Verses in sermons: Fasciculus morum and its Middle English poems / Siegfried Wenzel. 9780910956666

Citation preview

| The Mediaeval Academy of America

| Publication No. 87

VERSES IN SERMONS

BLANK PAGE

VERSES IN SERMONS |. FASCICULUS MORUM AND ITS |

MIDDLE ENGLISH POEMS |

\

Siegfried Wenzel

7 SAE

THE MEDIAEVAL ACADEMY OF AMERICA Cambridge, Massachusetts 1978

The publication of this book was made possible by grants of funds to the Mediaeval Academy of America from the Carnegie Corporation of New York.

Copyright © 1978 By The Mediaeval Academy of America Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 78-55887

ISBN 910956-66-9 |

Printed in the United States of America

For Elizabeth

BLANK PAGE

CONTENTS | List of Abbreviations ix Introduction J Chapter

I FASCICULUS MORUM 9 1. Contents and Structure 9 2. The Manuscripts 13 3. Date and Authorship 26 4. Influence and Uses 4] 5. Devices of Popular Preaching 50

II VERSES IN SERMONS 61 III THE ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM 101 1. Nature, Function, Textual History J/01 2. The Originality of Fasciculus morum 114 3. Preachers’ Verses and the English Religious Lyric 12]

IV THE TEXTS 133 1. The Verses 134 2. Other English Phrases 203 Appendix A: Synopsis of Fasciculus morum 207

Appendix B: Selected Dialect Features 2/5 Index of Subjects and Authors 22] Index of First Lines 229 Index of Manuscripts Cited 233

Vil

BLANK PAGE

ABBREVIATIONS

Bromyard John Bromyard, O.P., Summa praedicantium. References are to the respective article by title word (e.g., “‘Gracia’’), article number (“G.IX’’), paragraph (‘‘§ 14’’), and folio number, as these are found in MS Royal 7.E.iv. Brown, EL XIII Carleton Brown (ed.), English Lyrics of the XIIIth Century (Oxford, 1932). Brown, RE XIV Carleton Brown (ed.), Religious Lyrics of the XIVth Century,

second edition, rev. by G. V. Smithers (Oxford, 1952).

EETS Early English Text Society, Original Series. EETS, es Early English Text Society, Extra Series. EETS, ss Early English Text Society, Supplementary Series. ‘*English Verses”’ Siegfried Wenzel, ‘‘The English Verses in the Fasciculus Morum,”’ in Chaucer and Middle English Studies in honour of Rossell Hope Robbins, ed. Beryl Rowland (London, 1974), pp. 230-248.

FM Fasciculus morum. , Foster, ‘‘Some English Words” Frances A. Foster, ‘““Some English Words

from the Fasciculus morum,” in Essays and Studies in Honor of Carleton Brown (New York, 1940), pp. 148-157. Gray, Selection Douglas Gray (ed.), A Selection of Religious Lyrics, Clarendon Medieval and Tudor Series (Oxford, 1975).

Herbert, Catalogue J. A. Herbert, Catalogue of Romances in the Depart| _ ment of Manuscripts in the British Museum, 3 (London, 1910; repr. 1962).

Holcot, In Sapientiam Robert Holcot, O.P., Commentary on the Book of

| Wisdom. References are to the respective /ectio and folio as found in Oxford, Balliol College, MS 27. The edition of Super libros sapientiae, Hagenau 1494, which has been recently reprinted (Frankfurt, 1974), follows a slightly different numbering of /ectiones.

Index Carleton Brown and Rossell Hope Robbins, The Index of Middle English Verse (New York, 1943). References are to Index numbers.

Little, Studies | Andrew G. Little, Studies in English Franciscan History,

, Publications of the University of Manchester, Historical Series 29 (Manchester, 1917), pp. 139-157. Owst, Literature G. R. Owst, Literature and Pulpit in Medieval England: A Neglected Chapter in the History of English Letters and of the English People, 2nd ed. (Oxford, 1961). Owst, Preaching G.R. Owst, Preaching in Medieval England: An Introduction ix

x ABBREVIATIONS to Sermon Manuscripts of the Period c. 1350-1450 (Cambridge, 1926; repr. New York, 1965).

PL J.-P. Migne (ed.), Patrologiae Cursus Completus. Series Latina (Paris, 1844 ff.).

Register Carleton Brown, A Register of Middle English Religious and

, Didactic Verse, 2 vols. (Oxford, 1916-1920).

Robbins, SZ Rossell Hope Robbins (ed.), Secular Lyrics of the XIVth and XVth Centuries, 2nd ed. (Oxford, 1955).

Supplement R. H. Robbins and John L. Cutler, Supplement to the Index of Middle English Verse (Lexington, Ky., 1965). References are to Supplement numbers.

Tubach Frederic C. Tubach, Index Exemplorum: A Handbook of Medieval Religious Tales, FF Communications 204 (Helsinki, 1969).

*““Unrecorded”’ Siegfried Wenzel, “‘Unrecorded Middle-English Verses,”’ Anglia 92 (1974), 55-78. References are to the verse numbers.

“Vices, Virtues, and Popular Preaching”’ Siegfried Wenzel, “Vices, Virtues, and Popular Preaching,’’ in Medieval and Renaissance Studies: Proceedings of the Southeastern Institute of Medieval and Renaissance Studies, Summer, 1974, ed. Dale B. J. Randall (Durham, N.C., 1976), pp. 28-54. Walther, Initia Hans Walther, Initia carminum ac versuum medii aevi posteri-

numbers. ,

| oris latinorum (GOttingen, 1959). References are to entry Walther, Proverbia Hans Walther, Proverbia sententiaeque latinitatis medii aevi, 6 vols. (Gottingen, 1963 ff.). References are to entry

| numbers. — |

, Whiting, Proverbs Bartlett Jere Whiting and Helen Wescott Whiting, Proverbs, Sentences, and Proverbial Phrases from English Writings Mainly before 1500 (Cambridge, Mass., 1968).

References are to the entries, by alphabetical letter and number.

Wilson, Grimestone Edward Wilson, A Descriptive Index of the English Lyrics in John of Grimestone’s Preaching Book, Medium Aevum Monographs, New Series 2 (Oxford, 1973). For sigla of FM manuscripts, see Chapter I, pp. 13-22.

INTRODUCTION

MIDDLE ENGLISH LYRICS owe a profound and multiform debt to contem-

porary religious beliefs and institutions. They share major themes with

medieval preaching and devotion; their composition often imitates structures furnished by contemporary meditation or catechetical teaching; and their images and verbal material are widely borrowed from the Bible and the liturgy. Yet there is another debt of a different kind and far more concrete: the fact that they have survived in manuscripts which originally

were associated with monks and nuns, friars, or secular clergy. This tangible debt applies to many single poems, such as “Sumer is icumen in,”’

found in a commonplace-book made and kept at the Benedictine abbey at Reading, Berkshire. It applies equally to large collections of lyrics—

religious as well as secular—which have come to us in such famous anthologies as MSS Harley 913, Cambridge Trinity College 323, Advocates’ Library 18.7.21, and others, all at one time belonging to or actually written

by members of religious orders. Among such manuscripts of religious provenance which contain many English lyrics, Latin sermon books form a special group. From the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries a large number of books have come down to us which were made to collect and offer, in one form or another, sermon material for preachers. Some of these contain complete sermons; others merely gather notes on favorite topics, tales, and little sermon outlines in a very random way; others arrange similar material in alphabetical or topical order; and still others present such matters precisely as a well-ordered, discursive book should. All of them were written in Latin, but several books of this kind enclose in their folios a number—from a mere handful up to over two hundred—of Middle English poems, many of which are

unique to one particular manuscript and stand among the gems of our early literature. The best known of these books is Friar John Grimestone’s

““Commonplace Book,” outstanding in the number and quality of its English lyrics. Almost as well known, and just as little examined as Grimestone’s collection, is the subject of the present study, a Latin hand1

2 INTRODUCTION book for preachers written in the first half of the fourteenth century by an unknown Franciscan friar and, if the number of surviving copies is any indication, considerably more popular than Grimestone’s book made over half a century later. Modern interest in the Fasciculus morum arose almost simultaneously

in two separate scholarly disciplines, Middle English literature and medieval church history. When in 1916 Carleton Brown published the first-fruits of his labors of collecting and ordering Middle English religious poetry, he included originally five manuscripts of Fasciculus morum that contained some English verses.’ His list was soon expanded to ten, thanks

to the searches of his student at Bryn Mawr College, Miss Yvonne Stoddard, who was then planning to make a full edition.” At the same time,

in 1917, the great student of English Franciscan history, A. G. Little, published a longer account of Fasciculus morum in a lecture dealing with collections of sermon material used in popular preaching, in which he described the handbook, discussed its date and authorship, and listed 21 manuscripts.® Little’s essay has until now remained the only comprehensive account of the work. Even though Little’s examination was not carried much further in the

following decades, his sense of the importance which Fasciculus morum held in the history of medieval preaching remained alive in the two books* and a more recent article® devoted to the subject by Gerald R. Owst, as well as in shorter studies by Homer G. Pfander.® But it was primarily its Middle English verses which continued to attract students to the Latin handbook. In 1925 Professor Frances A. Foster, herself also a Bryn Mawr

Ph.D., took over Miss Stoddard’s work, intending to edit not just the

(Oxford, 1916). |

1 Carleton Brown, A Register of Middle English Religious and Didactic Verse, 1

2 In the ‘“‘ Addenda” of Register, 1, and in the “‘ Further Addenda” appearing in Brown, Register, 2 (Oxford, 1920), p. 6.

| 3 Andrew G. Little, Studies in English Franciscan History, Publications of the University of Manchester, Historical Series 29 (Manchester, 1917), pp. 139-157. On the number of manuscripts see the further discussion that follows below.

, *G. R. Owst, Preaching in Medieval England: An Introduction to Sermon Manuscripts of the Period c. 1350-1450 (Cambridge, 1926); Literature and Pulpit in Medieval

England: A Neglected Chapter in the History of English Letters and of the English People (Cambridge, 1933; second edition, with additions, Oxford, 1961). > Owst, *‘ Sortilegium in English Homiletic Literature of the Fourteenth Century,” in Studies Presented to Sir Hilary Jenkinson, ed. J. C. Davies (London, 1957), pp. 272— 303. It discusses the chapter ‘‘De fide” from Fasciculus morum.

°H. G. Pfander, ‘‘The Mediaeval Friars and Some Alphabetical ReferenceBooks for Sermons,’’ Medium Aevum 3 (1934), 19-29; and The Popular Sermon of the Medieval Friar in England (New York, 1937), his revised Ph.D. dissertation supervised by C. Brown. Both contain passing references to Fasciculus morum.

INTRODUCTION 3 English verses but the entire treatise, and for many years she examined the manuscripts, transcribed and collated texts, and sought to establish a base for her planned edition. When she had to give up her work for personal

reasons, she deposited her materials, including photostatic copies of several manuscripts, in the Beinecke Library of Yale University. In the _ meantime she had published two articles on Fasciculus morum, the second stating her rationale for choosing the base for the intended edition.” In the intervening years, other students of Middle English poetry, too, had examined Fasciculus morum carefully and used some of its material. In his unpublished Cambridge University Ph.D. dissertation, ‘On the Mediaeval English Religious Lyric”? (1937), Rossell Hope Robbins transcribed all the English verses contained in two Cambridge manuscripts of Fasciculus morum.® His findings concerning the early history of the Middle English lyric—besides the inestimable contribution to Middle English scholarship consolidated in his editions and, above all, The Index of Middle English Verse®—appear in several valuable discussions, of which an article on the authors of religious lyrics?® and a classification of the types of manuscripts that have preserved Middle English religious and secular lyrics?

, are directly relevant to Fasciculus morum. Aiming at a_ deeper understanding of the esthetic qualities of the medieval religious lyric, Rosemary Woolf has similarly stressed the importance of the handbook, first in an article on the image of Christ the Lover-Knight, and more recently in her book-length discussion of the medieval English religious lyric.?? Fasciculus morum is given similar emphasis in a recent book on _ 7B, A. Foster, ‘Some English Words from the Fasciculus morum,” in Essays and Studies in Honor of Carleton Brown (New York, 1940), pp. 148-157; “‘A Note on the Fasciculus morum,” Franciscan Studies, N.S. 8 (1948), 202-204. Miss Foster also is the editor of The Northern Passion and the Stanzaic Life of Christ. 8 Manuscripts Gol and Go2. For the manuscript sigla used throughout this book see Chapter I, pp. 13-22. ® Carleton Brown and Rossell Hope Robbins, The Index of Middle English Verse (New York, 1943), continued in R. H. Robbins and John L. Cutler, Supplement to the Index of Middle English Verse (Lexington, Ky., 1965). For the Index Prof. Robbins utilized Miss Foster’s transcriptions and her numbering of the verses in Fasciculus morum. ‘‘ Foster Numbers”’ therefore appear in the Index and in the Middle English Dictionary, ed. Hans Kurath, Sherman M. Kuhn, et al. (Ann Arbor, 1954 ff.). I have included them also in Chapter IV. 10 Robbins, ‘‘The Authors of the Middle English Religious Lyrics,” Journal of English and Germanic Philology 39 (1940), 230-238. 11 Robbins (ed.), Secular Lyrics of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries (Oxford 1952; second edition, 1955), pp. xvii-lv; Fasciculus morum is discussed on pp. xvili—x1x.

12R. Woolf, “The Theme of Christ the Lover-Knight in Medieval English Literature,” Review of English Studies, N.S. 13 (1962), 1-16, esp. pp. 7-9; The English Religious Lyric in:the Middle Ages (Oxford, 1968), passim.

4 INTRODUCTION the debt Middle English lyric poetry owed to Franciscan preachers.?? Yet despite the historical and critical interest in Fasciculus morum since

early this century, and despite the inclusion of several of its poems in recent anthologies,!* the handbook remains little known. Only a few of

, its verses have been printed, and those that have had this good fortune are not always well understood. No attempt has been made to compare their textual variants and to draw whatever inferences seem warranted about their history, their popularity, their function in medieval culture. Even the basic facts about Fasciculus morum which one would suppose to be most easily ascertainable are clouded by perplexing confusion. Take for instance the number of surviving manuscripts. Little spoke of twenty-

one. In 1924 C. Brown could refer to “some 29 manuscripts,” while Frances A. Foster eventually—by implication in her essay of 1940 and explicitly in her note of 1948—-gave a total of thirty manuscripts, the figure also adopted by Robbins in 1940. Yet a dozen years later Robbins declared that Fasciculus morum was “found in 22 manuscripts,”’ and this,

to say the least, uncertainty survives in more recent statements, such as Robbins’s “about thirty-one” (1970)'® and David Jeffrey’s “at least twenty-one” (1975). The seeds for this confusion, I assume, were sown

by Little himself, who in his basic description of the work spoke of twenty-one manuscripts—not once, in fact, but twice—yet actually listed twenty-two.'® 18 David L. Jeffrey, The Early English Lyric and Franciscan Spirituality (Lincoln,

Nebraska, 1975), esp. ch. 5. Based on his Princeton dissertation, 1968. For some critical comments on Professor Jeffrey’s work, see below, Chapter III, pp. 102-103 and notes. 14 Notably Theodore Silverstein (ed.), English Lyrics before 1500, York Medieval Texts (Evanston, Hl., 1971), who reproduces 13 verses from Fasciculus morum. His

edition has the merit of paying attention to the context of the poems, even though several misunderstandings occur. The Oxford Book of Medieval English Verse, chosen and edited by Celia and Kenneth Sisam (Oxford, 1970), includes two items found in - Fasciculus morum, but from different manuscripts. Douglas Gray (ed.), A Selection of Religious Lyrics (Oxford, 1975), reproduces two verses from Fasciculus morum, and a third from another manuscript which is also found in Fasciculus morum. 15 “Signs of Death in Middle English,’’ Mediaeval Studies 32 (1970), 292, n. 38.

16 Studies, pp. 139-140 and n. 2. Part of this confusion stems from the fact known to all cited scholars that several manuscripts only “contain extracts.’’ Miss Foster, somewhat obscurely, spoke of 24 (full) manuscripts and “‘six other manuscripts containing extracts’’ (‘A Note,” p. 202), without further specification. In the latter category she included two manuscripts (A and D) which are, properly speaking, abbreviated versions of Fasciculus morum and should be counted among the “‘full”’ manuscripts, as I have done. Her other manuscripts in this category mostly contain , only brief extracts, or the sermon outlines alone, or mere references to Fasciculus

INTRODUCTION 5 But such matters pale in importance before the larger questions which have so far not been asked, let alone been answered. Fasciculus morum is a handbook for preachers written in Latin and providing subject matter for sermons. What precisely are the English verses in it doing there? The conventional term which is usually applied to them, “‘preachers’ tags,” suggests shortness, insignificance, dispensability, but does not really tell

us anything about their relation to the context in which they appear,}” their precise function in a sermon, or their sources and literary background.

Nor do we to date have a very clear notion about how original or, conversely, how traditional any given poem of this kind was. Can the verses Of Fasciculus morum be credited to one writer or preacher who composed the handbook, or should we think of them as common snatches

floating from pulpit to pulpit, from convent to convent, as the result of polygenesis? Not all of these questions will ever be definitely answered, but I claim that a careful study of the verses in relation to their context and to the conventions of fourteenth-century preaching can produce some

very reliable new insights. , The present book, therefore, offers a complete and critical edition of the Middle English verses found in Fasciculus morum, together with a discussion of the manuscripts and such questions as the nature, composition, purpose, influence, date, and authorship of the Latin handbook. Some of these bibliographical and literary aspects of Fasciculus morum I presented in a lecture, given in 1974, on popular preaching concerned with the traditional vices and virtues;'® here I offer a more detailed and fully documented discussion. The present study further addresses itself

to the phenomenon of vernacular verses appearing in Latin sermons. Fasciculus morum, however, is not a set of actual sermons, and one may therefore object that its use for a study of “‘verses in sermons” is unjustified. Fortunately, a sufficiently large number of sermon collections made in the same period have been preserved which, exactly like Fasciculus morum, quote English verses in Latin prose sermons. In Chapter II I draw heavily on this material (which includes such well-known texts as Bishop morum, such as can be found in several additional codices. As currently known, Fasciculus morum has been preserved in 28 manuscripts, of which four are abbreviations of different sorts. All of this is more fully discussed in Chapter I. 17 J have analyzed different relations between the English verses and their Latin context in ‘‘The English Verses in the Fasciculus Morum,” in Chaucer and Middle English Studies in honour of Rossell Hope Robbins, ed. Beryl Rowland (London, 1974), pp. 230-248. 18 Wenzel, ‘‘ Vices, Virtues, and Popular Preaching,” in Medieval and Renaissance

Studies: Proceedings of the Southeastern Institute of Medieval and Renaissance Studies, Summer, 1974, ed. Dale B. J. Randall (Durham, N.C., 1976), pp. 28-54.

6 INTRODUCTION Sheppey’s sermon collections and the miscellany of Harley 7322, but also

much unpublished material) in order to discuss the phenomenon of vernacular verses found in Latin sermons outside Fasciculus morum. 1 should point out, however, that my study is not concerned with sermons preserved entirely in verse, or “metrical homilies” as they are known to Middle English scholars, which represent a quite different literary phenomenon that deserves to be investigated independently. I first became interested in Fasciculus morum when I gathered material

, for a study of the sin of sloth and found my attention engaged by the interesting and individual way in which the vice is treated in this handbook.

It gives me pleasure to record here again my gratitude to Rossell Hope - Robbins for encouraging my incipient curiosity about the work and for | strengthening my growing resolve to edit the entire treatise. I am likewise indebted to the Beinecke Library and especially to Dr. Marjorie G. Wynne

for placing Professor Foster’s materials on loan in the library of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, where they were at my disposal for several years. Though Professor Foster’s collation of the English verses is not complete, and though her search for a base text for

an edition needs to be undertaken afresh, with a fuller analysis of all manuscripts including two unknown to her (CC and Sp), I have benefited

from her partially typed and handwritten transcription of Fasciculus morum and her descriptive notes on the extant manuscripts. To Dr. Ian Doyle and Dr. Neil R. Ker I owe a special debt: to the former for sharing with me his rich collection of references to Fasciculus morum in wills and booklists and much other related knowledge; to the latter for bringing two new manuscripts to my attention. I have enjoyed the hospitality and good services of many libraries in England, Scotland, and the United States— too many to be individually listed here. May the shelf numbers of their holdings which appear in these pages stand as a monument of my gratitude.

But I must single out the librarians and staff of the Bodleian, the British Museum (as it was then called), the Anderson Room at Cambridge, and the Humanities Reference Room of the Louis Round Wilson Library in Chapel Hill for their kindness and help over longer periods; and Mrs. Bridget Johnston (Worcester), Mr. Patrick Strong (Keeper of College Library and Collections at Eton College), and Mr. Wyndham Woodward (formerly Librarian of the Spalding Gentlemen’s Society) for literally going out of their way in order to let me see manuscripts. I am further indebted to Professors Sylvia L. Thrupp, Robert E. Lewis, and Richard Rouse for valuable pieces of information. I am also deeply grateful for various kinds of financial support which

| have made this study possible. A Guggenheim Fellowship allowed me

INTRODUCTION 7 to examine the manuscripts in British libraries directly and at leisure. A grant from the American Philosophical Society sent me to hundreds of Latin sermon manuscripts for background material. Smaller faculty research grants from the University of North Carolina helped to purchase necessary microfilms. And a fellowship awarded by the National Endowment for the Humanities has given me the leisure to put the present study

into final form. oe

Finally, to my wife I owe, above all else, being always reminded that

there is more to life than verses in sermons. To her this book is affectionately dedicated.

BLANK PAGE

Chapter | | FASCICULUS MORUM

1. CONTENTS AND STRUCTURE

THE PURPOSE AND GENERAL ORGANIZATION of Fasciculus morum are out-

lined in the opening sentences of its first chapter with a clarity and directness that are characteristic of the entire treatise: Ut enim habetur [in regula beati Francisci et eciam (var. ecclesie)] statutum est alibi, tenemur populo denunciare et predicare vicia et virtutes, penam et gloriam, cum brevitate sermonis. Ideo a descripcione viciorum est incho-

andum et in virtutibus terminandum, primo in generali ac postea in speciali. Sed quia septem considero vicia capitalia et septem oppositas virtutes, tractatus igitur iste Fasciculus morum nominatur et per septem particulas dividitur, in quarum unaquaque, precedente vicii descripcione, sequitur virtus pro fine tanquam extirpatrix cuiuscumque mali. Nam “‘cuius finis bonus, ipsum totum bonum”’ [ut dicit philosophus].? As it is given [in the Rule of blessed Father Francis and] is [also (or, to the Church)] decreed elsewhere, we are held to denounce and preach to the people the vices and virtues, punishment and glory in brief words. There-

fore, we shall start with the description of the vices and end with the virtues, first in general and then in particular. But since I consider (or, take up?) seven capital vices and seven opposed virtues, this treatise is called Fasciculus morum and is divided into seven parts, in each of which after the description of a vice follows, at the end, a virtue, as the uprooter

of every evil; because “‘that whose end is good, is in itself all good”’ [as the , Philosopher says].?

Fasciculus morum thus introduces itself as an aid in the office of preaching. Its main subject matter, the vices and virtues, was indeed a standard, conventional ingredient of medieval sermons, required by St. Francis and by Church legislation after the Fourth Lateran Council, and 1 R, fol. 7r. All quotations of Fasciculus morum are from MS Rawlinson C.670 unless otherwise indicated. Readings in square brackets are supplied or corrected from other manuscripts. In Latin quotations throughout this book I preserve the medieval

spelling but normalize the use of u/v and introduce modern capitalization and punctuation. Abbreviations have been silently expanded, and I have added full identifi-

here cited is further discussed below. 2 Translations from the Latin are my own unless otherwise indicated. , cation of biblical quotations in square brackets. The first sentence of the passage

9

10 FASCICULUS MORUM frequently recommended in treatises dealing with the art of preaching. The specific tetrad of praedicabilia which is here quoted from the Second Franciscan Rule*—vices and virtues, punishment and glory—makes its appearance with equal regularity: it is mentioned, for instance, in works by the Franciscans John of Wales and Roger Bacon, by the Benedictine monk Ranulph Higden, and by Wyclif.® Consequently, after a brief discussion of vices and sins in general, the work takes up the series of the Seven Deadly Sins and pursues it in the

most common order from pride to lechery. Each part first discusses a chief vice and then introduces the opposite virtue as its “‘uprooter”’ (extirpatrix) or fighting opponent (pugil, athleta, expugnatrix). Hence the seven parts of the book deal successively with pride and humility, wrath

and patience, envy and love (caritas), avarice and poverty, sloth and occupation, gluttony, and sobriety, and finally lechery and chastity. The individual vices are treated by means of repeated topics, such as the definition of a vice, comparisons which illustrate its hideous or foolish nature, reasons for detesting it, its species, and its evil effects. Similarly, the virtues are defined, illustrated, sometimes divided into their species, and often further elaborated by showing how they can be acquired. The entire rhetoric of the treatise thus follows the great model for literature of

this nature, the Summa de vitiis et virtutibus by the thirteenth-century Dominican William Peraldus.

Into this simple structure the author has inserted other material which medieval preachers were officially obliged to preach, such as the Ten Commandments, the Pater Noster, the articles of the Creed, the theological and cardinal virtues, the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit, the seven works of mercy, the seven beatitudes, the three parts of Penance,

° For a brief survey of medieval English church legislation on preaching the vices and virtues and references in Artes praedicandi, see ‘‘ Vices, Virtues, and Popular Preaching.”’

* Regula II, cap. 9; Opuscula sancti Patris Francisci Assisinensis, Bibliotheca franciscana ascetica medii aevi 1 (Quaracchi, 1904), p. 71. > John of Wales’s Moniloquium begins by quoting the sentence from the Rule and then deals with the ‘“‘quatuor annuncianda sive predicanda”’ in its four sections (MS Cambridge, Peterhouse 200, fols. 1-62r). Other references to the four topics: Roger Bacon, Opus tertium, cap. 75, ed. J. S. Brewer, Fr. Rogeri Bacon Opera quaedam hactenus inedita, Rolls Series 15 (London, 1859), p. 390; Moralis philosophia, proem, ed. Eugenio Massa (Turin: Thesaurus mundi, 1953), p. 3; Margaret M. Jennings, ““A Critical Edition of the Ars componendi sermones of Ranulph Higden”’ (unpubl. Ph.D.

Dissertation, Bryn Mawr, 1970), pp. 69 and 78f.; The English Works of Wyclif, Hitherto Unprinted, ed. F. D. Matthew, EETS 74 (London, 1880), p. 50.

FASCICULUS MORUM 11 and similar traditional topics of a catechetical nature.° These matters are dealt with fairly briefly. Two other subjects, in contrast, receive a much more extensive treatment and as a result swell their respective sections

greatly beyond the normal proportions. In Part III’ the discussion of charity, which is the virtue opposed to envy, leads the author to ask how

lost charity can be regained. The answer, by meditating on Christ’s passion, leads to a series of chapters on Christ’s suffering and the Cross. With this, Part III is formally ended, but the author continues by expanding on “other ways in which Christ has shown us His mercy” and adds a long review of Christ’s life from the Incarnation to the Sending of the Holy Spirit and a final chapter on the Blessed Trinity. The reasons for such a long addition are clear. First of all, these chapters present material of the central articles of the Creed, a catechetical topic which is elsewhere in _ Fasciculus morum treated less fully. In addition, meditation on the life of

Christ was a central aspect of Franciscan spirituality and preaching. Nothing could be more fitting than to link this matter to the instruction on how to foster the virtue of love. How vital, how close to the preacher’s heart this subject was can incidentally be seen in the frequency with which English verses occur in this section—a situation which parallels what we find in contemporary sermons on the passion and the life of Christ, and which agrees with what we know about the history of the Middle English lyric. I should point out that although this section on the life of Christ is about as long as the discussion of envy and love proper, it is well integrated

into Part III] and reveals the author’s control over his chosen material. When, for example, in reviewing Christ’s life the author comes to the passion, although he provides food for meditation with a moralized exemplum (the Trojan War, an obvious parallel to the famous ChristKnight exemplum used earlier), he is quite conscious of having treated the passion before and passes over it more briefly. The same controlled comprehensiveness appears in a second long expansion. Part V eventually turns to Penance and discusses it exhaustively in a long series of chapters devoted to the conventional three parts of this

sacrament (i.e., contrition, confession, and satisfaction) and further to subparts (especially prayer, fasting, and almsgiving, which are the standard

three kinds of satisfaction). Then the author takes up another common ® For the inclusion of such catechetical matters into the official preaching program of the Church, see my discussion referred to in note 3 and further references given there.

For references to parts and chapters in Fasciculus morum see the synopsis of the work in Appendix A, with discussion of the proposed chapter numbering.

12 FASCICULUS MORUM topic of medieval preaching, the Three Enemies of Man, and in discussing it through a dozen chapters relates the World to faith and prudence, the

Flesh to hope and temperance, and the Devil to charity and strength. What is done here, confusing though it may seem at first glance, amounts to a very skillful integration of diverse elements into a structure reminis_ cent of a medieval summa. The author has managed to build into a logical system the topics of Penance, the Three Enemies, the three theological

virtues, and the four cardinal virtues (justice appears as one aspect of satisfaction!)—all catechetical topics which a medieval preacher was

enemies. | required to discuss regularly. And these topics are, in addition, very firmly connected within the main subject of Part V: the sin of accidia is overcome by spiritual occupation or activity, the virtue which consists chiefly in two

activities, that is, penance and man’s battle against his three spiritual

, The author’s firm control over his rich and diversified subject matter

reveals itself in smaller aspects as well. At the beginning of each section on

a vice or virtue, for example, he announces his approach clearly with a divisio introduced by “‘sic intendo procedere,” and in the subsequent development the parts are as clearly marked, usually by number and a topical word (“‘secundo dicendum est de X.’’). His desire to see and to

present matters in a coherent system even extends to the order and connection of the seven main parts of his book. Although the series of Seven Deadly Sins already forms a strongly linked set, he binds the parts even further by introducing, with Part IV, the topos of the Three Enemies of Man and thus passes from sins of the Devil (pride, wrath, and envy) to those of the World (avarice and greed, Part IV) and further to those of the Flesh (sloth, gluttony, and lechery, Parts V-VII).® The resulting repetition

of a given topic (here, the Three Enemies) may seem awkward, especially when one notices throughout the treatise a certain amount of similar repetition of concepts (for example: all men are created equal; fear of death is a deterrent to sin), images (the Charter of Christ; the quatrefoil of

love), stories (the joke about a pregnant girl), or moralized exempla (Dionysius the Tyrant; the toad in the tomb of a rich glutton). But it should be kept in mind that such repeated topics and figures elucidate different vices or virtues. Fear of death, for example, may be recommended as a deterrent to pride as well as to avarice, as was in fact commonly done in medieval homiletic literature. Besides, the author of Fasciculus morum

® For a brief history of this topos and its ubiquity in late medieval literature, see Wenzel, ‘‘The Three Enemies of Man,” Mediaeval Studies 29 (1967), 47-66.

