126/13-14: ofeche lyueng; [??]ei wol comune of eche matier)

AddDJP: sche [??]af holli to hym [??]at alle goudnes sent (cf.137/16: she [??]af al hooli to hym [??]at al goodenesse sent)

AddDJP: he berith horn his sceip [??]at first was lost (cf.151/19-20: he beri[??] horn a[??]en his shep, [??]at first was lost)

AddDJP: owre tyme of turnyng.' for yn [??]e lest moment of anhowre (cf. 152/11-12: oure tyme of tournyng, neiper long ne short, forin [??]e leest moment of an hour)

AddDJP: or to one or twei o[??]er to gostli lyuers (cf. 155/17-18:or ellis to one or tweyne o[??]er gostli lyuers)

AddDJP: as owre holi fadris saide (cf. 166/18: as oure hooli fadirsin oold tyme seiden)

AddDJP: for [??]ei fiende nat grace or ellis [??]owh [??]ai fiendgrace (cf. 188/1-2: for [??]ei fynde nat grace or see it nat, or ellis,[??]OU[??] [??]ei fynde grace)

AddDJP: whan a man felith eny steryng (cf. 204/24-25: whan a man orwomman feelip ony stirynge)

AddDJP: ensawmple of manye which nyed nat to reherse here (cf.222/7-8: ensample of many seintis, which neden nat to reherse)

In two instances, the omissions are longer and are arguably theresult of eyeskip in a common source for AddDJP:

AddDJP: for [??]ei thyng wilfulli be her owne worchynge (cf.140/3-4: for [??]ei [??]enke if [??]ei diden any [??]ing wilfulli bi herowne wirchyng)

AddDJP: yn reisyng of dede men, speche to dombe men (cf. 181/68: inreisyng of deede men, in [??]euynge si[??]f to blynde men, heeryng todeefmen, speche to domb men)

In the same vein as the shorter omissions, the AddDJP manuscriptshave words or phrases not present in the other manuscripts:

DJP: [??]at hit semyth to a man ynwardli (cf. Bazire-Colledge102/2021: pat it semep a man inwardli)

DJP: receiuyng of his graciouse [??]ift.es (cf. 105/6-7: receyuengeof his [??]iftes)

AddDJP: [??]is rest men mowe fynde and haue be verray kynde (cf.131/2-3: [??]is rest men mowen fynde bi verrei kynde)

AddDJP: and [??]at [??]ei haue god yn her spiriet (cf. 141/9-10:and [??]at [??]ei haue god [??]eir spirit);

AddDJP: and [??]ei had gret plente of water (cf. 185/4: and [??]eihad plente of watir)

AddDJP: with smytyng on [??]e brest and crossing be forhed (cf.202/13-14: wi[??] crossing on [??]e forhed and brest)

AddDJP: and such oper passyng thynges (cf. 209/12: and suchepassyng [??]inges)

Other readings in AddDJP substitute one word for another, in somecases synonymously:

DJP: suche gostli science (cf. Bazire-Colledge 95/18-19: thatgoostli science)

DJP: alle maner knowlechyng (cf. 110/13-14: al o[??]erknowlechynge)

AddDJP: Bot as of power of wicked spiritis (cf. 162/11-12: But asof power oiyuel spirites)

AddDJP: agoud spede (cf. 164/22: agrete spede)

AddDJP: [??]at [??]e wil nat say [??]0wre psawter (cf. 221/23-24:[??]at [??]e wil not use [??]0ure sautier)

In some instances, the substitutions change the meaning of thesentence but still make sense. When DJP read "for what euere hedesire" in comparison to "for what euere he deserue"(105/19) in the other manuscripts, both readings are meaningful incontext: contemplatives will receive plentiful gifts from God and haveto respond to them with meekness. These gifts can be desired as well asdeserved. The AddDJP sentence "And greteli it is to drede: yvnderstonde [??]ei be messageris of antecrist" works as well as"and greteli it is to drede [??]at in auenture [??]ei bemessangiers of antecrist" (144/9-10), though AddDJP assert morestrongly that the people described are the heralds of Antichrist,whereas the other manuscripts posit this as a possibility to be feared.

The substitution of "neydful" for "profitable"in the following variant reading reflects the exchange between"nedeful/neydful" and "medeful" (here rendered as"profitable") that repeatedly occurs in the manuscripttradition of The Chastising, as shown below:

AddDJP: and suche chastisynges be neydful as y saide be fore (cf.Bazire-Colledge 151/11-12: and such chastisynges bien profitable, as Iseide bifore)

These meanings also seem closely connected. In order to berewarding, the chastising of God's children is indeed necessary, soeven though the error is letter- or word-based, the erroneous readingsticks because it not without its merits.

Small, momentary shifts in the understanding of how the spirituallife is lived occur when AddDJP has "to vse beides andmekenes" instead of "to use deedis of mekenesse"(Bazire-Colledge 207/5), adding the saying of prayers as a remedyagainst pride to the deeds of meekness described in the text. Eventhough the AddDJP reading here is not the better one, it does not jarwith the rest of the text. When AddDJP has "as fer forth as yknowe" instead of "as ferforth as Ifeele"(Bazire-Colledge 220/27) in a comment on the necessity of saying theprayers of the office attentively, this may not be the better reading tobe followed by "and as I haue lierned"--logically it makesmore sense for a feeling to be confirmed by what one has learnt. Yet thespeaker's assertion of "knowing" the importance of sayingthe prayer attentively does not jar with the phrase that follows, and"y knowe" comes across as decisive and confident. In addition,it is in keeping with the text's repeated stress on knowledge. (61)

In one instance we can see how a variant reading was caused by themisreading of a word (either turning one word in two, or the opposite):

AddDJP: withoute eny desire or besechynge to god (cf.BazireColledge 134/14-15: wi[??]out any desire or besi seekyng to god);

In two instances the AddDJP reading is grammatically slightlydifferent from the reading found in the other manuscripts. In the firstan indicative verb is rewritten as a past participle, and in the seconda different modal auxiliary is used. Again, both versions work without amajor shift in meaning:

AddDJP: be amendid and profitid yn vertw (cf. Bazire-Colledge123/20: and bien amendid and profiten in uertu);

AddDJP: [??]at ladi wil nat put me awei (cf. 159/22-23: [??]at ladimay not putt me awey)

This cannot be said of the instances in which AddDJP readings areclearly erroneous:

AddDJP: and seywith [??]e mowth (cf. 158/19: and seie wi[??] [??]eherte)

AddDJP: bot his power is euer ri[??]thful (cf. 160/23: but hispower is neuer ri[??]thful)

AddDJP: Also [??]ifaman or woman louyth his neyhbor (cf. 201/16-17:Also if a man or woman loueb nat his nei[??]bor);

AddDJP: [??]owh he be ri[??]th. stable of conplexion (cf. 213/6:[??]ou[??] he be fieble of complexion)

In two instances the AddDJP manuscripts coincide with W, the earlyprinted edition placed in relation to the same group by Bazire andColledge, but neither of these is significant. (64) Similarly, in thesix instances in which the members of the group AddDJP do not agree, thedifferences are minor (omissions, minimally varying vocabulary) and donot affect the meaning of the text. (6>) In all the instances inwhich Add and J present unique readings, D agrees with all the other MS,including P, against AddJ. (66)

The complex manuscript tradition of The Chastising shows in themany instances in which members of the group AddJDP share readings withmanuscripts from other groups. These readings, often as a result ofminor changes and thus not significantly different, seem to occur acrossgroups without any clear pattern emerging. (67) More significant overlapmight be concluded from the instances in which manuscripts from groupAddJDP share readings with manuscripts from the group ALRT. As is thecase with most of the variant readings between attestations of TheChastising, the changes are minor and as such testify to a faithful andmostly uniform transmission of this text. (68)

Some of these variants, however, result in interesting readings. Inthe refrain at the end of each chapter, the ADJLPRT manuscripts have"wakith and praith [??]at [??]e falle nat in to temptacion"rather than "wake[??] and preie[??], [??]at [??]e entre nat intotemptacion" (Bazire-Colledge 96/12-13), which renders the Latin"ut non intretis in temptacionem" more closely. In ADJeHPRTWthe four erroneous opinions and their resulting heretical and sinfulbehavior described in chapters 9 to 12 are announced as "fowremaner sektis," whereas the other manuscripts describe them as"foure maner sikenessis" (130/2-3), a choice of word stillderiving from the preceding descriptions, in chapters 7 and 8, of thedropsy and the four fevers befalling those who "vnskillfulli andvnresonabli bien enclyned to lustes and eesis of [??]e bodi"(126/7-8). The "sektis" reading, on the other hand, isforward-looking and the better reading. Indeed, in chapter 10 the wordis used in all manuscripts to refer to types of erroneous living. (69)

Another substitution we have come across earlier isAAddDJLRT's "[??]e werkis whiche god werkith be hem be morenoble and neydful" for "[??]e werkis [??]at god worchi[??]bien more noble and medeful" (142/21). In addition to the addedemphasis on the person in which God works his good works, the AAddDJLRTmanuscripts stress the necessity of the works in order to be deservingof the reward rather than the reward they bring.

The AddDJPRTW sources stress the readers' capability fordiscernment when they have "But for as mych as [??]e se euyrmorebat many perelis fallith to gostli lyuers be [??]ei neuer so holi"instead of "But for as moche as I see" (187/5-6), which favorsthe authoritative position of the compiler. Another pronoun shift occurswhen the AddDHHeJJeLPW sources have "Clepe me yn [??]e day oftribulacion: for y schal delyuere [??]e and y schal worschipe[??]e" when the last phrase should read "and [??]ou schaltworship me" (203/14) in the translation of Palm 49:15 ("Etinuoca me in die tribulationis, eruam te et honorificabis me").Obviously caused by repetition of the sequence "y-[??]e" inthe preceding phrase, the shift has the effect of switching speakers. Asthe phrase "and y schal worschipe [??]e" needs to be spoken bythe reader to "our lorde" (203/ll), the psalm verse becomes ashort dialogue between the reader and God, rather than a speech by Godto the reader by way of the psalmist--an unintended but intriguingmomentary effect of a copying error.

The shared readings between members of the groups AddDJP and ALRTmight be significant in particular because it might be enlightening withregard to the quality of the text version and the superiority of thereadings members of these two groups share over other readings, evenwhen the variations are only minor. It is outside the scope of thisessay to reassess Bazire and Colledge's editorial decisions--inparticular their decision to choose B as their base manuscript, whichseems an odd choice given the many instances in which B disagrees withall other manuscripts. (70) Yet it would be worthwhile to check whetherthe readings the AddDJP manuscripts have in common with RT especially(two manuscripts that, like B and He, have a Carthusian connection andhence have been subject to correction in keeping with the Carthusianpreoccupation with good-quality texts), (71) do not present a betterreading (i.e., possibly closer to the Chastising compiler's) thanthe equivalent readings in B.

Within the group AddDJP, D is closest to P and diverges from Addand J, as pointed out above. D and P share unique readings in nineteeninstances, of which some are significant in that they are not justomissions of words, the use of synonyms, or small grammaticalalterations. D and P have "[??]at askid not to be forsakeoueral" when all other manuscripts have "[??]at asked nat tobe forsake atal tymes" (Colledge-Bazire 99/1-2), stressing placerather than time, and read "[??]us fel adam owt of paradise"when all other manuscripts have "[??]us fel adam in paradise"(136/19), with D and P presenting the more accurate reading. When D andP read "and to fowre maner sieknes" rather than "and tofoure maner sectis" (187/4), they repeat the word"sieknes" from the earlier "to be gostli seiknes"(cf. 187/3) but lose the distinction made earlier between the dropsy andfevers discussed in chapters 7 and 8 and the four sects of men discussedin chapters 9 to 12. In this case, D and P do not make the distinction,making this reading the poorer one.

D's and P's distance from Add and J also shows in that Dshares twentyfive readings with P and other manuscripts but not with Addand J. (72) However, the fact that D, as is the case with all extantcopies of The Chastising, (73) is an independent copy the immediatemodel of which does not survive is shown by the instances in which Ddiffers from P and agrees with all other manuscripts against P, oftenbecause of omissions in P, as in the following examples of omissionthrough eyeskip:

D: whan bei fiel hem not tempted (P omits) (cf. Bazire-Colledge97/21)

D: [??]euyng obedience to no man neibir to pope (P: omits "tono man neipir") (cf. 140/20-21)

D: Also it is a grete fredom and liberte whan a man is delyuered of[??]e seruage of be deyuyl (P omits) (cf. 153/23-24)

D: to [??]is me thenkith eche man may se and feile bat he schalthynke hym self able to receyue mercy (P omits) (cf. 154/16-17)

That D cannot have been the direct ancestor of P or anothermanuscript in the AddDJP group is shown by omissions as a result ofeyeskip unique toD:

D: [??]is men yn her own si[??]th [be.sup.*]ei [be.sup.*] verreifutyuys be cawse [be.sup.*]ei haue rwn away and fled far fram god / andas [be.sup.*]ai be fled, from god : so hit is neydful [??]at alle menfie away from hem as from a gostly enemy, (left out: ful contemplatif,but in goddis si[??]th [??]ei bien; cf. Bazire-Colledge 139/5-9. This isalso an omission in HeJeLa, otherwise unrelated to D)

D: For [??]ai be passid [??]e [trauayl.sup.*] for to be dischargidof vertwis [??]an for to gete hem. (*left out: of excercises, as [??]eiseien, and dischargid of alle vertuse. Alsswa [??]ai say [??]at a mannedi[??] more to traueile; cf. 140/16-19)

D: [??]er fore [??]ei trowe [??]at [??]ei mowe no more encrece yn[vertwis..sup.*] and. [??]at [??]ei mowe no more synne yn as myche as toher own si[??]t (*left out: and [??]at [??]ei mowe disserue no moremede; cf. 141 /6-8)

D: [??]if we turne to [hym.sup.*] cleirli: and with a symple mekehert (*left out: he takep us into grace. [??]e pite of god is so gretepat he dispisep neuer penaunce where it is offrid up to hym; cf.152/12-15)

D: owr lorde gladli takip hym and louyngli beclippith [hym.sup.*]a[??]en to his first state (*left out: and bi his mercy reformeb hym;cf. 152/16-18)

D: and for we be bownde be be precept [of.sup.*] god we schul loueowre neyhbor (*left out: god to loue oure euencristen. We shuln alsoloue hym [??]at is nat oure enemy bi kynde, for he is a man, and bi[??]e precept of; cf. 196/9-12)

In addition, D has a large number of unique readings, most of whichare too minor to discuss here. The scribe does have a tendency tointensify the text with small additions that could be interpreted asadding emphasis:

D: take hymyn to mercie (cf. Bazire-Colledge 154/25: take hym tomercy)

D: howeuer hit schall falle of me (cf. 159/12: what shal fal of me)

D: what euyr thei wil (cf. 190/24: what pei woln)

D: myche more [??]anne [??]at noble and soothfast fadir (cf.207/24208/1: moche more bat noble and sobfast fadir) D: bodeli penawnceowtward with preier (cf. 218/2: bodili penance wi[??] preier)

Another group of unique readings testify to the scribe'sdeliberate or, rather, intelligent interaction with the spiritualcontent of the text. Thus, asking advice is understood as a way tohumble oneself, and meekness is seen as a means to purify rather thanprove a person--a subtle qualification:

D: aske oft consail to meke hym (cf. Bazire-Colledge 155/18-19: andaske oft conseil, and to meke him)