FASCICULUS MORUM 13 is normally aware of having used the same material elsewhere, as is shown by cross references and often abbreviated treatment.

| 2. THE MANUSCRIPTS The treatise is known to have been preserved in twenty-eight manuscripts, which show a certain amount of variation in major aspects. Four copies are more or less abbreviated versions (B2, Pe, A, D). In the process of time several manuscripts have lost their first or last and occasionally

even interior leaves. The treatise itself is normally preceded by a very rhetorical dedicatory prologue, which begins with ‘‘Frater predilecte ac

sodalis preelecte,” fully printed below. This prologue is missing in defective copies (H, CC, W1) and in some abbreviated versions (A, D) and

has been omitted in BI. The first chapter following the prologue begins, “Ut enim [var., Et enim] habetur in regula beati patris Francisci et ecclesie [var. ecce, eciam]

statutum est alibi, tenemur...” (see above). Of the twenty-two manuscripts which contain the passage unmutilated, five have replaced the reference to the Rule of St. Francis with “‘in regulis sanctorum patrum”’ (L3, C, Pe, W2, Et). This suggests that the scribe, or the audience, or both, of these particular copies were non-Franciscan. Similar variants later in the text, where references to St. Francis have been changed or omitted, point in the same direction, although the manuscripts are not as consistent

in this regard as one might expect. ,

The text of Fasciculus morum is often accompanied by a list of chapters or an alphabetical subject index (called Tabula) or a series of sermon outlines (discussed later) or any combination of these additional pieces, whose

relative position also varies greatly. Their presence and position will be noted in the following brief descriptions. Fasciculus morum is found in the following manuscripts:

Bl Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS 187 (S.C. 2090),° fols. 124r—209v, followed by sermon outlines and subject index (fols. 209v—222r). Parchment, middle of the fifteenth century. The volume contains the Sunday Sermons by John Felton and other theological matters,

apparently for preaching. It was presented to the Bodleian Library by William Harwood, prebendary of Winchester, in 1611. Fasciculus © F. Madan and H. H. E. Craster, A Summary Catalogue of Western Manuscripts

in the Bodleian Library ..., 2,1 (Oxford, 1922), 207.

14 FASCICULUS MORUM morum was written by perhaps as many as three scribes, and another hand wrote the sermon outlines and the subject index.

B2 Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS 332 (SC. 2243),?° fols. 107v—182v,

| followed by sermon outlines and a list of chapters (fols. 182v—193r). This material is preceded by a Tabula fratris Iacobi Ianuensis.. .

super historias biblie and followed by a treatise on Faith, the Sacraments, and the Vices and Virtues by Servasanto de Faenza.

Parchment, late fourteenth century. The volume belonged to Nicholas Greene in the sixteenth century. Fasciculus morum is written in one hand, Anglicana formata, in 2 columns. Many of its

, exempla are simply alluded to or omitted. B3 Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS 410 (S.C. 2305)?! fols. 1r—92v (whole MS). Parchment, fifteenth century. Written by two hands. Presented by the Dean and Canons of Windsor in 1612. One leaf is missing between folios 72 and 73.

B4 Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS. 687 (S.C. 2501),?? fols. 1r—7lv,

followed by subject index (fols. 72r-73v). This is followed by sermons, treatises on the Pater Noster and the Decalogue, and theological notes with several exempla, in a different hand. Parchment, early fifteenth century, in two columns. One leaf is missing between folios 10 and 11. The volume bears the name of Thomas Cardyff in several places.

L1 Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Laud Misc. 111 (S.C. 1550),*° fols. | 49r-176v. The treatise ends incomplete in Part V, at the end of a quire. The volume contains various other theological treatises in Latin. Parchment, beginning of the fifteenth century. Fasciculus

morum was written by two scribes. |

L2 Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Laud Misc. 213 (S.C. 1045),1* fols. Ir-186r, followed by the subject index (fols. 186v—192r) and the sermon outlines (fols. 193r-214v, ending incomplete in the last

10 Tbid., 2,1:275f. .

11 Tbid., 2,1:300. 12 Tbid., 2,1:398f.

138 H. O. Coxe, Catalogi codicum manuscriptorum Bibliothecae Bodleianae. Pars ,

547.col.| 185 and p. 552. | | eae-Ibid.,

secunda Codices Latinos et Miscellaneos Laudianos complectens (Oxford, 1858-1885;

repr. with corrections and additions by R. W. Hunt, Oxford, 1973), col. 117f. and

FASCICULUS MORUM 15 sermon), with some scattered extraneous notes. Parchment and paper, fifteenth century. Fasciculus morum appears to be written in at least six different hands and is ascribed to John Spiser (fol. Ir)

and to Robert Selke (fol. 192r). , L3 ~ Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Laud Misc. 568 (S.C. 1117),?° fols. Ir-109r, followed by the sermon outlines and the subject index (fols. 109r—124v). Parchment, fifteenth century, in two columns. Fasciculus morum is here ascribed to Robert Silke (fol. 124v). This

copy has many marginal notes for the use of preachers, among which references to “‘alkot,”’ the Summa Parisiensis (i.e., Peraldus),

, the Dieta salutis, and an unidentified “librum M. Ricardi Chester de tipis’’ are of some interest. The book was bought on 13 Sept.

1611 by F. (or J.?) Sampson, for 2s. 6d. | R Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Rawlinson C. 670 (S.C. 12514),?® fols. 7r-150v, followed by the subject index (fols. 151r—156r). The

treatise is preceded (fols. 1r—Sv) by a list of chapters, which is longer than usual and includes brief summaries of each chapter, mentioning especially the exempla. A similiar list of chapters for the treatise Convertimini follows (fols. 5v—6r). Parchment, first half

of the fifteenth century. The text of Fasciculus morum has been carefully corrected, and on fol. 52r the note “corrigitur usque huc”’

appears, although two later sections have also been corrected and

, annotated.

Co Oxford, Corpus Christi College, MS 218,1” fols. 4r—219v, followed by the subject index (fols. 220r-228v) and the sermon outlines (fols. 229r-242r), which are in turn followed by a brief note and a story

about Guido. On fol. Ir—-v, a flyleaf which comes from another manuscript, a different hand has written a table of contents for Fasciculus morum. Parchment, end of the fourteenth century. Written in a Gothica textualis hand. The initials of the prologue, the seven parts, and the sections on Patience and on Abstinence are | illuminated with gold. Fasciculus morum is ascribed to Robert Selk at the end of the subject index (fol. 228v). On fol. 228v also appeared

*° Ibid., col. 406f. and p. 571. , 16 W. D. Macray, Catalogi codicum manuscriptorum Bibliothecae Bodleianae Partis quintae fasciculus secundus viri munificentissimi Ricardi Rawlinson . . . (Oxford,

1878), p. 342. | 17H. O. Coxe, Catalogus codicum manuscriptorum qui in collegiis aulisque Oxoniensibus hodie adservantur (Oxford, 1852), 2:86.

16 FASCICULUS MORUM an owner’s note: “‘Iste liber constat domino Willelmo Warde ac domino Michael’ Belle anno domini 1459,”’ which is now illegible.*®

Li Oxford, Lincoln College, MS 52,19 fols. 1r-172r, followed by the subject index (fols. 172v—176r), a list of chapters (fol. 176v), and the

, sermon outlines (fols. 177r—186v). Parchment, beginning of the fifteenth century, in two columns. Subject index and sermon outlines in a different hand from that of Fasciculus morum. The volume

was given to the College by Master Robert Flemmyng, Dean of Lincoln (died 1483), the nephew of the founder of Lincoln College, - but this volume does not appear in the book catalogue of 1474.?°

C Cambridge, University Library, MS Dd.10.15,?* fols. 13r—173v, followed by a list of chapters (fol. 174r-v). The volume also contains another popular treatise on the seven deadly sins, beginning “‘Veneni ratio potissime...’’ (fols. 1r—12v),?? and the Liber aureus de vita Christi Jesu compositus per dominum Bonaventuram

cardinalem (thus colophon; fols. 175r—229v). Parchment, late fifteenth century. Fasciculus morum apparently written in two different hands, the list of chapters in still another hand. Owners’ marks: ‘“‘George Weldon” on fol. i,v; bookplate of George I, of 1715, which would indicate that George I may have bought the volume from the library of Bishop John Moore in 1714. For a

and note 130. |

possible association of this copy with Colchester, see below, p. 41 _

Gol Cambridge, Gonville and Caius College, MS 71,?° fols. 13r—92v, followed by the sermon outlines (fols. 92v-100v) and the subject index (fols. 100v-104v). The manuscript also contains Holcot’s Super librum Sapientiae with table (fols. 105r—216) and is bound together with another manuscript containing legal matters, now

forming fols. 1-12. Parchment, fifteenth century. 18 See a handwritten note in the Coxe catalogue kept at the Bodleian Library.

19 Tbid., 1:33f. ,

20 R. Weiss, ‘‘The Earliest Catalogues of the Library of Lincoln College,”

Bodleian Quarterly Record 8 (1935-38), 343-359. 21:4 Catalogue of the Manuscripts Preserved in the Library of the University of Cambridge, 1 (Cambridge, 1856), 414, No. 574. A microfilm copy of this manuscript

1265F. |

is on deposit at the Library of Congress (Washington, D.C.), MLA Project, No. _ 22 Ror its popularity and attribution, see S. H. Thomson, The Writings of Robert Grosseteste, Bishop of Lincoln, 1235-1253 (Cambridge, 1940), pp. 268-270. 23M. R. James, A Descriptive Catalogue of the Manuscripts in the Library of Gonville and Caius College, 1 (Cambridge, 1907), 64f. |

, FASCICULUS MORUM __ 17 Go2 Cambridge, Gonville and Caius College, MS 364, fols. 1r—153v, followed by a list of chapters (fol. 154r) and the beginning of the subject index (fol. 154v), both in a later hand than the text. Parchment, about 1400. The initial letter of the prologue is illuminated with gold (for which the illuminator received 2d., fol. 158v). The book appears in the booklist of the University Library, Cambridge, made in or before 1424, with the correct initial words of the second and penultimate folios, where it is stated to have come “ex dono Magistri Willelmi Holler’.’’2> Holler, from the diocese of Norwich,

obtained a papal dispensation for promotion to higher orders and to hold a benefice when only twenty-one years of age, in 1412. He

, was a master at Cambridge by 1420.7° For a reference to Norwich in this copy of Fasciculus morum, see below, p. 41. The volume also

| bears the owner’s mark of Thomas Wareyn (end flyleaf), who was a Fellow of King’s Hall in 1436, Master by 1445, and Doctor of Theology by 1452.27 The flyleaf at the beginning bears the inscrip-

7 tion: “Pis longyth to pe Chauntry.”’ Pe Cambridge, Peterhouse, MS 213,7° fols. 1r-104v, preceded by a list of chapters on the front flyleaf. Parchment, fifteenth century, the initial letters of the prologue and of the parts (except I and IV) are illuminated in gold. Given to the college by Master John Warkeworth, who had bought it in 1463 (front pastedown and fol. i,v). Many exempla are only alluded to or omitted.

Jo Cambridge, St. John’s College, MS 159,29 fols. 34r—-186v (ends imperfectly in Part VII), preceded by the subject index (fols. 26r_ 33r). This in turn is preceded by a treatise on the Sacraments, written by Richard Lepar, chaplain of Foston, “‘de Mulcastre in Coupland” (struck through), in 1472 (fols. 1r—-15v); a copy of the

| Visio Pauli (fols. 24v—25v); and various short pieces, including a

24 Ibid., 2:413f. |

25 H. Bradshaw, ‘‘Two Lists of Books in the University Library,’’ Cambridge Antiquarian Society, Proceedings 2 (1862), 245; repr. in Collected Papers (Cambridge, ,

1889), p. 22. | | |

26 A. B. Emden, A Biographical Register of the University of Cambridge to 1500

(Cambridge, 1963), p. 311. ,

27 See ibid., pp. 620f. i , ,

28 M. R. James, A Descriptive Catalogue of the Manuscripts in the Library of Peterhouse (Cambridge, 1899), pp. 255f. The book appears as No. 392 in the medieval

catalogue of 1481 (ibid., p. 24). 29M. R. James, A Descriptive Catalogue of the Manuscript in the Library of St. John’s College, Cambridge (Cambridge, 1913), pp. 190f.

18 FASCICULUS MORUM will (1 Jan. 1474, at Foston; fol. 17v) and an inventory of the goods **Thome Marchall de barton in bowmerscyr,”’ dated 16 Oct. 1455

, (fol. 23r). Paper, late fifteenth century. The volume is much mutilated. Richard Lepar’s name appears on fols. 15v and 33r, and on the inside of the front cover (in a later hand). “‘Foston”’ seems

to be Foston on the Wolds, near Driffield, Yorks. | A London, British Library, MS Additional 6716,°° fols. 1r—58r, followed by various short pieces in Latin and English, including

the seven-sins section from Speculum Christiani (Latin with English verses, fols. 6lr—63r) and instructions for confession attributed to Grosseteste. This is the first of two manuscripts bound together. Parchment, first half of the fifteenth century. In 1623 the manuscript belonged to the antiquarian William Burton of Lindley,

county of Leicester. This copy represents essentially an excerpt from all seven parts of Fasciculus morum, its main interest being in the exempla. But not all exampla are present. On the other hand,

enough non-narrative, doctrinal matter has been excerpted to produce a fairly coherent treatise. From Part III onwards it might even be called a highly condensed summary of Fasciculus morum. _ The exempla have been analyzed by Herbert.** H __ London, British Library, MS Harley 1316,°2 fols. 1r-100v (beginning and end missing). The text begins at I, 9 and ends at V, 35. The volume is in very poor condition. Besides having lost the beginning

and end of the treatise, the volume has suffered from damp (fols. 1 and-100 and elsewhere), mutilation (fols. 96-97), and binder’s -. error: One quire has been misplaced, and in it a leaf has been wrongly inserted, so that the correct order of folios in their present

_ numbering is: 1-62, 69-100, 68, 64, 65, 66, 67, 63. Parchment, fifteenth century.

CC Canterbury, Cathedral Library, MS D. 14,°%° fols. 1r-222r (beginning _ missing), followed by the subject index (fols. 223r—236v, ending $0 [F. Madden et al.] Index to the Additional Manuscripts... acquired in the

years 1783-1835 (London, 1849), p. 448 (“‘Theology”’). ,

$1 Herbert, Catalogue, pp. 686-691. a

(London, 1808-12), 2:2. :

R. Ker. ,

82 TR. Nares et al.], A Catalogue of the Harleian Manuscripts in the British Museum

33H. J. Todd, Catalogue of the Books, both Manuscript and Printed, which are preserved in the Library of Christ Church, Canterbury (Clerkenwell, 1802), p. 126, is useless. This copy of Fasciculus morum was brought to my attention by Dr. Neil

FASCICULUS MORUM 19 incomplete), which includes the Latin verses, under V. Paper, fifteenth century. The owner’s name Richard Turner appears at least twice, in a more modern hand (fols. 222r, 237r).

LC Lincoln, Cathedral Library, MS 44 (A.2.13),* fols. 156r—228v, followed by the subject index (fols. 228v—231r). Both Fasciculus morum and the index are said to have been “‘composed’’ by Robert Selk (fol. 231r). The volume also contains the Sermones de tempore by Januensis (fols. 1r—154v), the same author’s Quadragesimale (fols. 232r—314v), and the sermon collection Convertimini (fols.

| 315r—338v). Parchment, fifteenth century. WI = Worcester, Cathedral Library, MS F.19,°° fols. 161r—229r (beginning missing), immediately followed by the sermon outlines (fols. 2291r—232v), of which 2l—probably one quire—are missing.

Fasciculus morum is preceded by four other works of use for preachers: a Tractatus de mirabilibus mundi ad mores applicatis, imperfect at both ends (fols. 3r-37v); a treatise on the vices and virtues, somewhat like Fasciculus morum, whose beginning is missing and whose first chapter here is “‘De differencia venialium et mortalium restat dicendum”’ (fols. 38r—104r); the Secundus liber

Elegii de mirabilibus mundi, an alphabetical dictionary of place names and geography (fols. 104r-130v); and a Liber qui dicitur Nicholaus de furno, inc. “*‘Abicere debemus fetorem,”’ an alphabetical dictionary of theological matters (fols. 131r—159v). Parchment, beginning of the fifteenth century. The volume belonged to John Lawerne, a Benedictine monk at Worcester Cathedral Priory

by 1433, who studied at Oxford in the 1440s and incepted as Doctor | of Theology in 1448; he owned a number of other books, too.*®

W2 + Worcester, Cathedral Library, MS Q.3,°” fols. 2r-166v, followed by the sermon outlines (fols. 167r—181v) and a list of chapters (fol. 182r—v). Parchment, fifteenth century.

D Durham, University Library, MS Cosin V.iv.2,°° fols. 1r—89v, 84 R. M. Woolley, Catalogue of the Manuscripts of Lincoln Cathedral Chapter

Library (Oxford, 1927), p. 23. , 85 J. K. Floyer (comp.), Catalogue of Manuscripts Preserved in the Chapter Library of Worcester Cathedral, ed. S. G. Hamilton (Oxford, 1906), p. 10. 86 A. B. Emden, A Biographical Register of the University of Oxford to A.D. 1500, 2 (Oxford, 1958), 112. 87 Floyer, Catalogue ... Worcester, pp. 104f. 38 [J. Raine], Catalogi veteres librorum cathedralis dunelmensis, Surtees Society 7 (1838), p. 174.

20 FASCICULUS MORUM followed by the subject index (fols. 90r-93r) and the sermon outlines, of which only 38 appear in this manuscript (fols. 93v—116v).

Fasciculus morum is attributed to Robert Selke (fol. 89v). The remainder of the volume, to fol. 165, is filled with short notes and

extracts of a theological and catechetical nature, in Latin and English. Paper, written in 1477. This copy of Fasciculus morum is clearly an abbreviation or extract, as the initial rubric states: ** Hic

incipiunt quedam notabilia que tractaui [i.e., extraxi] de libro vocitatum [sic] fasciculus morum”’ (fol. 1r; again, “‘expliciunt quedam notabilia...,” fol. 89v). The text was copied by Thomas Olyphauntt or Olyphant, chaplain, whose name appears twice, after the text of Fasciculus morum (fol. 89v) and at the end of the sermon outlines, here with the date of 12 July 1477 (fol. 116v).

E Edinburgh, University Library, MS 82,°° fols. 4r—-274r, followed | by the sermon outlines (fols. 274r-291r) and the subject index (fols. 291r—315v). Fasciculus morum is preceded by an exposition of the

Pater Noster, inc. “Inter omnia placencia deo’”’ (fols. 1r—4r). Parchment and paper, fifteenth century. The text was written “per _ fratrem Thomam Acclom, Carmelitam” (fol. i,r), who also signed his name at the end of Parts I and II (fols. 25v and 35r) and finished copying the sermon outlines “in vigilia sancti Eusebij’’ (fol. 2911). Et Eton (Bucks.), Eton College, MS 34, Part 11,*° fols. 5r—-88r, preceded by the subject index (fols. 1r—4v) and a list of chapters (fols. 4v—5r). The treatise is followed by a Miracle of Our Lady (fol. 88r—v) ** and

an incomplete series of exempla illustrating topics in (roughly) alphabetical order from Abstinentia to Fides (fols. 88v—96v). This is the second of two distinct manuscripts bound together. Parchment,

written in 1443 by William Gybbe, chaplain of Wisbech, Cam-

bridgeshire (fol. 88r).*? |

Sp Spalding (Lincs.), Spalding Gentlemen’s Society, MS M.J.B.14 (olim Maurice Johnson No. LIV),*® fols. 1r—-165r, followed by a list of 39 CLR. Borland, A Descriptive Catalogue of the Western Medieval Manuscripts in Edinburgh University Library (Edinburgh, 1916), pp. 136f. 40M. R. James, A Descriptive Catalogue of the Manuscripts in the Library of

Eton College (Cambridge, 1895), pp. 17f. : 41 Edited by S. Wenzel, ‘‘A Latin Miracle with Middle English Verses,”? Neu-

Dhilologische Mitteilungen 72 (1971), 77-85. , 42 Gybbe (not Sybbe, as often stated) was vicar of St. Peter’s, Wisbech, and is known to have owned (MS Rawil. poet. 118, poetry by Capgrave; Vatican Ottoboni 334, homilies) or copied (Bodl. 152, Peraldus, De vitiis) several other books. #8 The existence of this copy was brought to my attention by Dr. Neil R. Ker.

FASCICULUS MORUM 21 chapters (fols. 165v—166v) and the sermon outlines (fols. 168r—184v;

the penciled foliation is wrong). Between the list of chapters and | the sermon outlines appears a discussion of the Virtues of the Mass,

in English, written in a different sixteenth-century hand and crossed out (fols. 166v-167v). Parchment and paper, fifteenth century. Apparently written by “Willelmus Neuhous”’ (fols. 165r and 184v).

V Vatican, Ottoboni MS 626,** fols. 1r—-104r, immediately followed by a “Narracio holkote”’’ and then by the sermon outlines (fols. 105r—115r). After several other matters follow the subject index (fols. 173v—-177r) and a list of the number of chapters for each part (fols. 177r). The handwriting and presence of English verses speak

for an English provenance. Bannister thought the manuscript might have come to the Ottoboni collection with many other manu-

scripts once belonging to Cambridge friars, though the volume

bears no inscription to prove this. |

M Madrid, University, Library of the Faculty of Law, MS 116 *°.3,45 fols. 1r—139r, followed by the subject index (fols. 140r—149v). Fasciculus morum is here ascribed to “‘frater Ricardus de pissis magister in theologia De conventu salopie custodie vigoriensis provincie anglie’’ (fol. 139r). Paper, mid-fifteenth century.*® Very

probably the scribe, or the intended audience, or both were | Castilian. The treatise omits all the English verses and also English glosses and names; in fact, it normally omits stories situated in England or making use of English names or words. In addition, the reference to “these large cities, such as London and Coventry’”’ is changed to “‘such as Lisbon (vlixbone), etc.”’ For the English word babeweis (‘‘a grotesque decorative animal figure’’) the corresponding

| Spanish term bestiones is used. 44H. M. Bannister, ‘‘A Short Notice on Some Manuscripts of the Cambridge Friars, Now in the Vatican Library,’’ Collectanea Franciscana 1 (British Society of Franciscan Studies 5) (Aberdeen, 1914), 134 and 139. A microfilm copy of the manuscript is on deposit in the Library of Congress, MLA Project, No. 1264F. 45 J. Villa-Amil y Castro, Catdlogo de los manoscritos existentes en la Biblioteca del Noviciado de la Universidad Central (procedentes de la antigua de Alcala) (Madrid, 1878), p. 40. 46 T owe some of these details to Prof. Ruth J. Dean’s description given to Prof.

Frances A. Foster in 1935. A microfilm copy of the manuscript is on deposit in the Library of Congress, MLA Project, No 925F.

22 FASCICULUS MORUM Mo New York, Pierpont Morgan Library, MS 298,*” fols. 2r—98v. After various other matters, the sermon outlines follow on fols. 102r— _ 412r, and after another break the subject index (fols. 113r—116v). A second subject index appears on fols. 166r—176r. The remainder

of the volume (181 leaves) contains a multitude of excerpts and short pieces, in Latin and German. Parchment and paper. The volume was written by the German Franciscan Johannes Sintram of Wirzburg. He copied Fasciculus morum while he studied at Oxford (cf. notes on fol. 2r and vellum label on back cover) in 1412 (fol. 166v) and finished the second index when he was lector in Halle, A.D. 1416 (fol. 176v). Sintram was an avid note-taker and copyist

and has left us, in his manuscripts, much information about his , career.*® He also provided his copies with cross references, and one

, such reference to Fasciculus morum appears in British Library, MS Additional 44055, fol. 38v, top margin.*® In copying Fasciculus

| morum at Oxford he clearly had an exemplar before him that contained English verses. He copied none of them but refers to this fact at least once: “Hic deficiunt Rikme in anglico scripte”’ (fol. _ 83v). But he did copy a number of English words and glosses. More interestingly, he adds German glosses to a large number of Latin

and English words and translates several Latin hexameters into German verses. Besides these extant twenty-eight manuscripts, about twenty references

to copies of Fasciculus morum have been found in booklists, wills, and inventories of the fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries. Only one of these

can definitely be identified with a still existing manuscript. I list the

references in chronological order: | 47M. Harrsen, Central European Manuscripts in the Pierpont Morgan Library (New York, 1958), pp. 58f., No. 44. A more detailed typed description is on file in the Pierpont Morgan Library. See also T. C. Petersen, ‘‘Johs. Sintram de Herbipoli in Two of His Manuscripts,”’ Speculum 20 (1945), 73-83, with two partial photographs.

#8 For Sintram’s activities, see the just cited article by Petersen; and Father Ludger Meier, OFM, “‘Aufzeichnungen aus vernichteten Handschriften des Wiirzburger Minoritenklosters,” Archivum Franciscanum Historicum 44 (1951), 191-209, with a list of known Sintram manuscripts on pp. 204-209. Further: Alois Madre, Nikolas von Dinkelsbihl, Beitrage zur Geschichte der Philosophie und Theologie des Mittelalters 40,4 (1965), p. 97, n. 15. In 1444 Sintram left 61 volumes to the Franciscan

library at Wurzburg. | | | ,

#9 **Fit in libro scil. fasciculo morum folio 131 in volgari.’’? The reference is to a series of verbal “‘pictures’’ of the vices and virtues represented as armed knights with animal images, in the tradition of chapter 75 of Lumen animae. The vices and virtues

each speak a stanza in German. On fol. 161 in the Morgan MS. ,

FASCICULUS MORUM 23 1409—Robert Stoneham, vicar of Oakham, Rutland, bequeathed “‘certum librum in quaternis XIII . . . qui incipit ‘Frater predilecte’”’ to the

corrector’? of Assheridge (Bucks.), a religious foundation of brethren or canons called “‘Bonhommes’”’ in honor of the Precious

Blood of Jesus Christ. Corrector was the title of their prior.°° Apparently Stoneham had received the book in quires (“‘quos mihi dedit’’) from the corrector. The will was proved at Sleford, 15 Jan.

1409.°! Stoneham had been a fellow and sub-warden of Merton College and attended the Council of Pisa, where he died. He owned a number of books.®

1424—The list of books in the University Library at Cambridge made in or before 1424 lists a copy of Fasciculus morum whose initial words on the second and the penultimate folios identify it as the present

7 Go2 (see above). It was given by Master William Holler.** Before 1433—The list of books of the College of St. Mary, Winchester, made during the reign of Henry VI, lists a copy of Fasciculus morum, whose second folio begins “‘sic certe’’ and which cost 6s. 8d. It was

given by Robert Heete, fellow of the college.°* Heete, who was a fellow of Winchester College from 1421-1433, gave or procured over 30 books.®°

1440/1443—A list of books at All Souls College, Oxford, made between 1440 and 1443, mentions a copy of Fasciculus morum, whose second

folio begins “‘epistula.’’ It does not appear again in later lists, but these are mutilated.°° 50 Cf. R. R. Sharpe, Calendar of Wills Proved and Enrolled in the Court of Husting, London, A.D. 1258—A.D. 1688 (London, 1890), 1:574, no. 4. Also: David Knowles and R. Neville Hadcock, Medieval Religious Houses, England and Wales, 2nd ed. (London, 1971), p. 203. 51 A. Gibbons, Early Lincoln Wills (Lincoln, 1888), p. 139. 52 A.B. Emden, A Biographical Register of the University of Oxford to A.D. 1500 (Oxford, 1957), 3:1789f.

58 H. Bradshaw, ‘‘Two Lists of Books in the University Library,’’ Cambridge Antiquarian Society, Proceedings 2 (1862), 245; repr. Collected Papers (Cambridge,

1889), p. 22. |

54 'W. H. Gunner, ‘“‘Catalogue of Books Belonging to the College of St. Mary, Winchester, in the Reign of Henry VI,”’ The Archaeological Journal 15 (1858), 70. 65 Listed in Emden, Biographical Register . .. Oxford, 2:901-2. 66 FE. F. Jacob, “‘An Early Book List of All Souls College,” Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 16 (1932), 478; and N. R. Ker, Records of All Souls College Library 1437-1600, Oxford Bibliographical Society (Oxford, 1971), p. 7, No. 117.

24 FASCICULUS MORUM 1448—According to an inventory of the goods of “‘domus Beate Marie de

Elsyng spitell, infra Crepullgate, London”’ (1.e., Elsing Spital, a hospital for blind men), an otherwise unidentified copy of Fasciculus morum was found “‘in libraria.”’? Dated 7 Oct. 1448.°7

1463—Thomas Dorchestre, ironmonger of London, left a copy of Fasciculus morum to the overseer of his will, Master Edward Story, later bishop of Carlisle.°®

1472—A booklist of the library of Queen’s College, Cambridge, made by

Andreas Dokett, mentions two copies: L.8 (second folio, “‘locis tem de’’) and M.24 (second folio, “‘ possent’’).°°

1475-76—Thomas Worthington, M.A., vicar of Sherburn in Elmet (Yorks.), bequeaths three books to Balliol College, Oxford, for the use of its fellows. Among them is a copy of Fasciculus morum, also

, containing °“Parisiensis super Epistolas Dominicales.’’ Dated 9 Jan. 1475-76.°°

1483—-Master Robert Abdy, master of Balliol College and rector of

, Campsall, Yorks., bequeaths a “‘book called Fasciculus morum’’ to John, parish priest of Sanday, Beds.*1 This may be the same copy as the preceding, but the records give no further indication. 1481—-Sir Thomas Lyttleton, judge, bequeaths ‘‘a boke called Fasiculus Morum to the Church at Enfield,” in his will dated 22 Aug. 1481

(he died the following day).® :

, Ca. 1487—Master Richard Gren, B.D. (1461-74), gives a copy of Fasciculus morum to Pembroke College, Cambridge. ®* 57 James Peller Malcolm, Londinium redivivum; or, an Antient History and Modern Description of London ... (London, 1802), 1:29. 58 Prerogative Court of Canterbury, Register Godyn, fol. 24r; Jan. 1463/64 (communications from Prof. Sylvia L. Thrupp and Dr. A. I. Doyle). For Story, see Emden, Biographical Register ... Cambridge, pp. 560f. 59 'W. G. Searle, Cambridge Antiquarian Society, Communications 2 (1864), 177 and 179. 6° James Raine (ed.), Testamenta Eboracensia. A Selection of Wills from the Registry at York, 3, Surtees Society 45 (Durham, 1865), p. 220, n. °) Tbid., 3:284. For other books owned by Abdy, see Emden, Bodleian Library Record 6,6 (1961), 668. 62 N. H. Nicols, Testament vetusta (London, 1826), 1:367. 63M. R. James, A Descriptive Catalogue of the Manuscripts in the Library of Pembroke College, Cambridge (Cambridge, 1905), p. xvi. See also Emden, Biographical Register ... Cambridge, p. 269, who suggests the date 1487.