D: bot manyspuridbe meyknesse (cf. 164/12: but man ispreued bimekenesse)

The text as rendered in D also distinguishes between the cause ofan action and its aim where the other manuscripts do not, andcharacterizes fasting and keeping vigils as physical works:

D: for [??]e loue and to [??]e worschip of god (cf. Bazire-Colledge191/22: for [??]e loue and worship of god)

D: sum o[??]ir bodeli traueyle (cf. 213/1: sum ober traueile)

The substitution "medeful"/"nedeful" isrevisited here as well, though here D focuses on the spiritual rewardbrought by affliction rather than on the necessity of affliction for thepurity of the soul and on the rewards of mortification rather than itsneeds: (74)

D: and o[??]ir gostli meide (cf. Bazire-Colledge 214/10: ando[??]er gostli nede)

D: it is a meydful riwle (cf. 214/17: it is a nedeful rule)

D: it is only meydful to refreyne (cf. 215/1: it is nat oonlinedeful to refreyne)

The scribe's occasional lapses in concentration show inD's second unit in forty-odd erroneous readings, some of which areobviously nonsensical, and all of which remain uncorrected. (75) Whetherthe scribe of D uses different words or phrases with the same meaning asthe other text versions, whether he chooses different pronouns, putssingular nouns in the plural or vice versa, or repeats articles after"and" or "or," whether he more significantly addswords for extra emphasis or introduces variants that change or intensifythe spiritual content or import of a passage, the unique readings hebrings to D illustrate his active engagement with the text. He does notjust copy his model passively, or not always, at any rate. Thoughtfulattention while copying, either by the scribe of D, or by the scribe ofhis model copy, (76) also shows in the playful transpositions ofsentence elements and in doublets, which are frequent enough to besignificant. (77)

Signposting, Corrections, and Marginal Annotations in D

Some of the marginal annotations in D, written in red ink in thesame hand as the main text and the rubrics, signpost dropsy in chapter7, (78) the four fevers in chapter 8 (79) and the seven deadly sins inchapter 25, (80) as well as-somewhat randomly--the names of Heliseus andBalthasar in chapter 18. (81) The structural signposting of the illness,fevers, and seven deadly sins also occurs in other Chastisingmanuscripts. The Add manuscript signposts the seven deadly sins in Latinfrom folio 50v to 54r, (82) R marks them in English (fols. 45r-47r). B(fols. 23r-25v and fols. 76v-81r) and P (fols. 6v-7v and fols. 23v-25r)signpost both the illnesses and the seven sins in the same way as D.Though structural signposting may have been a scribal decisionindependent of the exemplar used, it seems likely that these marginaliawere deemed integral to the text and were passed on from one copy to theother. D shares this form of signposting with P, the manuscript it isclosest to, and with Add, another member of its group. Through sharedancestors, this type of signposting also links D to R and B, manuscriptsoutside its group, which might again be taken to show the complextextual relationships between the copies of The Chastising.

D has been little corrected. Erroneous readings mostly remainunspotted by the corrector (who was most likely the scribe) (83) and theannotator(s) contemporary with the scribe. Three marginal additions andone interlinear correction were made to the text. (84) In none of theseinstances is the resulting reading listed in Bazire and Colledge'sapparatus of variants.

Marginal annotations contemporary with the work of the scribe andmade by the scribe or, judging from the different color of ink, bysubsequent readers, are relatively few:

folio lOr: "of [??]y fle[sch] next to "The synnes bethbise: Glotonye. Lecherie. Symonie. Wichecraft."

folio 37r: "[?] to [??]is" next to "Eche suche man[??]at hath [??]is perfeccion and come to [??]is lownesse and parfitesufferaunce is first schaprli thretnyd"

Five different shapes of notae can be distinguished. The first notain the margin occurs on folio 8v; it is larger than all others in D andhas been written in the same ink as the trefoils (see below), next to"[??]at [??]ou be ri[??]t dispoused bobe for [??]i saule and for[??]i bodi, [??]ou schalt vnderstande foure thynges" (fol. 8v, 11.206-207.).

A second type of "nota" is made in a small script with asmall circularshaped abbreviation mark. This form of annotation marksoccurs on folios 48r, 49v, 57r, 64r, 66v, and 10lr, with the forms onfolio 49v and folio 66v somewhat smaller and hence possibly by adifferent reader:

folio 48r, right-hand margin: "nota hie" next to"and alle owtward vertwis" (cf. Bazire-Colledge 138/12). (85)

folio 49v, left-hand margin: "nota" next to "[??]ifhere bodeli kiend coueytip or be sterid to eny lust or lykyng soferforth [??]at [??]e sperit hath not his fredom" (cf. 141/12-14).

folio 57r, right-hand margin: "nota bene" next to"[??]at a man schulde neuyr mystrust [??]owh he be not turned to belast ende" (cf. 152/2-3).

folio 64r, right-hand margin: "nota" next to "[??]ewil of [??]e deiuele is alwei wicked" (cf. 160/22-23).

folio 66v, left-hand margin: "nota" next to the openingof chapter 17, "Ful holi men for li[??]th defawtis haue be takebodeli to be wicked spiritis" (cf. 164/6-7).

folio l0lr, right-hand margin: "nota" next to "Manymen repryeue it to haue [??]e psawter and matyns and gospels or [??]ebible in englisch" (cf. 221/8-10).

A third form of "nota," with a distinct abbreviation mark(two linked minims and an upward curving stroke), occurs only once, onfolio 56r:

folio 56r, right-hand margin: "nota" next to "It ismeydful to ri[??]thful men and holi men" (cf. 150/13-15)

In two instances, the "nota" has a larger abbreviationmark. These annotations may have been made by a fourth reader:

folio 68r, right-hand margin: "nota" next to "Of biswe mowe se ful many of ensawmplis" (cf. 166/9-10).

folio 78r, right-hand margin: "nota bene hie" next to"[??]is men beth so blendid yn here saule" (cf. 190/12-13).

In a fifth form, "Nota" is written with a capital N,which looks scribal:

folio 85r, right-hand margin: "Nota" next to "[??]erfore what euer temptacion a man haue whe[??]ir hit be of feith"(cf. 201/8-9).

If we can take these "notae" as signs of interest on thepart of the readers and/or as pointers they left for future readers, itis interesting to note that they express interest in the same themes.The first "nota" on folio 8v marks a passage that teachesconversion from a sinful life in the world to the conforming of the willto God's. The annotations to The Chastising mark passages warningagainst spiritual error and giving messages of reassurance. The secondtype of "notae (bene)" marks passages warning againstspiritual error (fols. 48r, 49v, and 66v) but also passages ofreassuring patristic teaching by Isidore of Seville (fol. 57r) andGregory the Great (fol. 64r). In particular, the saying by Isidore,which teaches that it is never too late for a sinner to repent and besaved, represents the spiritual optimism that in spite of its stress ontemptation and tribulation, is at the heart of The Chastising.Intriguingly, this annotator also marks a passage pointing to theobjections many contemporaries had to the use of English for prayer andreligious instruction (fol. l0lr), showing the compiler's (and thisannotator's) engagement with the controversies surrounding WyclifFsBible translation, which led to Arundel's 1409 Constitutions. (86)

The third type of "nota" highlights a passage thatdetails the necessity for righteous and holy people to learn fromadversity (fol. 56r). The fourth type of "notae" (with thelarger abbreviation mark) points to two passages in which models areheld up to the reader. The first passage (fol. 68r) shows the devil atwork when he torments people on their deathbed who have always led agood and religious life. The second passage (fol. 78r) discusses thepeople who hold the errors signaled in passages marked earlier (fols.48r and 49v). The scribal "Nota" (fol. 85r), like thecomforting messages marked by the first annotator, points to a passagethat is reassuring and positive: when a man has doubts about points ofthe faith, he does not sin when he regrets his doubts.

Several trefoils serve the same highlighting function. In theright-hand margin on folio 3r, there is a trefoil next to "sogostlich, 3if bou wilt wex hoot in be loue of god, do on many clothes ofvertu, for vertu is clothes to mannys saule" (fol. 3r, 11. 57-58),a passage in praise of a virtuous life. In the lefthand margin on folio8v, a trefoil has been drawn next to a passage urging moderation inabstinence: "I holde be neuer of be lasse merite [??]if [??]ou beno[??]t in lo abstinence as were sum tyme holi men and women a forevs" (fol. 8v, 11. 201-203). In the left-hand margin on folio 13v, atrefoil occurs next to "for only wrecchidnesse ha[??] non enemy inerthe. Ffor to drawe vs [??]at we conforme our wille to godis wille[??]ar be[??] [??]re thynges: on ensample of holi men and wommen"(fol. 13v, 11. 329-331), again, a passage that points to the necessityof conforming one's will to God's. On folio 54v in thelefthand margin, three trefoils occur in descending order of size andeach of them drawn closer to the text. The two lower trefoils, drawn inblack ink, and with a pen that results in a thickly-set line, seem tohave been added by postmedieval annotator 1. Marking "ffore[??]yr... hym be his mercy" (cf. Bazire-Colledge 148/6-11) andreinforcing the passage underlined in red "ffor epyr... of hobchirche" (cf. 148/8-10), they draw attention to a passagecommenting on the way a sinner may be punished for his misdeeds. God maypunish the sinner in this life or, everlastingly, in the next. Thesinner may also punish himself through his own devotion or because theChurch tells him to do penance, and in these cases God will withdraw hisrod.

In the right-hand margin on folio 62r, a trefoil marks a passagethat announces a prayer that can be used to chase the devil away:"to his confusyon for he.... and set at nawth" (cf.Bazire-Colledge 158/19-21). The trefoil next to "Also yn echetemptacion or tribulacion bodili or gostli it is ful cownfortable tothynke on [??]e wordis [??]at god saith be [??]e prophete" (cf.200/21-23) in the right-hand margin on folio 85r serves the samefunction, as do the ones in the left-hand margin on folio 87v, next to"Also I rede how owre ladi tawht seynt Bride" (cf. 204/17-18),and in the right-hand margin on folio 88r, next to "[??]at [??]edyeuele may knowe what a man saith to his schame and confusion yn [??]ismanere. Almi[??]thti god fadre yn heuene" (cf. 204/26-28). Thus thetrefoils signpost the reader to themes ranging from virtue, moderation,conforming one's will to God, and remedies against sin to effectiveshaming of the devil.

D illustrates both scribes' and readers' creativeinteraction with texts in Unit I, which reorders, deletes from, and addsto material grouped together in Hf, and scribes' and readers'reverence for the integrity of texts such as The Chastising, copied inits entirety without deliberate or major alterations in Unit II. Withthe Bodleian Library's acquisition of D, the scholarly communityhas access to yet another fine and unique example of the devotionalbooks that proliferated in the late fourteenth and fifteenth century inEngland, an anthology of thematically similar texts aimed at helpingtheir audience shape and live a life of prayer and contemplation.

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to Vincent Gillespie, Ralph Hanna, MichaelSargent, Jeremy Smith, Elizabeth Solopova, and Daniel Wakelin forsharing their knowledge and their research of this manuscript, and toMartin Kauffmann of the Bodleian Library for allowing them to work withthe manuscript. The sections "Description of Oxford, BodleianLibrary, MS Don. e. 247," "D's Second Unit: A New Copy ofThe Chastising of God's Children," "D's Place in theManuscript Tradition of The Chastising," and "Signposting,Corrections, and Marginal Annotations in D" were written by Cre aspart of the Swiss National Science Foundation project, "LateMedieval Religiosity in England: The Evidence of Late Fourteenth- andFifteenth-Century Devotional Compilations," carried out at theUniversity of Lausanne. The research of this new manuscript was madepossible by a Cost-Action Short Term Scientific Mission Grant, awardedto Cre by Cost-Action IS-1301, "New Communities of Interpretation:Contexts, Strategies and Processes of Religious Transformation in LateMedieval and Early Modern Europe," coordinated by Profesor SabrinaCorbellini at the University of Groningen, The Netherlands.

NOTES

(1.) Marleen Cre wrote the sections "Description of Oxford,Bodleian Library, MS Don. e. 247," "D's Second Unit: ANew Copy of The Chastising of God's Children," "D'sPlace in the Manuscript Tradition of The Chastising," and"Signposting, Corrections, and Marginal Annotations in D" ofthis essay. Raphaela Rohrhofer wrote the sections "D'sEnvisioned Audience," "D's First Unit and ItsRelationship to the Second Unit," and "A Comparison ofD's First Unit with the Text in Hereford, Cathedral Library, MS P.I. 9." Rohrhofer also provided the transcription and variants ofD's first unit in Appendices A and B of this essay.

(2.) An article on the sale appeared in the Telegraph on March 30,2014. It does not mention the manuscript. See "Sale of the Centuryas Aristocrats Auction Heirlooms," Telegraph, March 30, 2014,http://www. telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/artsales/10732013/Sale-of-the-centuryas-aristocrats-auction-heirlooms.html.

(3.) A reference to the sale can still be found on Christie'swebsite; see "Sale 1550/London: Valuable Manuscripts and PrintedBooks, 21 May 2014," Christie's,http://www.christies.com/lotfinder/print_sale.aspx?saleid=24630&lid= 1.

(4.) The description of the manuscript is based on the descriptionby Ralph Hanna and Vincent Gillespie. The authors are grateful thatGillespie and Hanna made their description available to them (in privatecorrespondence).

(5.) Hanna dates D to the mid-fifteenth-century, though bothGillespie and Daniel Wakelin suggest--on the basis of its resemblance toearly Pore Caitif manuscripts as regards size and layout--that it mightwell be an early fifteenth-century book (in private conversation). Bothhypotheses will have to be tested in further research of the volume.

(6.) For the edition of the text see Joyce Bazire and EricColledge, eds., The Chastising of God's Children and The Treatiseof Perfection of the Sons of God (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1957).

(7.) Quotation from The Chastising is by folio and line numbers inD, followed by reference to page and line numbers in the Bazire-Colledgeedition.

(8.) To briefly summarize the evidence, nine of the twelveChastising manuscripts have been located to the southeast Midlands: L(Soke of Peterborough, eLALME, unnumbered Linguistic Profile (LP) forThe Scale of Perfection in this manuscript), R (Norfolk, eLALME, LP4648), T (Suffolk, eLALME, LP 8420), P (southeast Midlands, Bazire1957), D (west Norfolk or east Suffolk), B (Cambridgeshire, eLALME, LP4773), He (southeast Midlands, Sargent 1977), H (southeast Midlands,Bazire 1957), and Ha (Lincolnshire, eLALME, unnumbered LP for Hand B). Ais written in a west Midlands dialect (Staffordshire, eLALME, LP 243 forThe Prick of Conscience in this manuscript). Add and J are northerncopies: Add (northern, Bazire 1957) and J (Yorkshire, North Riding,eLALME, LP 203). This suggests that The Chastisinghad a strong earlycirculation in the southeast Midlands and traveled further afield (tothe north and west) in the second half of the fifteenth century. Je iswritten in a southeast/central Midlands dialect, and both La and E mayhave a London/Middlesex basis. (See below for the identification of thesigla used here.) Joyce Bazire, "The Dialects of the Manuscripts ofThe Chastising of God's Children," English and GermanicStudies 6 (1957):6478; and Michael G. Sargent, "A New Manuscript ofThe Chastising of God's Children with an Ascription to WalterHilton," Medium Aevum 46 (1977):49-6S, at 57. On L, also seeMichael G. Sargent, "Bishops, Patrons, Mystics and Manuscripts:Walter Hilton, Nicholas Love and the Arundel and HollandConnections," in Middle English Texts in Transition: A FestschriftDedicated to Toshiyuki Takamiya on his 70th Birthday, ed. Simon Horobinand Linne Mooney (York, UK: York Medieval Press, 2014), 159-177, at 168.Onje, La, andE, see E. A. Jones, ed., The "Exhortacion" fromDisce mori: Edited from Oxford, Jesus College, MS 39 (Heidelberg,Germany: Universitatsverlag Winter, 2006), xxvi-xxvii.