FASCICULUS MORUM 25 1487—Fasciculus morum is listed among 17 books belonging to the Collegiate Church of St. Cuthbert in Darlington, County Durham.**

End of fifteenth century—The catalogue of St. Augustine’s Abbey, Canterbury, lists two copies: No. 736, in a book belonging to Laurence Moorlay, who was sacrist of the abbey in 1468-69 (second

folio, “‘debet ad proposite”); No. 837, a copy probably given by John Mynster, who was ordained deacon in 1453 (second folio,

| “*virtus’’).®° |

Beginning of sixteenth century—The remarkably detailed catalogue of Syon Monastery lists four copies: N.34, given by William Fytz-

thomas (second folio, “nt pecm’’); N.35, no donor indicated , (second folio, ““diendum nam’’); N.74 and O.58, given by John Lawisby, who died in 1499 (second folio, “‘quas dia’’); 0.63, given by Dode (second folio, “‘riat’’).®°

1519—Chaplain Robert Same of Bury bequeaths to the church of Wetheringsette “a book called Fasiculus Mors, to lye in the chauncell, for priests to occupye ther tyme when it shall please them, praying them to haue my soule in remembraunce as it shall please them of their charite.’’ ®*

Two more references can be added. Among the medieval catalogues of Durham Cathedral is a list of newly acquired volumes which were to replace books sent to Oxford in 1409 where Durham monks maintained a college of their own.®® Among the new books is a “ Fasciculus,”’ not other-

wise identified.©® Finally, John Bale in his alphabetical list of British authors speaks of a copy he had seen in the house of Richard Grafton.” The extant copies and the references found in medieval booklists and 6 Communication from Dr. A. I. Doyle. Cf. N. R. Ker, Medieval Libraries of Great Britain, 2nd ed. (London, 1964), p. 57, “‘Darlington.”’ 65 M. R. James, The Ancient Libraries of Canterbury and Dover (Cambridge, 1903), pp. 272 and 285. For the identity of the donors see A. B. Emden, Donors of Books to St. Augustine’s Abbey, Canterbury (Oxford, 1968), p. 13. 66 Mary Bateson, Catalogue of the Library of Syon Monastery, Isleworth (Cambridge, 1898). 67 Samuel Tymms, Wills and Inventories from the Registers of the Commissary of Bury St. Edmunds . . . Camden Society 49 (London, 1850), 253, note to p. 105, line 29.

68 For the history of Durham College, Oxford, see R. B. Dobson, Durham Priory, 1400-1450 (Cambridge, 1973), pp. 343-359.

69 J. Raine, Catalogi veteres, p. 43. 70 John Bale, Index Britanniae Scriptorum, ed. R. L. Poole and M. Bateson (Oxford, 1902), p. 470. Bale also saw MS Li (ibid., p. 473).

26 FASCICULUS MORUM wills reveal that Fasciculus morum enjoyed a fairly wide-ranging circulation in fifteenth-century England. They would suggest that the work was some-

what of a best seller in its category, the moral handbook, next to such volumes as the Summa virtutum et vitiorum by Peraldus or the Dieta salutis.

It was evidently read in all parts of England, from Canterbury, London, and Winchester to Yorkshire and Durham, from Worcester to Wisbech, — Norwich, and perhaps Colchester. At least three copies went to continental Europe in the fifteenth century (M, V, Mo). As to its social distribution, the records of ownership agree with the purpose for which it was written— it was a clergyman’s book. Thus it is found, during the fifteenth century, at several colleges of the two English universities, at a public school (in the British sense), and in the library of a hospital. It is associated with masters

and doctors of theology, with monks and friars, with large religious communities of men (Canterbury) and of women (Syon Monastery), and

with a number of secular priests and chaplains. Only two laymen are known to have owned a copy before 1500, one a judge, the other a London merchant.

3. DATE AND AUTHORSHIP

The terminus ad quem of the composition is clearly the end of the fourteenth century, since paleographically the earliest surviving copies (Co and B2) can be dated to that period” and the earliest reference to the work in bequests appears in 1409. Just as clearly, the terminus a quo 1s a century earlier. A story about an adulterous knight who repented mentions

that the anonymous knight came with the king’s party to the siege of Kenilworth (1266) “‘in the time of King Henry, the father of the most illustrious King Edward.” ”* The work must therefore have been composed after the accession of Edward I in 1272. In their attempts to locate it more precisely within this possible time span of over a century, A. G. Little”? - and, in his wake, Frances A. Foster”* culled several other passages from the text that point to a date in the early decades of the fourteenth century.

The moralized description of the shield of arms borne by the King of England as ‘‘de minio, goules, cum tribus leopardis transeuntibus de auro 71 T would also date Go2 to the end of the fourteenth century, on paleographical grounds. The volume was in the Cambridge University library by 1424. Notice further that Mo was copied at Oxford in 1412.

72'V, 14; R, fol. 105v. ,

8 Little, Studies, pp. 142-144. 74 Foster, “‘Some English Words,”’ pp. 149 and 155-156.

| FASCICULUS MORUM ~— 27 puro”’”° would place the composition before 1340, since in that year Edward III added the lilies of France to his arms.7* Many manuscripts refer to St. Thomas Aquinas as simply “‘Thomas,”’ which may suggest a date before his canonization in 1323. Further, the English word schaval-

dours appears in the text in a specific sense (“gentlemen brigands’’) attested for the period about 1317, while later in the century it acquired a

| more general meaning (“minstrels’’).“” Finally, Little pointed to an interesting reference to contemporary social evils. In his discussion of envy, the author of Fasciculus morum stresses the gravity of this sin by quoting

Sap. 2:24: “Through the envy of the devil death has entered the earth”’

and then raises and answers an imaginary objection with the following words: But perhaps you say, “‘ Never has slander of good people, their destruction

or death through envy entered this land.’ Consider, I say, and look closely. I believe that, if it were not for envy, there would be no country like this in the world.’® Have we not seen—but God forbid that ever untij eternity we should see it again!—that if someone was in favor with the king or another great lord, the envy of others is so great that they will never cease from speaking evil and saying, “He is a traitor, he will deceive the reign,’ and so forth, until he is led to his death? Have we not seen this ?7°

With respect to this text, Little concluded: “‘The passage suggests the reign of Edward II as the time of the composition,” ®° i.e., 1307-1327.

Unfortunately, the cited reference to the fall of the king’s favorite is some- : what vague, and if one sees in the passage an allusion to Peter Gaveston (executed in 1312), as Little may have done (though he did not say so), one

is faced with a rather strange show of sympathy on the part of our Franciscan author with a person who was widely condemned for his improper and immoral influence on the king. It is indeed possible to think that 75 V, 28; R, fol. 119v. 6 Cf. May McKisack, The Fourteenth Century, 1307-1399 (Oxford, 1959), p. 128.

English Words,”’ pp. 155f. . ™ See Oxford English Dictionary under ‘‘shavaldour’’ and Foster, ‘‘Some

, 78 The readings of this sentence vary greatly and do not always make sense. 79 TTI, 1: ‘Sed forte dicis: ‘Numquam per invidiam diffamacio bonorum,

destruccio aut mors hanc terram intravit.’ Palpate, dico et videte. Credo enim quod nisi invidia fuisset [var. fecisset], talis terra tante quantitatis non fuisset in mundo. Nonne vidimus—sed absit quod unquam in eternum iterum videamus—, si aliquis bene fuerit cum rege vel alio magno, quod tanta sit invidia aliorum/quod nunquam cessabunt malum dicere et loqui quia ‘proditor est, regnum decipiet,’ et huiusmodi, quousque ad mortem esset adductus. Nonne hoc vidimus?”’ R, fol. Ir—v. 80 Little, Studies, p. 143.

28 $FASCICULUS MORUM Little made too much of this particular passage and that, consequently, the date of Fasciculus morum can be pushed back into the reign of Edward I (1272-1307). I see three major reasons for doing so. First, the passage concerning the knight who participated in the siege of Kenilworth speaks of “tempore regis Henrici, patris regis Edwardi illustrissimi.”” One is — almost ‘compelled to think that such a remark can only have been made while Edward I was still king, because during the reign of his successor,

Edward II, surely a qualifying “primi”? or a longer phrase would be required in order to distinguish father from son. In fact, four manuscripts do indeed carry such a qualifier: ““tempore regis Henrici, patris Edwardi primi illustrissimi regis.”’®+ As we shall see later, these four manuscripts (Co, Li, C, E) reflect a line of descent in which the text of Fasciculus morum appears expanded and changed.®? In all likelihood, their reading of primi

was added to the original text at some time after the death of Edward I. Second, the latest works explicitly quoted in Fasciculus morum are the Breviloquium by John of Wales (died in 1285) ®? and the Summa confessorum,

which was compiled by John of Freiburg (died 1314) before 1298.8* While

- this in itself is not incontrovertible evidence for an earlier dating, it is worth noting that the Franciscan author of Fasciculus morum quotes the Dominican Summa confessorum but not its Franciscan counterpart, the Summa Astesana, written in 1317.8° Lastly, Fasciculus morum contains several exempla which connect it with collections and sermons made in the

late thirteenth century, notably the peculiar, localized story about an anchoress who received a message concerning negligent priests (see Verse 45), another equally peculiar tale of a vision of the punishments suffered

by a prince (see below, p. 56), and the more widespread tale of inscriptions found on an ancient tomb or sarcophagus. A more detailed

analysis of the latter exemplum and its form in Fasciculus morum in comparison with other exempla collections will serve to show that Fasci81 Co, fol. 121v. 82 See further discussion below, pp. 32-33 and 110. 83 Quoted in V, 37.

84 Quoted without the author’s name at least three times in Part V. In V, 22, on almsgiving, FM reproduces a longer passage from ‘‘ De hospitalitate ordinandorum”’ , verbatim. For the date of the Summa confessorum as 1297/98, see Leonard E. Boyle, OP, “The Summa confessorum of John of Freiburg and the Popularization of the Moral Teaching of St. Thomas and of Some of His Contemporaries,” in St. Thomas Aquinas, 1274-1974: Commemorative Studies (Toronto, 1974), 2:246-249. My argument for an earlier dating owes several suggestions to Prof. Boyle. 85 In the three passages just referred to, FM definitely quotes John of Freiburg, with accurate citations of book, ¢titulus, and rubric as found in the Summa. Corresponding material in the Astesana appears in quite different places. ,

FASCICULUS MORUM 29 culus morum is more closely related to late thirteenth-century works than to such popular fourteenth-century authorities as Holcot, Bromyard, or the Gesta Romanorum. Chapter 25 of Part V (on accidia) discusses seven obstacles to almsgiving and enjoins their removal through several different moral efforts that are likened to various agricultural activities. The chapter ends with a moralized story which inculcates the lesson that giving of one’s belongings in this life leads to eternal rewards in heaven. The story is about a rich

citizen who, when he dug the foundations for his palace, hit upon an ancient tomb in which lay four rings with inscriptions.®® The four inscriptions then are applied to almsgiving. Fertur autem in gestis Romanorum quod quidam predives palacium construere volens de sub terra in quodam sarcophago [MS: satophago]

cuiusdam antiquitus sepulti iuxta ossa sua quatuor anulos invenit sic inscriptos. Nam in primo scribebatur sic:

| Quod expendi habui. Quod donavi habeo. Quod servavi perdidi. Quod negavi punio.®”

[English translation next to the Latin lines; see chapter IV, Verse 50.] Moraliter autem loquendo, prima particula est quasi de se satis plana, scilicet “quod expendi habui.’’ Nam illa que in vita expendi circa victum et vestitum et huiusmodi, ex illis solacium et beneficium tunc habui. Sed pro secunda circumscripcione, scil. ‘““quod donavi habeo,’’ in quadam glossa [ad] Galatos 9 dicitur: “‘ Dare, inquit, elemosinam non est perdere sed ad tempus seminare, ut in futuro plus habeatur.”’ ... Pro tercia vero circumscripcione, quod est “quod servavi perdidi,”’ ait Chrysostomus super Mattheum: ‘“‘Si servas, inquit, divitias, iam perdidisti, quia tibi non

proficient ad usum salutis, sed ad interitum dampnacionis.”... Pro quarta scriptura, que fuit “‘quod negavi punio,” est sententia Salvatoris, quod homines qui in hac vita negant opera pietatis et misericordie, in tremendo iudicio punientur illius voce terribili: “‘Ite, maledicti, in ignem

eternum....” 88 |

, The tale does indeed occur in what is commonly known as the earliest dated manuscript of the Gesta Romanorum. But there it has an entirely different moral: The rich man is every Christian, his palace is his heart 86 Tubach, No. 4175. 87 Punio instead of the expected punior is the reading in all manuscripts that use this verb, except B1 and Jo. One suspects that the demands of rhyme overruled those of grammar. 88 R, fols. 115v-116r. The omitted material consists of patristic quotations.

30 FASCICULUS MORUM | | being prepared for the service of God, the tomb is his soul adorned with the gold rings of virtues, and the inscriptions—not four but nine—set forth a Christian’s right attitude towards body and soul, life and death.®® On the

other hand, the same story with the moral found in Fasciculus morum appears in the alphabetical preachers’ handbook by Bromyard: “Ex qua patet historia quod illud quod dedit pro amore dei, mortuus invenit,” and so on, and an initial reference to ““spes que ponitur in diviciis” is made, though not specifically to almsgiving. But Bromyard makes no reference to ““gesta Romanorum.” °°

~ J have, however, found the same story also in a treatise on the vices which was written before 1275.9! Here it is verbally closer to Fasciculus

, morum than in any other version,®? and its moral, too, parallels that of Fasciculus morum exactly, even though it is stated very briefly: “‘Ecce quod custodita perduntur et pereunt; pauperibus erogata servantur et crescunt.” 9? Clearly, Fasciculus morum is more closely related to this treatise than to the (much more popular) Gesta Romanorum. Its reference to “in gestis Romanorum”’ is, therefore, not to the work now commonly known by that title.°* This suggests to me that Fasciculus morum may have been written at a time before the collection now called Gesta Romanorum was composed and became widely influential in England. This suggestion

is strengthened by the appearance of the same story in two other manuscripts written in England in the late thirteenth century.°® Even though 89 Oesterley, Nos. 16 and 192. The text from the Innsbruck manuscript, dated 1342, was printed without the moralizations by W. Dick (ed.), Die Gesta Romanorum,

nach der Innsbrucker Handschrift vom Jahre 1342 und vier Miinchener Handschriften, , Erlanger Beitrage zur englischen Philologie 7 (1890), Nos. 33 and 164. °° Bromyard, SP, “‘Mors,’? M.XI, § 148; MS Royal 7.E.iv, fol. 354v,a: “‘Patet per antiquam historiam.”’ For the date, see Leonard E. Boyle, OP, “‘The Date of the Summa Praedicantium of John Bromyard,”’ Speculum 48 (1973), 533-537. ®1 Inc. “‘Quoniam ut ait sapiens,’ described in Traditio 30 (1974), 351ff. The

story appears in the section on avarice. ,

°2 It speaks of ‘“‘de quodam cive Romano,” palacium, and sarcofagus. Gesta

Romanorum speaks of “‘de quodam imperatore Romano’”’ (“‘ Adrianus”’ in No. 192), basilica and palacium, and sarcofagus. Bromyard does not identify the rich man and has “‘fossa vel tumba.”’

°3 MS Durham Cathedral B.I.18, fol. 75r,b. Notice that FM also speaks of those who ‘‘elemosinam negant pauperibus,”’ immediately after the quotation of,

*“Tte, maledicti....”’ |

94 “*Gesta Romanorum”’ was used in the late thirteenth and the fourteenth centuries in reference to a type of story, not merely to the specific collection thus entitled. See the following note and also Chaucer’s usage in The Man of Law’s Tale, 1126; Wife of Bath’s Prologue, 642; and Merchant’s Tale, 2284. °° (a) MS Worcester Cathedral Q.46, fol. 10r, in a sermon given by an Oxford Franciscan on 27 Dec. 1291. See F. Pelster, ‘“‘Sermons and Preachers at the University

FASCICULUS MORUM _ 31

the origin and early history of Gesta Romanorum are still shrouded in darkness, it seems to me clear that, on the basis of this exemplum, Fasciculus morum Is oriented towards treatises of the late thirteenth century. The story itself appears in the extant manuscripts of Fasciculus morum with a number of significant variations, which can tell us a good deal more about the textual history of the work. The text presented above speaks of

four rings (quatuor anulos) bearing the inscriptions that are quoted and interpreted. But analogues of the tale found outside Fasciculus morum tell of a sarcophagus enclosed with three bands (tribus circulis circumdatum) which bear—or bears—the following inscriptions: (1) Expendidi. donavi. servavi. negavi. (2) Habui. habeo. perdidi. punio.

The third circulus is said to contain the expositio or glossa of the first two: (3) Quod expendidi habui... (as in Fasciculus morum).

Despite minor difference of word order or word choice in the inscriptions,

this is the story as preserved in Quoniam,°® Bromyard, the two cited sermons, another fourteenth-century collection of sermons,®’ and—with modifications—Gesta Romanorum.*® I shall refer to it as the Common Type. In contrast to it, the quoted text of Fasciculus morum uses only the third inscription and reports it as appearing on four, not three, rings. But the twenty-five manuscripts of Fasciculus morum which preserve the tale show some interesting variations. Seventeen of them present it in the form printed above, which I shall call the ‘“‘ Vulgate Version.”’ Notice that in the given text the first inscription is explicitly linked to the first ring (“‘nam in primo [anulo] scribebatur sic”’), while the three following lines are not explicitly said to occur on rings 2-4 respectively. This minor

lack in precision is avoided by four manuscripts of this group, which

introduce lines 2-4 with “‘in secundo..., in tercio..., in quarto....” There is, however, a second group of manuscripts in which the rich of Oxford in the Years 1290-1293,” in A. G. Little and F. Pelster, Oxford Theology and Theologians c. A.D. 1282-1302, Oxford Historical Society 96 (Oxford, 1934), p. 158. The story begins, ‘‘ Legitur in gestis Romanorum.”’ (b) MS Cambridge, Pembroke College 258, fol. 1r, the exemplum without moralization, in a collection of exempla. 86 See above, note 91. The Durham manuscript skips the first inscription, but it speaks of three. ®7 Printed by Theo Stemmler, ‘‘ More English Texts from MS Cambridge Univer-

sity Library Ii.III.8,”’ Anglia 93 (1975), 7, No. 10. A further occurrence is in the sermons ascribed to Robert Holcot: MS Peterhouse 210, fol. 96r (Sermon 64). 88 Oesterley’s No. 16 omits parts of the inscriptions, perhaps for the purpose of leading to nine parts in the moralization.

32 FASCICULUS MORUM citizen is said to have found three rings. One manuscript (Go2) neatly lists the complete three inscriptions just as one finds them in the Common Type

outside Fasciculus morum (see above) and explicitly distributes them among the three rings. As in the “ Vulgate Version”’ only the last inscription

with its four lines is then pursued further in the moralization. The other three manuscripts in this group also speak of three rings, but only one (V) lists all three inscriptions of the Common Type, as does Go2. Having done so, it reverses itself and goes on to say: “In primo anullo scribebatur: ‘Quod expendidi habui’.”’ In other words, its moral interpretation of the inscriptions follows the “ Vulgate Version,’’ where “‘Quod expendi... ”’ 1s the inscription on the first of four rings. The other two manuscripts of this

full: ,

group (D and B1) show a similar and even more obvious inconsistency

between introducing three rings and listing four inscriptions.®® | A third group of manuscripts (E, Co, Li, C) presents a genuine

variant of the entire “‘ Vulgate Version” which for greater clarity I print in Fertur enim in gestis Romanorum quod quidam predives aulam construere

volens in eius fundamento sarcophagum, idest sepulcrum, invenit | cuiusdam antiquitus sepulti, tribus circulis vel anulis aureis circumdatum. In primo vero sic scribebatur: Comedi.*°° donavi. servavi. negavi. In secundo vero scribebatur :1°*

~ Habui. habeo. careo. punio. Qui cum intelligenciam horum verborum ignoraret, in tercio circulo exposicionem predictorum invenit in hunc modum scriptam: Quod comedi?®? habui.

Quod donavi habeo.

Quod servavi perdidi. oS

Quod negavi punio. ,

Plane autem loquendo... [interpretation of the four lines of the third inscription follows].*°%

This is, of course, the Common Type of the story as found in Quoniam, Bromyard, and elsewhere. °° Bl is a beautiful example of the scribal confusion at work here. It mentions three rings, then gives only the four-line inscription of the Vulgate Version, but distributes the four lines among the three rings. Following this, the scribe has added the Common Type inscriptions for rings 1 and 2: ‘‘ Unde versus: Expendidi, donavi,

.../negavi, punior.”’ Fols. 187v—188r. ,

| , 100 or he may have simply followed and slightly elaborated on a version like that found in a sermon by an Oxford Franciscan, where the rich citizen finds three bands not around the coffin but in the ground: 104 For further discussion, see Chapter ITT, p. 110.

105 Rings with inscriptions appear in Holcot, Moralitates, No. 24 (Amore | langueo,”’ etc.). Notice that in Holcot’s moralization a story follows about four inscriptions found in an ancient grave, but the inscriptions differ from the ones here discussed.

34 FASCICULUS MORUM ‘“‘Invenit in fossura tres circulos litteris inscriptis [read inscriptos].”*°° As to the number of rings involved, it is reasonable to think that the author of

Fasciculus morum deliberately omitted the first two inscriptions of the

Common Type, since he was concerned only with the “exposition” of | their messages. Apparently the compiler of the Gesta Romanorum was equally selective in his report of the inscriptions and, in his case, ended up with nine parts. Such selectivity and shaping of “traditional” material on the part of the original author is found elsewhere in Fasciculus morum. The analysis of such a rather complex situation, therefore, supports other arguments for dating the composition of Fasciculus morum early in the fourteenth century, very probably as early as the reign of Edward I. In addition, it reveals that during the first eighty or ninety years of its life, from which no manuscripts have been preserved, the text suffered not only

the normal deterioration due to scribal errors of all sorts, but was also submitted to more drastic changes, contamination as well as abbreviation and expansion. The story of that development can be told only by a full

| critical edition of the text.

The distance of the preserved manuscripts from their lost original and

the variations among them also complicate the question of authorship. | As already mentioned, the work begins with the following short prologue: Frater predilecte ac sodalis preelecte, quia Scriptura attestante, Prov. 18, ‘“*Frater qui adiuvatur a fratre quasi civitas firma,’’ vestram fraternalem caritatem ac mihi caram fraternitatem supra petram Domini positam et

fundatam toto cordis conamine operisque iuvamine stabilire [MS stabiliter] peroptans et firmare, ad vestram peticionem fasciculum pauperculum viciorum et virtutum, ad vestrum solacium et utilitatem simplicium, e diuersis tractatibus collegi et hic modulo meo [MS corrected from hoc

modulacio modo] inserui. In quo si quid minus utile inveneritis, meam insipienciam arguatis. Scio enim et protestor in omni sapiencia et doctrina,

prout scribitur Apoc. 3, quod “‘miser sum et miserabilis, pauper et cecus.”’ Pro illis vero que placent et valent, alijs regraciari et laudare

, curetis.?°7

Most beloved brother and chosen companion: Since Scripture testifies

that “‘a brother that is helped by his brother is like a strong city”’ (Proverbs 18:19), I wish, with the greatest effort of my heart and the aid of my work, to make stable and firm your brotherly love and beloved brotherhood which is placed and founded upon the rock of Our Lord. At your request I have gathered a small bundle of vices and virtues, out of various treatises, for your own pleasure and for the use of the simple, and , 106 MS Worcester Cathedral Q.46, fol. 10r. See note 95 above. 107 R, fol. 7r.

FASCICULUS MORUM 35 have here bound them together in my own small way. Should you find in it anything of little use, you must blame my own lack of wisdom, forI _ know and affirm that in all wisdom and learning, as it is written in the Book of Revelation, “‘I am wretched and miserable, poor and blind” (Apoc. 3:17). But for the things that please and are useful, give thanks

and praise to others! ,

Like many other medieval prologues, this paragraph is self-consciously

rhetorical: it not only presents a modest firework of verbal elegance but also puts forth a commonplace protestation of humility as well as a ratio

scribendi, here the response to the request from an unnamed dedicatee. In , addition, it offers the work as a collection of material on the vices and virtues gathered from various written sources, and the image here used— of a bundle or bunch or bouquet—furnishes the title of the work, as it is explicitly stated in the following sentences, which have already been quoted.

| Fasciculus is not one of the more common medieval book titles.1° Yet the word had good classical and biblical standing, and in medieval Latin it was used metaphorically to indicate a gathering of pious thoughts for meditation,?°® of good deeds,*?° or of sins and their circumstances as one remembers them in examining one’s conscience.*41 More appositely, the metaphor had been employed previously in a similar collection of material on the vices and virtues made by Peter the Chanter:

[I shall] collect authorities against the individual vices that must be shunned and for the individual virtues, as it were in a modest and small 108 Tt is not mentioned in the seminal papers by Paul Lehmann, “‘ Mittelalterliche Biichertitel,’’ in Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften (Munich), Sitzungsberichte,

, 1948, Heft 4, and 1953, Heft 3; both repr. in Lehmann, Erforschung des Mittelalters, 5 (Stuttgart, 1962), 1-93. There is the well-known anti-Wycliffite Fasciculi zizaniorum; a Fasciculus medicine rerum naturalium, collected in 1507, in Cambridge, Trinity

College MS 1443; and a florilegium of Latin poetry entitled Fasciculus morum ex | approbatorum poetarum auctoritatibus collectus, made by the Dutch schoolmaster Henricus Boort and printed ca. 1500, which has nothing in common with FM except the title. 109 In commenting on Cant. 1:12, “‘ fasciculus myrrhae dilectus mihi,”’ St. Bernard says we should gather Christ’s sufferings (myrrha) into a fasciculus and carry it in our heart (inter ubera) in meditation. Sermones in Cantica, XLII, 3 (PL 183:994). 110 Brinton thus applies the common lore about the phoenix who, in old age, is said to build a nest from sticks of aromatic wood, ‘‘idest de bonis operibus fasticulum [sic] componere.”’ Sermo 8, ed. Devlin, p. 28. 111 A fifteenth-century sermon thus applies Matthew 13:30 (“‘Colligite primum zizania, et alligate ea in fasciculos, ad comburendum”’): “‘Secundo debes tua peccata

confiteri sive dicere coram deo, alligando ea in fassiculos.” Cambridge University Library, MS Kk.IV.24, fol. 286v,a.

36 FASCICULUS MORUM fasciculus, in a way that arranges them by separate titles which are to be kept in one’s memory.'??

Though they have their individual flavor, the title and prologue of Fasciculus morum+* are sufficiently indebted to literary conventions to offer little help in determining the work’s authorship. However, the problem is not, as so often happens, that Fasciculus morum poses as an orphan, but rather that the existing manuscripts name three different fathers, to which later tradition has added a fourth. First of all, four manuscripts, all written in the fifteenth century, ascribe the work to a Franciscan named Robert Selke (Selk, Silke) in their explicit to the alphabetical subject index. L2, for example, states: “‘ Explicit tabula super librum qui intitulatur Faciculus morum Quem composuit Frater Robertus Selke Minor” (fol. 192r). The same wording appears in Co (fol. - 228v), and both manuscripts clearly give the form quem, which attributes the treatise itself (not the tabula) to Selke. L3 gives a similar explicit, with the name spelled ‘“‘Silke,”’ and here both the treatise and the tabula are ascribed to him (“‘quos composuit ... ,”’ fol. 124v). Substantially the same ascription appears in LC, though in a slightly different wording: “‘ Explicit libér qui intitulatur fasciculus Morum cum tabula eiusdem quos composuit

Frater Robertus Selk minor” (fol. 231r). A fifth manuscript, D, which

, 112 This is how I interpret the sentence from the long version of Peter the Chanter’s Verbum abbreviatum. In MS Vatican Reg. lat. 106 it reads: ‘‘Hoc autem preludio usus sum auctoritate contra singula vitia suggillanda. et pro singulis virtutibus. quasi sub modico et brevi fasciculo per diversos titulos memoriter tenendos distincte collecturus.’’ As the text stands, the future participle collecturus lacks a direct object, and the beginning of the sentence would mean: ‘“‘In this prelude (i.e., prologue?) I have used authority against the individual vices ... ,”” which is not what Peter has actually done in the prologue. I would, therefore, emend auctoritate to auctoritates, to serve as direct object of collecturus, and translate: ‘‘I have used this prelude as one who is about to collect... .”’ The term preludium, incidentally, need not mean “‘prologue’”’; it might refer to the preliminary process of cutting down the wood and non-productive foliage surrounding the altar which Peter speaks of in the preceding context, with a quotation of Judges 6:25. For the quoted sentence and the work, see John W. Baldwin, Masters, Princes, and Merchants: The Social Views of Peter the Chanter and His Circle (Princeton, 1970), 2:8. I am very grateful to Professor

Baldwin for lending me his microfilm copy of the manuscript. ,

| 118 The use of mores for virtutes is not uncommon. A fourteenth-century abbreviation of Peraldus’s Summa virtutum et vitiorum, for example, is called “‘Summa

morum et uiciorum”’: British Library, MS Addit. 15123, fol. Ir (from Italy). Roger Bacon declares in his Moralis philosophia (Pars IV, dist. i) that he has plucked “‘has morum radices et flores et fructus”’ from various books: ed. E. Massa (Turin, 1953), p. 187. Notice also that a number of manuscripts contain the following hexameter at the end of FM, whether the sermon outlines follow or not: ‘*‘ Finis sermonum est hec

coleccio morum.”’ ,

| FASCICULUS MORUM — 37 introduces itself as an extract, bears the same attribution at the end of the

treatise proper: “‘...que continentur in libro qui vocatur fasciculus Morum etc.; quem librum composuit frater Robertus Selke de ordine fratrum Minorum. §Expliciunt quedam notabilia ... ” (fol. 89v). It would, therefore, appear that the treatise itself, and perhaps the tabula as well, was written by Robert Selke, OFM.*7* However, L2 bears a second ascription, which attributes the treatise to Friar John Spiser, OFM: “In hoc libro cotinentur [sic] summa que dicitur

Fasciculus morum. de compilacione fratris Johannis Spiser Ordinis Minorum.”’ This ascription in the top margin of fol. lr, neatly separated _ from the text by a wavy line, is awkwardly written in an obvious attempt to produce some sort of textura and could date from the middle of the fifteenth century or even much later.**° The various hands in which L2 is

written (at least six) are all quite unlike this ascription, although it is possible to think that hand A, responsible for fols. 1-47, actually wrote

the ascription as well, because apparently this scribe took delight in practicing different scripts, as his changing from a nicely set Secretary Bastard (Ir) to a much more current Secretary (lv and following) indicates.11® Since the ascription to Spiser militates against the ascription to Selke later in the same volume, one may wonder if “‘de compilacione...”’ ~ here does not refer to the work of a scribe or, even more simply, the work of a friar who physically gathered the quires written by a number of scribes into one volume. The third claimant is mentioned in M, whose Castilian scribe wrote the

following explicit to the treatise: “Explicit fasciculus morum quem composuit frater Ricardus de pissis magister in theologia de conventu salopie custodie vigornie provincie anglie” (fol. 139r). The ascription surprises by its precise detail of the friar’s conventual affiliation, a detail which agrees with the geographical provenance of the treatise (see below), and it is remarkable that a scribe who consistently omitted English words

and place names should have troubled to tell his readers the author’s affiliation with Salopia (Shrewsbury). On the other hand, no Ricardus de Pissis has as yet been found among the masters in theology at Oxford, Cambridge, or Paris. While this does not make the friar a ghost, one must 114 Little identified a Robert Sulks, or Sellack, OFM, of Hereford, who was ordained acolyte and subdeacon in 1371. “‘If this is Robert Silke or Selke, he was probably a reviser, not the original compiler.’ Studies, p. 141, n. 1. 115 This ascription uses the abbreviation mark “, typical of the mid-fifteenth century. It occurs again in the section written by hand D (fols. 78r—126v). | 116 T yse the terminology employed by M. B. Parkes, English Cursive Book Hands, 1250-1500 (Oxford, 1969).

38 FASCICULUS MORUM treat this ascription with suspicion until other testimony to the historical existence of ‘‘Ricardus de pissis”’ comes to light. A more tangible historical personality lies behind a fourth name, which appears in connection with Fasciculus morum only in the modern period. Shortly after 1600, the Jesuit Johannes Major revised and edited an earlier exempla collection, which was published a number of times under the title Magnum speculum exemplorum in Douai from 1603 on.'?” The book

contains at least two stories which are said to be found “in libro qui dicitur Fasciculus morum.’!?® At the end of each story appears the ncte, ‘“‘Joannes Aedeus Minorita auctor Fasciculi virtutum et vitiorum.”’ Both stories occurred in the earlier collection on which John Major’s revision is based, i.e., the Speculum exemplorum compiled by Aegidius Aurifaber

(editio princeps: Deventer, 1481). Aurifaber’s compilation mentions ‘fasciculus morum’’’!® but says nothing about its author. Where, then, did Johannes Major get this piece of information? The answer seems to be John Bale’s Scriptorum illustrium Catalogus,

published at Basel in 1557-1559, which among the works written by ‘“‘Ioannes Edaeus”’ cites a “‘Fasciculus uirtutum ac uitiorum.”2° That a

Jesuit at Douai around 1600 should have access to a copy of Bale’s chronological catalogue of British authors is not surprising. More puzzling is the question on what grounds Bale connected Fasciculus morum (which, as will be seen, is the same as Fasciculus virtutum ac vitiorum) with John Edaeus. His earlier [/lustrium majoris Britanniae Scriptorum Summarium

(London, 1548) mentions neither Edaeus nor Fasciculus morum. But Bale’s alphabetical notebook,’?? seemingly made before 1557, contains

the following relevant entries: ,

17 For the history of this work, see Rainer Alsheimer, Das Magnum Speculum Exemplorum als Ausgangspunkt popularer Erzahltradition: Studien zu seiner Wirkungs-

geschichte in Polen und Rufland. Europaische Hochschulschriften 19,3 (Frankfurt, 1971).

“ae **Detractio,’’ VIII, the vision of a dead person with his tongue on fire;

**Paupertas,”’ V, the vision of the punishment inflicted on a cruel magnate: see below

p. 56. Ed. Cologne, 1747, pp. 227 and 572. John Major’s work contains other exempla that also are in FM; but they are not thus identified. 119 Here the two stories appear as dist. IX, no. lviii (‘‘Detractio’’) and no. ccvi (‘‘Tyrannus’’); in the edition of Strasburg, 1487, on fols. M.3v and R.2r—v, respectively. “120 Scriptorum illustrium maioris Brytannie ... Catalogus, 1 (Basel, 1557), 530. 121 Extant in MS Bodleian Selden supra 64. The contents have been rearranged

and printed by R. L. Poole and M. Bateson (ed.), Index Britanniae Scriptorum (Oxford, 1902). In the following I quote the page in Poole and Bateson, and the folio of MS Bodl. Selden supra 64.

FASCICULUS MORUM — 39

(1) Three entries on “Ioannes Ede’? of Hereford, none of which lists - Fasciculus morum among Ede’s works (pp. 198-199; fols. 36v, 87v, and 132v);?22

(2) the entry: “‘ Minorita quidam, theologus, scripsit Fasciculum virtutum

et vitiorum, li. I. ‘Frater predilecte ac sodalis.” Ex domo Ricardi Grafton” (p. 470; fol. 132v); (3) another entry: “‘Fasciculus morum, li. vij. ‘Frater predilecte ac sodalis preelecte.’ Ex collegio Lincol. Oxon.” (p. 473; fol. 48r). ,

What seems to have happened is that in preparing the second edition of his Catalogue John Bale, making use of his notebook, (a) realized that the

Fasciculus morum he had seen at Lincoln College (now Li) and the Fasciculus virtutum et vitiorum he had seen in Richard Grafton’s house (now apparently lost) were the same work, since they have the same incipit; and (b) without further basis attributed this work, under the title Fasciculus virtutum ac vitiorum, to John Ede, because Ede was a Minorite and the work had been written by ‘“‘some Minorite,” and because these two pieces of information (see 1 and 2 above) appeared on the same page of his notebook (fol. 132v), under letter M. In other words, Bale’s attribution is the result of unwarranted association. Friar John Ede, who wrote several theological works, was warden at Hereford, and died there in 1406.17° If my suggested dating is correct he could not possibly have written Fasciculus morum. At our present state of knowledge, therefore, the greatest claim for authoring Fasciculus morum belongs to Robert Selk. If the identity of the author thus remains in some doubt, his membership in the Franciscan order is certain. All ascriptions of the treatise are toa

Franciscan friar; the majority of the preserved manuscripts begin with a reference to the Rule of “‘beati patris [nostri] Francisci”’; and in the body of the work occur three other references to St. Francis as a great exemplar of a holy life,12* all of which strongly speaks for Franciscan authorship. Again, the status quo of the preserved texts is not as uniform and neat as 122 Three separate entries because Bale had originally found and entered information under ‘‘Doctor Herfordensis”’ (fol. 36v), ‘‘Ioannes Herforde”’ (fol. 87v), and ‘‘Minorita’’ (fol. 132v) under the appropriate letters in his carefully planned alphabetical notebook, and had at-a later date added “‘Ioannes Ede” (fols. 36v and

- 132v) and “vel Ede” (fol. 87v), respectively. His biographical and some bibliographical information comes from Leland. 123 See A. B. Emden, A Biographical Register ... Oxford, 1:624—625. Emden’s information comes from Bale. 124 St. Francis is mentioned as an example of voluntary poverty (IV, 12), of intense prayer and weeping (V, 20), and of overcoming fleshly desires (VII, 19).

40 FASCICULUS MORUM

| one might wish. While some manuscripts consistently lack all mention of St. Francis, others refer to the Rule but delete the reference to the saint, and still others conversely lack the initial mention of the Rule but keep the later references. Even so, we can be reasonably certain that Franciscan references did occur in the original version. A number of allusions point to the custody of Worcester as the region

in which Fasciculus morum originated. Most specific is a story that illustrates the power of the Cross. As the dying Friar Warinus South 1s beset by devils who plague him with vexing questions on the Trinity and the Catholic faith, his confrére Thomas de Whitchurch, sent to fetch the lector, places a crucifix in his hands, at which point Friar Warinus sees the devils flee in unseemly haste. This happened ‘‘in the convent of the Friars Minor at Salopia (Shrewsbury).’!2° The manuscripts have preserved the story and names with remarkable uniformity. Another tale—about the adulterous knight coming to the siege of Kenilworth already referred to— ends with the remark that the knight himself told the story of his conversion

to the friars of Coventry: “Istam narracionem fratribus Coventrie narravit.”’??° It is worth noting that one manuscript has replaced the reference with “‘canonicis Lychilfeld.’’+?” A third story, equally based on hearsay, deals with the vision of an anchoress of holy life which she told

at one time to the bishop of Worcester (“cuidam episcopo Wigornie/ Wigorniensi’’).1?® Finally, in illustrating that man’s body and soul are companions which rejoice as well as suffer together, the author suggests

this comparison: “‘Let us assume that there are two companions who share equally in the gain and in the loss of their goods, as it often happens among merchants in these large cities, such as London or Coventry.”!?°

In this case the place names do not authenticate a story but merely exemplify an illustration; they are therefore likely to be treated with less respect by later scribes, and indeed in several manuscripts London and 125 TTT, 14. See Little, Studies, pp. 145 f. The story also appears in a collection of

exempla preserved in Leicester, Wyggeston Hospital, MS 1.D.50/XIII/3/1, fol. 3v. I owe this reference to Dr. Neil R. Ker. 126'V, 14; R, fol. 105v. Twelve manuscripts read ‘“‘fratribus couentrie”’ and eight read ‘‘fratribus conuentus’’ (plus two reading ‘‘fratribus et conuentui’’ and ‘‘fratribus illius conuentus,”’ respectively). It is evident that conuentus is a misreading, due to the

confusing similarity of abbreviated forms.

127 Go2, fol. 102r. Two closely related manuscripts (Gol, V) merely allude to this tale with “de narracionibus fratris Rogerii de Burbache”’ (in the text; Gol, fol. 67r). 128 V, 3. See further Chapter IV, Verse 45. No significant variants. 129 * most were rather more nonchalant about such documentation. Searching through the vast body of fourteenth- and fifteenth-century sermons may, therefore, uncover further unidentified uses of Fasciculus morum material, provided the search goes beyond the mere reappearance of a certain story and looks for substantial identity of its phrasing as well as for similarity of context. The following

examples fulfill these criteria; they also deal with stories that are not widespread outside Fasciculus morum and its influence. A fifteenth-century

collection of sermons preached at Cambridge contains the exemplum of the Christ-Knight with its English verses (Verse 26) said to come from “Virgilius in Eneydos,”’ as in Fasciculus morum.*5* It is followed by the moralized simile of hunting tiger cubs with the help of mirrors, which is

also found in Fasciculus morum, although it enjoyed a much wider circulation.’*> A different collection may have used one of the sermon outlines that are found in several Fasciculus manuscripts, together with material on dangers to faith from Part V, to which the sermon outline refers.*°° The vision of the multilated Christ-Child, already referred to above, also appears in the sermons of Master Robert Ripon of Durham (ca. 1400), though here the Lombard of London is not named, nor does Ripon say that he was buried among the Dominicans.1*” Another tale which Ripon shares with Fasciculus morum is the example of the merchant companions, here located in Norwich.*®® Ripon is one of those preachers

who took some pains to indicate their sources; but I have not found any mention of Fasciculus morum in his sermons. Such identified and unidentified quotations in later sermons show that Fasciculus morum was in fact used for the purpose its author intended, as

he explained in his introductory sentence: an aid in preaching. This intention is likewise revealed in the text of his work, first of all in technical phrases directed to the preacher. For example, in discussing man’s battle 153 Good examples are the Franciscan Liber exemplorum, ed. A. G. Little (Aberdeen, 1908), and the Dominican collection in MS Royal 7.D.i, from which Father Stephen L. Forte has published several stories (see note 136, above).

, 154 Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, MS 392, fol. 255r. Verbally identical with FM. 158 Tbid., fols. 256v—257r. For the curious story see G. M. Benton, “‘ A Bench-End

in Wendens Ambo Church,” Transactions of the Essex Archaeological Society, New Series, 15 (1920), 267-272.

*5° Cambridge, University Library MS Kk.IV.24, fols. 240v—241r. The Latin sermon uses the English term “‘Eluenlond,”’ as does FM in V, 30.

157 MS Harley 4894, fol. 100r. See above, p. 41.

188 Tbid., fol. 159v. See above, pp. 40-41.

46 FASCICULUS MORUM against his Three Enemies, the author mentions the story of Julius Caesar who, on his victorious return from Asia Minor, coined his well-known motto, “ Veni, vidi, vici.”’ The first term, veni, is then explained as referring to his entering the battle bravely, and this in turn leads to a brief listing of Christ’s spiritual armor (i.e., the virtues) against the onslaught of the Three Enemies with their respective vices. The list is cut short with the direction

to “‘expound as you see fit” (“‘expone sicut placet’’).1°° This phrase is often used also in reference to biblical stories which in the text are only alluded to and identified and then left to the preacher’s knowledge and discretion for further expansion. For instance: One must resist minor temptations, because these are apt to lead to major and mortal sins, just as small children are sent into a house through the window to open the door for thieves. “‘ This is prefigured in II Kings 5:2, where ‘the thieves of Syria

, have led captive the daughter of Israel.” Expound as you please.’’1®° Another technical phrase, “nota historiam,”’ is very often used for precisely the same purpose. It does not merely denote a reference to a biblical story; it is also clearly an injunction to the preacher to tell the story alluded to at some length.*®* The injunction was apparently taken very seriously by the scribe responsible for the exemplar of the expanded version of the treatise which 1s found in manuscripts Co.Li.C.E. In these copies, biblical stories are commonly told or quoted at length, whereas most other manuscripts give only an allusion or reference. A very similar marker, used to suggest that the preacher might expand a presumably well-known non-

| biblical story or exemplum, is the phrase nota narrationem, which also

appears many times in Fasciculus morum.+®

Another sermon device that appears occasionally in the handbook is the

concluding formula, such as “ad quam nos perducat...,’ used to , 189 TIT, 17; R, fol. 55r. 160 “Tn cuius figura legitur Regum 5 quod ‘latrunculi Syrie captivam duxerunt

, filiam Israel.’ Expone ut placet.”’ I, 3; R, fol. 10r. 161 For example, in the moralization of the locus amoenus (III, 12): ‘‘ Talis enim locus valde delicatus est in estu, sicut patet de junipero et Helia, Regum 19, et de Jona et edere, Jone 3. Nota historias si placet’’ (R, fol. 46r). Phrases like nota historiam occur with the same function in many other handbooks and sermons. In the Middle English collection of Harley 2247, for example, the story of Joseph is not told (as it is in Mirk’s Festial). Instead, the author has written, ‘‘ Nota historiam si velis”’ (fol.

67v). Similarly, the author of Ancrene Riwle at one point mentions several Old Testament figures and then says: ‘‘ Me schal, leoue sustren, tellen ou peos storie, uor hit were to longe te writen ham here.’ Ed. Mabel Day, EETS 225 (London 1952), p. 68 (my punctuation). 162 A good example is the story about the false judge Gayus: ‘‘Hic nota narracionem de illo falso iudice...”’’ (IV, 2; R. fol. 69v). See Wenzel, ‘‘The Gay Exemplum and Carol,”’ Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 77 (1976), 88.

, FASCICULUS MORUM 47 terminate Parts I, II, and VII.*® In fact, the whole style, the very texture of the work strongly reflects mental and verbal habits intimately associated with late medieval preaching. There is a constant urge to adduce proof texts, whether they are biblical, patristic, or taken from other authorities. In addition, such texts are frequently linked by concordantia vocalis. A good example occurs in the story about the sarcophagus and the rings with the four inscriptions, which was quoted earlier: At least two inscriptions (“quod donavi habeo”’ and “‘quod servavi perdidi’’) are interpreted with the help of quotations (from the Glossa and St. Chrysostom, respectively) that contain the same verbs as the inscriptions. Such concordantia vocalis was a major technique used in developing the sermon theme and was highly recommended by contemporary artes praedicandi.1** , The clearest evidence that Fasciculus morum was intended and used as

a practical handbook for preachers lies in the sermon outlines that accompany the treatise in fourteen manuscripts?© and are found in another

manuscript which lacks the treatise itself.‘°° There are forty-two such outlines, for the Sundays from the first Sunday of Advent (with two sermons) through Trinity Sunday and for the major feast days of this period (Christmas, St. Stephen, St. John the Evangelist, Holy Innocents,+®"

St. Thomas of Canterbury, Circumcision, Vigil of Epiphany, Epiphany, Ash Wednesday, Good Friday, Rogation Monday, and Ascension).?® Their themes are normally but not always taken from either the Gospel or

the Epistle for the day. The format of the outlines varies somewhat, as does their length,1®® though one can perceive a basic similarity in their structure and intent. To demonstrate the latter I quote Sermon 34, for the Second Sunday after Easter. It 1s one of the shorter outlines but shows | their purpose with paradigmatic clarity: (1) “You should follow His steps,” I Peter 2 [:21]. (2) With our physical sight we observe that masons, carpenters, writers, and in brief craftsmen 768 Such an ending was of course widely used in medieval treatises of a religious nature, including several of The Canterbury Tales. 164 See for example Robert de Basevorn, Forma praedicandi, chaps. 35 and 39; ed. Th.-M. Charland, Artes praedicandi: Contribution a (histoire de la rhétorique au moyen dge (Paris, 1936), pp. 279ff. and 291ff. 165 They are: B1, B2, L2, L3, Co, Li, Gol, W1. W2, E, Mo, V, D, Sp.

166 Cardiff, Public Library, MS 3. 174, fols. 237-252v. | :

167 The outline for the Feast of the Holy Innocents consists of nothing but a reference to the Christmas sermon, which—like that on Holy Innocents—has the

word puer in its theme. , 168 The series of sermon outlines is incomplete in W1, evidently due to the loss

of one quire. ,

*6° The longest outlines are three to four times the size of that quoted here.

48 FASCICULUS MORUM of almost any trade, if they want to work well and rightly and achieve the due result of their work, need to examine and follow a trustworthy model, so that by it they may be guided the better in their own labors. Now, all

! Christians who wish to come to eternal happiness have need of a like model. But none better can be found than the life of Christ. (3) Hence, after the advice of blessed Peter, “‘you should follow His steps.” (4) Concerning this, we must notice that Christ, like a good leader, has gone before us on a threefold way: that of humility and obedience, (5) for which see Part I, ch. 8; that of poverty and patience, for which see Part IV, ch. 5; and that of purity and continence, for which see Part VII. (6) Hence for all these things we can say with Genesis 33[:14]: “‘ Let my Lord pass before His servant, and I will follow softly His steps.’?7°

After stating the theme (1), the outline furnishes an introduction to the sermon with a piece of everyday experience (2). Such an approach is used in a number of outlines, while others begin with an example from history or from nature. The introduction, which is never as fully developed as a proper ante-theme would be, then leads to the restatement of the theme (3), and this in turn is followed by the division (4). Only one term of the theme is divided (in this case, apparently, vestigium), a limitation that

again is characteristic of all the outlines of Fasciculus morum. For the development of the three parts of the division, the outline then refers to pertinent sections of Fasciculus morum by part and chapter (5). It finally closes with a biblical quotation (6), which verbally contains the term from the theme that was divided and developed (in our example, both “‘sequi”’

and “‘vestigia’’).*71 These six steps, which recur consistently in the other outlines with only slight variations in their arrangement and relative proportions, can generate full-length sermons which, though relatively 170 “< Sequamini vestigia eius, I Pet. 2. Ad sensum videmus lathamas istos, carpentarios, scriptores, et breviter quasi cuiuslibet operis artifices, si velint bene et recte operari et ad debitum finem operis pervenire, necesse habent fidele exemplar respicere et sequi, ut per hoc in operibus suis melius dirigantur. Sed modo omnes

Christiani ad bonum finem et gaudium eternum optantes pervenire huiusmodi exemplar neccesse habent habere. Sed melius haberi non potest quam vitam [sic] Christi. Ideo iuxta consilium beati Petri, Sequamini vestigia eius. Circa quod est advertendum quod Christus ad modum boni ductoris nos precessit in triplici via, scil. humilitatis et obediencie (nota particula 1, cap. 8), paupertatis et paciencie (nota part. 4, cap. [blank]), puritatis et continencie (nota part. 7). Unde pro istis potest dici illud Gen. 33: Precedat dominus meus servum et ego sequar paulatim vestigia eius.” B1, fol.

discussion. 216v. In my translation I have inserted numerals to facilitate references in my _ 44 This technique is discussed by Robert de Basevorn, Forma praedicandi,

chap. 46 (ed. cit., pp. 306-307).

FASCICULUS MORUM 49 simple, would follow the precepts of contemporary artes praedicandi exactly.17?

It is difficult to say whether these outlines were written by the author of Fasciculus morum or are a later addition. While some of the apparatus surrounding the treatise, such as the alphabetical subject index, is attributed to Robert Selke in at least some manuscripts, no ascription whatever

exists for the sermon outlines. References between the two works lead exclusively from the outlines to the treatise. This suggests that the outlines were indeed written by a second author. To provide a treatise of praedicabilia with a list of sermon themes for specific days and with references to

pertinent sections in the treatise was a common enough practice. MS Royal 11.B.iii, for example, which was written about 1300 and belonged to St. Edmund’s Abbey, contains three folios of “‘Adaptaciones omnium sermonum in hoc libello contentorum prout competunt sabbatis, dominicis, et feriis totius anni’ as well as for saints’ feasts (fols. 278r—280v). The treatises whose material is thus “‘adapted”’ to sermon themes are Peraldus’s Summa de virtutibus and a treatise on the vices derived from Peraldus. A similar collection of sermon outlines begins with the theme “‘ Abiciamus opera tenebrarum ...” and gives introductions to sermons that are very similar in character to Fasciculus morum. It, too, refers back to a longer treatise, here the extremely popular Dieta salutis.1"* The sermon outlines

in Fasciculus morum, together with the alphabetical index of subject matters, must thus be seen as part of a vast activity of producing indexes, - concordances, and the like, in an effort to make the works of the Fathers

and, in our case, contemporary works of praedicabilia more readily accessible—an activity which by 1350 had been going on for at least a

century.'”* |

172 Good presentations of the structure of late medieval sermons can be found in Charland, Artes praedicandi, Part Il; Woodburn O. Ross (ed.), Middle English Sermons, EETS 209 (London, 1960), pp. xliii-li; and James J. Murphy, Rhetoric in the Middle Ages (Berkeley, 1974), pp. 269-355, including an abbreviated translation of Robert of Basevorn’s treatise on pp. 344-355. 173 Abiciamus is of uncertain authorship and survives in many copies. I have used British Library, MS Royal 7.C.i, where the series of 64 sermons outlines (fols. 74r-78r) follows upon Dieta salutis, as it does in many other manuscripts. — 174 See especially H. G. Pfander, ‘“‘The Mediaeval Friars and Some Alphabetical Reference-Books for Sermons,’ Medium Aevum 3 (1934), 19-29; Johannes Baptist Schneyer, Geschichte der katholischen Predigt (Freiburg, 1969), pp. 178-185; and Malcolm B. Parkes, ‘‘ The Influence of the Concepts of Ordinatio and Compilatio on the Development of the Book’’ in Medieval Learning and Literature: Essays Presented to R. W. Hunt, ed. J. J. G. Alexander and M. T. Gibson (Oxford, 1976), pp. 115-141,

with many further references passim. Professor Richard H. Rouse is currently engaged in a longer study of medieval indices, concordances, and the like.

50 FASCICULUS MORUM The intention to make Fasciculus morum a workable handbook for preachers shows even in its physical appearance. Many surviving copies contain the apparatus characteristic of handy reference books: not only are chapter initials usually enlarged and colored, but most copies bear very

clear rubrics indicating. parts, chapters, and often the subject matter. Marginalia of this sort make it of course very easy to locate passages that

are referred to in the sermon outlines or in the alphabetical index. I believe that this intended use as a preacher’s reference book may even explain why the earliest surviving codices originated only two or three generations after the date of composition. Earlier copies were simply read and leafed to pieces; they may well have been among those “‘cedule quasi dirute et vetustate consumpte”’ that William Chartham spoke of.

». DEVICES OF POPULAR PREACHING

When one speaks of the “popular sermon”’ of the late Middle Ages, one may think either of the tone of the sermon as it is created by elements

of a wide popular appeal, or of its structure, or of its audience. With | respect to the last, Fasciculus morum was clearly written for preachers who would address, not religious communities, clerical assemblies, or groups

of university students, but the common lay people. This is indicated not only by the opening remark, “‘we are held to preach to the people,” but also by components of its subject matter that unequivocally apply to the laity, such as, proper tithing (I, 10), oppression of the poor by tyrannical lords (III, 1), and the need to chastize one’s children (I, 11). But also the structure of the intended sermons and—far more importantly—their tone show beyond any doubt that the work was created as a tool for popular

preaching. We saw earlier what shape sermons might take in which material from the handbook was to be utilized. The skeleton of such outlines was to be filled with sermon material that would prove the validity

of specific points of faith and morals advanced in the sermon, would illustrate them, and would strengthen their emotional impact on the audience. How this was achieved is neatly shown in the following short passage on evil speech, one of the three kinds of pride of the mouth (i.e., multiloquium, vaniloquium, and maliloquium; I, 4): In the third place, we must beware of evil speech, for according to the Apostle, [I] Cor. [15:33]: ‘‘ Evil talks corrupt good morals.” For a small

| quantity of leaven corrupts the entire dough, and a single drop of poison affects many once it has spread. According to Anselm, the tongue must be _ guarded most strongly, for through it all evils are suggested and carried

FASCICULUS MORUM 51 out. And to show that it must be guarded well, it has been set, as it were,

in a prison, with a wall of teeth in front of it, and lips as ramparts. In Ephesians 4[:29] it is said, “Let no evil speech proceed out of your

mouth.”” Whence it is well said in English:

See and hear and hold thee still, If thou wilt live and have thy will. Hence we read about a holy father who saw angels rejoicing when the talk was about God, but putting stained and dirty hands to their mouths when the talk was of worldly things. When he learned this, he carried a stone in his mouth for three years, so that he might learn silence.1"5

In a single paragraph the warning against speaking ill is bolstered up with two biblical quotations, one quotation attributed to a Doctor of the Church, three similitudes, a proverbial verse in English, and an exemplum (which actually conflates several stories from the Vitae Patrum).17® These are all standard devices which were recommended by artes praedicandi for developing the sermon and which typify the popular sermon of the later Middle Ages. From the impressive wealth of such rhetorical ammunition collected in Fasciculus morum | will focus here on the similes in order to convey the © richness and flavor that characterize the illustrative material in the handbook throughout.?”” Its similes have been gathered from the most diverse range of life and letters. “‘ Natural science,”’ first of all, is represented by the properties of stones, plants, and animals. Medieval lapidaries have furnished many curious details about such stones as the diamond, chrysolite, jasper, magnet, asbestos, beloculus, and terribulus. From the plant 175 ““Tercio cavendum est de maliloquio quia iuxta Apostolum ad Cor. vii: Corrumpunt bonos mores colloquia prava. Modicum eciam fermentum totam massam corrumpit, et una veneni gutta multociens [all other MSS multos] inficit cum fuerit diffusa. Secundum ergo Anselmum: ‘Maxime custodienda est lingua, quia per ipsam omnia mala consuluntur et prestantur.’ Et ideo ad designandum quod bene deberet custodiri, posita est quasi In carcere, et murus dencium ante eam, atque labia pro antemuralibus. Eph. 4 dicitur: Omnis sermo malus non procedat de ore vestro. Et Jacobus primo: Sit omnis homo velox ad audiendum, tardus ad loquendum. Unde bene

anglice dicitur: ,

Se and here and holde pe stylle, zefe pou wolte lyue and haue py wylle. /

Unde legitur de quodam sene angelos vidente letantes quando audivit fratres [canceled?| de deo loquebatur. Sed quando vero de mundanis loquebatur vidit eos quasi maculatos et manus ad ora ponentes quasi stercoratos [sic]. Quod intelligens tribus annis portabat lapidem in ore ut disceret taciturnitatem.” R, fol. 10r—v. 176 See the comment on Verse 6 in Chapter IV. 177 T have sketched the “‘popular”’ rhetoric of FM more briefly in my paper **Vices, Virtues, and Popular Preaching,”’ pp. 41ff.

52 FASCICULUS MORUM world come lily, almond, peony seed, juniper, and agnus castus, a healing

herb whose various properties illustrate a number of moral points. But

it is the animal kingdom that provides the preacher with the largest number of nature images, far too numerous to be listed here. Among them

are many our author could have known only from books: basilisk and | chameleon, hyena and harpy, ostrich and elephant, and several marvelous fishes (/ollicus, narchus, torpido) and exotic snakes (prester, pandera), besides the more common lion and panther, raven, and pelican. Many of these beasts act very strangely, as for instance the goat that becomes sterile when it licks an olive, or the female stork who manages to keep her

extramarital affairs hidden by taking a bath, or the well-known eagle who protects its young from a serpent’s poison by placing a magic stone in its nest. This pseudo-learned and rather quaint material is, of course, quite

familiar to any reader of medieval sermons and much other literature besides.

Equally familiar are other nature images which, though often found in literature, are nevertheless more closely related to actual observation and daily experience. Thus we find such well-worn truths as that flies are caught with honey, drones do not produce but only consume, cuckoos put their eggs into other birds’ nests, and flowers wilt when they are handled too much. But every so often our attention is arrested by an image of less general currency and greater liveliness: Apples are squeezed till the juice

drops from them; the mastiff is driven from the kitchen with boiling water; on holidays a dancing bear is dragged through villages and gets bitten by the dogs; and the hen and the falcon, while being respectively a common and a noble bird during their lifetime, have their status reversed in death, when the hen graces a king’s table while the falcon is tossed on

the dunghill. ,

An even larger host of similes is derived from the world of man. Here, too, we are served a number of general observations: a father loves that

son best who resembles him most; widows wear weeds; windows are opened to let the sun in; lighting a single candle can bring light to a whole house; a bier is adorned when a corpse lies on it; and in the alms-chest the

more precious gifts are usually found near the bottom. Most of these images, however, refer more specifically to one of the main social classes. Many a simile speaks of the noble life, especially of combat and warfare. The king’s marshall makes arrangements for the camp, and various tents are set up; the border is fortified; possible traitors must be dismissed when — the lord of a castle wants to resist a siege, and cushions or bales of hay are

placed on the walls against the battering ram. Ancient knights bit the earth when they lay dying; a knight’s honor is greater when he has suffered

FASCICULUS MORUM 53 much; if he dies in combat, his shield is hung up in church or offered at the altar; and various shields are moralized.‘”® In contrast, town life furnishes fewer comparisons: City gates are closed at night, and garbage is thrown into the streets and washed away by the rain. Landlords pay

their workers, and when they are particularly satisfied add a robe to the regular wages. The marketplace image?”® appears a number of times,

once including a regular business luncheon among sellers and buyers, and merchants are singled out for their shrewdness in making money. Rather surprisingly, hardly any images come from the world of the clergy. Various aspects of pilgrims and their equipment are moralized, and at one point the folly of joining a group of travelers bound for Scotland is pointed out if one wishes to go on a pilgrimage to Rome or Compostella. False pardoners showing faked relics are used to illustrate bad excuses made in confession, and the summoner appears once as an image of death. But no other similes from the life of priests and bishops, friars, monks, or nuns are used in the treatise. Yet students and the learned professions do appear occasionally in several lively images. Thus, the master takes his pupil by the ears and flogs him, while the flogged scholar would rather be at home or, otherwise, studies diligently in face of the rod. The work of professional scribes provides two extended similes: one recommends holding the book up against the light if one wants to check the quality of the lettering and the

accuracy of the transcription, which is then applied to the “book of conscience’’; the other speaks of the good scribe whose task it is to transcribe his exemplar exactly, “without adding or taking away anything; for usually scribes are not knowledgeable enough (scioli) to correct books”’; just so must man copy God’s law in his heart. Another academic profession similarly used to illustrate moral truth is that of the physician, who gives various types of medicine according to the stage of the disease and lets a

desperate case have whatever he wants. In addition, astronomers are reported to observe an eclipse indirectly in a water basin; and the figure of a legal charter is introduced several times. The best-represented class, however, is the common folk. The world of the plowman furnishes a set of related agricultural images that illustrate proper almsgiving. Similarly, the plow and its various parts visualize aspects 178 For the shield of the English king, see above, p. 26. The shield of patience:

‘*Purpureum, cum leone argenteo rampante in medio, cum corona aurea, ac in pectore eius unam rosam habebat de minio, idest goules, gestante”’ (VII, 19; R, fol.