(9.) On folio 18v lower margin, left-hand corner: a drawing of whatlooks like a purse or jug, with letters (four minims) written inside it.On folio 35r right-hand margin: vague drawings or pen trials. On folio37v lower margin: a drawing of two parallel horizontal lines connectedby four lines curving inward to the center (two from the left, two fromthe right). On folio 80v lower margin: scribble (unintended?).

(10.) See A. G. Dickens, Reformation Studies (London: HambledonPress, 1982), 176ff.

(11.) Bazire and Colledge, Chastising, 95,1. 1.

(12.) Ibid., 8; Catherine Innes-Parker, "The Legacy of AncreneWisse: Translations, Adaptations, Influences and Audience, with SpecialAttention to Women Readers," in A Companion to Ancrene Wisse, ed.Yoko Wada (Cambridge: D.S. Brewer, 2003), 164.

(13.) Bazire and Colledge, Chastising, 4.

(14.) Ibid., 95. Contemporary modifications in this manuscriptappropriated the text to a male audience (7-8).

(15.) Ibid., 95.

(16.) Ibid., 41.

(17.) Hf also contains a manuscript that consists of thepseudo-Bonaventuran Meditatio vitae Christi on folios lr-93r andBonaventura's Vita etmiracula Francisci (legenda maior) on folios93v-140v; R A. B. Mynors and R. Thomson, Catalogue of the Manuscripts ofHereford Cathedral Library (Cambridge, UK: D.S. Brewer, 1993), 69. Inthe following, reference to Hf pertains to the second manuscript boundinto Hf (fols. 141r-153r).

(18.) In the Christie's sales catalogue, Emilio Donadoni firstposited a link between D and Hf on the basis of the shared presence of a"Treatise on Love" (which is actually an excerpt from theStimulus); Emilio Donadoni, "The Chastysing of Godde'sChildren," Valuable Manuscripts and Printed Books: SalelSSO; 21 May2014 (London: Christie's, 2014).

(19.) Ogilvie-Thomson gives the following variant for"enclosed" in MS Pepys 2125: "holde[??] [??]e holy andhy[??]e and [??]at passyng oper and preyse[??] [??]e and wurshepi[??][??]e [??]erof'; Richard Rolle, Richard Rolle: Prose and Verse, ed.S.J. Ogilvie-Thomson, EETS (o.s.) 293 (Oxford: Oxford University Press,1988), 111,1. 461.

(20.) For more information on Margaret Kirkby, see Hope EmilyAllen, ed. English Writings of Richard Rolle, Hermit of Hampole (Oxford:Oxford University Press, 1963), 82-83.

(21.) Saint Bonaventura, S.R.E. Cardinalis S. Bonaventurae exordine minorum episcopi Albanensis, eximii ecclesiae doctoris, operaomnia, vol. 12, ed. by Adolphe Charles Peltier (Paris: Vives, 1868).

(22.) This is an expansion of the list containing themanuscript's source texts written by Vincent Gillespie and RalphHanna and kindly made accessible to Rohrhofer and Cre, who have madeadditions.

(23.) Robert E. Lewis, Norman Francis Blake, and A. S. G. Edwards,Index of Printed Middle English Prose (New York: Garland, 1985).

(24.) P. S. Jolliffe, A Check-List of Middle English Prose Writingsof Spiritual Guidance (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of MedievalStudies, l974).

(25.) Carl Horstmann, Yorkshire Writers: Richard Rolle of Hampole:An English Father of the Church and His Followers, vol. 2 (London:Sonnenschein, 1895-1896).

(26.) In addition to D and Hf, IX Poyntes occurs in London, BritishLibrary, MS Harley 1706 (henceforth Har; the text printed in Horstmann)and in Cambridge, Trinity College, MS B. 15.39 (henceforth Tr): seeJolliffe, Check-List, 111. For references to other texts using theninepoints scheme, see Valerie Edden, Index of Middle English Prose.Handlist XV: Manuscripts in Midland Libraries (Cambridge, UK: D.S.Brewer, 2000), 27.

(27.) See note 21.

(28.) Following a hint from Vincent Gillespie, Ralph Hanna, andMichael Sargent, Rohrhofer identified this passage in D as a translationfrom the Stimulus amoris.

(29.) Rolle, Prose and Verse.

(30.) The authors are grateful to Vincent Gillespie and Ralph Hannafor this information.

(31.) As the present essay defines itself as an introduction to D,Rohrhofer plans to publish in-depth results of the literary analysis inthe future.

(32.) For discussions on miscellanies and anthologies, see, e.g.,Julia Boffey and John S. Thompson, "Anthologies and Miscellanies:Production and Choice of Texts," in Book Production and Publishingin Britain 13751475, ed. Jeremy Griffiths and Derek Pearsall (Cambridge,UK: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 279-316; Stephen G. Nichols andSiegfried Wenzel, eds., The Whole Book: Cultural Perspectives on theMedieval Miscellany (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1996).

(33.) See Julia Boffey, "Short Texts in ManuscriptAnthologies: The Minor Poems of John Lydgate in Two Fifteenth-CenturyCollections," in The Whole Book: Cultural Perspectives on theMedieval Miscellany, ed. Stephen G. Nichols and Siegfried Wenzel (AnnArbor: University of Michigan Press, 1999), 73-74; see also the otheressays in the same volume; Boffey and Thompson, "Anthologies andMiscellanies," 279-316.

(34.) See, e.g., Elizabeth Dutton, Julian of Norwich: The Influenceof LateMedieval Devotional Compilations (Cambridge, UK: D. S. Brewer,2008), 3.

(35.) Angus Mcintosh, Michael Benskin, and M. L. Samuels, ALinguistic Atlas of Late Medieval English: County Dictionary, vol. 4(Aberdeen, Scotland: Aberdeen University Press, 1986), 250.

(36.) Mynors and Thomson, Catalogue of the Manuscripts, 69; Edden,Index of Middle English Prose, 28; Ralph Hanna, The English Manuscriptsof Richard Rolle: A Descriptive Catalogue, Exeter Medieval Texts andStudies (Exeter, UK: Exeter University Press, 2010), 66.

(37.) Hope Emily Allen, Writings Ascribed to Richard Rolle, HermitofHampole, and Materials for His Biography (New York and London: D. C.Heath and Oxford University Press, 1927), 261.

(38.) Ibid., 261. See also Edden, Index of Middle English Prose,28; Hanna, English Manuscripts, 66; Mynors and Thomson, Catalogue of theManuscripts, 69; Siegfried Wenzel, Latin Sermon Collections from LaterMedievalEngland (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 131.

(39.) The Stimulus amoris circulated in several versions, and theStimulus amoris minor, the Latin urtext composed by the Franciscan Jamesof Milan at the end of the thirteenth century, received considerableexpansion, forming the Stimulus amoris maior I and II, inEisermann's terminology: Falk Eisermann, Stimulus amoris: Inhalt,lateinische Uberlieferung, deutsche Ubersetzung, Rezeption (Tubingen,Germany: Max Niemeyer Verlag, 2001), 4-5. Michael Sargent counts 130manuscripts of the Stimulus amoris maior, ninety containing the Stimulusamoris minor, and a further 150 codices incorporating fragments, inMichael Sargent, "Bonaventura English: A Survey of the MiddleEnglish Prose Translations of Early Franciscan Literature," inSpatmittelalterliche geistliche Literatur in der Nationalsprache, vol.2, Analecta Cartusiana 106, ed. James Hogg (Salzburg, Austria: Institutfur Anglistik und Amerikanistik, 1983-1984), 159. Eisermann increasesthe number of complete and fragmentary Stimulus witnesses to fivehundred, of which thirty were circulating in England. The work'sreception history in England included its circulation in Latin versions,Walter Hilton's translation into the vernacular, and itsincorporation into new contexts; Eisermann, Stimulus amoris,227-229,521.

(40.) See Appendix B.

(41.) Ralph Hanna dates this part of Harley 1706 to the second halfof the fifteenth century; Hanna, English Manuscripts, 98.

(42.) James dates Tr to the early fifteenth century; M. R James,The Western Manuscripts in the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge: ADescriptive Catalogue,vol. 1 (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press,1900), 233.

(43.) Line numbers in D refer to the transcription in Appendix A

(44.) The fact that Tr and Har contain full copies of IXPoyntes isnot part of the argument on lineage, because the date when D lost itsfirst pages remains elusive.

(45.) Mynors and Thomson, Catalogue of the Manuscripts, 69,attribute this Latin ascription to the hand of John Foxholes OFM,archbishop of Armagh in the first half of the 1470s, who is referencedon 154r.

(46.) Hanna, English Manuscripts, 67-68; see also Wenzel, LatinSermon Collections, 125-131; and Richard Sharpe, A Handlist of the LatinWriters of Great Britain and Ireland before 1540 (Turnhout, Belgium:Brepols, 1997), 165.

(47.) Wenzel, Latin Sermon Collections, 125.

(48.) Ibid., 131.

(49.) Hanna, English Manuscripts, 66.

(50.) See note 17.

(51.) See Vincent Gillespie, "'Lukynge in halybukes': Lectio in Some Late Medieval Miscellanies," in Lookingin Holy Books: Essays on Late Medieval Religious Writing in England,Brepols Collected Essays in European Culture 3 (Turnhout, Belgium:Brepols, 2011), 136; Ralph Hanna, "Miscellaneity and Vernacularity:Conditions of Literary Production in Late Medieval England," in TheWhole Book: Cultural Perspectives on the Medieval Miscellany, ed.Stephen G. Nichols and Siegfried Wenzel (Ann Arbor: University ofMichigan Press, 1999), 37; Marleen Cre, Vernacular Mysticism in theCharterhouse: A Study of London, British Library, MS Additional 37790,Medieval Translator 9 (Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols, 2006), 20.

(52.) Eisermann, Stimulus amoris, 236-238; see also Ian Doyle,"A Survey of the Origins and Circulation of Theological Writings inEnglish in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries" (PhD thesis,Cambridge University, 1954), 207; Claire Kirchberger, ed. Introductionto The Goad of Love, attributed to Walter Hilton (London: Faber andFaber, 1952), 13-46.

(53.) See the variant readings Ogilvie-Thomson provides for 11.329-484; Rolle, Prose and Verse, 104-113. Rolle builds on Hugh ofStrasbourg's Compendium theologicae veritatis in this section; seeAllen, Writings Ascribed, 265; and Claire Elizabeth Mcllroy, The EnglishProse Treatises of Richard Rolle, Studies in Medieval Mysticism(Cambridge, UK: D.S. Brewer, 2004), 142.

(54.) See Annie Sutherland, "The Chastising of God'sChildren: A Neglected Text," in Text and Controversy from WycliftoBale: Essays in Honour of Anne Hudson, ed. Helen Barr and Ann M.Hutchison, Medieval Church Studies 4 (Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols, 2005),353-373, at 354-358.

(55.) On The Chastising as a devotional compilation andcontemplative text, see Rosalynn Voaden, "Rewriting the Letter:Variations in the Middle English Translation of the Epistola solitariiad reges of Alphonso ofJaen," in The Translation of the Works ofSaint Birgitta of Sweden into the Medieval European Vernaculars, ed.Bridget Morris and Veronica O'Mara, The Medieval Translator 7(Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols, 2000), 170-185; see also Marleen Cre,'"We Are United with God (and God with Us?)': AdaptingRuusbroec in The Treatise of Perfection of the Sons of God and TheChastising of God's Children," in The Medieval MysticalTradition in England VII, ed. E. A Jones (Cambridge: Brewer, 2004),21-36; and Marleen Cre, "Take a Walk on the Safe Side: Reading theFragments from Ruusbroec's Die geestelike brulocht in TheChastising of God's Children," in De letter levend maken:Opstellen aangeboden aan Guido de Baere bi) zijn zeventigste verjaardag,ed. Frans Hendrickx, and Kees Schepers, Miscellanea Neerlandica 39(Leuven, Belgium: Peeters, 2010), 233246. Also see Marleen Cre,"'[??]e han desired to knowe in comfort of 30ure soule':Female Agency in The Chastising of God's Children," Journal ofMedieval Religious Cultures 42.2 (2016): 164-180; and Marleen Cre,"Spiritual Comfort and Reasonable Feeling: Annotating TheChastising of God's Children in Oxford, Bodleian Library, MSRawlinson C 57," in Emotion andMedieval Textual Media, ed. Mary C.Flannery (Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols, forthcoming).

(56.) On the manuscripts of Disce mori and Ignorancia sacerdotum,see Jones, "Exhortation," xv-xxiii. For a list of the chaptersfrom The Chastising that occur in Disce mori, see ibid., xl.

(57.) As pointed out above, P addresses the text to a "deref(r)end" (over an erasure; see the variants listed in footnote inBazire-Colledge, p. 95), and Bazire and Colledge point out that the workof the corrector of P "consists not so much of textual improvementsand emendations as of manipulations of the text to make it appropriatefor reading in a house of male religious"; Bazire and Colledge,Chastising, 7-8.

(58.) Ibid., 36; and Sutherland, "Chastising," 356-357.

(59.) These variants are listed in Sargent, "NewManuscript."

(60.) Cre follows Michael Sargent in the naming of the correctors,deviating from Bazire and Colledge's practice of referring to themusing Greek letters. See Sargent, "New Manuscript," 62, n. 49.

(61.) Abbreviations have been silently expanded, and all italics inthe analysis of the variants listed below are Cre's. For the groupsof manuscripts that Bazire and Colledge distinguish, see Bazire andColledge, Chastising, 32.

(62.) The text in Add starts halfway through ch. 4, atBazire-Colledge 110/17.

(63.) Cre, "'[??]e han desired to knowe.'"

(64.) The AddDJPW sources have "yn to mynystracion"instead of the erroneous "into my mynistracion"(Bazire-Colledge 197/15)--caused by repetition of the initial letters of"mynistracion"--found in the other manuscripts. They also read"and accusith his ri3thwisnes," an abbreviation of the longer"accusib [??]e ri[??]twisnesse of god" (199/13). Yet D agreeswith all manuscripts against AddBJPW when it has "and aboue alvertwis werkis" (cf. 139/16) rather than "aboue all uertuswerkis."

(65.) DJP against Add: in alle [??]yng mot be fulfilled (cf.Bazire-Colledge 112/17: in al [??]inge ewer mote be fulfilled; Add has"myght"); DJP: [??]at blissidful ladi fond grace a[??]enstpride (cf. 137/9: [??]at blissful ladi fonde grace a[??]ens pride);ADHLRTW against AddJP: also y trowe not [??]e desire as for [??]owreself (cf. 152/19: also I suppose [??]e desiren it nat as for[??]0ureself; Add omits "I suppose"); DJP against Add: [??]atwe leue owre goude wurchyng (cf. 157/7-8: [??]at if we leeue oure goodeworchyng; Add omits "[??]at if'); DEJeLa: erroneous "apriuat a temperal ioye" against AddJPW: apriue temperal ioye (cf.183/17-18: apriuat temperal ioie); DJP against Add: for as saith seyntaugstyn [??]ere ech synne is not wilful is no synne. but ban it bewilful [??]at is to saye no deidly synne (cf. 201/1921: for as sei[??]seint austyn, [??]at eche synne [??]at is nat wilful is no dedeli synne;there is eyeskip here in Add, which omits "is no dedeli synne. Butal be it suche temptacions bien no synne [??]at bien nat wilful").That this was a difficult sentence with which many scribes had problemscan be seen in the many variant readings (cf. Bazire-Colledge 201, n.20).