149r). Death the summoner carries a quartered shield with figures of ape, lion, archer, and scribe (I, 13; R, fol. 21v. See also below, p. 57). 178 See also Wenzel, ‘‘Chaucer and the Language of Contemporary Preaching,”’

Studies in Philology 73 (1976), 151.

34 FASCICULUS MORUM of man’s good will. Too much dung is said to produce weeds, while harvest-

ing seven different crops becomes a simile for the seven deeds of mercy. Other villagers besides the plowman receive a fair share of attention. The blacksmith serves as a figure of the devil, either because of his sinister work

| with bellows, hammer, and anvil, or because he plays a painful trick on unwary citizens by putting a glowing hot horseshoe in the street which they are

| tempted to pick up. Butchers, as one may expect, feed hogs for slaughter. Millers dam up water but cannot hold it indefinitely (like usurers), while the mill itself is an apt image for man’s heart which the Fiend tries to fill with sand, pitch, and straw. Shrewd cooks take a boiling pot off the fire before it spoils (avarice) or spills (lechery). Tinkers, wandering from village to village, are more interested in broken pots and pans than in beautiful bowls of gold and silver (envy). When the swineherd calls one pig, the whole herd comes running (dancing women). The poor spinning woman,

finally, wets her wool in order to increase its weight (contrition). | These honest crafts are balanced by a number of not so honest occupa-

tions. It is perhaps a little surprising to find a proportionately large number of comparisons with thieves. They lie in wait and signal to each other by hooting, as do slanderers. They send small children into a house through the windows, who then open the doors for the big robbers. Faced by great wealth, a thief is sometimes so stupefied that he cannot act and consequently gets caught. A thief may forego robbery when faced with the gallows; on the way to the gallows, he has nothing to be proud of; and if he once escapes from the gallows, he will return to robbery more ardently. _ In some countries, if a prisoner breaks jail, he is automatically assumed to’ be guilty and punished more severely. False beggars, that true scum of medieval society, fake handicaps and cry when people approach but laugh behind their backs. Other vagabonds (trutanni) sit idly in the sun all day long, companions in fruitlessness to minstrels (ioculatores) who can tell of great deeds but perform none. Minstrels suggest games, of which a number are mentioned in the handbook;*®° and games in turn suggest the world of children and their mothers and nurses, from which likewise many platitudes and some not so commonplace observations have been drawn.'*4 But enough examples have been given to indicate the wide social range and, beyond that, the enormous span from abstruse booklearning to everyday experience of the material included.

ibidem, p. 43. ,

180 For three games, see “‘ Vices, Virtues, and Popular Preaching,” pp. 42-43. 181 Among the latter, especially the confusion of r and / in children’s speech; see

| FASCICULUS MORUM 55 | The other major sermon device of which many instances were brought together—illustrative stories or narrationes—displays a similar diversity.

Stories were taken from all the great areas that provided doctrine and entertainment: the Bible, classical myth and fable, Greek and Roman history, both political and philosophical, and of course the vast world of medieval Christian fable and legend, beginning with the Vitae Patrum and

St. Gregory’s Dialogues and leading up to contemporary events and - miracles. It is surprising, however, that two major story types which appear consistently in medieval sermons and handbooks—saints’ legends

and miracles of Our Lady!®?—are almost entirely absent from Fasciculus | morum. The tales included also vary widely in their tone, from gruesome

and frightening to affectionate and hopeful, from serious to frankly jocular. I have elsewhere given a representative sampling of the amazing wealth of story material for which Fasciculus morum is justly famous.1%% Some ten stories deserve special mention because they stand particularly close in time and place to the author of Fasciculus morum and may, therefore, help future search for his identity, his sources, and the influence of his work. Several of them have already been discussed in the previous section on authorship and date: the tale about Friar Warinus South, the adulterous knight at the siege of Kenilworth, the vision of the mutilated

Christ-Child, the bailiff at Norwich who oppressed the poor, and the report of the message an anchoress received about a syncopating priest. Other tales in this group will be discussed later in connection with English

verses (Chapter IV): the story of the ioculator Ulfrid (Verse 36) and a nemo-joke involving a traveler and two ferrymen (Verse 32).

There remain three tales which are curious in themselves and not common outside Fasciculus morum. The first is about a (court) fool named William who loved his lord very much and grieved at his unjust, sinful life.

In order to call him back to virtue, he pretended to be sick and made his last will in which, among his other belongings, he bequeathed his soul to hell. When his astounded master asks the fool why he would want to do that, William replies that he loves his master so much that he wants to be with him forever. This story occurs once or twice later (perhaps copied 182 Tt is noteworthy that the popular story about a penitent knight who promises

to build a monastery (Tubach, No. 3342), which appears often in collections of Miracles of Our Lady, in FM lacks any reference to the Virgin altogether. 183 ** Vices, Virtues, and Popular Preaching,’’ pp. 44-45. See also Little, Studies, pp. 147ff. The exempla in MS A are analyzed by Herbert, Catalogue, pp. 686-692, but it should be borne in mind that A does not contain all exempla usually found in FM, nor is Herbert’s list exhaustive.

56 FASCICULUS MORUM from Fasciculus morum) but was not widespread, nor in fact does the figure of a wise fool appear much before Renaissance literature.*°* __ The second tale illustrates the punishment for sacrilege. A cleric from the household of “‘a certain great prince’’ who in his life had done much

harm to. poor people and churchmen was curious about his deceased master’s fate. In a vision, which is recounted at some length, he saw his former lord tormented in various ways and was eventually told the precise

reason for each torment. The cleric, having barely escaped alive, later narrated his vision to his lord’s daughter, “‘who told these things to a reli-

gious (who put them in writing for the perpetual remembrance of this event), whose names I deem it more useful to hide than to reveal openly.’’18°

The story, with the last sentence, occurs also in an exempla collection thought to have been composed shortly after 1250, perhaps by a Dominican friar at Cambridge, and differently in Bromyard’s Summa praedicantium,'*® but it is otherwise not known to occur outside Fasciculus morum (except

that Chartham copied it from the manual). |

The final story is in a lighter vein and appears twice, under Sloth and under Lechery, where it exemplifies the behavior of people who excuse their sins by blaming their maker. There are some people, and especially young women, who when asked why they acted this way when their belly begins to swell and grow, reply

that they had to do it because it was thus predestined for them before [they ever wore] smock or shirt. But surely, one may well answer them as

a certain friar once answered such a wanton: “Truly, my daughter, he who formed the bag on your belly in this fashion was a very poor tailor, for it pokes out disgracefully!°’+®”

I know of no other occurrence of this tale.1®®

No matter how entertaining such verbal jokes and other comic tales may have been, we must remember that they, together with all the other stories collected, were intended to be told not for their own sake but to illustrate a moral point, whether they exemplify a moral already stated

, scripts.

184 T have translated the story in ‘“‘Chaucer and the Language of Contemporary Preaching,”’ Studies in Philology 73 (1976), 149, and referred to its appearance elsewhere and to similar tales on p. 150, notes 38-40. 185 TV, 9; R, fol. 80r. The sentence in parentheses does not appear in all manu-

186 See Forte, ‘‘A Cambridge Dominican Collector ...,’ pp. 145f., No. 311.

The version in FM is not directly copied from Royal 7.D.i, but it is surprisingly close in structure and in its wording. Bromyard, “‘Rapina,” R.I, § 31; fols. 505v—506r.

187 For the Latin text, see Chapter IV, pp. 205-206. :

188 Bromyard also gives a tale about a pregnant woman who blames predestination: “‘Gratia,’’ G.III, § 27; fol. 215v,b; but this is not the same as in FM.

| FASCICULUS MORUM 57 (“unde narratur...’’) or, after being told, are subjected to a piece-bypiece allegorization (“moraliter/spiritualiter autem loquendo...’”’). Both techniques are common in Fasciculus morum, as they are in other sermon literature.

. In addition to having such illustrative function, occasionally a story or simile may be used to provide the structure for a longer exposition or an | entire chapter. For instance, almsgiving is likened to sowing seed. First the author applies three aspects of sowing to the question of who should receive alms. Then he derives seven obstacles to fruitful almsgiving from seven properties of the seed. Finally, the conditions for effective almsgiving are discussed with the help of a further development of the seed image, now centering on the right preparation of the soil in which it is

sown.789

For similar structuring purposes Fasciculus morum and contemporary sermons employ two other devices which must be briefly glanced at. The first is a method of amplification by which, according to Thomas Waleys,

“some preachers take the individual letters of a word and then give other | words that begin with these letters.”1°° The secondary words are then further developed. For example, in expanding the idea that pride can be overcome best by the thought of death, the author takes the word MORS,

“which has four letters corresponding to four words, which in turn correspond to four properties of death.”’ The four letters of MORS thus are

made to stand for mirum speculum (mirror), orologium (clock), raptor (thief), and citator (summoner),'®! and several paragraphs go on to explain

how death can be compared to a mirror, etc.19? | The second structuring device, which appears more frequently than the preceding, is the moralized “picture”: an abstraction is said to have 189 V 24-25: R, fols. 112v-115v. 190 De modo componendi sermones, ed. Charland, p. 396. Waleys uses as an example DEUS = ‘“‘dans eternam vitam suis.”’ He carefully distinguishes this method from ‘“‘etymology’”’ and has a rather low opinion of it (ibid.). In contrast, the earlier Ars praedicandi by William of Auvergne includes the technique in compositio and, thus, considers it as a kind of ‘‘etymology.”’ See A. de Poorter, “‘Un manuel de prédication médiévale. Le MS 97 de Bruges,”” Revue néo-scolastique 25 (1923), 205. The treatise on sermon development by Richard of Thetford (fl. 1245 ?) considers this technique a refined type of excoriacio, or finding the “‘etymology” of a word by interpreting not only its syllables (sacerdos = “‘sacer dux”’; “‘Edburga exponitur quasi ediburg, quasi ‘beata ciuitas’’’) but even its individual letters (“‘mons dicitur quasi mane obstans novo soli. Taurus quasi tuens agmina vaccarum robore virium suarum”’). MS Royal 4.B.viti, fol. 265v,a. 191 The awkwardness of the first and last Latin terms suggests that this particular

device was included for use in vernacular preaching. : 1927, 13;R, fol. 21r.

58 FASCICULUS MORUM been depicted in a certain way, usually as a person with various attributes, which are then allegorized one by one and reveal qualities inherent in the concept.!9* The fickleness of the world, for example, is visualized and developed in the section on avarice with the following picture: Therefore it is said in poetry that in former times the World was depicted in the form of a seated woman with three heads that wore crowns and had inscriptions on them. On the first forehead was written, “‘I have promised,” but on its crown, ‘“‘ Heaven has made [it] a fable.’’ On the second forehead was written, ““I have laughed at [you],”’ but on its crown, “‘The sea has made [you] a statue.” On the third forehead was written, “I have left [you],” but on its crown, ‘‘The earth reads [or: collects] the letter.’’ Spiritually speaking, this woman signifies the falseness of the world, whose three faces are the properties of worldly happiness, namely, prosperity, shrewdness, and falseness.1%*

The three heads with their inscriptions are then interpreted, one after the

other, at some length, and the development incorporates much other illustrative material, including several stories and English verses.1%° Fasciculus morum contains similar pictures of Death,’%* the god of flatterers,}®” Flattery,?°* Justice,!®° Prayer,2°° Love, 2° and the god of the 193 For the technique and its history, see Beryl Smalley, English Friars and Antiquity in the Early Fourteenth Century (Oxford, 1960), pp. 165ff. and passim.

194 “*Tjnde fertur poetice quod antiquitus mundus sic depingebatur, scil. in specie muliebri sedens cum tribus capitibus coronatis et sic inscriptis. Nam in fronte primi capitis scribebatur hoc verbum: ‘Promisi,’ sed in eius corona sic: ‘Celum fecit fabulam.’ In fronte secundi capitis scribebatur hoc verbum: ‘Derisi,’ sed in eius corona sic: ‘ Mare fecit statuam.’ In fronte vero tercij capitis scribebatur hoc verbum: *Divisi,’ sed in eius corona sic: ‘Terra legit litteram.’ Spiritualiter autem loquendo. . .”’

IV,4;R,fol.71r.

IV, Verses 36-39. ,

195 The development of the picture occupies fols. 71r—-72v in R. See also Chapter

21v. ,

196 Death: a knight on horseback with quartered shield of arms. I, 13; R, fol.

197 God of flatterers: has head of a cat, body of a dragon. III, 5; fol. 35v. Also

in Harley 7322, fol. 89v.

198 Flattery: a whore with cup and mirror. III, 3; fol. 35v. Also in Harley 7322, fol. 104r, and Holcot; see Herbert, Catalogue, p. 112, No. 44, and p. 174, No. 96. 199 Justice: a beautiful girl, head erect, blind, without hands. V, 15; fol. 107r.

Credited to “‘Agellius”’ (i.e., Aulus Gellius, Noctes Atticae, XIV, 4, with which the | picture has very little if any resemblance). The same in Convertimini (see Herbert, Catalogue, p. 119, No. 7) and the Gesta Romanorum (Oesterley, No. 247). 200 Prayer: A beautiful man, with fiery body and erect head, long straight lance, with four angels holding rotuli with inscriptions. V, 20; fol. 110v. Credited to ‘“‘commentator Juvenalis.”’ For other occurrences, see Chapter IV, Verse 48. 201 Love: A beautiful girl with uncovered head, joyful face, offering an apple with inscription (“‘longe et prope’’), bearing another inscription on her breast (‘‘ vita

FASCICULUS MORUM 59 glutton.?°? Some of these pictures are identical with or very similar to passages in Holcot’s Moralitates. Their use in Fasciculus morum, together with the great interest in classical fable and history that one finds in the narrationes, would closely relate the author of Fasciculus morum to the “classicizing friars’’ of the fourteenth century studied by Beryl Smalley. A final device of popular sermons which appears in Fasciculus morum again and again is its verses, in Latin as well as in the vernacular. To them the remainder of this study will be devoted.

et mors’’). V, 36; fol. 128v. The image forms part of a narratio said to come from **Gesta Romanorum”’ in which the citizens of Rome are told that their city will last as long as the name ROMA if reversed remains with them (Amor). They then paint _ this image of Love and bring it four kinds of offerings. See Verse 51. A similar image with these inscriptions appears in Holcot’s Moralitates (Herbert, Catalogue, p. 110, No. 26; see Smalley, English Friars, p. 180, no. 1). Harley 7322, fols. 64v—68v, has the same “‘picture”’ of Charity, but with many more attributes; it is not close to FM. In Bromyard’s Summa praedicantium the same image exemplifies Gratitudo (G.IV, § 9; fol. 217v,b). Notice that this part of the Summa was written before 1330, i.e., several

years before Holcot’s Moralitates (between 1334 and 1342); see Boyle, “‘The

Date... ,”” Speculum 48 (1973), 535; and Smalley, p. 146. , 202 God of the glutton: has the head of a hog, belly of a leech, and bottom of an ass. VI, 2; fol. 131r. Also in Harley 7322, fol. 85r.

BLANK PAGE

| Chapter II IN DISCUSSING THE USE of verses in prose sermons we must, first of all, recall the high regard which “‘poetry”’ enjoyed during the Middle Ages as

a proper medium for teaching and study. There was hardly any field of human knowledge which was not summed up or presented in more or less extensive poems. The basic facts of grammar,? rhetoric, and poetics,® of mathematics,* music,° and medicine,® of the lore about plants,’ animals,® and stones,® were reduced to verses. Even literary history was written in poetic form.’° Truly astonishing is that more abstract fields, dealing with

concepts and rules rather than names and things, should have been sum- : marized in verses as well. The great twelfth-century summa of dogmatics, Hugh of St. Victor’s De sacramentis christianae fidei, for example, was abridged in a metrical version which remained popular to the end of the

Middle Ages;?! and its even more important and universally used suc1 Cf. L. Thorndike, ‘‘ Unde versus,” Traditio 11 (1955), 163-193. The following notes cite representative examples and are not intended to be exhaustive. 2 E.g., Alexander of Villedieu, Doctrinale (written 1199); see below, n. 18. 3 E.g., Marbod of Rennes, De ornamentis verborum (PL 171:1687ff.), and the

well-known handbooks by Evrard the German, Matthew of Vendome, John of Garland, and Geoffrey of Vinsauf. *E.g., Alexander of Villedieu, Carmen de algorismo, ed. R. Steele, The Earliest Arithmetics in English, EETS, es, 118 (London, 1922). 5° E.g., the eleventh-century Musicae Guidonis regulae rhythmicae, ed. Martin Gerbert, Scriptores ecclesiastici de musica, 2 (St. Blasius, 1784), 25-34; ‘“‘Ad organum faciendum,”’ ed. E. de Coussemaker, Histoire de l’harmonie au moyen-dge (Paris, 1852), pp. 235-243. I owe these references to Professor Calvin Bower. ° E.g., De viribus herbarum or Macer floridus, by Odo of Meung, ed. L. Choulant (Leipzig 1832); Regimen sanitatis Salerni, ed. Alexander Croke (Oxford, 1830), or Francis R. Packard, The School of Salernum ...(New York, 1920). 7E.g., the Hortulus by Walafrid Strabo (ninth century), ed. Ernst Duemmler, Monumenta Germaniae historica, Poetae latini aevi carolini 2 (Berlin, 1884), 335350.

SE.g., the eleventh-century De naturis animalium by Theobald of Monte Cassino, ed. PL 171:1217ff. ° E.g., Marbod of Rennes, Liber lapidum (eleventh century), ed. PL 171: 1758ff. 10 E.g., Hugo of Trimberg, Registrum multorum auctorum, ed. K. Langosch, in Germanische Studien 235 (Berlin, 1942). 11 See J. de Ghellinck, Le mouvement théologique du XII* siécle, 2nd ed. (Bruges,

1948), p. 196, n. 4; and his earlier article, ‘‘Medieval Theology in Verse,”’ Irish

Theological Quarterly 9 (1914), 336-354. , 61

62 VERSES IN SERMONS cessor, Peter Lombard’s Sentences, also was subjected to metrical summation.!? John Lawerne, Benedictine monk of Worcester and Doctor

: of Theology at Oxford in the 1440s, has left a prose summary of the Sentences in his notebook, where he formulates the main topics of each

contain: |

| ‘book in a little poem. For instance, Book IV of the Sentences is said to Utrum cruor Ihesu Christi Fit medela culpe tristi Humane mesticie. Unde cuncta sacramenta

, Graciarum condimenta Fluerunt ecclesie.?° | Another theological schoolbook that was rendered in verses is the Verbum _abbreviatum by Peter the Chanter,’* and even St. Thomas Aquinas did not escape a similar fate.1° Nor was canon law left out of this adaptive process. One of the cornerstones of its study during the later Middle Ages, Raymund of Pennaforte’s Summa de poenitentia, was versified within a generation of its composition (by Arnulf of Louvain), and in the late fourteenth century

a German Dominican, Adam of Aldersbach, made another metrical version which eventually was several times printed.*®

The main purpose of such metrical endeavors was obviously to provide students with their basic subject matter in a form that could be

| easily memorized and retained. Such a pedagogical intention is, of course, not limited to the medieval world, as versified rules of Latin grammar produced in our own century testify. But other intentions lay behind the production of such didactic poetry as well. Several authors of metrical schoolbooks writing around 1200 state expressly that their works were intended to replace “‘trivial’’ secular, 1.e., pagan, poetry. Alexander of

| Villedieu, for instance, produced a versified account of the Christian church year and related matters (Ecclesiale) as a direct substitute for 12 Ghellinck, Le mouvement, pp. 272-273. F. Stegmiiller, in Repertorium commentariorum in Sententias Petri Lombardi (Wirzburg, 1947), 1:6-8, lists different metrical versions, to which must be added his Nos. 80 and 242. Another version exists in Durham Cathedral MS A.IV.5, fols. 175-183. 13 MS Bodley 692, fol. 7v.

14 See J. W. Baldwin, Masters, Princes, and Merchants: The Social Views of Peter the Chanter and His Circle (Princeton, 1970), 1:41. 18 Ghellinck, ‘‘ Medieval Theology in Verse,”’ pp. 341-346. 16 A, Teetaert, “Raymond de Penyafort,” in Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, 13,2 (Paris, 1937), 1816-17. Gratian’s Decretum also is summarized in verses, in Durham Cathedral MS A.IV.5, fols. 184ff.

| VERSES IN SERMONS _ 63 Ovid’s Fasti, to satisfy what he deemed an unwarranted and dangerous interest in classical poetry fostered by Arnulf of Orléans.!” He also tried to supplant what he called “the trifles of Maximian”’ with a versified grammar, his Doctrinale.1® In a like vein Alexander recommended his contemporary Peter Riga for replacing pagan mythology with sacred history: Non decet illa legi que sunt contraria legi. Has abolere volens sordes et cordis et oris,

| Viuifico clerum Riga Petrus rore rigauit,

Qui nos de petra mellis dulcedine pauit.?9 ,

The modern editor of Peter’s Aurora, a long verse reduction of the Bible, has gathered further expressions of the same sentiment from Jacques de Vitry, a Frisian chronicle, and Vincent of Beauvais.2° However inferior the results may have been, such verse reductions clearly aimed not merely

at supplying doctrine but also at catering to their readers’ aesthetic pleasure in poetry.

Peter Riga’s work itself suggests an additional reason for versified reductions: the role of biblical epics in devout reading and meditation. The works of such early Christian poets as Juvencus, Proba, and others, though primarily intended to replace the Aeneid, seem to have owed some

of their impetus also to their meditative function, and this intention together with simple didacticism continued in later vernacular renditions of Holy Writ, from Caedmon’s poems to the fourteenth-century Cursor mundi and similar works in French and German.” The tendency to summarize doctrine in verse form, which flourished in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, did not leave handbooks for simple

parish priests untouched. The versified Verbum abbreviatum, already , mentioned, belongs to this class. Another interesting production arising 17 Alexander of Villedieu, Ecclesiale, ed. L. R. Lind (Lawrence, Kansas, 1958), lines 1-67, esp. 54-56. 18 Doctrinale, lines 1-4, 24-25; ed. Dietrich Reichling, Monumenta Germaniae paedagogica 12 (Berlin, 1893). 19 Ecclesiale, lines 20-23. 20 P. E. Beichner (ed.), Aurora: Petri Rigae Biblia versificata, The University of

Notre Dame, Publications in Mediaeval Studies 19 (Notre Dame, Indiana, 1965), 1: XXXii—XXxXiii. : 21 See the perceptive survey by M. Wehrli, ‘“‘Sacra Poesis. Bibelepik als europaische Tradition,” in Die Wissenschaft von deutscher Sprache and Dichtung: Festschrift fiir Friedrich Maurer (Stuttgart, 1963), pp. 262-283. More ambitious studies

are: Dieter Kartschoke, Bibeldichtung: Studien zur Geschichte der epischen Bibelparaphrase von Juvencus bis Otfried von WeiBenburg (Munich, 1975); and (with special

interest in the function of versified versions) Reinhart Herzog, Die Bibelepik der Spatantike: Formgeschichte einer erbaulichen Gattung, 1 (Munich, 1976).

64 VERSES IN SERMONS out of the general trend to educate the lower clergy in early thirteenth-

century England is the Summa brevis by Richard of Leicester or of ; Wethringsette, chancellor of Cambridge University by 1222.22 Richard set out to compile in his work what a parish priest was to know and to teach his flock. The material covers such standard catechetical matters as the articles of faith, the Lord’s Prayer, the gifts of the Holy Spirit, the chief virtues, the capital vices, the seven sacraments, the Decalogue, the joys of

heaven and the pains of hell. All this is elucidated with “‘auctoritates scripturarum et scientie magistrorum, et specialiter dicta bone memorie magistri Willelmi de Montibus.’’*° The last named scholar had taught at Mont-Sainte-Geneviéve at Paris, had then become chancellor of Lincoln cathedral from about 1190 to 1213, and had written several treatises to aid preachers** and confessors.2° Some of them are entirely in verse: the widely circulated Compendium penitentiale (beginning “‘Peniteas cito’’),?°

| and a longer poem on theological matters called Versuarius or Versarius. Both poems indeed furnish many verses for Wethringsette’s Summa brevis,

which, though essentially in prose, abounds with memory verses for its catechetical matters. Here one finds the oft-quoted verses that list the Seven Deadly Sins, their branches, the remedies for a vice, the effects of

contrition, the necessary qualities of a good confession, the goods of matrimony, the impediments to Holy Orders, and so forth—indeed a good

many of the summarizing verses which occur again and again in later handbooks including Fasciculus morum. A noteworthy feature of Wethring22 On Wethringsette, see A.B. Emden, A Biographical Register of the University of Cambridge to 1500 (Cambridge, 1963), pp. 367 and 679. Manuscripts of the Summa brevis (57) are listed in the unpublished D. Phil. thesis by Father Leonard E. Boyle, **A Study of the Works Attributed to William of Pagula’’ (Oxford, 1956), 2:20—22. The work deserves a critical edition. 23 MS Royal 4.B.viii, fol. 222r,b.

24 Particularly the interesting alphabetical collection Similitudinarius. It begins: **Ad declarandum sermonem quocumque propositum similitudines undecumque deo

donante collegimus, scientes quia proposiciones in medium prolatas probant seu _ dilucidant auctoritates et raciones, exempla et similitudines. Ut autem facilius et cicius aliquod simile spectans ad propositum reperire valeamus, tractatum presentem de similitudinibus secundum ordinem alfabeti disponere curavimus, et huic operi Similitudinarium nomen imposuimus.’’ MS Peterhouse 255, fol. 84r. See also Ph. B. Roberts, Stephanus de Lingua-Tonante: Studies in the Sermons of Stephen Langton

(Toronto, 1968), pp. 90-92. ,

2° On William and his works, see H. Mackinnon, ‘‘ William de Montibus: A Medieval Teacher,” in Essays in Medieval History Presented to Bertie Wilkinson, ed. T. A. Sandquist and M. R. Powicke (Toronto, 1969), pp. 32—45, and earlier literature

quoted there. 26 Printed in PL 207 :1153—-54.

VERSES IN SERMONS 65 sette’s Summa is that it also versifies biblical examples and similes for the vices. Wrath, for instance, is indicated by several scriptural figures that are summarized in this hexameter: Ira furor, trabs est, tempestas cordis, et ignis.?’

The brief allusions are then explained as follows:

De primo dicitur: “Ira furor brevis est’? [Horace, Epistles, 1,ii,62]. De secundo, in Matheo: “‘Eice trabem de oculo tuo,” etc. [Matth. 7:3]. Quid sit tempestas docet Psalmista petens se salvum fieri ‘‘a pusillanimitate spiritus et tempestate’’ [Ps. 54:9]. Igni bene comparatur; sicut enim ignis in carbone, sic ira in animi commocione. Ignis in flamma, ira in contencione [read: ignis in flammam, ira in contencionem prorumpit?]

Hinc bene dicitur: “Extingue flammas litium,” etc. [from the hymn *“Rector potens, verax Deus’’]. Et de huiusmodi dicitur in III Regum [19:12]: ““Non in igne Dominus.” Et in Johele [1:19]: ‘‘Ignis commedit speciosa deserti.”’

That such zest to include mnemonic verses in prose treatises should

spill over into other literary genres than doctrinal handbooks is not astonishing. Hence we find them, for example, in Alexander of Hales’s commentary on the Sentences,”® in biblical commentaries by Thomas Docking*®? and John Wyclif,°° in the Ancrene Wisse,®* and even in Margery Kempe’s ‘“‘autobiography.”°? A particular fondness for such verses or tags can be found in annals and chronicles.** The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle is well known for its “chronicle poems,” which are often of 27 MS Royal 4.B.viii, fol. 229r,a. For similar lines on accidia, see Wenzel, The Sin of Sloth (Chapel Hill, 1967), p. 74. 28 Alexander of Hales, Glossa in IV libros Sententiarum (Quaracchi, 1951-52), about 25 verse items, mostly in Book IV. 29 See A. G. Little, “‘The Franciscan School at Oxford in the Thirteenth century,”’ Archivum Franciscanum Historicum 19 (1926), 848. 80 G. A. Benrath, Wyclifs Bibelkommentar (Berlin, 1966), p. 266, n. 687, and p. 290, n. 796. 31 Two Latin hexameters on subjects for meditation, ed. M. Day, EETS 225 (London, 1952), p. 107. 82 Discussed by R. K. Stone, Middle English Prose Style: Margery Kempe and Julian of Norwich (The Hague, 1970), pp. 85-88. %8 For the period before 1230, C. R. Cheney finds a ‘“‘marked taste for versifi-

cation’? especially among Cistercian, though not lacking in other, chronicles: “English Cistercian Libraries: the First Century,’ in Medieval Texts and Studies (Oxford, 1973), p. 337. See also Antonia Gransden, Historical Writing in England c. 550

to c. 1307 (Ithaca, N.Y., 1974), pp. 363 and 414. A number of such verses were collected by L. B. Hessler, ““The Latin Epigram of the Middle English Period,” Publications of the Modern Language Association of America 38 (1923), 712-728.

66 VERSES IN SERMONS considerable length,°* and later chronicles continued the practice to the end of the Middle Ages.*° Again we should notice that mnemonic usefulness accounts only in part for their employment; obviously their authors _ took genuine pleasure in turning out a few good lines, and it has been argued that such poems may have served as a relief from the otherwise heavy chronistic matter or even as a kind of chorus commenting on the events narrated.*° Certainly many of these verses do nothing but summarize the memorable events of a given year, such as the peculiarly flat line on Edward I’s second marriage (1299) found in the Flores historiarum: Regi sponsa datur, quae Margareta vocatur.?"

But other verses are truly poetic eulogies or invectives. Such are very frequent in the Lanercost Chronicle: Pope Clement IV, for instance, is celebrated with a praising epitaph; *® in contrast, Boniface VIII receives a punning curse for an act of legislation which brought him a good deal of hostility among the friars.°° I wish to emphasize the variety of functions served by such verses in

prose texts; they were variously mnemonic, rhetorical, or meditative, or simply an outlet for wit and verbal skill.*° Medieval theoreticians of poetry clearly recognized and taught that discourse in verse serves at least three

| different functions: it not only helps our memory but also expresses things 54 Besides the well-known poem on the Battle of Brunanburh (under A.p. 937), there are verses on the coronation of King Edgar and on his death, on the deaths of other kings, and on other matters. 55 For example, the Lanercost Chronicle, written in the mid-fourteenth century, preserves a Latin poem on the Battle of Bannockburn, A.p. 1314; ed. J. Stevenson

, (Edinburgh, 1839), pp. 226-227. 36 A, Lhotsky, ‘“‘Uber metrische Einlagen in spatmittelalterlichen Geschichtswerken,” Innsbrucker Beitrage zur Kulturwissenschaft 12 (Festschrift Karl Pivec; 1966), 257-263.