(66.) All these instances are recorded in Bazire and Colledge,Chastising. D agrees with the majority of manuscripts whenever theydisagree with the BHeJeLa group and whenever they disagree with a uniquereading in another manuscript or W, unless listed in the variants inthis essay.

(67.) The only variant reading that is not the omission orsubstitution of an article, demonstrative or possessive, is thefollowing: AddDHaJPW: pat is trauelid with eny spice of pride (cf.Bazire-Colledge 207/4-5: pat is trauelid with ony spirit of pride). TheAddDHaJPW sources have the more common reading here, but when"spirit of pride" means "the urge to pride" (seeMiddle English Dictionary, s.v. spirit (n.), meaning 4c(b)), the textalso makes sense.

(68.) The differences are of the same kind as the ones discussedearlier between AddDJP and the other manuscripts: omissions andadditions of single words, use of synonymous words, and smallgrammatical changes such as the use of singular or plural forms of nounsand pronouns and the use of different verb forms. On the significance ofthe uniform transmission of texts, see Daniel Wakelin, ScribalCorrection and Literary Craft: English Manuscripts 1375-1510 (Cambridge,UK: Cambridge University Press, 2014), 3-10 and 43-53.

(69.) The phrase "the secwnde sekt of contrarios leuyng"(cf. Bazire-Colledge 134/10) is the one instance in which the wordreturns. The other three chapters simply speak of people who livecontrary to virtuous living: "which lyue contrariousli to all manervertwis" (cf. 130/11); "he leuyth yn al maner contrariete tohaue pe loue of god" (cf. 138/17); "O[??]ir men [??]er be ofcontrarious leuyng" (cf. 142/14).

(70.) Bazire and Colledge choose B on the basis of its superiorreadings--of which they give three examples (Bazire and Colledge,33)--and because it is a copy "for which it can be justly claimedthat it is physically perfect, whereas other good and carefulmanuscripts, such as A, Add and J are not"; ibid., 33. Thus, ratherthan editing T as corrected by corrector Tc on the basis of He, theychoose to "present readers with the most nearly perfect manuscript,and to emend that where emendation seemed necessary andwarrantable"; ibid., 34. Bazire and Colledge do not always emendthe B reading when it disagrees with all other manuscripts, probablybecause they do not consider the variations significant enough.

(71.) Wakelin, Scribal Correction, 78-81. Also see Michael G.Sargent, James Grenehalgh as Textual Critic, Analecta Cartusiana 85.1-2(Salzburg, Austria: Institut fur Anglistik und Amerikanistik, 1984).

(72.) Of these twenty-five, the following are the most significant:ADJeLaPR: Now we schul knowe be presence of owre lorde ihesu (cf.Bazire-Colledge 105/5: How mowen we haue [??]e presence of oure lordiesu crist); DPRW: whan [??]ere was but litil eny congregacioun o/monkis(cf. 162/15: whanne [??]er were butfewe monkes); DLPRT: to vexe hem soor(cf. 163/15: to trauele hem soore); DHLPRTW: bot be stereyng of anoper(cf. 164/14: but be strengpe of anober); DHLPRTW: for brekyng of behestof deedli thyng (cf. 89/12: for brekyng of biheeste of an erpli bing).

(73.) A direct link between two Chastising manuscript is lateral,as T and He were corrected against each other. All corrections by Tcderive from He, and He has indeed been corrected against a manuscriptfrom the LRT group. Hec also left corrective notes in T. See Sargent,"New Manuscript," 59.

(74.) Indeed, in this passage, the opening of chapter 26, D sharesreadings with all other manuscripts against P, which has clearlyerroneous readings:

D: [??]at [??]at is leifful (P: "vnleful," with"vn" erased) (cf. BazireColledge 214/19) D: [??]at [??]at isleifful (P: "vnlieful") (cf. 214/22)

D: [??]ynges [??]at beb leifful (P: "vnlieful") (cf.215/2)

It is a meydful riwle in general ordir of louyng to a man or womanwhich hath do vnleiffulli: bat he refrayne hym self / from [??]at /[??]at is leifful [paragraph] In bis refreynyng we most holde twe byngis/ [??]at is to seie: [??]e maner of satisfaccion / and [??]e neyd ofpurgacion [paragraph] [??]e maner of satisfaccion is : [??]at after[??]e trespas refreynyng of [??]at [??]at is leifful / be mesurid beauctorite of holy churche / [??]at aftir [??]e wordis of seynt John: wemowe do worthi fruytis of penawnce / bot [??]is maner of satisfaccionlongith to hym to knowe [??]at hath cure of saule / as it is write ynholi chirche lawe / to [??]0W it nedith nat to knowe [??]er fore y passeouyr of satisfaccion. [paragraph] Bot now to schewe [??]0W of be nyed ofpurgacion of [??]e saule: [??]e schul vndirstonde [??]at it is onlimeydful to refreyne fram [??]ynges [??]at beb leifful for satisfaccionbot also to vse affliccions or trauayl in gostli werkyng owtward to puta wai possessions or make hem lasse which we haue yn custom / for ytrowe eche man and woman hath som traueyl with 00 byng more [??]an withan o[??]ir/ and [??]at traueyl we clepe a passyon. (D, fols. 95v-96r)

cf. Bazire-Colledge 214/17-215/7:

It is a nedeful rule in general ordre of livyng to a man or wommanwhich ha[??] do vnlieffuli, [??]at he refreyne hymself for [??]at whicheis leeful. In this refreyneng we musten holde twei [??]inges: [??]at isto seie, [??]e maner of satisfaccion, and nede of purgacion. The manerof satisfaccion is pat aftir the trespas, be refreyneng of [??]at [??]atis leeful be mesured bi auctorite of holi chirche, [??]at aftir [??]ewordis of seint joon, we mowe do wor[??]i fruytes of penaunce; but[??]is maner of satisfaccion longi[??] to hym to knowe [??]at ha[??]cure of soule, as it is writen in holi chirche lawe. To [??]0U itnedi[??] nat to knowe: [??]erfor I passe ouer of satisfaccion. But nowto shewe [??]0U of [??]e nede of purgacion of [??]e soule: [??]e shulvndirstonde [??]at it is nat oonli nedeful to refreyne of [??]inges[??]at bien lieful for satisfaccion, but also to use affliccions ortrauaile in goostli werkyng outward to put awei passions, or make hemlasse, which we han in custom; for I trowe eche man and womman ha[??]sum trauaile wi[??] oon [??]ing more [??]an ano[??]er, and [??]at trauelwe clepen a passion.

(75.) The two most obviously nonsensical errors are D: to hiscostly fadre (cf. Bazire-Colledge 111/8: to his goostli fadir); and D:to mennys cwoieng (cf. 119/15: to mennys knowynge). In two instances,the scribe ends copying in mid-word: D: a[??]ens such tempta (cf.151/15-16: a[??]ens suche temptations); and D: [??]e chasti [??]at hesufferith (cf. 199/6-7: [??]e chastisynge [??]at he suffri[??]).

(76.) On scribes' making and thinking, see Wakelin, ScribalCorrection, 3-10.

(77.) Some examples should suffice: D: I haue rehersid schortlihere (cf. Bazire-Colledge 99/15: I haue rehersid heere schortli); D:[??]at fulli he is beclupid (cf. 102/21: [??]at he is fulli beclipped);D: yn his blisse be his merci (cf. 148/22: bi his merci in his blisse);D: cownseile and cownfort o[??]ir (cf. 150/11: counceil o[??]er andcomforten); D: god hath [??]if me and put in me (cf. 155/3-4: god ha[??]put in me and [??]0ue me); D: al ordynaunce and obseruawnce (cf.192/11-12: alle [??]e obseruaunces and ordenauncis); D: myekli to suffrewith wte eny gruchchyng (cf. 199/14-15: mekeli wi[??]out grucchynge tosuffre); D: remedies a[??]enst dredful goostli temptacions (cf.205/12-13: remedies a[??]ens goostli dredful temptacions).

(78.) Folio 38v, left-hand margin, bracketed, in red: "of[??]e dro/pesie" next to "wexe seke for colde [??]anne [??]aifalle yn to [??]e dropsie" (cf. BazireColledge 125/16-17).

(79.) Folio 39v, left-hand margin, cropped, bracketed, in red:"[[??]is i]s [??]e coti/[di]ane fe/[u]yr" next to "Thisis a cotidian fyuere" (cf. Bazire-Colledge 126/20), and "[?][??]e feuyr / [ter]cian [??]at co/myth of an /[h]ete" next to"[??]e secunde feuyr is clepid a tercia" (cf. 127/3); fol.40v, left-hand margin, cropped, bracketed, in red: "[?] [??]etercian / [fy]euer bat is / [ca]wsid of colde" next to "[??]esecunde fieuer of vnstabilnes is cawsid of colde" (cf. 128/12);fol. 41r, right-hand margin, cropped, bracketed, in red: "Of [??]equar[t]/yn fyeu[er]" next to "In some men [??]e quarteynfyeuyris cawsid of [??]is vnstabilnesse" (cf. 129/10-11).

(80.) Folio 89r, right-hand margin, cropped, in red:"Pri[de]" next to "a[??]enst Pride" (cf.Bazire-Colledge 206/12); folio 89v, left-hand margin, cropped, inred:" [C] oueytise" next to "A[??]enst coueytise"(cf. 207/11); folio 90v, left-hand margin, cropped, in red: "[W]rathe" next to "A[??]enst wrathe" (cf. 208/20); folio91r, right-hand margin, cropped, in red: "Enuy[e]" next to"A[??]enst enuye" (cf. 209/10); folio 92r, right-hand margin,cropped, in red: "Slewt[h]" next to "A[??]enstslewth" (cf. 210/12); folio 93r, right-hand margin, cropped, inred: "Gloteny[e]" next to "A[??]enst glotonye" (cf.211/15); folio 93v, left-hand margin, in red: "Lecherie" nextto "A[??]enst lecherie" (cf. 212/11).

(81.) FoUo 70v, left-hand margin: "helyseus" next to"helyseus" (cf. BazireColledge 169/16)and"balthasar"nextto "balthasar" (cf. 169/17-18).

(82.) Folio 50v: contra superbiam; folio 51r: contra auariciam;folio 52r: contra iram; folio 52v: contra inuidiam; foho 53r: contraaccidiam; foho 53v: contra gulam; foho 54r: contra luxuriam.

(83.) This often seems to have been the case. In Wakelin'ssurvey of the corrections in manuscripts from the Huntington Library,"the overall results show a clear tendency for correcting to bedone by the people who do the copying itself." Wakelin, ScribalCorrection, 72ff.

(84.) Folio lOr: marginal correction "wych" to beinserted instead of the crossed-out words in "takyng away anymannys name or fame [??]if [??]e spekyng oper"; foho 18r: marginalcorrection "[??]e tym" and caret ([at.sup. *]) in the text in"in to * [??]at hit pleise god for his grete pite to cownfort hymbe grace"; foho 68r: marginal correction "many," andcaret ([at.sup. *]) in the text in "Of bis we mowe se [ful .sup.*]of ensawmplis" (cf. Bazire-Colledge 166/9-10); foho 72r:interlinear correction "man and woman" in "euery *scholde mekeli drede visions" (cf. 182/11-12); foho 90r: marginaladdition "X ihu" and caret ([at .sup.*]) in the text in"for ei[??]er he wil ordeyne for hem [[??]at.sup. *] neydith (cf.208/3-4); foho 99r: marginal correction "[??]c" and caret ([at.sup.*]) in the text in "[??]at * falle not yn to temptacion"(cf. 219/18-19).

(85.) Next to the chapter opening, another hand has erroneouslywritten caxij.

(86.) See Sutherland, "Chastising," 355-357.

WORKS CITED

Manuscripts

Cambridge, Magdalene College, MS Pepys 2125.

Cambridge, St. John's College, MS E.25.

Cambridge, Trinity College, MS B.14.19.

Cambridge, Trinity College, MS B. 15.39.

Hereford, Cathedral Library, MS P. 1.9.

Liverpool, University Library, MS F.40.10.

London, British Library, MS Additional 33971.

London, British Library, MS Harley 1706.

London, British Library, MS Harley 2218.

London, British Library, MS Harley 6615.

Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Ashmole 41.

Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Bodley 505.

Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Bodley 923.

Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Don. e. 247.

Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Eng. th. c. 57.

Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Laud. Misc. 99.

Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Rawlinson C57.

Oxford, Jesus College, MS 39.

Wynkyn de Worde's printed edition of The Chastising ofGod's Children. Yale, Beinecke Library, MS Osborn fa46 (ohmTaunton, Somerset Record Office, MS Heneage 3084).

Primary Texts

Bazire, Joyce, and Eric Colledge, eds. The Chastising of God'sChildren and The Treatise of Perfection of the Sons of God. Oxford:Basil Blackwell, 1957.

Saint Bonaventura. S.R.E. Cardinalis S. Bonaventurae ex ordineminorum episcopi Albanensis, eximii ecclesiae doctoris, opera omnia.Vol. 12, ed. Adolphe Charles Peltier. Paris: Vives, 1868.

Horstmann, Carl. Yorkshire Writers: Richard Rolle of Hampole, anEnglish Father of the Church, and His Followers. Vol. 2. London:Sonnenschein, 1895-1896.

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

Secondary Texts

Allen, Hope Emily, ed. English Writings of Richard Rolle, Hermit ofHampole, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1963.

---. Writings Ascribed to Richard Rolle, Hermit of Hampole, andMaterials for His Biography. New York and London: D.C. Heath and OxfordUniversity Press, 1927.

Bazire, Joyce. "The Dialects of the Manuscripts of TheChastising of God's Children."English and Germanic Studies 6(1957): 64-78.

Boffey, Julia. "Short Texts in Manuscript Anthologies: TheMinor Poems of John Lydgate in Two Fifteenth-Century Collections."In The Whole Book: Cultural Perspectives on the Medieval Miscellany, ed.Stephen G. Nichols and Siegfried Wenzel, 69-82. Ann Arbor: University ofMichigan Press, 1999.

--- and John S. Thompson. "Anthologies and Miscellanies:Production and Choice of Texts." In Book Production and Publishingin Britain 13751475, ed. Jeremy Griffiths and Derek Pearsall, 279-316.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1989.

Cre, Marleen. "Spiritual Comfort and Reasonable Feeling:Annotating The Chastising of God's Children in Oxford, BodleianLibrary, MS Rawhnson C 57." In Emotion and Medieval Textual Media,ed. Mary C. Flannery. Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols, forthcoming.

--- "'[??]e han desired to knowe in comfort of [??]0uresoule': Female Agency in The Chastising of God'sChildren." Journal of Medieval Religious Cultures 42.2 (2016):164-180.

--- "Take a Walk on the Safe Side: Reading the Fragments fromRuusbroec's Die geestelike brulocht in The Chastising of God'sChildren." In De letter levend maken: Opstellen aangeboden aanGuido de Baere bij zijn zeventigste verjaardag, ed. Frans Hendrickx andKees Schepers, 233-246. Miscellanea Neerlandica 39. Leuven, Belgium:Peeters, 2010.