87 Flores historiarum, ed. H. R. Luard, Rolls Series 95 (London, 1890), 3:299.

— 88 ap. 1267; ed. cit., p. 82. ;

89 a.D. 1296; ed. cit., p. 177. See also the invective against William Wallace, A.D. 1305 (p. 203).

40 For the verbal artistry in such verses, see Hans Walther, ‘‘ Lateinische Verskiinsteleien des Mittelalters,’’ Zeitschrift fiir deutsches Altertum 91 (1962), 330-350. A good illustration are the following lines found in Bromyard and elsewhere:

, Emineas, cum femineas discernis, ydeas. Ne sedeas sed eas ne pereas per eas. “‘Luxuria,”’ L.VII, § 41 (fol. 301v,b); cf. Walther, Proverbia, 7063, and Initia, 5359,

which do not list any English manuscripts. :

VERSES IN SERMONS 67 succinctly and gives us pleasure.*’ These “final causes”’ were themselves summed up in verses, as for instance: Metra iuvant animos, comprehendunt plurima paucis, Pristina commemorant et sunt ea grata legenti.*?

Verses had such a diversity of effects not only for the reader (“‘legenti’’) but for sermon audiences as well, as the remainder of this chapter will show. Yet all too often critical studies of ‘preachers’ tags” have focussed - too narrowly on their mnemonic function alone. The following statement

is characteristic:

During his sermon a preacher might repeat such a little tag in the hope that its rhythm and rhyme would help his congregation remember some moral or tenet. Tags might serve another purpose: their shortness and ‘pithiness would help the preacher himself to remember the heads of his sermon.*°

Based on the preceding survey of the variety of functions which verses had

for medieval writers and readers or listeners, we can expect that verses quoted in prose sermons, too, did more than merely “help to remember.” | That preachers of the thirteenth and the following two centuries were extremely fond of sprinkling their sermons with verse tags in Latin as well as in the vernacular languages is well known and impresses even a casual reader of the surviving sermon manuscripts. Their fondness did not go unchallenged, however. Alanus of Lille, in his Summa de arte praedicatoria, condemned—together with scurrilous and childish words—‘rhythmorum melodias et consonantias metrorum, quae potius fiunt ad aures demulcendas quam ad animum instruendum; quae praedicatio theatralis est et mimica, et ideo omnifarie contemnenda.”’ ** He goes on to reject excessively

“‘nicturata praedicatio”’ by alluding to Isaiah 1:22: “Your merchants ‘mix water with wine’,” and later equates such fraudulent practices with the rhetoric of false preachers.*® Nevertheless, Alanus was too much of a *1 “La plupart de ces théoriciens tentent de définir le discours poétique en fonction de causes finales: delectatio, firmitas memoriae, lucida ac venusta brevitas”’; Paul Zumthor, “‘Rhétorique et poétique latines et romanes,”’ in Hans Robert Jauss and Erich Kohler (eds.), Grundriss der romanischen Literaturen des Mittelalters, 1: Géneralités, rédacteur Hans Ulrich Gumbrecht (Heidelberg, 1972), p. 72. See also the fine discussion of the relative merits of prose and verse given by Paul Klopsch, “*Prosa und Vers in der mittelalterlichen Literatur,” Mittellateinisches Jahrbuch 3 (1966), 9-24.

] 42 Walther, Proverbia, 14823; Initia, 10972. 43 Robbins, SL, p. xviii, rephrasing Owst, Preaching, p. 272.

#4 Chap. I; PL 210:112. | 45 Tbid. and col. 183.

68 VERSES IN SERMONS poet to withstand the temptation of quoting a line or two himself, and what he condemned was clearly the excessive use of such rhetorical embellishment. His own “Art of Preaching” thus contains some twenty - quotations from classical poets and several medieval mnemonic verses.*® There is some evidence that a certain uneasiness about using verses in preaching persisted through the later Middle Ages.*” The preacher of a

| fifteenth-century English sermon, for example, refers to adverse criticism , of his having begun an earlier sermon with a verse: “I rede in holy write— I sey noght at I rede in Ouidie noyper in Oras; vor pe last tyme pat I was her, ich was blamyd of som men word, because pat I began my sermon wyt a poysy.”*® The very criticism and denial confirms, of course, what

extant sermon manuscripts reveal in abundance—through the fifteenth century the use of verses in sermons was frequent and ubiquitous. The use of “‘riming lines in English” was discussed a generation ago by Homer G. Pfander in his study of The Popular Sermon of the Medieval Friar in England. Pfander saw two major rhetorical purposes: such verses

served “‘first, to mark structural divisions of the sermon by stating the

Text, Principals, Subdivisions, and Closing; and second, to supply dilation and ornament.’’*® Basically sound as it is, I believe this statement.

—as indeed Pfander’s all-too-brief study of his subject—is capable of much expansion and refinement. For one thing, the preacher’s use of English verses must be seen in the wider context of his using verses in a prose sermon, whether Latin or vernacular, because English verses as they *6 He followed the same practice in his sermons, too. For quotations from Aeneid and Metamorphoses, see M.-Th. D’Alverny (ed.), Alain de Lille: Textes inédits (Paris, 1965), pp. 132 and 136; and “‘Un sermon d’Alain de Lille sur la misére de ’homme,” in The Classical Tradition: Literary and Historical Studies in Honor of Harry Caplan, ed. Luitpold Wallach (Ithaca, N.Y., 1966), p. 533. *7 Roger Bacon, himself a Franciscan, criticizes the verbal elegance of sermons composed by young friars, with their rhymed divisions, as “‘infinita puerilis stultitia et vilificatio sermonum Dei’’; Opus tertium, cap. 75, in Opera quaedam hactenus inedita, ed. J. S. Brewer, Rolls Series 15 (London, 1859), p. 309 and also p. 304.

, 48D). M. Grisdale (ed.), Three Middle English Sermons from the Worcester Chapter Manuscript F.10, Leeds School of English Language. Texts and Monographs 5 (Leeds, 1939), p. 22.

_ 49H. G. Pfander, The Popular Sermon of the Medieval Friar in England (New York, 1937), p. 45. It should be noted, however, that in discussing this subject Pfander later arrives at a more comprehensive view which recognizes different rhetorical and dramatic functions of such verses (pp. 47-51 and 66). G. R. Owst, in Preaching in Medieval England, also assigns two purposes to “‘stray verse in a Latin prose homily,’’ but they are more narrowly mnemonic, for the preacher and for his audience (p. 272; see above, note 43). However, Owst later also speaks of ‘‘ driving

home particular points” (p. 273). ;

VERSES IN SERMONS __ 69

appear on the pages of surviving manuscripts are heavily dependent on a firm Latin tradition. Secondly, the material studied should be expanded to include handbooks for preachers together with actual sermons. For a full understanding of the frequency and diversity of such verses as well as of their function and their distribution, it is necessary to examine the verse material contained in such works as Fasciculus morum, Grimestone’s notebook, Bromyard’s Summa praedicantium, and exempla collections. And

lastly, even the connection between the friars and the use of verses in preaching may be worth a second look. As to their various functions, such verses, first of all, may summarize or formulate some matter that needed to be memorized. They not only continue the fashion of reducing doctrinal material in verse form that was surveyed above, but very often borrow from such earlier reductions and collections directly. Thus we find verse renditions of the Decalogue, the qualities necessary to a good confession, and a host of similar catechetical topics. The “‘circumstances of sin,’’ for example, as formulated in the

hexameter ,

Quis, quid, ubi, quibus auxiliis, cur, quomodo, quando*°

are found everywhere, in all kinds of literary genres, and have a very long history. Similarly, the hexameter on the five species or rather occasions of lechery, Visus, colloquium, contactus, et oscula, factum,

deriving from the lineae Veneris or amoris of classical antiquity®* and versified at some point in the Middle Ages, appears whenever lechery is discussed at length, from Alanus of Lille’s De arte praedicatoria®? and Wethringsette’s Summa brevis®® to treatises on the vices,°* Fasciculus morum,®°> and many sermons. The Latin lines were often translated into English rhymes, and normally the two versions follow each other in the 50 See the very detailed study by J. Griindel, Die Lehre von den Umstanden der menschlichen Handlung im Mittelalter, Beitrage zur Geschichte der Philosophie und Theologie des Mittelalters 39,5 (Miinster, 1963). Walther, Proverbia, 25432 (and also 25427-33), and Initia, 16099-1002 and 16108.

51 Walther, Proverbia, 33819. The “‘quinque lineae”’ are listed in prose by Donatus, Commentum Terenti, ed. P. Wessner, vol. 3 (Leipzig, 1908), pp. 127-128, on Eun., IV,2,12. See also Horace, Carmina, 1,13,15. 52 PL 210:122. 53 MS Royal 4.B.viii, fol. 231r,a.

54 F..g., “Primo videndum est,”’ Cambridge University Library, MS Ff.1.17, fol. 60v; here called ‘“‘the devil’s five fingers.”’ 55 VII, 2, furnishing the outline for chapters 2—6; fol. 134v.

70 VERSES IN SERMONS

manuscripts. Thus, Fasciculus morum offers mnemonic verses for the Decalogue, the (moralized) qualities of the Host, and four qualities of a good confession in both Latin and English (see Chapter IV, Verses 22, 44, and 46). Another example is a Latin poem which lists fifteen pains of hell:

| Ignis et algor, stridor et horror, lacrima, vermis, Malleus et fetor, spes perdita, vincula, fames,

| Esse carere deo, tenebre, nox, mors sine morte.°® In a macaronic sermon these three hexameters are immediately followed

by an English verse rendering: ,

| Fyre, and colde, and te3eghatyng (7), Drede, worme, and weping,

Bel3yng, stenke, and [hJope for-lorne, Hunger, bandis ar em be-forne, Wantyng euer of goodis se [read sy3te], And mirkenes wyt-oten lyte, Nythe, dede wyt-oten hende— Pis wil manis saule schende.®”

A different kind of verse which often appears in sermons derives from the liturgy, especially from hymns and prayers. The former were of course metrical from the beginning and were frequently rendered into English verses. A favorite in this respect seems to have been the hymn for Good Friday, “‘ Vexilla regis prodeunt,’ of which several different translations have been preserved.®® Another well-known example is the metrical translations of liturgical hymns made by Friar William Herebert in the early

fourteenth century. Though his poems have been preserved as a selfcontained collection without context, scholars have felt sure that they ““were intended for citation (or recitation) during his sermons.” *® Just such

recitation of another liturgical hymn occurs in a Palm Sunday sermon found in a Worcester Cathedral manuscript. Here the hymn 56 Cf. Walther, Initia, 8675 (listing MS Harley 1801 only). 57 Merton College, MS 248, fol. 166v,b. The English poem (Index 797) was

apparently copied by someone not very familiar with the language, though its meaning is clear: “‘Fire and cold and teeth-grating, / Dread, worm, and weeping, / Bellowing [for ‘hammerstrokes’], stench, and lost hope, / Hunger, bonds are before him [or them], / Want forever of God’s sight, / And darkness without light, / Night, death without end, / This will harm man’s soul.” 58 See ‘‘ Unrecorded,”’ No. 45. 5° H. Gneuss, “‘ William Herebert’s Ubersetzungen,” Anglia 78 (1960), 192; and Hymnen und Hymnare im englischen Mittelalter (Tibingen, 1968), pp. 216ff. Earlier: C. Brown, RL XIV, p. xiv.

VERSES IN SERMONS 71 Gloria, laus [et honor tibi sit, rex Christe, redemptor, |

Cui puerile decus prompsit osanna pium]®° is translated into an English poem which has so far gone unnoticed: Blysse and loye and heryng Be to pe, lord kyng, Begger of man-kunde, To wan pe chyldren singgyng Wep here palmes beryng Of py mylde comigg To-day makep munde.®*

In contrast to hymns, Latin liturgical prayers were composed in prose, yet they too appear occasionally in English rhymes. A good case is the Advent antiphon “‘O Sapientia,’”’ which is quoted and translated into two English couplets in a Latin sermon preserved in the same Worcester manuscript.®* The desire to cast prayers in rhyme extended even to Middle English prayers that are not directly translated from Latin sources.®* Verses in either Latin or English, or in both languages, are similarly employed to summarize a story. An exemplum taken from the Life of St. Kentigern, for example, tells of the miraculous finding of the ring belonging to a penitent adulteress.°* The event is said to have been represented in a picture (or badge?) containing a fitulus verse:

| Tunc episcopus quoddam signum fecit fieri, in quo expressit ex una parte cathedram et regem supersedentem quasi furientem; in alia parte uxorem

plorantem et lugentem; et in tercia episcopum devote orantem; et in circuitu hunc versum: Rex furit, hec plorat, sed Christum presul adorat. Vel sic anglice: Thy kyng is wode and fowle doth fare. The qwene wepyth and makyth gret care. The byschop prayth a lityl stownde, And thorwe the grace of owre lady the ryng ys fownd.® 60 Only the first two words are cited in the manuscript, followed by “‘etc.”’ For

. the text of the hymn, see Zhe Sarum Missal, ed. J. Wickham Legg (Oxford, 1916), |

| p. 96.

81 Worcester Cathedral, MS F.126, fol. 30v,a. Begger (line 3) means “buyer,

redeemer.””’

62 **{Jnrecorded,”’ No. 70.

63 See R. H. Robbins, ‘‘Popular Prayers in Middle English Verse,’’ Modern Philology 36 (1939), 337-350.

6 Tubach, No. 4102. 65 Tambeth Palace, MS 78, fols. 220v—221r. Cf. ‘‘ Unrecorded,”’ No. 60.

72 VERSES IN SERMONS At least one verse item in Fasciculus morum, No. 36, sums up in similar fashion the story about Ulfrid who found and lost good fortune with a gift-producing cloak. Another example occurs in the tale about a hermit who, being given a choice among three sins, chose that which seemed to him

the least dangerous (drunkenness), only to find that it quickly leads him to rape and murder. The tale is widespread and occurs in Fasciculus morum as well as in actual sermons.®* In one exempla collection the hermit sums up his experience in two hexameters, Sobrius quando fui, nullus mihi timor inhesit. Ebrius commisi duo scelera pessima mundi,

which are immediately translated: Whil pat i was sobre, sinne ne dede i nowht.

, But in drunkeschipe i dede pe werste pat mihten ben thowht.®” In the last case—as perhaps also in other cases just considered—it might be said that the Latin and English verses do not so much summarize

the story as draw its moral in pithy, almost proverb-like form. Their function is not primarily summarizing and certainly not mnemonic, but rather rhetorical and dramatic. When in one exemplum a dying sinner

exclaims, , I dye for sorowe, I peyne for powht, I brenne in fyyr pat queyncheth nowht,

Me to py peyne synne has browht! °® ,

or elsewhere a damned soul is heard wailing, Alas, alas, pat I was born,

Bope lyf and sowle y am for-lorn! © : we have reached the emotional climax of a story, at which the moral point ~ which it illustrates is being driven home with dramatic force. The anony-

, mous author of Liber exemplorum understood the rhetorical effectiveness of such verses precisely when he recommended that a couplet similar to the last one mentioned be quoted for the purpose that “‘terror audientibus incuciatur.”’”°

fol. 155v. ,

, 86 Tubach, No. 1816. In FM under gluttony. Also in a sermon of MS Bodley 649, 87 Index 4079; MS Harley 2316, fol. 15r. The scribe wrote 3 for p. 68 St. Paul’s Cathedral, MS 8, fol. 121v, Cf. ‘‘ Unrecorded,”’ No. 26.

8° See Chapter IV, Verse 47. |

, 70 Liber exemplorum, ed. A. G. Little, British Society of Franciscan Studies 1

(Aberdeen, 1908), p. 45. ,

VERSES IN SERMONS 73 To achieve such dramatic emphasis seems the main impulse behind a category of verses, in Latin and in the vernacular, which I have elsewhere called “message verses.””* In them a character within a given story told in prose formulates the point of the exemplum, whether it is a damned soul, a grinning devil, a supernatural voice (as in Verse 45), an animal (as the. rooster in Verse 5), or Christ speaking from the Cross (Verses 29-31) or metaphorically knocking at the gate of his beloved for whom He has been sorely wounded in battle (Verse 26). Such “message verses’’ form the vast majority of verse items used in popular preaching, and very often they are

integral parts of the stories in which they appear, which without them would lose their point. A special type of message verse is the inscription said to be found on

rings, tombs, statues, and similar objects. In the previous chapter I discussed a story that contains a set of such inscriptions discovered in an ancient tomb, from Fasciculus morum. Another example is the titulus said to be written above a wall painting in the chamber of an English bishop. In order to remind himself of his humble origins, the bishop was wont to contemplate a picture “in which were painted a cart full of dung, and oxen drawing it to the field, and a small boy goading the oxen, who was followed by a small pig. And above this was written: Undyrstande what thow were and art, For sum tyme thow dreue thy fadyr cart.”’”?

If such message verses were intended to formulate the moral of a story which itself served to illustrate a moral point made in the course of a

sermon, we must also consider a separate type of verse which was to ““prove’’ a point directly, without an intermediate story, namely rhymed proverbs. The use of proverbs in popular sermons from the twelfth century

on is well attested, whether they have been preserved in Latin or in a vernacular language.’? Many proverbs were originally metrical. Others “1 **English Verses,” p. 243.

72 Lambeth Palace, MS 78, fol. 225v. The same motif with different details appears in a story reported in the Lanercost Chronicle under the year 1244 (ed. Stevenson, Edinburgh, 1839, pp. 51-52). Here the verse is:

Wille Gris, Wille Gris, |

Thinche twat you was, and qwat you es!

| See Index and Supplement 4174. The two forms are apparently conflated in MS Gonville and Caius College 351, fol. 97r: see M. R. James, A Descriptive Catalogue | of the Manuscripts in the Library of Gonville and Caius College (Cambridge, 1907), 1:398, and cf. “‘Unrecorded,’’ No. 78. 73 See the older works by Hauréau, Notices et extraits, 2 (Paris, 1891), 96-99 and 278-284; 5 (Paris, 1892), 37, 42, 49, 158; 6 (Paris, 1893), 62, 68-72, and Owst,

74 VERSES IN SERMONS were not, but occasionally got transformed into a hexameter or a rhyming couplet by a gifted preacher. For example, the observation that “the cat would eat fish but would not wet its feet” 1s attested in a Middle English prose form of about 1300 as: Cat lufat visch ac he nele his feth wete.’*

This is immediately translated into the hexameter: | Catus amat piscem sed non vult tangere flumen.”

Conversely, the biblical proverb, “‘Circulus aureus in naribus suis, mulier

pulchra et fatua” (Prov. 11:22), was put into an English couplet at an

early time, |

A gulden begh in a soghes wrot, A faire wyman and a sot,’

and appears thus in one of Felton’s sermons.” _ In addition to this persuasive function—whether the appeal is to the mind or to the heart—, verses were also employed for structural purposes. Rhymed inscriptions in particular often furnish the frame for a longer discussion. An early fifteenth-century sermon on “‘Convertimini,”’ for instance, contains a “picture”? of Sin, which is said to look like “the goddess of hell who, struck by paralysis, trembled continuously. Around her stood three statues. The first was an image of God, the second of the devil, and the third of a man. The main statue [of Sin] offered a charter to each of the surrounding statues. To the image of God it offered this: God wyth hys angelis y haue y-lorne. Alas pe whyle pat y was borne! 78

To the image of the devil it offered this charter: To pe deuyl y owe lowte, Trouage, omage, and fowte.”® Literature, pp. 41ff., and the more recent studies by Louis Mourin, Jean Gerson, prédicateur francais (Brugge, 1952), pp. 382ff., and Ph. B. Roberts, Stephanus de Lingua-Tonante, pp. 54f. See also further discussion below. | 74 Whiting, Proverbs, C.93. 7 Cambridge, Trinity College, MS 1149 (0.2.45), p. 351. For a different example, see the commentary to Verse 4. 76 Whiting, Proverbs, W.486; Supplement 37.3.

7 British Library, MS Additional 22572, fol. 32r. Begh is here updated to ryng. 78 Index 994. C. Brown printed another version in RL XIV, No. 54, but his description, “‘The Sinner’s Lament,’’ obviously makes no sense. Cf. ‘‘ Unrecorded,”’ No. 19.

79 Meaning: ‘‘To the devil I owe loyalty, truage (i.e., tribute), homage, and fealty.”

VERSES IN SERMONS 75 And to the image of man it showed this scroll: _ Schame and scenschyp ys myn ende. Man pat me louep y schal hym scend.’’ ®°

The entire “picture,” here attributed to “‘Tullius,” is then moralized, and the three inscriptions provide the structure for a longer discussion of the effect which sin has on man’s relations to God, the devil, and himself—the standard topics of “‘displicet deo, placet diabolo, nocet proprio subiecto.” The use of a moralized “picture” of an abstraction as a peculiar sermon

device in late medieval preaching and in Fasciculus morum has been discussed earlier (Chapter I, pp. 57~59). Inscriptions or tituli, normally phrased in rhyming verses, are simply part of the attributes contained in such a “picture.” ®! The structural function of verses appears even more clearly and more

frequently in the division of a sermon. To divide a sermon theme, or a term of the theme, or simply any topic, into parts and to name these parts with the help of some kind of rhythm or rhyme was a favorite exercise in medieval preaching as well as in many other intellectual activities. Long before the thirteenth century Latin prose writers employed parallelism of sentence rhythm and occasionally rhyme in the cursus.°* These features reappear in the distinctiones where a concept is divided into several parts or aspects, and the latter are expressed with some rhythmic parallelism and end rhyme.®?

The word play evident in Latin distinctiones appears likewise in their English counterparts, as the following examples show: Ancilla in sacra scriptura accipitur multipliciter. Primo modo pro carna-

liter viventibus, secundo pro invidiosis et detrahentibus, et tercio pro desperatis et finaliter impenitentibus. Cuius filii dicuntur: 89 Cambridge University Library, MS Kk.IV.24, fol. 187r. The context is in Latin, the verses are in English only.

81 Other examples of ‘“‘pictures’’ with inscriptions in English verse are: **Humility’’ in MS Bod. lat. theol. d.1 (see ‘“‘ Unrecorded,”’ No. 23); “‘ Love” in MS Bodl. 649 (see ibid., No. 36); “‘Death’’ in Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, MS 423 (see ibid., No. 24); ‘“‘Death”’ in MS Harley 2316 (index 673). See further the comments _

on tituli by Douglas Gray, Themes and Images in the Medieval English Religious Lyric , (London, 1972), pp. 45ff., with notes. . 82 For the use of rhyme in medieval Latin prose, see Karl Polheim, Die lateinische

Reimprosa (Berlin, 1925; second edition, 1963). Its use in sermons especially is , discussed on pp. 383-392 and 455-459. 83 On the distinctio see B. Smalley, The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages, 2nd

ed. (Oxford, 1952), pp. 246ff., with older literature; and J. B. Allen, The Friar as Critic (Nashville, Tennessee, 1971), pp. 32-33, 70-73, and 103-108.

76 VERSES IN SERMONS Fle3ly [fleshly] folewerys pat worchyn afftur wyl. Enuyous bakbyterys pat demen euer yl. Vngracius despayre[r]s her penawnse to ful-fyl.**

| Riches pat faylen in tyme of ned. Quidam ponunt confortacionem suam in J Power Pat ys wycked yn dede. Triste of goodus reward and hus mede.®°

, It is easy to see how such distinctiones can be used in a sermon: they are cited at the point where the formal division or subdivision is to be given, and the individual lines then reappear a second time or more often

when the respective member of the division is developed in the course of the sermon. What interests us here is the evident preference in popular sermons from the thirteenth through the fifteenth century for metrical divisions. The fashion set in Latin was soon imitated in vernacular preaching. In the following I shall offer a number of examples which display a variety of metrical forms employed in English verses of this kind, as well as different relations to the Latin context and to the Latin sermon

divisions on which they are based. |

In the first example, the two terms of the theme (from II Kings 19:5) are explained or applied in what amounts to a rough English couplet: In principio dico sicut dixi: Surge et comede. In quibus verbis ecce duo. Primo: A comawndement of cryst pat 3e schold ful-fille,

cum dicitur surge, suple de peccato tuo. Secundo: A reseyuyng of heuene-fode to strygth pe to with-stonde pe fyndis wille, cum dicitur comede, it est, recipe venerabile sacramentum altaris.®®

In the development, the English lines reappear at the appropriate places. Often a theme is divided into three parts. Examples of rhyming lines

in English are:

Queritur quis fidelis inveniatur. Ad Cor. 4 [I Cor. 4:2]. Reverendissimi: Prout docet scriptura, triplici questione [for racione?] queritur questio: 84 Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, MS 392, fol. 263r. The arrangement of

this and the following divisions into lines is my own. 85 MS Harley 655, fol. 290v. The manuscript contains many such distinctiones. 86 MS Harley 331, fol. 22r.

VERSES IN SERMONS 77 Primo, for to know thyng pat is spedful. 2°, for to echchew thyng pat is synfull. Et 3°, for to wytte thyng pat is wondurfull.®"

A sermon outline for the Annunciation in John Dygoun’s notebook gives the following “processus sermonis”’: By bat tokyn pat sche conseuyd goddys sone by hyre mylde mode. By pat tokyn pat sche kepte hyre fote drye yn pe rennyng flode. By pat tokyn pat whan alle me[n] fule, scho sadly stode.®*®

The long lines that appear in some of the preceding examples are elsewhere paralleled by shorter ones with a stronger rhythmic beat or swing to them. The theme “‘Ecce nunc tempus acceptabile”’ (II Cor. 6:2), for instance, is divided into: Pe loren is founden, Pe strong is bounden, A si3t is cried, A [mede] is tried.®°

_ Latin, |

The same pattern of two short couplets whose lines are all syntactically identical appears in another manuscript. Here a sermon on the theme — “Ortum est bellum satis durum” (II Kings 2:17) announces its division in Vexilla denudantur, acies ordinantur, partes proclamantur, bellatores examinantur,

which is immediately translated as: Baneres beth displayd, Hostes beth arayd, Partys byth ascryed, And werryou[r]s beth y-tryed.°°

A quatrain with apparently alternate rhyme occurs in another manuscript, where a sermon on “‘Sedet a dextris dei”? (Mark 16:19) has the division: Isto die manifeste fuit toti mundo declaratum: 87 MS Bodl. 857, fol. 155r. 88 Oxford, Magdalen College, MS 93, fol. 141r. 89 Oxford, Merton College, MS 248, fol. 132v,a. For mede (‘‘reward,” merces) the division reads maide, but the correct form appears later in the sermon (fol. 133r,b). °° Cambridge, University Library, MS Kk.IV.24, fol. 135v,a.

78 VERSES IN SERMONS | Pat pe 3ate is open,

Pe kyng is comen,

Pe writte is broken, , Pe sesyn ys nommen.°®* , , , The quoted examples might give the impression that the makers of such metrical divisions were content with an almost excessive parallelism of their lines only slightly relieved by some change in the end rhyme. In

actuality, even without examining the entire corpus of English sermon divisions one can state that the surviving manuscripts offer material that speaks for a great variety, for experimentation, even for individuality in the use of such verse forms. I offer a few final examples to illustrate this observation. First, a sermon on the feast of St. Margaret presents the following division in Latin and in English: Nam per aquam intelligo fluxum mundialis vanitatis,

per ignem intelligo luxum carnalis voluptatis, ,

per draconem versutum hostem invisibilem,

| per gladium bisacutum mortem invincibilem. Et signant spiritualiter Anglice: Falsehede of pe world, Wrechedhede of pe flesh, Pe wykkednesse of pe qued, And pe hardnesse of the ded.°?

Here the highly refined artistry of the Latin lines, with their cursus, end rhyme, and intriguing manifold internal rhyme, is almost totally lost in the English quatrain, although the translator has not been insensitive to the metrical fireworks of his model, as his shift from -hede to -nesse in the

interior of the two couplets demonstrates. A quite different situation appears in a sermon on the Eucharist, from a different manuscript. Instead of the rigid parallelism of the lines with some delightful minimal changes observed in the preceding example, we here find a major metrical change between the two Latin couplets, a change imitated in English with a remarkable sense of freedom: Epulari. Debetis scire quod epulacio corporis Christi quadruplex bonum facit, quia—

, Dat roboris facultatem, ,

et corporis sanitatem; prebet cecucientibus veram illuminacionem, et esurientibus plenam refeccionem (vel perfectam replecionem). ®1 St. Paul’s Cathedral, MS 8, fol. 199r. °2 Oxford, Merton College, MS 248, fol. 135r,a. The English quatrain is marked

**divisio in anglico,”’ in the margin. .

VERSES IN SERMONS 79

Anglice: Hetyng of Cristys body— | 7

| , and helyd man; | , and fyllit man of ryth.°? strenkthid man,

yth helpyt man hys sith,

The same mixture of dependence on and freedom from the pattern of the Latin division is met in my two final examples. A sermon on ‘“‘ Vocati estis”’ (I Peter 2:21) eventually comes to the following division: Pro processu sermonis debetis scire quod sicut quatuor modis sumus vocati, ita ad quatuor summus vocati, videlicet: Ad stadium pugne fortioris, ad domum scole. melioris, ad scannum™ regis certioris, ad aulam mense lautioris. To a feld of daynty® fy3tyng, To a scole of holy techyng,

, To a dome dredful, , And toa mele blesful.°° In the English rendering the monotony of the four Latin lines is broken not only by a change in the end rhyme, but also—and more notably—by

a shift from lines of three to lines of two stresses. This stanza pattern occurs elsewhere in this manuscript and may well be the mark of an individual preacher. I close with an example in which four monorhyme Latin lines have been transformed into an English couplet of four-stress

lines—the verse form which is by far the most common in English verses | found in sermons: Dic ut lapides isti panes fiant [Matth. 4:3]. ... Lapides possunt designari peccatores, nam lapides sunt— Duri ad frangendum, graves ad deserviendum, frigidi ad tangendum,

, et quidam sordidi ad videndum.

In anglico sic: — :

°3 Cambridge, Gonville and Caius College, MS 359, fol. 32r.

84 Scannum = ‘‘bench”’ (of a judge). , 85 Perhaps for doughty?

°6 Cambridge University Library, MS Kk.IV.24, fol. 227v,a.