--- Vernacular Mysticism in the Charterhouse: A Study of London,British Library, MS Additional 37790. Medieval Translator 9. Turnhout,Belgium: Brepols, 2006.

--- '"We Are United with God (and God with Us?)':Adapting Ruusbroec in The Treatise of Perfection of the Sons of God andThe Chastising of God's Children." In The Medieval MysticalTradition in England VII, ed. E. A. Jones, 21-36. Cambridge, UK: Brewer,2004.

Dickens, A. G. Reformation Studies. London: Hambledon Press, 1982.

Donadoni, Emilio. "The Chastysing of Godde'sChildren." In Valuable Manuscripts and Printed Books: Sale 1550; 21May 2014. London: Christie's, 2014.

Doyle, Ian. "A Survey of the Origins and Circulation ofTheological Writings in English in the Fourteenth and FifteenthCenturies." PhD thesis, Cambridge University, 1954.

Dutton, Elizabeth. Julian of Norwich: Thelnfluence of Late-MedievalDevotional Compilations. Cambridge, UK: D.S. Brewer, 2008.

Edden, Valerie. Index of Middle English Prose. Handlist XV:Manuscripts in Midland Libraries. Cambridge, UK: D.S. Brewer, 2000.

Eisermann, Falk. Stimulus amoris: Inhalt, lateinischeUberlieferung, deutsche Ubersetzung, Rezeption. Tubingen, Germany: MaxNiemeyer Verlag, 2001.

Gillespie, Vincent. '"Lukynge in haly bukes': Lectioin Some Late Medieval Miscellanies." In Looking in Holy Books:Essays on Late Medieval Religious Writing in England. Brepols CollectedEssays in European Culture 3. Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols, 2011. 113-144.

Hanna, Ralph. The English Manuscripts of Richard Rolle: ADescriptive Catalogue. Exeter Medieval Texts and Studies. Exeter, UK:Exeter University Press, 2010.

--- "Miscellaneity and Vernacularity: Conditions of LiteraryProduction in Late Medieval England." In The Whole Book: CulturalPerspectives on the Medieval Miscellany, ed. Stephen G. Nichols andSiegfried Wenzel, 37-52. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1999.

Innes-Parker, Catherine. "The Legacy of Ancrene Wisse:Translations, Adaptations, Influences and Audience, with SpecialAttention to Women Readers." In A Companion to Ancrene Wisse, ed.Yoko Wada, 145-173. Cambridge, UK: D.S. Brewer, 2003.

James, M. R. The Western Manuscripts in the Library of TrinityCollege, Cambridge: A Descriptive Catalogue.Vol. 1. Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press, 1900.

Jolliffe, P. S. A Check-List of Middle English Prose Writings ofSpiritual Guidance. Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies,1974.

Jones, E. A, ed. The "Exhortation"from Disce mori: Editedfrom Oxford, Jesus College, MS 39. Heidelberg, Germany:Universitatsverlag Winter, 2006.

Kirchberger, Claire, ed. Introduction to The Goad of Love,attributed to Walter Hilton. London: Faber and Faber, 1952.

Lewis, Robert E., Norman Francis Blake, and A S. G. Edwards. Indexof Printed Middle English Prose. New York: Garland, 1985.

Mcllroy, Claire Elizabeth. The English Prose Treatises of RichardRolle. Studies in Medieval Mysticism. Cambridge, UK: D.S. Brewer, 2004.

Mcintosh, Angus, Michael Benskin, and M. L. Samuels. A LinguisticAtlas of Late Medieval English: County Dictionary. Vol. 4. Aberdeen,Scotland: Aberdeen University Press, 1986.

Mynors, R A B., and R Thomson. Catalogue of the Manuscripts ofHereford Cathedral Library. Cambridge, UK: D.S. Brewer, 1993.

Nichols, Stephen G., and Siegfried Wenzel, eds. The Whole Book:Cultural Perspectives on the Medieval Miscellany. Ann Arbor: Universityof Michigan Press, 1996.

Sargent, Michael G. "Bishops, Patrons, Mystics andManuscripts: Walter Hilton, Nicholas Love and the Arundel and HollandConnections." In Middle English Texts in Transition: A FestschriftDedicated to Toshiyuki Takamiya on his 70th Birthday, ed. Simon Horobinand Linne Mooney, 159-177. York, UK: York Medieval Press, 2014.

---. James Grenehalgh as Textual Critic. Analecta Cartusiana 85.1-2(Salzburg, Austria: Institut fur Anglistik und Amerikanistik, 1984).

--- "Bonaventura English: A Survey of the Middle English ProseTranslations of Early Franciscan Literature." InSpatmittelalterliche geistliche Literatur in der Nationalsprache. Vol 2.Analecta Cartusiana 106, ed. James Hogg, 145-176. Salzburg, Austria:Institut fur Anglistik undAmerikanistik, 1983-1984.

--- "A New Manuscript of The Chastising of God's Childrenwith an Ascription to Walter Hilton." Medium Aevum 46 (1977):49-65.

Sharpe, Richard. A Handlist of the Latin Writers of Great Britainand Ireland before 1540. Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols, 1997.

Sutherland, Annie. "The Chastising of God's Children: ANeglected Text." In Text and Controversy from Wyclifto Bale: Essaysin Honour of Anne Hudson, ed. Helen Barr and Ann M. Hutchison, 353-373.Medieval Church Studies 4. Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols, 2005.

Voaden, Rosalynn. "Rewriting the Letter: Variations in theMiddle English Translation of the Epistolasolitarii ad reges of AlphonsoofJaen." In The Translation of the Works of Saint Birgitta ofSweden into the Medieval European Vernaculars, ed. Bridget Morris andVeronica O'Mara, 170185. The Medieval Translator 7. Turnhout,Belgium: Brepols, 2000.

Wakehn, Daniel. Scribal Correction and Literary Craft: EnglishManuscripts 1375-1510. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2014.

Wenzel, Siegfried. Latin Sermon Collections from Later MedievalEngland. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2005.

APPENDIX A:

Transcription of the First Booklet of Oxford,

Bodleian Library, MS Don. e. 247

Method of transcription: to rephcate D's text as closely aspossible, the original word division has been retained, which means thatparts of compound words that have been written separately in themanuscript have not been joined in the transcription. Equally, formsthat were written together have also been recorded as such.

D's scribe uses v in word-initial position in all but sixcases, where he wrote u, and his spelling is reflected in the followingpages. Abbreviations have been expanded in italics in accordance withthe majority of unabbreviated forms, punctuation has been modernized tomake the text more readable, and capitalization has been regularized toagree with the editorial decisions on punctuation.

Most of the incongruencies and omissions have not been corrected inthe text, because the reader will be able to resolve these erroneousreadings readily by referring to the variants in Appendix B. As a rule,notes are only used in cases where reference to the variants would notresult in clarity, and editorial alterations to the text are marked withsquare brackets.

Only extant in four manuscripts, the IX Poyntes extract in D hasbeen compared to London, British Library, MS Harley 1706 (Har, asprinted in Horstmann), Cambridge, Trinity College, MS B.15.39 (Tr), andHereford, Cathedral Library, MS P. I. IX (Hf). From the start of theStimulus amoris segment in line 25, the variants refer to Hf only. Inthe variants section (Appendix B), abbreviations have been expandedsilently, and marginal additions have been identified with an asterisk.

[fol. lr] [extract[Florin]romIXPoyntes] in thili[??]t. [paragraph]Forgodisseruant scholde neuer more thenke, ne speke, ne do bote as hewolde in [??]e presence ofhis lorde. For certenli al [??]at [??]ouspekest and dost god seye as ueralich as [??]ou wer in his presence[??]er oure ladi sit in heue [n]. For godis loue take hede. 3if[??]ouart aschamid for to do a 5 dedly synne be fore thyn euencristen, [??]ewich is frele and sinful as [??]ou art and may no[??]t greue but[??]ibodi, moche more scholdest [??]ou be agast to synne bi fore thi god[??]at neuere trespased andschalbe [??]i domesman at [??]e dai ofdome.[paragraph] The ix poynt is, in cas [??]at [??]ou my[??]t come to [??]eparfeccion of [??]is poyntes, [??][alpha]t [??]ou knowlech [??]at hit isa grete grace of godis goudnesse [??]at he wil woch saue to [??]eue[??]e so muche grace of 10 parfeccion. Natheles oft be thenke [??]e ofo[??]er many benfait[??] of god how hath worschiped [??]i soule beenpreyntyng ofhis owene ymage, and how he hath taken thi kynde andsuffred for thi loue despites deth, andhowhath grauntes to be [??]i fodein [??]is lif and wil be [??]i ioie and thi blisse in an o[??]er lif.

Andforencheison[??]at[??]oumy[??]t [fol. lv] now sen hem in hisgodhed whiles 15 [??]ou art in [??]is worlde, oft [??]erfore beholde hymin his manhode hongyngfor [??]e on the crois, and haue sorwe andconpassion hym, as [??]ou haddest and suffredest alle his wondes and hispaynes in [??]i bodi. And be inward sori[??]at[??]ou mi[??]t not fele in[??]e be [??]e paynes [??]at he suffred for [??]e, synful wrecche.[THORN]e thoghtes ofte haue in mynde and speciallich wanne he lieth onthe auter arte masse, and say to hym in this manere: 20 'Lord ihesucrist, [??]ou [??]at art bred of lif [??][alpha]t cometh out of heuene,so fede me and fulfille me with [??]e, so [??]at I haue non hongur afterno thyng bot [??]e. And so make me drynke wrth [??]i bloude and of thiloue [??]at I be nou[??]t a [??]erst bot after [??]e. Lorde hold sofaste my soule and my loue to [??]e [??][alpha]t for non o[??]ere louene for synne ne be neuere departid fro me. Amen.' 25 [Stimulusextracts and additions] For encheson [??]at loue may alle do with anymysdo, and loue is [??]e rote of parfeccion of alle vertues, and [??]emore [??]ou hast of god loue, [??]e betre [??]ou art, and [??]e moreliche to god, and nere to blisse. For [fol. 2r] all [??]e mesure ofgoudloue schalle [??]eue [??]e mesure ofblisse in heuen, and [??]ere fore[??]er is non bettre to man o[??]er woman [??]an for to studie how hemay in god loue. 30 Certis wonderful is [??]e vertu ofloue, for hitenclineth god to erthe and rereth (1) mannys saule to heuen, and god and[??]i saule knytte[??] to gedre in ioie and in blisse. Loue make[??]man, for he maketh frende and [??]e seruant child. The abhominable hemake[??] glorious and [??]e sori ioious. [THORN]e colde he make[??]hoot, and [??]e derke he maki[??] bri[??]th, and [??]e harde he makithnesche.

35 As witnesseth [??]e deuout saule in [??]e boke ofloue spekyng togod in [??]is manere: An[y] saule melti[??] arte [??]e speche of hym[??]at I loue. O worde amable. O worde dilettable. I vnworthi wrecche[??]at am not worthi be clepid on of godes

creatures, bot how am y so muche loued of[??]e [??]at my hertmeltith at [??]e speche of[??]e. O brennyng of trewe loue, moche is[??]i mi[??]th. Fforhertofor myn herte was as drie and 40 as harde as[fol. 2v] ston. And now thorw [??]e uertu of my saule is multen in me. Ogoud loue, what may 13eue the [??][alpha]t [??]ou woldest euere moredwelle with me ? Ffor wondurful is [??]i uertu [??][alpha]t turnest mein to god and god in to me.

What is more my[??]tti) orswettere, orgladdere,ornoblere[??]an[??]ou? Certis no thyng. [THORN]ou bindest god to [??]epiler. [THORN]ou puttest [??]e croune of thorne vp on his hede. 45[THORN]ou henghym opon [??]e crois and nailedest hym[??]er to. [THORN]ouopinidest his blissed hert with [??]e scharpe spere, out of[??]e wichcom water and bloude in remission ofmannys trespas. Wasch wel thi saulein [??]at bathe, and [??]anne schalt [??]ou haue with [??]evertu ofbrennyng loue.

O blissful loue, [??]ou makest me morne, and loue lonynge afteroure spouse 50 ihesu crist, and desire hym alone. O loue desirous[??][alpha]t fulfillest [??]e hongri of soueraigne delites. For at alouelich worde of [??]e my saule is molt in me. O [??]ou swete saule,[??]if[??]ou art milte at o swete worde of[??]i spouse, what likyng werehitto[??]e[??]ifhewoldeklippeandkisse[??]e.Certesnotongemaytelle,[fol.3r] and[??]ere fore, [??]if[??]ou wilt be parfite, lerne for [??]equike to feer in thyn herte, and ther fore thou

55 schalt vnderstonde [??]at aman [??]at is colde becomyth hoot indiuers maneris: be clothyng of many clothis, be goyng to [??]e fier, betrauaillyng ofbody, hoot spices, and strong drynke. So gosdich, [??]if[??]ou wilt wer hoot in [??]e loue of god, do on many clothes ofvertu,for vertu is clothes to mannys saule. Ho so lakke[??] o vertu, his sauleis naked in o partie, and [??]er fore [??]if[??]ou wilt be hoot, alle aboute clothe thi saule with

60 many vertues, so [??][alpha]t non lakke to [??]e. And sit oftebi[??]e brennyng fier ofloue [??]at crist aqueked in his brennynge andbetir passion, and thenke ofte on [??]e loue of god and charite towardman, and of blyndnesse and [??]e malice of man toward god.

For [??]if hit is so [??]at godis sone wolde one (2) to hymmankynde withioute dep[alpha]rtyng, how muche more schulde oure sauleone hym self to god, and euermore

65 cleue to hym withoute dep[alpha]rtyng? Certes[??]ifgoddes sonewolde ofsobrennyngloue one hym a sonys to mankynd, moche more schuldeman [fol. 3v] open his hert for to receyue hym to dwelle [??]ere ynne.What wodnesse is in [??]at man [??]at make[??] hym cloose his herte togod, and openeth hit to wrecchidnesse, likyng to [??]e deuille, to [??]eworlde, and to [??]e flesch. For certis goddissone toke no[??]t mannisflesch for a man

70 scholde loue lykyng ofhis flesch, bot as he dwellyng and beyngin flesch punisched and (3) painde his flesch, and left [??]e likyngesofhis flesch. And his saule was euer cleyuyng to god be loue. So a mandwellyng in flesche scholde leue and destroie [??]e likynges ofhisflesch and euere haue his saule to god bi loue and contemplacion.[paragraph] Alias muche his [??]e blyndnesse of man [??][alpha]t is madeofbodi and saule. And [??]e

75 saule with oute comparison is bettre [??]anne [??]e bodie.Natheles, alle his tyme he spende[??] aboute his likynges and thenges[??]at longe[??] to[??]ebodi,anda boute his saule hath he non besenessefor to fede hym, for to norische hym, ne for to resten hym in god, [??]ewiche were more bettre and more delettable with outen comparison.[paragraph] Cer[fol. 4r] tes [??]ey a saule were worse [??]anne a best,[??]it he scholde loue god

80 to whom he is liche, for eche thyng loue[??] kendlich [??]at isliche to hym. And [??]ere fore my saule, [??]if[??]ou wilt algate loueflesch, loue no flesch bot cristes flesch, [??]at for [??]e andalmankynde hangyd on tre andpayned witnoute mesure greuouslich Here on[??]enke continualli for[??]e meditacion of cristes passion rerith manyssaule and his mende to heuene, and techi[??] what he schal do, and heschal [??]enke, and speke. And

85 for[??]ermore hit schal quike [??]isaule[??]emore able toparfeccion and trauail and make [??]e holde litel be [??]i self, and inthynkyng worchyng schal make [??]eparfit in[??]e loue of. (4)

O passion desirous. O deth wonderful. What is more wonderful [??]andeth [??]at quiketh, [??]an wondes[??][alpha]t helen,[??]anblod[??][alpha]t maketh whit and clenseth, [??]an sorwe [??]at 90glade[??] ? [THORN]e openynge ofhis syde heuyth oure herte to his hert.Bot [??]it sese no[??]t for to wondre, for[??]e sonne wannehe wasderkeschynedmore bri3th, [??]e fieraquaynt more hete[??],[??]e welldried [foL4v] morewelleth[??]epassionAndcertesouerwonderfulhit is [??]atcrist in [??]e croce thurstyng made drynke, he naked clo[??]ed vswj'th vertues, his hondes nayled to [??]e tre vnbynde[??] ourehondes, his feet (5) nailid to [??]e croce make[??] vs 95 renne to hym.Be [??]e way ofloue and goude werkes and out sendyng his saule, heenspireth gostli lif in to oure soule.

O passion meruaillous [??]at makest hym [??][alpha]t thenky[??] ofton[??]e no[??]t onlich euen with angeles bot passe angeles to [??]eliknesse of almi[??]tti god. Ffor he [??]at dwelleth in meditacion becristes turment and wondes take[??] non hede ofhym self, bot his god

100 paynid for hym. He desireth [to] bere [??]e croce with hislorde, and in [??][alpha]t he berith hym, he berithheuene and erthe. Hedesireth to be coronnyd with thomes as his lorde was, and in [??]at heis coroned with hope of ioie endless. He desireth to hange naked on[??]e croce with his lorde, and in [??][alpha]t he is clothed withclothyng ofvertues. He wil with crist drynke ofhis bear drinke, andcrist hym drynkesse with soueraigne wyne of [fol. 105 5r] swetnesse. Hewol be paynid with hym on [??]e croce, and in [??]at angeles hymworschippith and oure ladi hym taketh as here owne sone. [paragraph] Thesorwe of cristes in man other woman torneth hym to gladnesse and[??]epayne to ese, and whanne a man desireth to hange on [??]e croce withcrist and suffre [??][alpha]t he suffred, criste hym take[??],kisse[??], and clippeth (6) as his owene brother and childe.

110 O passion amable and delectable. [paragraph] Alias, alias, whinaddy ben don on [??]e croce with hym, andhonde andfootnayledto hym?[THORN]annemi[??]t Ihauedeydwithhym and be beried with hym, and neuerehaue departidfrom hym And[??]ere fore certes [??]if I ne may no[??]t do[??]us bodelich, I will do thus gostlich and entre in to hym, and in hymI wil me [??]re dwellynges. On is in hondes, on is in feet, [??]e[??]ridde in hert. [THORN]ere I wil

115 reste, and slepe, and ete, and drinke, rede, and synge, andpraye, and alle my nedes tret and speke. [THORN]ere I schal speke withswete hert, and alle [??][alpha]t me nedi[??] y schal purchace ofhymalone. [THORN]ermay [fol. 5v] non enemy me greue ne disese,and[??]erfore wil I abide and dwelle for euer more.

And in [??]is manere schal I folowe [??]e stappis ofhis swetemodre, whas saule [??]e

120 swerd of sorwe p[alpha]rced in the tyme ofhis paynful passyon.To her I wil speke sekerlich and to what thyng me like[??] I schalencline her, and onlich I wil apeere I crucified with hir son, bot alsoI wil go to chirche and bicom a litil childe with my lorde, meke andinnocent as a lombe. I schal medle [??]e moderis milke with [??]echildes bloude [??]at schal quenche al [??]e mislikyng of my flesch andof my saule.

125 O swete woundes of oure lord ihesu crist. O [??]e blyndnesse ofman [??]at ha[??] no mende ne no reward to his wondes [??][alpha]tbe[??] [??]e gates of p[alpha]radis opend for I go in. Ne knowe I now3t[??]at crist is [??]e ioie and [??]e delites ofhem [??][alpha]t bein inblisse. Whi [??]anne be [??]ai slowe for to entre in to hym be [??]eopon gates ofhis wondes? Be holde how[??]e gates of p[alpha]radis be[??]iopenedwith o scharp swerde. Be holde [??]e tre oflif bo[??]e in

130 braunche [fol. 6r] and in frut, fulle of holis oueralle. Inwiche holis bot [??]ou sette [??]i foot of[??]i loue, [??]ou schaltneuer take [??]e fruyt of[??]e tre. Be holde now on is openyd [??]etresour ofgodis whom and of endeles delites. Of[??]at I ne hadde be in[??]e stede of[??]e spere [??]at wente in to cristes syde and yn to hysherte. Certes I wolde neuer haue comen out be my wille. Boty wolde hauesayde: 'Here is my restefor euer more.

135 Here I wil dwelle, for I haue chosun [??]is place'. Alias[??]e folly of men [??]at chese[??] for to dwel in [??]e worde, in [??]eflesch, and in [??]e places [??][alpha]t ben vnclene, wrecchid, andsinful, and for to haue goddes sone [??][alpha]t is souereyn goudnesse,ioie and blisse, ne wil entre in to hym be his open woundes, hauynggeinwardlich mende [??]ere on.

O my saule [??]ou art maked to [??]e liknesse of god. Ho mute holde[??]e with [??]i

140 self. Lo how[??]i swete spouse is wonded for[??]e oueral anddesireth for to clippe [??]e and kysse [??]e. Be holde how for greteloue he hath opened his side to [??]e, and profered to [??]e his hert.Be holde [??]e wondes ofhym [??][alpha]t hangyth, [??]e bloude of[??]einnocent, [??]e pris of[??]e diggere. His hed he hath enclined [??]e forto [fol. 6v] kysse, his armes he hath spred [??]e for to clippe, hissyde he opened [??]e for to loue, and alle [??]is for to drawe

145 mannys saule for to loue hym.

And for to come to [??]i desire, say [??]is orison: 'Lordealmy3tti god, fadre of heuene, for [??][alpha]t largesse and [??]isonnesse passion and for me suffrede deth, and his and rris (7) moderexcellent holynesse and [??]e meritis of alle holy seintes, graunte mesynful and vnworthe creature for to loue [??]e alone, so [??]at myn hertbe euermore brennyng in

150 [??]e fuer ofloue, and [??][alpha]t I mowe in alle [??]yngandalle my workes desire [??]i worschippe, and euer more haue [??]i passionin myn herte, and verray knowlechyng of my wrechidnesse andvnworthinesse. In nothyngbe my ioie bot in[??]e andfor[??]e, and withalle myn herte I beseche [??]e [??]at for no [??]ynge be I disesed, nesort bot for synne, ffor [??]e wich [??]e sonne suffredpainful deth anddespitous. Louelich lorde and spouse ihesu 155 crist, write in myn hertso [??]at I mowe rede [??]i loue towar [d] me and [??]i sorwe for me,and [??]e mende for hym euermore he dwellyng fresch in my herte. Amen.

[extract from The Form of Living begins] Atte [??]e firstebegynnynge tome enterelich [fol. 7r] to [??]i lorde ihesu crist[THORN]is turnyng is now[??]t ellis bot [??]e turnyng from allecoueytise andlikyngand ocupacions, andbesinesseof[??]iswordlich[??]ynges,

160 and fleschlich lustes, and vayn loue. So [??]at [??]i thou[??]t[??]at was al way downward in to [??]e erthe wiles [??]ouwerin[??]eworlde now be vpward as fier sechys [??]e heest place of heueneri[??]tto [??]i spouse [??]ere he sitti[??] in his blisse. To hym [??]ou arttumyd wanne his grace ledeth [??]yn hert, and forsakest alle vices, andconformest hit to vertues, and to

goud[??]ewys, and to alle manere bonerte andmeknesse. And[??]oumaistleste andwex 165 in goudnesse, for [??]ou hast be gunne with outeeny slownesse and werinesse and sorynesse of lif.

[paragraph] Ffoure thynges [??]ou schalt haue in thi [??]ou[??]tfor to [??]ou be in p[alpha]rfit loue. For whanne[??]ou artcomen[??]erto, [??]i ioie and[??]i desirwil al weybe hyngyng in ihesucrist On is of[??]e mesure of [??]i lif her [??][alpha]t so schort is[??]at vnnethes hit is ou[??]t. Ffor we ne 170 leue bot in o poynt[??][alpha]t is [??]e lest thyng [??][alpha]t maybe, and trewlich ourelif is [fol. 7v] lasse [??]anne o poynt [??]if we likne hit to [??]e lif[??]at lasti[??] euere.

An o[??]er is an vncerteinesse of oure endyng, for we weti[??]neuere whanne we schuldye,newhere,nehow,newhederwheschullegonewhannewebededAndgod wille [??][alpha]t [??]is be vncertayne and vnknowe for wescholde euere more be redi to dy and 1075 go.

[paragraph] The [??]ridde is [??][alpha]t we schulle answere tofore [??]e ri3twis iuge of alle [??]e tyme [??]at we han here ben: howwehaue here lyued, what oure occupacions hanhere ben, and what goud wemy[??]t haue donnewhanne we hanhere ben idel. For[??]e profit saith: he[??]at clepeth [??]e tyme a[??]ens me [??][alpha]t euereche day he hathlent vs here for to spende

180 hit in godesseruise, and in penaunce, and in goud vse. 3ifwelese hit and wast hit in erthli loue and vanites, ful greuousli schallewe be demed and punisched[??]er fore. Hit is on of[??]e most sorwe[??]at maybe, bot we enforce vs mi3thli in[??]e loue of god al [??]at wemay the while oure schort tyme lasteth. For[??][alpha]t we[??]enke[??]not on god we [fol. 8r] may counte as [??]yng [??]at we haue lost.

185 [paragraph] The furthe is [??][alpha]t we [??]enke how moche is[??]e ioie [??][alpha]t [??]ai hanne [??]at lasti[??] in godes loue into here endyng, ffor[??]ai schul be bre[??]eren and felawes in hismaieste, [??]e whiche si[??]th schal be mede and mete, and alle delites[??][alpha]t any creature may thenke, and more [??]an any man may telleto alle his louers with outen ende. Hit is mochel to cum to [??]at blis[??]anne to [??]enke hit o[??]er telle hit. Also [??]enke what sorwe andwhat

190 payne and what tomement [??]ai schul haue [??][alpha]t louenou[??]t god ouer alle o[??]er thengis [??]at men seie in [??]is worldebot feyneth here body and here saule in lust and in vnclennesse of[??]is lif, in pride, and in coueytise, and in o[??]er synnes. Thayschul brenne in [??]e fier ofhelle with [??]e deuelis wham [??]ai serueas long as god is in heuene with his seruantes, [??][alpha]t iseuermore.

195 I wolde [??]at [??]ou were clene brennyng al way to ihesucristward, and encressyng [??]i lif and [??]i seruise in hym no[??]th asfoles doth, for [??]ai begynyth in [??]e hiest degre and [fol. 8v]comethdoune to[??]e lowest. I say no[??]t [??]if[??]ouhaue be gunnevnskilful abstinence [??][alpha]t [??]ou holde on, bot for many[??][alpha]t were brennyng arte [??]e begynnyng and able to [??]e loueof ihesu crist for ouer muche penaunce [??]ai han lettid

200 [??]am self and made hem so feble [??]at [??]ay mowe no[??]tloue god as thai schulde. In [??]e wichloue [??]at[??]oube euermore andmore is my desire and couaytise. I holde [??]e neuer of[??]e lassemerite [??]if[??]ou be no[??]t in so abstinence as were sum tyme holimen and women a fore vs. But souereynlich loke [??]ou sette al [??]i[??]ou[??]t how [??]ou myrjt loue [??]i spouse ihesu crist more [??]anne[??]ou hast doon.

205 And dar I lay [??]at [??]i mede waxing where fore [??]at [??]oube ri[??]t dispoused bo[??]e

for [??]i soule and for [??]i bodi, [??]ou schalt vnderstande fourethynges. The first is what fowle[??] (8) a man. The secunde whatmaki[??] hym clene. The thridde what holdith hym in clennesse. Theferthe what thyng drawe[??] hym for to ordeyne his wille alto godiswille.

210 Ffor the ferste wer [??]ou wil [??]at we synne in [??]rethynges [??]at [fol. 9r] make[??] vs fowle, (9) [??][alpha]t is withherte, mout, and dede. The synnes ofhert beth thies: euyl thou[??]tes,euyl delites, assent to synne, longe abydyng, and likyng, and vnclene[??]ou3tes, desire ofwerk, euyl suspecion 3if[??]ou let [??]yn hert anytyme idel withoute ocupacion of[??]e loue ando[??]epreisyngofgod, enydrede, euylloue, errour, fleschlich affeccion to thi

215 frendes, ioie of eny mannis euil fare, wether thai be enmyo[??]er non, despit of poure o[??]er synful men, honoure riche men forhere richesse, sorwe ofloste of thi wrecchid catelle, dout what is to doand what for echemanne o way to be siker, and what he schal do, and whathe schal leue, obstinacion in euylle, anoi to do goude, anger to dogoude, sorwe [??]at he dede no more euyl, or he did no3t [??]e wille and[??]e lust ofhis

220 flesch, [??]ewich he my[??]t haue don, glaclnesse in thenkyngin euyl [??]at [??]ou hast [done], vnstabilnesse of[??]ou3t, pyneofpenaunce,ypocrisie, loue to pleise menfor hem selue, schame of goudededis, ioie of euil dedis. Singuler [fol. 9v] with, couaitise ofhonour,or of dignite, or to better [??]anne o[??]er, or fairer, or to be moredred, vayn glorie of goudis of kynde hope o[??]er ofgrace, schameofpoure frendes, pride and bost and of

225 riche kyn or gentel. Ffor alle riche and poure we ben lichegentel and fre a for godis face, bot of oure goud dedis make vs anybettre or worse [??]anne o[??]er, despite ofgoud consail and goudtechyng.

[paragraph] The synnes of thi mouth beth [??]ise: Ofte sweryng,forswere, sclaundre of crist or of any ofhis halowen, nemne his namewithoute reuerence, striwyng a[??]ens

230 so[??]nesse, grotchyng a[??]ens god for any anguische, or anytribulacion, or disese [??]at may falle in erthe, to say godis officeindeuoutable and with oute reuerence, flateryng, cursyng, disesyng,bakbityng, chidyng, diffamyng, makyng discorde or debat, fals witnesse,euyl consail, scornyng, vnbuxumnesse in worde to [??]i souerayn, tumegoude dede to euyl for to make hym be holde euyl [??][alpha]t doth hymnoye, for we ben holde for

235 totourneowre [fol. lOr]euencristeninto[??]ebest,excitynganymantowreche to vndememe in anyo[??]er[??][alpha]the dothhym self, faynspeche, moche speche, idelspeche, o[??]er wordes [??]at beth needful. Preysyng or mayntenyng ofeuyl dedis, synge or prai more for drede or for praysyng [??]anne for[??]e loue of god.