80 VERSES IN SERMONS Stones bep harde and heuye in wy3t, He bep colde and foule-som in si3t.9”

Besides the division or partitio, another part of the sermon which frequently elicited verses is the sermon theme. We have ample evidence that in popular medieval preaching the biblical text on which the sermon

was based, after being quoted in Latin, was commonly rendered in vernacular verses.°® The preference of a metrical over a prose rendition can

be seen in a sermon collection that is full of such versified themes. One sermon here renders the biblical text first in English prose, then immedi-

ately in verse: , |

Qui navigat mare, enarrat pericula [Eccli. 43:26]. Anglice: Qwo sailet opon —

pe see may oft telle of perlys. Vel sic: , Vr maryner pat oftyn hat sailid pe see Hath clepid vs to tell vs qwer perelis be.°°

Again, such renditions show much variety in form and skill. Sometimes the result is literal and clumsy, producing short lines, Quocumque die comederitis ex eo, eritis sicut dii [Gen. 3:5]. In anglico: Qwat day 3e etyn of pis, 3e schole ben as god is [for goddis?],?°°

or longer ones: Convertimini ad me in toto corde vestro, Joel 2 [:12]. Anglice: With all 30ur herte and 3oure mynde

, Turnyth a3en to me ere 3oure lyffys ende.?° But faithfulness to the biblical text can also produce the smooth four-stress

couplet that seems to have been the preferred form in popular sermons:

| Sperate in deo quia adiutor noster est, Ps. 51 [1.e., 61:9]. ,

3216. ,

Tryste in gode, bope more and les, For houre helper soply he is.1°?

®7 Oxford, Merton College, MS 248, fol. 78v,a. The English couplet is Index

98 For the same practice in French, see the sermons by Pierre d’Ailly (preached ,

in the 1380s), edited by Edith Brayer, Notices et Extraits des manuscrits de la Biblio-

théque Nationale et autres bibliothéques . . . 43 (1965), 248-343. °° MS Bod. 649, fol. 128v. None of this and the following examples (notes 99 to 108) is listed in Index or Supplement.

100 MS Bod. lat. theol. d.1, fol. 70r. :

101 fol. 165r. 102 MSTbid., Bodl. 857, fol. 171r. ,a ,

VERSES IN SERMONS 81 To achieve this result, the biblical text normally had to be somewhat expanded. I quote two more cases that show a rather simple expansion in order to meet the metrical exigencies: Fortis armatus custodit atrium. Luc. 11 [:21]. Anglice: A my3ti werrour and a wy3t Kepes his halle armed bri3t.*°

Coruit in platea veritas: Thema in die parassaues. Ysa. 59 [:14]. Anglice:

In pe hye strete of pe tounne Sothenesse ys falle a-downe.1%*

But often the Latin material is expanded so as to include, in the English verses, the moral application or interpretation of the biblical text. In the following example the biblical text—‘‘ Now is the day of salvation ’’—is translated in the second line, while the first explains why this is the day of salvation: Nunc dies salutis. 2* ad Corinthios, 6[:2]. Anglice: Alle seke and woful come to weele, Now is a day of gostle hele.*°°

The same pattern of glossing expansion recurs elsewhere in this manu-

script, of which one more example will suffice: | Assumpsit eum in civitatem. Matt. 4[:5].... Anglice: He so mercy doth for goddis sake Into pe cite of mercy he schall be take.?°°

It should be added that verse renderings of biblical quotations occur of course outside the sermon theme as well, although less often. Certain favorite passages were even translated more than once?®’ and are found very frequently. Verse translations may occur wherever biblical passages are quoted as proof texts in the course of a sermon. An Easter sermon preached at Lynn in 1431, for example, which contains many English verses of all kinds, presents a number of biblical personages who witnessed

that Christ was the lamb offered for mankind. Thus, Isaiah prophesied: Quasi agnus coram tondente obmutescet et non aperiet os suum (Is. 53:7),

which is immediately Englished as: 103 MS Bodl. 649, fol. 34r.

104 Oxford, Trinity College, MS 42, fol. 65r. , 105 MS Bodl. 649, fol. Ir.

108 Thid., fol. 8r. | ,

107 See the discussion of multiple translation below, pp. 89-90. , ,

82 VERSES IN SERMONS

, Stille Iam qwan man me dredyth, As pe lomb qwan man hym scheryth. The remaining witnesses are similarly treated. Jeremias: Agnus mansuetus qui portatur ad victimam (Jer. 11:19): Meke is be lomb pat not away ran, But forth was born to suffre deth for man.

‘Ezechiel: Agnum eiusdem agni [anni] immaculatum faciet holocaustum (Ez. 46:13):

, He schall in sacrify3sse offeryn here A ryte qwyth lombe al of a 3ere.

John the Baptist: Ecce agnus dei qui tollit peccata mundi (John 1:29):

| Pe holy lomb se vel loo pou be-forn. , Pe werdys synnes a-wey be born. Peter: Non corruptibili auro vel argento redempti estis de vestra vana conversacione, sed precioso sanguine agni incontaminati (1 Pet. 1:19): 3e ne arn not bowt wyth werdly good,

But wyth be holy lomb is blod. ;

John the Evangelist: Ecce in medio troni et in medio quatuor animalium agnum stantem quasi occisum (Rev. 5:6): Lo pe lomb in trone stondande

a Be-twene iiij bestis pat is deyande.*°® The richness and vitality of verses quoted by medieval preachers as well as their variety, which is so much greater than Pfander’s analysis suggested, can be best appreciated by scanning a late fourteenth-century sermon which contains examples of nearly all the types of verses that have been discerned. The sermon, preserved at Worcester Cathedral,1°® is entirely in Latin except for the English verses. Its theme is ‘* Benedictus qui venit, etc.” (Matth. 21:9), from the gospel for the First Sunday in Advent. After an introduction, the theme is elaborately divided into what amounts to twice four considerations: Christ comes as a knight, a teacher, a physician, and a judge; and in each case we must ask who comes, to whom, by what way, and for what purpose. The latter fourfold division, however, is not followed with full rigor; rather, the preacher tends to

108 MS Bodl. lat. theol. d.1, fols. 169r-170r. | 109 Worcester Cathedral, MS F.126, fols. 27r,a—28r,a. For some further remarks

on the manuscript, see Wenzel, ““The Moor Maiden—A Contemporary View,”

Speculum 49 (1974), 70-71. -

VERSES IN SERMONS 83 | discuss each main part in only two sections, the second mostly dealing with the way by which the knight, teacher, etc., comes. This is reflected not only

in the actual development of the two main parts (on “knight” and *teacher”’; the other two main parts are not developed), but shows already in the initial division. In any case, the divisions, announced in Latin, are immediately translated into English:11° Sed hic oportet scire quattuor: Primo quis venit, 2° ad quos venit, 3° per quam viam venit, 4° propter quid venit. Et hic advertendum est quod dici potest sic quod quidam miles strenuissimus venit ad inpotentes pro eis

pugnaturus. Quidam doctor discretissimus venit ad ignorantes eos -informaturus. Quidam medicus peritissimus venit ad infirmatos eos visitaturus et sanaturus. Quidam iudex iustissimus venit ad causatos iusticiam ab iniusticia discreturus. Anglice potest sic dici quod ille qui venit Anglice est:

, A knyht of pris to ffyth for man. A Clerk ful wyse and techyn he can. A scley leche pat brynge3 oure hele. A streyt domes-man oure met to dele.

Et ex istis scietis quis venit et propter quid venit. Sed serte ipse venit ad inpotentes per viam orientalem planam, non spinosam; ad ignorantes per viam meridionalem lucidam, non tenebrosam; ad infirmatos per viam ecclesie [read: occidentalem] mundam, non luto-

sam; et ad causatos per viam aquilonarem rectam, non tortuosam. Anglice sic: Pe knith comep of pe est by way of pouerte and meknesse, to helpen hem pat ben onmythy. A clerk comet oute of pe soup by wey of loue and sopnesse, to techen hem pat bet vnwytty. A leche comep oute of pe west by wey of mercy, to hem pat ben sykned sore. A iustyse comep oute of pe north by wey of ry3ht, to hem pat ben pledid hym by-fore. Et ex istis sciri potest ad quid venit et per quam viam venit.

Pe furste wey is pleyn and noth porny. Pat oper is bry3th and nowt pestrui. Pe prydde is clene and vnfenny. Pe ferthe is euene and vnhully.*"" _ 110 Notice that the four questions—who, to whom, by which way, and for what— are distributed differently in the two Latin and the three English divisions, although all the verbal material appears in each language, The development, correspondingly, does not follow a rigidly schematic and repetitive pattern.

111 Fo], 27r,a. The English lines are not listed in Index/Supplement. ,

84 VERSES IN SERMONS The first part is then developed at length, with the preacher’s attention

focussing, first on Christ’s coming as a strong knight in battle, and secondly on his coming to fight for the weak. In the latter section much is said on how deeply human nature is weakened by sin, and various evils of the time are chastised, among which lechery is one: Quot pericula, quot mala venerunt de istis fatuis amoribus! Vix sciunt homines aliquid loqui vel cogitare nisi una pars sit de feditate luxurie. Omnes enim cantus et omnia solacia hominum sunt de amore fatuo amasiarum. Numquam enim, quod sciam, audivi cantum de amore bono qui deberet esse inter virum et uxorem preter unum, et adhuc iste includit

fatuum amorem, et est iste cantus Anglice: ,

Euereches kokewoldes dore stondep anyne, etc.1? | Next appears an exemplum to show that evil desires alone, even when

not carried out, draw divine punishment. In Rome a man and a woman had set a date for a secret meeting in a ruined temple, but were both strangled by a demon (Dyanus). Later their heads were found hung up by the hair, with a biblical inscription on their foreheads: Deficit gaudium [text: granum] cordis nostri, versus est in luctum chorus noster, cecidit corona capitis nostri. Ve nobis, quia peccavimus [Lam. 5:15-

| 16]. Anglice sic: ,

Oure gladnesse of herte ys awent, To sorwe and wo oure murpe is went, Pe garlaund of blisse is fallen ous fro, Alas, for oure sennes we han pis wo.1?3

Towards the end of the first main part, the preacher turns to the way by which Christ came to the weak. This way lies in the east, 1s straight and without thorns, and signifies Christ’s humility and poverty. His humility, shown especially in the Passion, is the subject of another biblical quotation,

English verse: |

this time a question, which together with its answer is translated into Et ideo non inmerito queritur ydem Ysaias: Quis est iste qui venit de Edoun

[sic] tinctis vestibus de Bosra? [Is. 63:1]. Anglice: Wat ys he pat comep so bryth Wyt blody clopes al bydith? Et responderi certe poterit quod venit filius hominis querere salvum facere

quod perierat {Luke 19:10], vel sic: ; 112 Fol. 27v,a.

_ 418 [bidem. Cf. “‘Unrecorded,”’ No. 49. |

VERSES IN SERMONS 85

, He ys god ful of myth | Pat man by-cam for vs to ffyth. For oure sennes he was ded And per-for ys hys robe so red.12*

This is immediately followed by the collect for the Second Sunday of _ Advent, which is then likewise rendered in English verse: Et ideo: “‘Excita, Domine, corda nostra ad preparandam Unigeniti tui viam, ut per eius adventum purificati tibi mente servire mereamur.”’

Anglice sic: |

Egge oure hertes, lord of myth, Pi sonys weyis so to dyth,

Pat we mowen, wen he comep,

Wyp worpi work hem wel-comin.'+5 ,

The second main part of the sermon follows, dealing with Christ’s coming as a teacher to instruct the ignorant. Among the various kinds of ignorance from which all mankind suffers, uncertainty about the hour of death is singled out for a Latin memory verse with English translation: Nunc modo nec sciunt quando morientur nec quo devenient post mortem, sicud dicit quidam metrice sic:

Sunt tria ve que mestificant me nocte dieque: Hinc quia migro, nescio quando, devenio quo. Anglice:

Pre weyis per ben Pat me deryen Bop day and nyth:

| Pat y schal henne, Bote y ne wot wenne,

No wer y schal alyth.+?6

The topic of ignorance leads the preacher to discuss three evil teachers —World, Flesh and Devil—, and after describing the school of the last he tells a story in which demons come to fetch the soul of a powerful nobleman named Gay, around whose death-bed they perform a dance (chorea)

with Latin words, which again are translated.11” The nobleman then is ordered to join their song, and he exclaims: 114 Fol. 27v,b. Cf. *‘ Unrecorded,” No. 82, and Index 3907. 115 Thidem. ‘“‘ Unrecorded,” No. 12.

. 116 Fo]. 27v,b. For other versions of this commonplace verse, see below, note 138.

117 See my discussion of the exemplum, with texts, in ‘‘The ‘Gay’ Carol and Exemplum,” Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 77 (1976), 85-91.

86 VERSES IN SERMONS | , , Heu, heu, prodolor, sicud iudicavi iudicor. Anglice:

Alas, alas, pat I was i-borne, For dome wyp dome I am for-lorne.*?®

Finally, the sermon pleads for man’s turning to the true magister, who teaches us above all charity, and it ends with the Advent antiphon, _ **O Sapiencia, que ex ore altissimi,”’ etc. Anglice sic:

Pu wysdom pat crepedest out of godes moupbe, Pat rechest frame est to west, fram norp to soup, Pat all pynges madest thorow py myth,

Come to tech vs pe wey of flyth.**9 ,

Thus, a single sermon utilizes vernacular verses for the sermon division, for several biblical quotations, for two liturgical prayers, and for

a variety of summarizing, mnemonic, and dramatic purposes. Most of them are translated from Latin, but at least one, unfortunately only alluded to and not quoted in full, comes from a native English song.

The peculiar phenomenon of vernacular English verses appearing - thus frequently in the midst of Latin sermons raises the question of what language these sermons were in fact preached in—Latin or English? Evidence for an answer is, of course, almost entirely limited to the sermon texts themselves that have been preserved. It is commonly held that these sermon texts may have been composed and written down before they were delivered, or they may have been written down after delivery either by the preacher himself or by a reportator.**° In either case, whatever the language of their oral delivery, they would normally have been committed to parchment or paper in Latin. If addressed to laymen, they would then have been preached in the vernacular; if addressed to clerics, in Latin. This view was

stated nearly a century ago by the great student of preaching in medieval | France, Albert Lecoy de la Marche,?*! and has been accepted for medieval England by G. R. Owst!?? and others. The current authority on medieval

sermons, J. B. Schneyer, simply declares that ‘“‘discussions about the language of preaching... have long since been settled.”’*?8 118 See ibidem; and Chapter IV, Verse 35. 119 Fol. 28r,a. Printed in ‘‘ Unrecorded,’’? No. 70. 120 The basic discussion of the problem and the process of reportatio is still that by A. Lecoy de la Marche, La Chaire frangqise au moyen dge, specialement au XIII? siécle, d’aprés les manuscrits contemporains, 2nd ed. (Paris, 1886), pp. 330-331. 121 Tbid., pp. 233-269. See also Roberts, Stephanus de Lingua-Tonante, pp. 52-56.

| 122, Qwst, Preaching, pp. 223ff. 123 J. B. Schneyer, Geschichte der katholischen Predigt (Freiburg, 1969), p. 128.

VERSES IN SERMONS _ 87 The presence of English verses in a Latin sermon would, therefore, indicate that this sermon was delivered, or at least intended to be delivered, in English. To be sure, one must consider the kind of English verses that

are present; an occasional English proverb alone does not prove that the

sermon was not preached in Latin. University preachers at Paris and Oxford, when preparing their students for their future pastoral work, could easily have slipped a native proverb or song into their otherwise Latin sermons. But when dramatic message verses or the divisions or even the sermon theme itself appear in English verses, there can hardly be any doubt that the entire sermon was intended for delivery in the vernacular. Yet the whole question concerning sermon language and audience may be

more complex than existing studies have allowed it to be, and an actual mixture of languages in one and the same sermon must not be ruled out altogether. A macaronic sermon of the fifteenth century, for instance, is basically in Latin with occasional words and phrases in English which form integral parts of the sentence structure. The preacher displays a certain amount of “scientific”? knowledge which, together with the general tone of the sermon, would suggest a learned, 1.e., clerical, audience. Yet in

all probability the sermon was preached in English, for at one point the

- preacher says: ‘“‘Dixi in latino quod sunt diversa dicta de altitudine nubium....” 2+ Evidently the preacher was speaking in English but quoted his scientific authorities in Latin.‘2° How much the two languages intermingled in this and similar sermons—learned as well as popular—, and how the preference of the vernacular over Latin may have increased in general during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries are, I believe, still open questions. Whatever the language actually used in the pulpit, the English verses which form the subject of this study have been preserved in sermons and handbooks written in Latin. Yet their indebtedness to the Latin language goes much further. The examples I have given earlier show that many

English verses are more or less direct translations of Latin material, whether in prose or verse. To be sure, the extant manuscripts contain some verses that were entirely of vernacular origin. Those are mostly proverbs

or proverbial sayings, usually quoted in their original language and occasionally rendered into Latin, in a way that often stands out by its 124 Fol. 245r,a. I have summarized the sermon in “‘ Chaucer and the Language of

Contemporary Preaching,” Studies in Philology 73 (1976), 158-160. , 125 The quotations are from Albumasar, Ptolemy, Pliny, and Bacon. The sermon divisions are mostly in English and have end rhyme; one biblical quotation is translated into an English couplet.

88 | VERSES IN SERMONS clumsiness.!2° Yet the bulk of the English verses are clearly the result of translation from Latin. This is immediately obvious in the case of verses

that summarize and formulate material to be memorized (the Creed, qualities of confession, etc.), that render liturgical prayers and hymns, or

that present the sermon theme or divisions. But verse summaries of a story and message verses of various types are just as heavily indebted to Latin models and sources. There was a firm and enormously rich tradition

in medieval preaching to create and use such verses in Latin. Of this productivity the material collected in Hans Walther’s Proverbia sententiaeque medii aevi latini furnishes overwhelming proof, and this voluminous

collection has by no means gathered up all Latin verses preserved in sermon manuscripts. We must think of the clerics and preachers of the high Middle Ages as immensely eager to formulate an observation or the | gist of a story in a verse that is often pithy, witty, and even punning. Like

| orators at any age—religious, political, or commercial—, they strove for punch lines in verse.

Although Fasciculus morum tells one story which contains a scene depicting how such a verse came into being, as an impromptu utterance of two Parisian lawyers,'*” unfortunately very few verses of this kind give us any hint as to their authorship and approximate time of composition. Yet the urge to produce some well-turned hexameters ran strong, and it laid

hold of stories not only of recent oral vintage but also of long literary standing. For example, the tale of an unjust judge who is flayed by Cambyses, told in Valertus Maximus’s collection of Facta et dicta memorabilia,!2® reappears in several exempla collections of the late thirteenth and

early fourteenth centuries.‘*° At the same time the story has become embellished with the following message verses expressing Cambyses’s warning to the judge’s son: Sede sedens ista, itudex, inflexibilis sta. A manibus reseces munus, ab aure preces.

126 See Lecoy de la Marche, Chaire, p. 251. The clumsiness of such Latin renditions can also be easily studied in the proverb collection by A. C. Friend, “‘ The Proverbs of Serlo of Wilton,’ Mediaeval Studies 16 (1954), 179-218. 127 See Chapter IV, Verse 34; cf. ‘‘English Verses,”’ p. 244.

128 VT, 3, ext. 3; ed. Karl Kempf (Leipzig, 1888), p. 291. The story is from

Herodotus, Historiae, V,25. |

129 See Tubach, No. 2859. For a more complete list, see Johannes Bolte’s

edition of Johannes Pauli, Schimpf und Ernst (Berlin, 1924; repr. 1972), 2:288-289, who also indicates several illustrations of the tale. Further illustrations in F. Saxl, “‘A Spiritual Encyclopaedia of the Later Middle Ages,’’ Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institute 5 (1942), 101 and pl. 24a. The tale is frequently attributed to

**Helinandus, lib. 15.” |

| : VERSES IN SERMONS 89 Sit tibi lucerna sedes pellisque paterna, _

| Qua resides natus pro patre sponte datus.?°° These lines appear with the story in Holcot, Bromyard, Ranulph Higden, Fasciculus morum (in a variant form), and elsewhere. It is absolutely

typical that the lines should, sooner or later, have been put into English as well: Trevisa’s translation of Higden’s Polychronicon (1387) renders them—rather slavishly—into four English couplets. The urge to versify, thus, spilled over into the vernacular languages, whether in the form of direct translation or through imitation of Latin verses. The extent of their influence on Middle English was indeed wide. For example, the central portion of John Grimestone’s notebook (folios 51-100, approximately one third of the work) contains 67 English verse items (plus one repeated). Of these, 40 are translations of Latin texts which are quoted, while of the remaining 27 another four or five pieces certainly

are inspired by Latin models.'®? The extent of this indebtedness is not always fully recognized. One English couplet found in Fasciculus morum, for instance— Pat ys mery to be a wyfe. Dye y woll and lese my lyfe (Verse 53)— was once included in a discussion of “‘ popular poetry” and called “‘tantaliz-

ing,” whereas in fact it is a verbatim translation of a learned hexameter

found in Seneca’s Declamationes.'** |

On the other hand, such versifying in English carried with it a good deal of the vitality it had in Latin. The continuing zest to make verses is, I believe, best revealed in the existence of multiple translations of the same Latin model. As Rosemary Woolf has shown, certain favorite meditative 130 Thus in Holcot, In Sapientiam, lectio 85 (fol. 130v,a). Walther lists the verses in Initia, 17466, and Proverbia, 27839, which include Ranulph Higden’s Polychronicon

form: ,

and John de Fordun’s Scotichronicon (written probably in the 1380s). Additional occurrences, besides Holcot, in Bromyard, ‘‘Iudices,” I.[X, § 36 (fol. 261r,a; three lines only), and in Fasciculus morum, V, 15 (R, fol. 106v), in the following variant Sistens in cathedra itustus iudex stabilis sta. Sint tibi lucerna lex, ius, pellisque paterna. A manibus recedes munus, ab aure preces. 131 Rd, Churchill Babington and J. R. Lumby, Rolls Series 41 (London, 18651886), 3:174 and 175. The English verses also appear in MS Lansdowne 210, which

contains excerpts from Polychronicon; cf. Index 1811. ,

132 Cf, E. Wilson, Grimestone, Nos. 74-141. In many instances Wilson offers only a partial reproduction of the Latin source text found in the manuscript. 183 Robbins, SL, p. xxxix. The context of the verse quotes Seneca.

90 VERSES IN SERMONS , passages in Latin were again and again translated into English verse and expanded into longer lyrics.18* The same is true of the humbler tags used in preaching. A good case is Lamentations 5:15-16: “*Defecit gaudium cordis nostri: versus est in luctum chorus noster. Cecidit corona capitis nostri: Vae nobis, quia peccavimus.” One translation, in two couplets

(Index 221), appears in Grimestone’s notebook (twice), in a Worcester , sermon, in a version of Convertimini, and in a miscellany (Harley 7322).1°°

The same Worcester manuscript contains a different translation, also in two couplets, which again is also found elsewhere.*?® The already men-

tioned miscellany, Harley 7322, contains a third translation in three

| couplets (index 3311). A fourth translation, in one quatrain, appears in Wimbledon’s sermon “ Redde rationem”’ (Index 3397); and a fifth, also in one quatrain, appears elsewhere (Index 3398). Translations of Latin verses

show the same vitality. The first stanza of the hymn “Vexilla regis prodeunt,” frequently quoted in Good Friday sermons, has been found in at least six different Middle English verse translations.15” Similarly, the mnemonic verses on the “Three Sorrowful Things ’’— Sunt tria ve que mestificant me nocte dieque, etc.—

| which I quoted from a Worcester sermon, have been preserved in at least eight different Middle English verse renderings of various metrical forms, including one by John Grimestone.!*8

How widespread was the practice of using English verses in preaching | as it is revealed by the extant manuscripts? In the present chapter I have utilized some fifty manuscripts of sermons or materia praedicabilis which contain English verses.'®® Of these, nineteen (excluding Fasciculus morum) 1384 The English Religious Lyric in the Middle Ages (Oxford, 1968), passim. Such

meditative passages are ‘“‘Candet nudatum pectus,”’ ‘‘O vos omnes qui transitis per viam’”’ (Lam. 1:12), “‘Memorare novissima tua’”’ (Eccl. 7:40), etc.

135 See ‘* Unrecorded,”’ No. 41. , 186 Tbhid., No. 49.

*°7 Tbid., Nos. 45 and 50; and Index 2833 (Lydgate ?), 3403, 3404, 3405 (Herebert).

*88 The eight different versions are: Index 695, 1615, 3711, 3712, 3713, 3969; Supplement 3199.5; and the version in Worcester Cathedral MS F. 126, printed above,

p. 85. Three of these versions are accompanied by the Latin source, for which see below, Chapter III, note 48.

, *89 T have excluded from consideration and from this count the type of manuscript labeled “‘Friar Miscellancy’’ by R. H. Robbins (SZ, pp. xvii f.), i.e., such poetic “‘anthologies’’ as Digby 86, Trinity College Cambridge 323, Harley 2253, the Kildare MS (Harley 913), and British Library Additional 46919 with Friar Herebert’s hymns. Although some of their material was evidently used in preaching, the precise position and role of their poems in a sermon are not clear from the context. The same

VERSES IN SERMONS _ 91 - are major texts, in so far as each offers a significant number (at least half a dozen or more) of English verses of usually more than one type. They are, in roughly chronological order:

(1) Oxford, Merton College MS 248. Sermons collected by Bishop John Sheppey, OSB, during his stay at Oxford University (master in 1332).

A number of sermons bear the names of Oxford preachers, including several Dominicans and Franciscans.+*° (2) Oxford, New College MS 92. Several series of sermons collected or actually made (fols. 139-187) by John Sheppey, OSB. His own sermons are dated 1336-1354 and seem to be in his hand.**!

(3) London, British Library, MS Harley 2316. Second half of the fourteenth century. A theological miscellany containing exempla, legends, _ fables, and miracles of the Virgin. Several stories refer to Dominicans.**?

(4) London, British Library, MS Harley 7322. Second half of the fourteenth century. A theological miscellany containing sermons, sermon

outlines, and exempla.'*% ; (5) Edinburgh, Advocates Library, MS 18.7.21. Theological common-

places in alphabetical order, written by Friar John of Grimestone in 1372. Grimestone was apparently a Franciscan./**

(6) Worcester, Cathedral Library, MS F. 126. Several series of sermons and other theological matter, written in hands of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. At least parts belonged to Worcester Cathedral in

the fifteenth century (fol. 69r). |

(7) Cambridge, University Library, MS I1.111.8. About 1400. Collection of sermons and sermon materials.?*° is true of later fifteenth-century ‘‘Commonplace-Books”’ (Robbins, ibid., pp. xxvii-

xxx). In contrast, the manuscripts here dealt with collect miscellaneous sermon material, whether actual sermons or sermon outlines, exempla, and such (cf. Robbins, ibid., pp. xviii f.).

140 See G. Mifsud, ““John Sheppey, Bishop of Rochester, as Preacher and Collector of Sermons,”’ B. Litt. thesis, Oxford, 1953; Emden, A Biographical Register

... Oxford, p. 278. 141 Mifsud, chapters IV and V. 142 For some descriptive notes, see H. L. D. Ward, Catalogue of Romances in the Department of Manuscripts in the British Museum, 2 (London, 1893), pp. 307 and 677;

Herbert, Catalogue, pp. 573ff. ,

143 Cf. Herbert, Catalogue, pp. 166ff. A good impression of the variety of

English verses can be gained from C. Brown, A Register of Middle English Religious Verse (Oxford, 1920), 1:352ff. 144 Brown, RL XIV, pp. xvi-xix; Wilson, Grimestone. 145 Peter C. Erb, ‘‘ Vernacular Material for Preaching in MS Cambridge University Library Ii.IIJ.8,"’ Mediaeval Studies 33 (1971), 63-84; see also his dissertation

92 VERSES IN SERMONS (8) London, St. Paul’s Cathedral, MS 8. Three different manuscripts containing sermons and theological matters, written in the fourteenth and very early fifteenth centuries, possibly at the convent of Austin friars at

| Droitwich.!*®

(9) Cambridge, Pembroke College, MS 257. Sermons, early fifteenth

century. ,

(10) Cambridge, Jesus College, MS 13, art. 6. Sermons. The whole volume, which James says is probably from Durham, contains sermons. Two of them in art. 2 are for St. Francis.**” (11) Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Laud misc. 77. Sermones dominicales by John Waldeby. Early fifteenth century. Many English divisions, mostly in lower margin, but some items also in the text. Waldeby was an Austin friar at Lincoln, Oxford, and York, and died soon after 1372. — (12) Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS 649. Sermons by John Swetstock,

given between 1417 and 1421.1*® | (13) Cambridge, University Library, MS Kk.IV.24. Fifteenth century.

: *“‘Exhortaciones fratris Johannis de bromiard de ordine fratrum predicatorum”’ (fols. 1-114v and tables) and other sermons. Only the latter use English verses, and in plenty.

(14) Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS lat. theol. d.1. Sermons, written and perhaps preached by Nicholas Phillip, OFM, or perhaps rather by

William Melton, OFM, in the 1430s.14° (15) Oxford, Magdalen College, MS 13. Theological commonplaces, written by John Dygoun, recluse at Sheen, ca. 1438.

(16) Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS 857. Sermons, catechetical matters, exempla. First half of the fifteenth century. Written by “Castell de Wyroull.”’

(17) London, Lambeth Palace Library, MS 78. Speculum parvulorum,

(Toronto, 1970). Further: Theo Stemmler, ‘‘ More English Texts from MS. Cambridge University Library l.III.8,”’ Anglia 93 (1975), 1-16. Since Erb and Stemmler print the English material, I have not quoted from this manuscript here. 146 N. R. Ker, Medieval Manuscripts in British Libraries, 1: London (Oxford, 1969), pp. 248-249. 147 M. R. James, A Descriptive Catalogue of the Manuscripts in the Library of

Jesus College, Cambridge (Cambridge, 1895), pp. 11-12. 148 Owst, Literature, p. 70, n. 2; and Roy M. Haines, ‘‘‘Wilde Wittes and Wilfulnes’: John Swetstock’s Attack on Those ‘Poyswunmongeres,’ the Lollards,” in Popular Belief and Practice, ed. G. J. Cuming and Derek Baker (Cambridge, 1972), . 143-153.

pp. 244-246. ,

PP 149 A. G. Little, Franciscan Papers, Lists, and Documents (Manchester, 1943),

VERSES IN SERMONS 93 compiled by William Chartham, OSB, in 1448. Pious tales copied from a variety of authors.1°°

(18) Lincoln, Cathedral Library, MS 44, art. 4. Sermon collection Convertimini (fols. 315—331v) and another set of sermons (fols. 332—338v).

Fifteenth century. The volume also contains sermons by “Januensis”’ (i.e., Jacobus de Voragine) and the Fasciculus morum. There are some indications of Franciscan ownership.