The synnes (10) beth [??]ise: glotonye, lecherie, symonye,wichecraft, brekyng of

240 the holidai, receyue godes bodi in dedli synne, brekyng of avowe. Apostasie,

dissolucion in godis seruise, brekyng of licence many place [??]atis forbode, euyl ensaumple 3euyng, takyng away any mannys name or fame,3if3e (++) spekyng o[??]er (12) vnclennesse o[??]er blethlich heryng,custom ofte for to falle in to [??]e same synne be sleuthe, desire moregoud for pride, for aray of oure body, o[??]er for any o[??]er vanite

245 [??]anne we haue nede of, for to seme to vs selfholier,cunnyng, wiser [??]anne we ben. To desire any degre cunnyng o[??]erworschip [??][alpha]t we be no3t worthi to, to desire vertues no[??]tfor hym selfbot for worschip [??]at comy[??] [??]er of, and [??]anne[??]at scholde [??]oure principal cause of [??]oure loue and of [??]ourelowe [fol. 1 Ov] nesse toward god [be] (13) cause of vnkyndenesse, hate,and vnbuxumnesse, rebelle to oure soueraynes,

250 dispisyng or no3t charchynge [??]e lawes and [??]e hestesofoure religion, despisyng hem [??]at ben lasse [??]enne we, mislokyng,euyl hery[much less than]g vnclene touchyng or handlyng.

And in alle synnes of dede 3e most haue and charge [??]ecirc*mstances, [??]e wich beth thise: [??]e tyme ofplace, [??]e manere,[??]e noumbre, [??]e parsones, [??]e dwellyng [??]e cunnyng (14) [??]econdicion, [??]e age. [THORN]ise make[??] [??]e synne more o[??]er lasseto conuert (15) to

255 synne or constrayne ony to synne.

O[??]er many synnes [??]er beth of omission, [??]at ben leuyng goudun do [??]at scholde be do: no[??]t [??]enkyng on god, ne louyng, nedredyng, ne preisyng hym, ne [??]onkynghym of[??]e benefices, do no[??]talle [??]at we schulde do forgodes loue, be no[??]t sorie for synne aswe schulde be, dispose vs no[??]t to receyue grace, and, [??]if we haue

260 take grace, to vse hit no[??]t as we ow[??]t to done, to turneno[??]t to inspiracion of god, to confourme no[??]t [??]i wille to godiswille, to [??]eue no[??]t thyn entent to [??]i preieres and to [??]ynoffys [fol. 11 r] bot rebelle out faste and rekke neuere bot [??]at[??]ai be sayd for to do necligentlich [??]at we be holde to dobea voweor heste, or eniunid (16) in penaunce, haue no ioie ofoure euencristenprofit as ofoure owen. Sorwe no3t for here euyl fare,

265 stondyngno[??]t a[??]ens temptacions, for3euyng no3t hym [??]atha[??] don vs harme, pesyng no3t striues to hem [??]at be[??] vnkunnyngconforte no[??]t [??]am [??]at ben in sorowe, o[??]er sekenesse,o[??]erpouerte, penance, or any o[??]er disese. Thyse synnes and many momakyn men foule.

The [??]ynges [??]at clensith vs be[??] [??]re a[??]ens [??]is[??]re manere of synnyng. [THORN]e ferst 270 is sorwe ofherte a[??]ens[??]e synnes of[??]ow3t ofhert, and [??]at [??]ou most haue fulle willeneuere to synne more, and [??]at [??]ou haue sorwe of alle [??]i synnes,and alle [??]i ioie and alle [??]i solace be on god, and yn god, [??]athe be no[??]t put out of[??]yn herte. [THORN]at o[??]er is schrifte ofmou[??]e a[??]eyns [??]e synnes of mouthe, and [??]ou schalt be hastedwithoute tareyng, open withoute excusing and hole with oute departyng.As for to telle o

275 synne to o prest and an o[??]er to [??]e secunde, [??]ou mosttelle alle [??]at [??]ou hast in [??]y mynde, or [fol. 11 v] [??]ou art[??]ou no3t schreuyn. The [??]ridde is satisfaction a[??]ens [??]esynnes of dede. And he ha[??] [??]re parties: fastyng, praiere, andalmosdede. No[??]t onlich to [??]ifmete and drynketopoure men, botfortofor[??]ifhem [??]at do[??]vs wrong and pray for hem, and enforme hymhow[??]ai schuld do [??]at kenne[??] no[??]t so welle as we. Ffor [??]e280 [??]ridde thynge [??]ou schalt wel weten [??]at clennesse be houethbe kepte in hert, in mouth, and in warke. Clennesse ofherte [??]re[??]ynges kepen. On is wakir[??]og[??]t and stable in god. Ano[??]er isbesynesse to kepe [??]i fyue wittes, so [??]at alle wikked steryng ofhem be kept and closed out of [??]i flesch. The [??]ridde is honestocupacion and profitable.

285 Also [??]re thynges kepith clennesse of mouth.Onis[??]at[??]oube [??]ynke [??]e or [??]ou speke. An o[??]er is [??]at[??]ou be no[??]t muche of speche til [??]in hert be stabled in [??]eloue of ihesu crist, so [??]at [??]e beseme [??]at [??]ou lokest alwayon hym whe[??]er [??]ou speke or no[??]t. Bot suche a grace my[??]t[??]ou not haue in [??]e first dai, bot with grete trauail, and gretebesynesse to loue ihesu crist, and with custom [??]at [??]e ey3eof[??]yn [fol. 12r] hert be

290 euermore vpwarde. And [??]us [??]ou schalt com [??]er to. The[??]ridde is [??]ou schalt for no thyng ne for no meknesse lye in anymanere, ffor ich lesyng is synne, and euyl, and displeisyng to god. Hitbe houe[??] no3t [??]at [??]ou say alle [??]e so[??]e, bot be no way sainon lesyng. 3if [??]ou sayst o [??]inge of [??]i self [??]e seme[??][??]i praisyng and saist hit to [??]e praisyng of some and helpe ofo[??]er, [??]ou dost no3t unwisli, for [??]ou saist [??]eso[??]e.Bot

295 3if[??]ou wilt haue eny thyng preue, telle hit to non bot tohym [??]at [??]ou wost wel wille no3t schewe hit bot onlich to [??]epraisyng of god, ofwhom is alle goudnesse. Ffor god 3ifhym o specialgrace no3t onlich for hym self, bot also for hem [??]at wille[??] do welfor here ensample.

Clennesse of werke [??]re [??]ynges kepe[??]. On is continual[??]o3t on de[??], for [??]e

300 wisemansei[??]:'[??]ynkeon[??]ynendyngand[??]ouschaltneuerdye'.Ano[??]eris[??]is: flefro euyl [??]at 3eue[??] more ensaumpleto loue[??]e worlde [??]anne god, [??]e lustes ofbody [??]anne clerwesseof saule. [THORN]e [??]ridde is temperaunce and discretion in mete anddrynke, [??]at hit be no3t to muchene to litel for substance of[??]ibody, for bo[??]e [fol. 12v] come[??]to on endyng, outrage and of ouermoche abstinence, for no[??]er is godis wille, and [??]at

305 wil no3t manye wene, for no3t [??]at man can say. 3if[??]ouwilt take [??]i substaunce of suche as god sendeth at tyme and stedewhat hit euer be, I take out no mete no drynke [??]at cristen men vsithwith discrecion and mesure, [??]ou dost wel, ffor so dede criste hymself and his apostelis. 3if[??]ou loue many metys [??]at men vsen, no3tdispysing [??]e mete [??]at godha[??] maked to mans helpe, bot for[??]e[??]enke[??] [??]ou hast no nede [??]ere of,

310 [??]ou dost wel. 3if[??]ou se [??]at [??]ou art strong to serue[??]i god, and [??]at hit breke no3t [??]i stomak, for 3if[??]ou hauebrokun hit with ouer muche abstinence, and [??]at hym lakke appetit tomete, oft schalt [??]ou be faynt as [??]ou schuldest 3if vppe [??]igost. And wete [??]ou wel [??]at [??]ou synnest in [??]at dede and for[??]at [??]ou my3t wete sone for[??]yngbe a3ens [??]e or with [??]e.[THORN]ere fore while [??]ou art 3ong, I rede [??]at [??]ou ete [??]ebetre and werte

315 as hit come[??] [??]at [??]ou be no3t be gylid, and after[fol.13r]ward,whanne [??]ou hast sayd manye [??]inges, and ouercome manytemptacions, and knowest [??]i self and god betre [??]an [??]ou dostnow, [??]anne if[??]ou seyst hit be to done, [??]an [??]ou my3t take[??]e to [??]e more abstinence. And [??]er whilbe [??]ou my3t do preuypenaunce [??]at alle [??]er of no3t weten.

320 Ri3twynesse is no[??]er in fastyng ne in etyng, bot [??]ou artri3thwis 3if hit alle yliche to [??]e: despite and praysyng, pouert andrichesses, hongur and delites, nede and plente. 3if[??]ou take [??]isewith a [??]o3t of god, I holde [??]e blissed and childe of ihesu.Menymenandwomenparauenturepreiseth[??]efor[??]ouhastybounde[??]e toreligion, bot no wisman wil no3t prayse [??]e so Ii3tlich, for03th[??]at be sei3t [??]e don wrthouten

325 forth. Bot 3if [??]i wil be conformed enterlich to do godswille, and recche no3t of mannys praisyng no blaming, and take non hede3if[??]ay speke lasse goud of[??]e [??]anne [??]ay dede a fore, botonlich [??]at [??]ou be more brennyng ingodes loue [??]anne [??]ou were.Ffor o [??]yng [fol. 13v] werne I [??]e [??]at I trowe [??]at god hathnonparfite seruant in erthe withoute enemye, for only wrecchidnesseha[??] non enemy in erthe.

330 Ffor to drawe vs [??]at we conforme oure wille to godis wille[??]ar be[??] [??]re thynges: on ensample ofholimen andwommen[??]ewichwere bese ny3t and day to serue god and drede hym and loued hym. Andwe folowe hym in erthe, we schul be with hym in heuene. A no[??]er is[??]e goudnesse of oure lorde [??]at desspiseth non bot gladlich receyuealle [??]o [??]at comyth to his mercy and is more homlich to hym[??]anne

335 his bro[??]er, or suster, or eny frende [??]at [??]ay most loueor tristen. The [??]ridde is [??]e wondurful ioie of[??]e kyngdomofheuene [??]at is more [??]anne tong may telle. For ri[ss]th as inhelle no man leue may for muche payne, bot godis mi3t suffred hit no3tfor to deye. So [??]e ioie of[??]e si3t of ihesu in godhede is so muche[??]at [??]ai most deie for ioie, 3if ne were his goudnesse [??]at hewil his loueres be euer more leuynge in blisse, as

340 [fol. 14r] his ri3thwisnesse wille [??]at alle [??]at loue[??]not hym be euermore leuyng in fure [??]at is orible any man to [??]enke.Loke [??]anne what hit is to fele, bot for as mocheas[??]aiwilno3t[??]enkehitnownedredehit,[??]ayschullesuffre hit euermorewith outen ende.

Now hast [??]ou harde how [??]ou my3th dispose [??]i lif and rulehit to godes wille, 345 [hortatoryconclusionbegins]andassaithseyntJames,'hitwerebettreno3thforto knowe [??]e lawe ofgod [??]enne knowe hit and do no3t [??]ere after.' And[??]er fore,my leue frende, y consaille [??]e [??]at [??]ou forsake no3th anddispise li[ss]tlich[??]is lore and doctrine, alle be hit [??]atparauenture for diuerse occupacions and lettyngs [??]at [??]ou hast in[??]e worlde, [??]ou fyndest no gret sauoure [??]er in arte [??]ebegynnyng. For as ich haue saide 350 afore, hertlich loue of god andgoudnesse oflifwil no3t be geten with oute grete trauail and longcontinuaunce, bot whanne hit is hadde, hit is ful of lykyng ofswetnesse.

And [??]ere fore, whanne [??]e holi gost sende[??] [??]e eny sauourto loue [fol. 14v] god, forsake hit no3t, bot kepe hit stille. And after[??]e grace [??]at he 3eue[??] [??]e, parforme 355 hit and encrece hit,and 3if [??]ou dost [??]us, I drede no3t [??]at [??]ou schalt forsakealle undeneloue[??]atisno3mtohisworschippeforhisloue.And[??]anneschalt[??]oubenhis spouse, dwellyng with hym in [??]e blisse of heuen endlich.

And ifhit be so, dere frende, [??]at [??]is schort lesson do [??]egoud, [??]anke god [??]ere of and pray for me. The grace ofgod almygtti,ihesu verrai god and man [??]at is verrai 360 loue and comfort ofhisloueris be with [??]e, and kepe [??]e fro euyl, and bryng[??]e to [??]ispouse [??]at [??]ou hast take [??]e to, [??]e wich is euerlastyng god.Amen.

NOTES

1. MS: strereth.

2. "one" has been scraped off, but faint traces remain.

3. MS: and and.

4. Whereas in D this sentence is left incomplete, in Hf it endswith "god."

5. MS!fert.

6. MS: clipprth.

7. Crossed out.

8. MS:folwe[??].

9. MS!folwe.

10. Inserted in the right margin: "of bi fle[sch]" (cutoff).

11. Crossed out, "wyth" inserted in the right margin.

12. MS: written twice, abbreviated the second time.

13. MS: is.

14. MS: cumyng.

15. MS: couert.

16. MS: eininid.

APPENDIX B: Variants

1 li[??]t] sy[??]te Har, si[??]t Tr, sight Hf godisseruant] ne add.TrHf

2 bote] bote (te added above the line) Hf wolde] do add. HarTr hislorde] god Har

3 al] as HarTr [??]at [??]ou] [??]enkeste add. Har, [??]enkist add.Tr, [??]enkest and add. Hf and] or Har seyej yt add. Har, it add. Tr as[??]ou] as [??]ou[??] [??]ou HarTri

4 oure ladi sit in heue] as he sytty[??] in heuene Har, as hesitti[??] in heuene Tr For] and for HarTr

4-7 For... dome] om. Hf

5 is] ben Har

7 is] [??]at add. HarTrHf

8 [??]at] om. Har [??]is poyntes] [??]ese poins her bifor Hfknowlech] welle add. Har, weel add. Tr

9 grace] benefice Hf he] om. Hf woch saue] for add. Hf of] andHarTrHf

10 benfait[??]] benefices Hf, benefetys Har, benefitis Tr how] headd HarTrHf

11-12 and how he hath taken thi kynde and suffred for thi louedespites deth] om. HarTri

12 despites] despitous Hf how] he add. Har grauntes] grauntedHarTri, granted for add. Hf [??]i] mede and pi add. Hf

13 and thi blisse] om. Hf lif] [??]at ha[??] non ende add. Hf

14 [??]ou] ne add. Hf now] not HarTr, om. Hf sen hem] him se Hf

15 [??]is worlde] [??]e wei toward [??]i contrei Hf oft [??]erfore]om. Hf, [??]erfore oft Har for [??]e] om. Hf. on] vpon Har, in TrHf

16 conpassion] of add. HarHf, on add. Tr as] [??]ou[??] add. HarTrisuffredest] feledest Hf

17 his] om. Har [??]ou] ne add. Hf [??]e be] [??]i body TrHar,[??]i bodi Hf

18 wrecche] wrche (crossed out in red ink) Tr [??]e] [??]ese HarHf

thoghtes] poyntys Har ofte haue] haue ofte Har in] [??]i add. Har

19 he lieth on the auter atte masse] [??]ou seeste [??]e holysacramente of Crystys body at [??]e masse or on [??]e auter Har, [??]ouseest [??]e holy sacrament of cristis bodi at masse or on [??]e autir Trand] [??]an add. Har, [??]anne add. Tr to hym] om. Har

20 [??]ou] om. Har so] to Har and] to add. Har

21 so] graunte me add. Har I haue non hongur] me ne hungre Hf no]eny Har bot] oonly after add. Har, aftir add. Tr

221 be nou[??]t a [??]erst bot after [??]e] me [??]irste no[??]ingbote [??]e Hf so] om. Har

23 [??]at for] for om. Tr ne be] y Har, I Tr neuere] be add. HarTr

24 me] [??]e Har, [??]ee Tr

25 Line 25 marks the start of the Stimulus amoris segment. Thevariants compared below refer to D and Hf.

25 with] withoute

26 rote of] rote and fruit and be add.

28 schalle] be add.

29 o[??]er woman] om. may] encrece add.

30 strereth] rery[??] * amor facit mirabilia hie (the asteriskdenotes a marginal addition)

31 and in] in om.

32 man] god and god man. [??]e hei[??]est he maki[??] lowist and[??]e lowest hei[??]est add. for] [??]e fo seruant] he maki[??] add.

33 he maki[??]] om.

34 he makith] om. 36 an] ani

38 bot] om. at [??]e] [??]e om.

40 harde as] a add. of] [??]e add.

42 me in to god and god in to me] god in to me and me in to god44-48 [??]ou bindest...brennyngloue] om.

49 [??]ou] [??]at me] vs

52 O [??]ou] [??]ou om.

53 [??]if] and klippe] be add. [??]e] om.

54 quike to feer] tende [??]e fur of loue

55 in] in (inserted above the line)

58 vertu is] vertues ben to] of to mannys saule] of mannis souleand

59 alle a boute] om.

61 aqueked] atende

62 and of] [??]e add.

66 hym a sonys] himself to alles of mankind

68 likyng to be deuille] and

69 goddissone] ne add.

70 and beyng] om.

71 and and] and flesch, and] and om.

74 Alias] wondir add.

76 saule] ne add.

77 hym, for to] for to om.

78 be wiche were more bettre] albehit [??]at [??]is wer li[??]terand esier 82 and] for add. on tre] was on [??]e cros

84 techi[??]] him add. do, and] what add.

85 quike] tende [??]e more able to] to workis of and trauail] andof trauail add.

86 thynkyng] and spekynge and add.

87 of] god add.

90 heuyth] one[??] hert] om.

91 wanne he was derke] derkid

92 passion] schameful make[??] vs gloriouse add. 92-93 hit is] om.

95 loue and] of add.

97 thenkyp oft] ofte [??]enki[??]

99 be] in turment] tormentes take[??] non hede of hym self] nese[??]et nou[??]ht himself

101 hym, he] hym [??]at

102 to] om. on] in

103 croce with] cros as

104-105 drynkesse with soueraigne wyne of swetnesse] drynke[??]with wyn of souereine swetnesse

105 paynid] and scornid add. hym] crist on] in

106 sone] child cristes] passion add. in] a add.

107 other woman] om.

108 desireth] for add. on [??]e croce with crist] with crist in[??]e croce

109 kisse[??], and clipprth] clippi[??] and kisse[??]

110 passion] an dep add. and delectable] om. Alias] O alias on] in

112berefore] om.

114 wil] make to add.

116 with] to his

117 [??]er fore] [??]er add.

119schall] Ischal

120 paynful] om.

121 her, and] nou[??]ht add. apeere I] I om.

122 chirche] [??]e crache

123 childes] sonis

124 bloude] and make me a noble drinke add.

125 man] men ha[??]] han

126 I] scholde add.

127 I] hei

129 gates] [??]ate swerde] spere

130 braunche] braunches

131 schalt neuer] ne mi[??]ht nou[??]ht

132 whom] wisdom Of] O

136 worde] world [??]e places] o[??]er places

137 wil] nou[??]ht add.

138 hauyngge inwardlich mende [??]ere on] om.

139 mute] my[??]hte

140 is wonded for [??]e] for [??]e is wondid ('is'inserted above the line)

141 kysse [??]e] [??]e om.

143 diggere] bugger armes he hath] ha[??] om.

144 he] om.

144-145 and...hym] so [??]at he al be fichid faste in [??]in hertebat for be was nayled to be cros

147 [??]at] [??]i and for] [??]at for 147-148 and his and his] andhis om.

148 graunte] to add.

150 of] [??]i add. [??]yng and alle] [??]ynges and in alle

152 ioie] and in gladnes add.

153 [??]ynge] ne add.

154 [??]e] om. [??]e sonne] [??]i sone deth and despitous] anddespitous de[??]

156 euermore he] euer be

157 [??]e firste] om. torne] [??]e add.

159 alle] [??]e add. and] [??]e add. and] [??]e add. and] [??]eadd. wordlich] worldes

160 lustes, and] lustes and (d inserted above the line) to] om.

161 [??]e worlde] [??]e (inserted above the line) world sechys]seching of] in

163 ledeth] lighte[??]

164 manere] of add. And] [??]if add. (inserted above the line)

165-166 werinesse and sorynesse of lif] sorynesse and werynes of[??]i lif 167to][te .sup.*] nota quattuor meditanda

168 hyngyng] brenyng

169 is of] of [om.sup. *]1

172 an] om. .[om..sup. *] 2

174 vncertayne and vnknowe] vnknowe and vncerteyn for we scholdeeuere more be] to vs for he wole [??]at we be alwey

176 to fore] [bifore .sup.*] -3-

177 occupations han here] here om.

178 here] om.

179 he [??]at] he ha[??]

180 hit and] hit or

181 loue and] in add.

182 mi[??]thli] nameli

184 counte] hit add.

185 is [??]e ioie] [??]at [??]e ioye is * [is.sup. * ]-4-

186 felawes] wip angeles and holi men, preising, seinge, and hauyng[??]e kyng of ioye in his fairhede and schinyng add.

188 man] om. mochel] lighter add.

190 tornement] [??]at add.

191 feyneth] file[??]

192 vnclennesse] lecherie in coueytise] in om. in o[??]er] in om.

193 deuelis] deiul

195 clene brennyng al way to ihesu cristward] alwey clymbing toihesu ward

196 * -contra indiscretam abstinenciam-

197 no[??]t] for I wolde [??]at add.

198 on] hit add. [??]e] om.

201 desire and couaytise] coueityng and myn amoneisting

202 so] muche add.

202-203 as were sum tyme holi men and women a fore vs] om.

203 souereynlich loke] om.

205 And] [??]anne lay] sey mede] is add. waxyng] and nou[??]htwanyng add.

206 * nota quattuor hic

207 folweb] file[??] The secunde what] [??]at o[??]er what [??]ing[207-208.sup. *] 1-2--3-4-

210wer][wyte.sup. *]-l-

211 folwe] foule herte] and [add..sup. *] -synnes of herte-thou[??]tes] [??]ou[??]ht

212 longe abydyng, and likyng, and vnclene [??]ou[??]tes] om.

213 of] euil add. werk] wikkid wille add. suspecion] indeuocionadd.

214eny]euil errour] and add.

215 frendes] ober [??]at [??]ou louest add.

216 richesse] vncouenable ioye of any worly vanites add. thiwrecchid] [??]e worldes

217 clout what] no[??]ht add. o way] owe[??] and] om.

218-219 anger to do goude] anger to serue god

219 wille and [??]e lust] lust or [??]e wil

220 gladnesse in thenkyng in euyl [??]at [??]ou hast] om.

221 for hem selue] drede to displese ham

222 euil] ydul

223 dignite, or to] behold add.

224 kynde] or of add. and bost and] om.

225 riche and poure] om. gentel and] om.

226 bot of] bot [??]if

227 and] of add.

228 Ofte sweryng] swer oftesibes * -synnes of mou[??]-

229-230 striwyng a[??]ens so[??]nesse] a[??]eyn sei[??]enge andstriuyng so[??]fastnes 230 or any] or noy or or disese] om.

232 chidyng, diffamyng, makyng discorde or debat] defamyng, chidingsowing of discord, treson

233 to [??]i souerayn] om.

234 ben holde for] owe

235 euencristen] ney[??]bur dedis best] nou[??]ht in to [??]eworste add. (r inserted) excityng] of add. wreche] wra[??][??]e

236 idel] foul

237 o[??]er] ydul wordes] or wordes add. [??]at beth] nou[??]htadd. Preysyng] of glosinge wordes, defendyng of synne, creiyng inlau[??]tre, mowe makyng on any man, to singe seculer songes and loue hamadd. or mayntenyng] om. or prai] om.

238 drede or for] om. praysyng] of men add. for [??]e loue] om.

239 synnes] of dede add. lecherie] drinkenes add. * -synnes ofdede-

240 holidai] sacrilegie add. vowe] owes

241 brekyng of licence many place [??]at is forbode] om.

241-242 euyl ensaumple [??]euyng] to [??]iue ensample of euil

242-244 takyng away any mannys name or fame... sleuthe] to hurteany man in his bodi, or in his good, or in his fame, [??]efte, rauyn,vsur, deseyt, sulle ri[??]htwisnes, here euil, [??]iue to harlotes,wi[??]hold necessaries fro [??]i bodi or to [??]iue hit outrage, tobigynne [??]ink [??]at is ouer mi[??]ht, custome to synne or fallingofte in synne

244 for pride, for aray of oure body, o[??]er for any o[??]ervanite] om.

245 to vs self] om. cunnyng] or connynger, or

245-249 To desire... rebelle] to holde [??]e office [??]at wesuffise nou[??]ht vnto, brynge vp newe gyses, to be rebel

250 dispisyng or no[??]t charchynge [??]e lawes and [??]e hestes ofoure religion] om. despisyng] defoule

251 we] in seyng, in hering, in smelling, in touching, in handling,in

swolewing, in wi[??]tes, in weyes, in signes, to receyue [??]ecirc*mstanses of synnes, [??]at is to sey add.

253 of place] [??]e stede parsones] person

254 cumyng] cunyng [??]e condicion] [??]e eelde make[??] [??]e][??]e om. o[??]er or

255 or] be temptid to add.

256 ben] is of * synnes of omission

257 do] [??]at is add. on] in ne louyng] om.

258-259 be no[??]t sorie for synne as we schulde be] to sorewenou[??]ht for synne as he scholde do vs] him

259 we] he

260 we ow[??]t to done] he ou[??]te to done to kepe hit nou[??]htno[??]t to] nou[??]t atte

261-262 and to [??]yn offys] om.

262 [??]at] [??]at (inserted above the line)

263 we be] he is be] borow heste] comandement or] is add. penaunce]to drawe along [??]at scholde be do sone add.

264 oure euencristen] his nei[??]bur oure] his Sorwe] [om..sup. *]sorewe here] his

265 vs] him harme] keping nou[??]ht trewe to his nei[??]bor as hewolde [??]at he dude to him and [??]eldyng him nou[??]ht a good dede foran ober [??]if he may, amending nou[??]ht him [??]at synne[??] bifor hisey[??]en

266 to hem] teaching hem nou[??]ht o[??]er] or in

267 o[??]er] or in pouerte] or in prison add. penance, or any oberdisese] om. mo] om.

269 (*) vs clense[??] [??]re binges -2-

270 of hert] om.

270-271 most haue fulle wille neuere to synne] haue in wille neuereto singe

271 [??]at] [??]at (inserted from above) haue] haue (e inserted)

272 be] only add. he] [om..sup.*] the

273 [??]ou schalt be hasted] [??]at schal be hasti

274 tareyng] delay open] nakid

275 to [??]e secunde] synne to ano[??]er

275-276 [??]ou most telle alle [??]at [??]ou hast in [??]y mynde,or [??]ou art [??]ou no[??]t schreuyn] om.

276 satisfaccion] [??]at add.

276-277 a[??]ens [??]e synnes of dede. And he] om.

278 to [??]if mete and drynke to poure men] [??]eue pore men meteand drinke do[??] vs J don [??]e

279 hym] hem kenne[??] no[??]t so welle as we] be[??] in poynt toperische

281 kepen] [kepi[??].sup. *] -3- hou clennes schal be kepid-

282 in] of alle] [??]e add.

283 kept and] om.

285 [??]re thynges kepith clennesse of mouth] clennes of mou[??]kepi[??] [??]re [??]inges be [??]ynke [??]e or] pynke [??]e bifor ar

286 is] om. til] bot of lytel semliche alwey forte

287 crist] om. [??]e beseme] [??]ou [??]enke

288 in] on with grete] wi[??] long 290 euermore] euer is] [??]at

292 displeisyng to god. Hit be houe[??] no[??]t [??]at [??]ou say]nou[??]ht at godis wille. [??]ou [??]arst nou[??]ht telle alwei so[??]e][??]if [??]ou wilt add. 292-293 bot be no way sai non lesyng] bot allelesinges hate

294 some] god saist [??]e so[??]e] spekist so[??]fastnes

295 to hym] such on

295-296 wost wel wille no[??]t schewe hit] wer siker [??]at hescholde nou[??]ht be schewid

296 goudnesse] and [??]at to some bettr [??]an to o[??]er

296-297 Ffor god [??]if hym] and [??]eui[??] ham

297 hym] hem

299 continual] assiduel

300 endyng] endinges dye] synne [??]is] om.

301 god] er[??]e [??]an heuene add. [??]e lustes] ful[??]e

303 no[??]t to muche ne] ney[??]er to outrage ne [??]at hit besubstance] sustinance [??]i] [??]e

304 of] om. abstinence] fasting

305 wil no[??]t manye] manie wol nou[??]ht can] may substaunce]sustinance

306 at] [??]e add. and] [??]e add. euer] om. mete no diynke] no[maner .sup.*] mete and drinke

308 loue] leue

309 [??]enke[??]] [??]at add.

310 strong] stalworthe [??]i god] [??]i om.

311 [??]at hym lakke] [??]e is bynome

312 faynt] in quo[??]es schuldest [??]if vppe] wer redi to [??]elde

313 for [??]at] [??]at om. my[??]t] nou[??]ht add. for [??]yng]we[??]ir pin abstinence

314 ete] and drinke werte] [??]e worse

317 seyst] see [??]at done, [??]an] do [??]e] om.

318 [??]er whilbej [??]e while my[??]t] maist alle] men add. ber ofno[??]t] men parnou[??]ht

320 hit] om.

321 yliche] be add. hongur and] nede as add. delites] anddeinte[??]es add.

322 and plente] om. [??]o[??]t] [??]onkyng childe of] heyed bi for323-324 Meny... wil] Men [??]at comeb to [??]e [??]ei preisen [??]e for[??]ei seen [??]e enclosed, bot I ne may

324 be sek[??]t I see

325 forth] om.

326 no] ne of her take] pou add.

327 a fore] om. onlich] om.

329 enemye] enemys of some men in erthe] om.

330 * 4-

331 on] is add. bese] and ententif add. * - l-

332 loued] loueden folowe hym] folewe ham

333 hym] [ham .sup.*] -2-

334 [??]o] om.

335 loue or] most [add..sup. *] -3-

336 For ri3ht] Hit is so

337 no man leue may] mi[??]ht no[??]ing liue bot] [??]at add. for]om.

338 of] in in] his add.

339 ne were] hit newer wil] [??]at add. euer more leuynge] lyuyngeuer

340 not] om. hym] nou[??]ht add. euermore] euere 341-342 as mocheas] om.

342 now ne] and drede hit] now add.

344 hast [??]ou] hast ou

345-357and...endlich] om.

358 And if hit be so, dere frende, [??]at [??]is schort lesson do[??]e goud] [??]if hit do be good and profit

358-359 [??]ere of] om.

360 fro] al add.

361 euerlastyng god] euer lyuynge god wi[??] oute ende