(19) London, British Library, MS Harley 665. A miscellany of theological and other notes and exempla. Late fifteenth century. These manuscripts date from the first half of the fourteenth through the latter part of the fifteenth century and bear witness to the extensive use of English verses in sermons preached in the period from the 1320s and 1330s until roughly the middle of the fifteenth century. On the question of what kind of preacher used such verses freely, the manuscript evidence is less clear, since in many cases it is hard, if not impossible, to tell whose preaching a given manuscript reflects or for whom it was written. Nevertheless, a number of these volumes are clearly associated with Franciscans (Nos. 1, 5, 6, 14) or Dominicans (1), and others may have been connected with one of these orders (Franciscans: 10, 18; Dominicans: 3, 13). Nos. 8

and 11 are associated with Austin friars. On the other hand, monks (Sheppey, 1 and 2; Chartham, 17; perhaps the Benedictines at Worcester, 6) and a recluse (Dygoun, 15) were equally interested in collecting such sermons and—certainly in the case of Sheppey—in using verses in their own preaching. The ultimate authorship of such verses we will probably never know. That Franciscan and, to a lesser degree, Dominican friars produced verses - and used them in their sermons has long been known and is hardly debatable. But against those critics who would credit the friars with just about all sermon verses, I would point to men like Alanus of Lille, William de Montibus, Richard Wethringsette, and the two Parisian lawyers of Verse 34 shown in the process of making up some very popular verses, none of

whom were friars; and I would point to the sermon manuscripts with verses that have just been surveyed, to which can be added a number of copies of Fasciculus morum that bélonged to secular masters and priests, all of which demonstrate that vernacular verses were also used in sermons

by preachers other than friars. | Some further observations can be made about the history of English

150 Analyzed to some extent by M. R. James and Claude Jenkins, A Descriptive

Catalogue of the Manuscripts in the Library of Lambeth Palace (Cambridge, 19301932), pp. 128-134. The work was discussed above, in Chapter I, pp. 42-43.

94. VERSES IN SERMONS verses in sermons. Evidently this practice began well before 1300, as is attested by several thirteenth-century sermon manuscripts that contain occasional verses. Thus, a series of sermon notes written at Bury St.

Edmunds preserves at least one verse item in English.4®* Another thirteenth-century text contains some early message verses in sermon notes and other material for preaching.*°? Similar message verses appear in several other thirteenth-century sermon collections,!®* including one

“certainly of Dominican origin”!5* and another apparently made by Franciscans.*®° In all these instances, the language of the English verses quite plainly gave the scribes some trouble—writing in Latin obviously

came to them more naturally. I find the same to be true of a Summa de vitiis written in England before 1275.1°° The text contains a number of English proverbs, sayings, and popular songs, as well as a roughly rhymed translation of a biblical quotation. The scribes of both manuscripts that have preserved the work (copied about 1300 and a little later, respectively) evidently experienced some difficulty with English items, as is shown by

several occurrences of phrases like “nota Anglicum” or “ut dicitur Anglice”’ that are not followed by an English quotation.1>" It may well be that such scribal uneasiness, together with the smaller number of thirteenth-

century manuscripts that have been preserved in comparison with fourteenth- and fifteenth-century codices, accounts for the relatively meager yield of English verses surviving in sermons from that period. To these two causes should be added that the English language did not regain

, full literary status until the middle of the fourteenth century, or even later. 15! Cambridge, Pembroke College, MS 100. The stanza was printed without the opening words by James, A Descriptive Catalogue of the Manuscripts in the Library of

Pembroke College, Cambridge (Cambridge, 1905), p. 93, and complete in ‘“‘Unrecorded,”’ No. 92. 152 Bodleian Library, MS Rawlinson C. 534 (S.C. 12381); see ‘‘ Unrecorded,”’ Nos. 64 and 46. The manuscript also contains several English ahd French proverbs.

153 F.g., Cambridge, Gonville and Caius College, MS 351. Cf. M. R. James, A. Descriptive Catalogue of the Manuscripts in the Library of Gonville and Caius College (Cambridge, 1907), 1:398; and *‘ Unrecorded,’”’ Nos. 78, 90, and 38. 154 MS Caius College 408; “‘ Unrecorded,’’ Nos. 55 and 62. For the Dominican origin, see William A. Hinnebusch, The Early English Friars Preachers (Rome, 1951), . 307.

° *®° Cambridge, St. John’s College, MS 255 (ca. 1300). Various proverbs and divisions, and one message verse printed in ‘‘ Unrecorded,”’ No. 4. 156 See Wenzel, ‘‘The Source of Chaucer’s Seven Deadly Sins,’’ Traditio 30 (1974), 351ff. The English items occur in sections that were added to the material taken from Peraldus. See *“‘ Unrecorded,”’ Nos. 51, 53, 65, 8, 87, 80. | +®7 For example: Durham Cathedral, MS B.I.18, fols. 32v,b; 55v,a (a reference to ““Candet nudatum pectus’’); 116r,b; etc.

VERSES IN SERMONS 95 This fact, too, is interestingly reflected in manuscripts concerned with preaching. When John of Wales, for instance, gives an example of a vernacular proverb, he thinks of one in French rather than English (see the two quotations below). One might object that perhaps in this case John _was writing for university students at Paris. But the same situation occurs in the Summa praedicantium of John Bromyard, who as far as we know wrote for fellow preachers in England. In his use of vernacular proverbs and sayings, French examples by far outnumber the few English items he cites.158

It further seems safe to say that the earliest vernacular verses used in preaching were rhymed proverbs. Several kinds of evidence point to this conclusion. There are, first, the sermon manuscripts themselves: One of the earliest codices discussed above contains the following verses in a series

of sermon notes which exhort to penance: , Quo sabet [i.e., who-so habet] longe ligge in sinne, Nu is tyme pat e blinne. Zanne is to late Zanne the wif, etc.*°°

The second couplet—“‘ Then it is too late when the wolf [is at the gate]””— evidently conflates the proverbial wolf at the door with the verse,

All too late, all too late When the cart (or death or bier) is at the gate, preserved in The Proverbs of Hendyng and elsewhere.’ A different rhymed proverb also found in Hendyng and in The Proverbs of Alfred appears in another thirteenth-century sermon collection: Meni man syngat Wan he hom in bringat A fayr yunge wyf... .*®

The treatise on the vices mentioned above likewise contains a number of rhymed proverbs, including one stanza that also appears in Hendyng.*° 158 Thus in MS Royal 7.E.iv, written in the second half of the fourteenth century

and belonging to Rochester Priory. In the printed editions most vernacular items have been omitted. Bromyard’s preference for French sayings appears equally in his Distinctiones (MS Bodl. 859). I have edited one English proverb from Bromyard’s Summa in English Language Notes 14 (1976), 87-90. 159 Cambridge, Pembroke College, MS 100, fol. 114v (see above, note 151). 460 Cf. Whiting, Proverbs, C.51. For the wolf, see Whiting, Proverbs, W.468. 161 Cambridge, Gonville and Caius College, MS 351, fol. 102v (see above, note 153). Cf. Whiting, Proverbs, M.194. 162 “*UJnrecorded,”? No. 51; see above, note 156.

96 VERSES IN SERMONS What was practiced in the pulpit was at the same time acknowledged in theory, for contemporary artes praedicandi on occasion discuss with approval the use of vernacular proverbs. Thus, John of Wales lists various ways of beginning the protheme, of which the third is “‘aliquod vulgare proverbium,”’ for which he gives the following example (unfortunately in Latin): ‘‘ Vulgariter dicitur ‘qui igne indiget, manu vel digito eum querat.’ Quia ergo nos igne spiritus sancti et eius illustratione indigemus, etc.’’!®

A few lines later, John similarly recommends “aliquod vulgare proverbium” as one way to introduce the sermon theme itself and gives another example: “‘Vulgariter dicitur in lingua materna quod ‘sicut dominus, sic et familia sua’....°’1®* In the fifteenth century a German friar based his sermon collection on Latin and German proverbs which are

used as the actual sermon themes.*° |

But vernacular proverbs can be found in the development of the sermon as well. The reason for their great and relatively early popularity is, I think, their recognized value as proof texts. In preaching they clearly enjoyed an authority on a par with scriptural and patristic quotations. A

thirteenth-century ars dictaminis, for example, defines proverbium as ‘‘auctorabile dictum virtutis et moralitatis inductivum”’ whose use is sanctified by Christ himself since He spoke “‘in proverbiis’’ ;1°° and Martin Luther still shared this view when he commented that vernacular proverbs “are a strong argument.’!®" A glance at Fasciculus morum shows that, *88 John of Wales, Ars praedicandi, MS Bodl. 571, fol. 165v,a. The vernacular

proverb presumably is “‘Qui a mestier dou feu a son doit le quiert’’; see Joseph Morawski, Proverbes francais antérieurs au XV® siécle (Paris, 1925), No. 1812. John’s exposition and example are repeated verbatim in Ranulph Higden’s Ars componendi sermones, ed. M. Margaret Jennings, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Bryn Mawr, 1970, pp. 107f. 164 MS Bodl. 571, fol. 166r,a. This proverb can be used to introduce the theme **Sancti estote quoniam ego sanctus sum.”’ The proverb presumably is, ‘‘Tel est le

seigneur, tel est la meine,’’ as found (in French), for example, in Grimestone’s Commonplace Book, MS Advocates Library 18.7.21, fol. 110r. It is also preserved in English, but apparently translated from the French; see Whiting, Proverbs, L.455. John of Wales’s exposition and example again reappear in Ranulph Higden, loc. cit.,

_ pp. 124-125. | #8 See Joseph Klapper, Die Sprichwoérter der Freidankpredigten (Breslau, 1927). 166 Walter Kronbichler, Die “‘Summa de Arte Prosandi’’ des Konrad von Mure,

Geist und Werk der Zeiten 17 (Zurich, 1968), p. 150. The Summa was written 1275/76.

167 ““E’s ist ein fein Ding umb proverbia germanica undt sind starckhe beweissung.’’ E. Thiele, Luthers Sprichwértersammlung (Weimar, 1900), p. xvii. See also the remark made in a fourteenth-century German legal document: ‘‘Whenever you can attach a proverb, do so, for the peasants like to judge according to proverbs.’’ Quoted

VERSES IN SERMONS 97 together with biblical and patristic quotations and exempla, proverbs formed a standard ingredient in the material collected to prove a moral point. This aura of authority which surrounds the vernacular proverb is also reflected in the fact that medieval preachers often label a proverb as

antiquum, presumably on the assumption that old age and wisdom go together. This usage in Fasciculus morum (Verse 37) is impressively paralleled by John Bromyard, who introduces hundreds of proverbs with the phrase “secundum antiquum proverbium,” whether he then quotes the saying in Latin or in the vernacular.

Hence it is their authoritative status, together of course with their familiarity, which explains the frequent appearance of vernacular proverbs in medieval sermons at a relatively early date.1®® One can easily see how

such popularity soon extended to other vernacular verses primarily because of their proverbial quality—verses that sum up the moral of an exemplum (such as the Cambyses verses quoted above) and genuine message verses are remarkably similar to popular proverbs in their content, form, and tone. On occasions one can still observe how a message verse that originated within a tale becomes detached from its narrative and is quoted as a free proverb. A good case is the story about an ungrateful devil named Gerard who has helped a miller.‘®° The story is reported by Bromyard as follows: And all such people [i.e., those who after becoming rich forget God] act like a devil who, when he received for his work at the handmill a cape and hood from his landlord, stopped doing good and said in English:

Now that I have cape and hood, Longer will I do no good!?7° by Archer Taylor, The Proverb (Cambridge, Mass., 1931), p. 87. But well-chosen proverbs appealed equally strongly to a learned or aristocratic audience, as their presence in medieval epics and romances, The Owl and the Nightingale, and elsewhere

reveals. See also the remarks by Grace Frank, ‘‘ Proverbs in Medieval Literature,” Modern Language Notes 58 (1943), 508-515. 168 For the use of vernacular proverbs (here French) by Stephen Langton (died | 1228), see Roberts, Stephanus de Lingua-Tonante, pp. 54-55. Another early witness is Bishop Alexander of Stavensby, who in his Latin ‘‘Treatise on the Seven Deadly

, Sins,’ written between 1224 and 1237 to provide doctrine that was to be preached ‘*on all Sundays and feast days,’’ quotes an Anglo-Norman proverb; F. M. Powicke and C. R. Cheney (eds.), Councils and Synods, 2,1 (Oxford, 1964), p. 218. 169 Tubach, No. 1640. 170 Bromyard, ‘‘ Divicie,’’ D.XI, § 17 (fol. 135v,a): ‘“‘Et est de omnibus talibus

sicud de diabolo qui, cum pro opere suo in mola manuali a patrefamilias capam accepisset et capucium, bene agere cessabat, dicens anglice: ‘Modo habeo capam et

98 VERSES IN SERMONS Bromyard, who evidently was very fond of the tale, unfortunately does not cite the saying in English. But an English couplet which is clearly the vernacular equivalent of Bromyard’s Latin words has been preserved in a thirteenth-century Dominican collection of short sermon notes, in the section “against religious who grow lukewarm”: _ Before they receive tonsure and are accepted into an order, they serve at every beck and call and want to do everything with good will. But after their tonsure—nothing. In English:

Son [?] so he hauet coperuz and te hod Ne wile he nomore don non god.?72

In contrast to Bromyard, the saying is here quoted without the story and as if it were an independent proverb. The manuscripts I have examined thus suggest that the popularity of English verses of all kinds in sermons reached its peak between the midfourteenth and the first half of the fifteenth century. It is worth noting that in later fifteenth-century English prose texts one frequently misses verses at precisely those places where one finds them in fourteenth-century sermons and sermon handbooks. For example, such favorite passages as

Christ’s words from the cross (“Behold, man, what I suffer’) or the biblical warning “‘ Memorare novissima,”’ which have a long tradition of

multiform renderings into English verse, appear as blunt prose in the Middle English sermons edited by Grisdale.'’? Likewise, in the fifteenthcentury English sermons preserved in MS Royal 18.B.xxiii Christ’s words from the cross are rendered in prose,'”? and the same is true of the wide-

spread Latin hexameter on Pride, “Si tibi copia...,’ which John Grimestone and one copy of Fasciculus morum had translated into vernacular verses (Verse 8).1’* These 51 sermons, which fill 336 pages in capucium, amplius bonum non faciam’.’’ Bromyard refers to the story again under ““Gratitudo,”” G.IV, § 12 (fol. 218r,a), where he calls the devil ‘‘Gerardus”’; and a third time under “‘Servire,”’ S. VIII, § 8 (fol. 552r,a), again with name. The tale is also

alluded to, with a reference to “‘brumyard,” in a Latin sermon by Robert Ripon, although here the devil says, in English: ‘‘Suld syche a proude grome grynd corne?”’ MS Harley 4894, fol. 55r. 171 Cambridge, Gonville and Caius College, MS 408, fol. 150v; see “‘ Unrecorded,”’

No. 55. 172 Grisdale, Three Middle English Sermons, pp. 47 and 64. 178 Middle English Sermons, ed. Woodburn O. Ross, EETS 209 (London, 1960), p. 111 ¢*O vos omnes’’). 174 Thid., p. 68.

VERSES IN SERMONS 99 print, contain only some ten verse items.!”> Similarly, Mirk’s Festial and another cycle related to Mirk, in contrast to the Latin sermon manuscripts I have been discussing, are extremely meager in verses.'”® Earlier in this chapter I summarized a Latin Worcester sermon which contains English

verses of all the types there surveyed. In the just mentioned fifteenthcentury cycle, the first sermon on the First Sunday in Advent (on “‘ Ecce rex tuus venit’’), though different in theme and content, yet uses a division which is thematically similar to one in the Worcester sermon. The fifteenth- | century sermon also ends with the same Advent prayer that in the Worcester sermon closes the first main part (viz., ““Excita, Domine, ...’’). For the history of verses in sermons it is highly illustrative to compare the two sermons with respect to these divisions and prayers. The fifteenth-

century sermon still makes an attempt to formulate the division with _ parallelism and end rhyme, though the result can hardly be called verse: First, Criste commyth in pe wey of obedyence, mercy, and mekenes, ageyn pe develles pride, malice, and wikkednes. Second he commyth in pe wey of pacience and pouerte, ~ ageyn pe worlde falshed, covetise, and sotelte. And pe pird in the wey of contynence and clennes, ageyn pe freel flesshis corrupcion and wrecchednes.?”"

The contrast with the earlier Worcester sermon is even more striking in the English rendering of the collect: O pou mercifull lorde. mekely we beseche the excite and stir vp our hertes by pi good grace to welcum and aray before pi holy and vertuous wayes of thyn only begoten son pat be pi gracious aduent and holy comming we may be worthi to serue hym in clennes of life to his plesure.*”®

In contrast to the crisp quatrain of the Worcester sermon (quoted on p. 85), here the collect has become padded (“mercifull,” “‘mekely,”’ etc.) and inflated (by doublets: ‘‘excite and stir vp,”’ etc.)}—in short, extremely

prosy. | :

175 Five of them in one sermon. One could add six to eight further passages, mostly divisions, which might be considered to have end rhyme. but are otherwise hardly metrical. 176 Mary McD. Long, ‘‘ Undetected Verse in Mirk’s Festial,’’ Modern Language Notes 70 (1955), 13-15, prints several items which could be considered verse. These are not listed in Index/ Supplement. 7 MS Harley 2247, fol. 1v. Similarly in MS Royal 18.B.xxyv, fol. 13r; Cambridge, University Library, MS Gg.VI.16, fol. 34v. On this sermon collection see further Chapter I, note 142.. 178 MS Harley 2247, fol. 2r.

: 100 VERSES IN SERMONS Such indifference to, even neglect of verses appears in fifteenth-century prose writings even when the author was working with a verse in his model. For example, the Latin Cambyses verses quoted earlier in this chapter (pp. 88f.) were cited in Ranulph Higden’s Polychronicon (written in the 1320s,

| with later additions).1”® John Trevisa, who translated the work in English prose (completed by 1387), rendered the two distichs into four English couplets,?®° which are not very skillful, but at least they rhyme.1®* In the fifteenth century (“between 1432 and 1450”’)'®? another translation was made, but here the original verses appear in plain prose.+®°

Whatever the causes of such a development may have been,?** our manuscripts clearly reveal a great slackening of interest in using verses in preaching during the later fifteenth century. Evidently, the pride and the delight which preachers had taken in peppering their sermons with little poems that would rouse their audience’s attention, strike their emotions, and perhaps stick in their minds when they returned home from church, had become a thing of the past.

179 Ed. Churchill Babington and J. R. Lumby, Rolls Series 41 (London, 1865—

139. 1886), 3:174.

180 Printed ibidem, p. 175. Not listed in Index. But see Index 1811 for another

version in extracts from the Polychronicon.

181 Trevisa’s lack of versifying skills may account for the fact that elsewhere in his translation of the Polychronicon he renders Latin verses in prose. 182 John Taylor, The Universal Chronicle of Ranulf Higden (Oxford, 1966), p. 183 Polychronicon, ed. cit., 3:175.

184 Rosemary Woolf, English Religious Lyric, pp. 361ff., suggests that the gradual disappearance of verses was caused by the increased availability of cheaper manuscripts and, eventually, printed copies, which made it no longer necessary to memorize subject matter for meditation. This explanation seems to me only partially applicable to verses in sermons.

, Chapter III

| THE ENGLISH VERSES OF | FASCICULUS MORUM 1. NATURE, FUNCTION, TEXTUAL HISTORY

THE PRACTICE of embedding vernacular verses in Latin sermons and preaching aids, which we have traced in the previous chapter, is fully reflected in Fasciculus morum as well. Its seven parts are sprinkled with fifty-five English poems that range in length from two to fourteen lines, and the attached sermon outlines contain six additional items.+ As in other sermon books, these English verses are heavily indebted to Latin models. When their relation to their immediate context is examined,? it appears that of the fifty-five items in the handbook thirty are directly translated either from a Latin verse (twenty-three, mostly one or two hexameters) or from a Latin prose passage (seven), which may be a prayer,

a biblical verse, or a quotation from the Church Fathers. One item is perhaps translated from French (Verse 17). Eight more English verses were verbally suggested by their Latin context, which furnished at least a phrase, and sometimes more, for the English lines.* In contrast, the remaining sixteen verses have no direct verbal base in the Latin context,

- though of course they are thematically related to it. Of these, ten are tacked on,‘ in the sense that they are not logically necessary to the develop-

ment and could be dispensed with. Almost all of these are proverbial in nature and are cited to prove a given point. The final six verses, however, which are likewise without verbal base in the Latin text, form integral | parts of a story® or of the prose development® and could not be omitted without losing the point of the discussion or narrative. Where a Latin model, whether in hexameters or in prose, is rendered 1 Included are all rhymed passages in English found in all manuscripts of FM. The work also contains a few unrhymed items which are listed in the Index but are not verses; I discuss them in Chapter IV after the verses. 2 For a more detailed discussion of this relation, see my essay “‘ English Verses.”’ 3 Nos. 6, 7, 12, 13, 16, 21, 24, and 51. * Nos. 3, 4, 5, 18, 20, 25, 37, 40, 49, and 54. 5 Nos. 23, 32, 45, and 47. S Nos. 27 and 52. 101

102 ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM in English, the preferred verse form is clearly the four-stress line arranged

in couplets with parallel rhyme. More than half of the English verses appear in this form. Yet occasionally the results are couplets of different — lengths: some lines could be read as having only two stresses (Verses 43, 50, 52, perhaps parts of 44, 46), while others clearly have three (Verse 19), , five (11), six (14, 15, 267), and even seven (39). The very long lines of Nos. 26 and 39 apparently caused some uneasiness to at least one scribe in each case, who consequently altered the metrical pattern (V in No. 26; Blin No. 39). The more usual couplet of four-stress lines also appears in texts that are not translations (e.g., Nos. 3, 5, 12, 20, etc.). Moreover, English verses that have no Latin models often form stanzas of various shapes, from a three-stress triplet (a,aa, No. 6) to a six-stress quatrain (agaaa, No. 37) to more complex forms such as three-stress ababab (No. 4) and aabaab (Nos. 7, 49), four-stress ababcded (No. 31, translated) and aabbb (No. 40), tail-

rhyme a,ab,c,cb (Nos. 16, 21) and a,b,ababab (Nos. 13, 54), and the

curious stanza of No. 45. What surprises is that the author of Fasciculus morum should have included such a large variety of verse forms.

In his recent book on the Franciscan origin of the Middle English religious lyric,’ David Jeffrey claims that many verses in Fasciculus morum are written in carol form or as songs with a refrain, and he thereby seeks to derive support for his general thesis that preachers’ verses were

devised for singing during the sermon. Unfortunately, Jeffrey’s discussion of the Fasciculus verses is brimful of misunderstandings and factual errors, from his calling Fasciculus morum a “‘ preacher’s collection” and a “haphazard” compilation,® through numerous faulty transcriptions

of the English verses,? to his complete misunderstanding of their Latin contexts. Quite typical is his comment on Verse 48: “A fragment of a Christ-from-the-cross song; the scribe had perhaps forgotten the poem in

its entirety, yet he works tantalizing snatches of it into his section ‘de> contricione et elemosma [sic]’.’’?° In fact, Verse 48 is not a fragment nor ” David B. Jeffrey, The Early English Lyric and Franciscan Spirituality (Lincoln, Nebraska, 1975); FM and English preachers’ verses are discussed especially in Chapter V.

8 Pp. 189 and 199, respectively.

° Of the 28 poems Jeffrey prints from FM, only two (both single couplets) are free from mistakes, and a third poem is reasonably accurate. This modest achieve-

ment is marred by wrong manuscript and folio references, and by a mistaken comment on the context of the third item. Another poem is accurately copied, but from Little’s edition without acknowledgement. Jeffrey failed to see that Little’s is a reconstructed text. 10 P, 192. His transcription of these eight English lines contains at least five errors and a wrong line division.

ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM 103 is it a song, nor is it spoken by Christ on the cross, nor does it occur in the section on contrition and almsgiving; rather, it is a complete translation of four inscriptions on a “‘picture”’ of Oratio in the chapter devoted to the benefits of prayer. Similarly, he describes and prints Verse 55 as “‘three grisly stanzas and a stark refrain.”41 The manuscripts offer no evidence

that this poem is organized in stanzas and provided with a refrain; Jeffrey’s supposed third stanza contains two couplets with different end rhymes. In the same careless fashion Verses 14 and 15 are printed together as “a song”’ which “‘has a nearly illegible refrain,” without regard for the Latin text which separates the two English poems, or the blunt fact that both translate Latin passages quoted before them.12 No wonder that Jeffrey should eventually come to claim that Verse 36—the summarizing poem in the story about the foolish ioculator Ulfrid—was composed by Ulfrid, a Franciscan preacher... .1% Based as it is on such nonsense (of which the foregoing is only a sample), Jeffrey’s view that these English verses in Fasciculus morum were sung from the pulpit need not be taken seriously. There is no evidence that the verses in this handbook are com| posed in song or carol form or were intended for singing.** Regarding their function, the Fasciculus morum verses serve the same wide variety of purposes that we had found in similar preaching aids, with the exception of hymns and liturgical prayers. The majority function as proof texts, as “‘authorities”’ for a stated doctrinal or moral point which

they serve to enforce together with quotations from Scripture or the Fathers, similes, and exempla. Often such proof texts are proverbial in nature and simply express a general observation or truism. No. 5, for instance, is in fact a proverb, richly attested in medieval English, Latin, and many other languages. In contrast, the stanza of No. 7 has not been found outside Fasciculus morum and is not translated, yet it versifies and expands a common proverb, “pride will have a fall.’’ The stanza on Lady Fortune

(No. 37) is explicitly introduced as “‘antiquum proverbium,” and the 11 Pp, 193. His transcription (p. 194) is not from R as claimed but from B1, with at least ten divergences from the manuscript. 12 P, 194. He acknowledges that Verse 15 is a translation in note 99 and adds the

slipshod. , 13 Pp, 195.

remark, “‘I suspect that the rest of the chapter may have been translated in the complete poem,” whose meaning escapes me. His transcription contains at least a dozen errors and one wrong line division. Manuscript and folio references are equally 14 The suggestion that many verses in prose sermons were intended for singing had already been made by Homer G. Pfander, The Popular Sermon of the Medieval Friar in England (New York, 1937), pp. 48-51 and 66. Unfortunately, Pfander’s key

text (p. 48) is not free from errors of transcription either. ,

104 ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM suggestion that the author of Fasciculus morum freely drew on proverbial lore is further strengthened by his quoting “‘Hendyng”’ on three occasions, after an English verse (Nos. 3, 4, and 12), as well as by his using a stanza form elsewhere which is strongly reminiscent of The Proverbs of Hendyng

, (Nos. 7 and 49). Other proof texts are more exhortatory in tone and structure, telling the audience to amend their lives or to chastise their children or to remember death. Some of these are translated from Latin sententiae in hexameters (e.g., Nos. 1, 2, 8, etc.) or inspired by a Latin prose passage (e.g., No. 19); others are based on native proverbs (such as 12 and 49). A similar proverbial background seems to be reflected in two poems (Nos. 25 and 40) which voice a complaint at the degeneracy of the

virtues, respectively. ,

times: the disappearance of true love and the mutation of vices into Different in their immediate function are verses which appear within

a story. At least seventeen verses belong to this type, including both original English verses and translations that are quoted after their Latin or French sources. These are all ““message verses.’ Some versify an actual

written message (Nos. 28, 53) or an inscription (Nos. 33, 50); others record a verbal message, whether it comes from heaven (Nos. 6, 45) or from the dying or the dead (Nos. 35, 43, 47). Several items record a conversation which contains the gist of the respective story (Nos. 17, 32,

41, 42), while others comment on the narrated event either in a direct remark made by a participant (No. 23, a common proverb) or witnesses (No. 34) or in a summarizing statement from the narrator (No. 36). Finally, the well-known exemplum of Christ as the lover-knight has Christ Himself appeal in verse to his ungrateful lady, the soul (No. 26). The last

| mentioned item belongs thematically to a group of other message verses which appear outside exempla: appeals of the suffering Christ to mankind spoken from the cross (Nos. 29, 30, 31), all three translated from Latin and indeed forming part of a rich tradition. Similarly outside a narrative frame appear messages conveyed by inscriptions on a statue of Prayer (No. 48) or spoken by four kings on the wheel of Fortune (No. 38). When used in a sermon, all the verses so far mentioned—whether message verses in the

strict sense or prooftexts—would have carried a dramatic emphasis designed to appeal to the hearers’ emotions. In contrast, several other , verses seem to have served rather as aids to the preacher’s or his audience’s memory. These include versified prayers (Nos. 10 and perhaps 20), a succinct verse rendering of the Decalogue (No. 22), and mnemonic verses on the four objects of love (Nos. 24 and 51), the qualities of the host (No. 44), and the four conditions for a good confession (No. 46). Since the individual lines of the two last mentioned verses (Nos. 44 and

ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM 105 46) are developed at some length in the subsequent Latin discussion, these verses can also be said to serve as divisiones furnishing the structure for the following development. The same is in fact true of several poems I have

| classified as message verses, particularly the inscriptions found on an image of Prayer (No. 48). Besides these, an acrostic on MORS, whose component letters provide the structure for the subsequent development,

is rendered into English verse in one manuscript (No. 18), and many manuscripts contain four contradictoria in English verse (No. 52) which are then similarly expanded. Finally, the sermon outlines present English translations for several sermon divisions (Nos. 56-59), while the sermon theme itself is put into English verses in two instances (Nos. 60-61). In comparison with other preaching aids Fasciculus morum holds a rather unique position because of its much richer textual history: not only has the work been preserved in a relatively large number of copies, but it continued to be copied over a period of nearly a century and a half. One may expect that a look at the preservation of its English verses and their

variants will shed light on the entire history of preachers’ verses, in particular on their origins and popularity and on the attitudes with which

successive generations of scribes and preachers approached them. Such an | examination will have to begin with the baffling observation that the twenty-eight manuscripts that contain Fasciculus morum have preserved the fifty-five verses in a curious variety of combinations (see the table on

pp. 106-107). Seven manuscripts (B2, B4, Pe, A, H, M, Mo) have no

English verses at all, even though some of them contain an occasional | English word or phrase in the Latin text. Of the remaining twenty-one © manuscripts, only three have, or can be assumed to have had, a “complete set”’ of fifty-one verses:'© R, LC, and W1 (with forty-eight verses, but its beginning folios are missing). Two more have an almost complete set: B3

(49) and L2 (49). Next, a group of eight manuscripts preserves a fairly large number of verses: E (41), Sp (39), Gol (37), V (37), Go2 (32), Jo (29), B1 (27), and L1 (22). Finally, a third group has only occasional verses: L3

(11), Li (9), D (6), W2 (5), CC (4), Co (3), C (3), and Et (3). But within these groups, individual manuscripts by no means preserve the same sets of poems. The three to five occasional verses found in manuscripts with the lowest total, for example, are not the same items in each manuscript. On the other hand, a manuscript which has a large number of English verses (E) lacks the one (No. 47) which has been preserved in the largest number of manuscripts. 18 The ‘‘complete set’? is Nos. 1-55 minus 6, 8, 18, 27; the latter four items are plainly additions or substitutions that have crept into a single manuscript (6, 8, 18) or a peculiar group of closely related manuscripts (27).

MS , mL eT de BLT EET EE DISTRIBUTION OF VERSES IN FASCICULUS MORUM MANUSCRIPTS

(See the description of the manuscripts in Chapter I, pp. 13-22.)

IN FASCICULUS MORUM

1 5 10 15 — 20 25 30 35

B3 Se Be TT EEE uit steletel*l Le] lelel*fel* [ele] [tele] | [ede] | ce] | EL

BL LTT EE EE dt SS ea a os a Oa a a a al a sl Co TT EE EE EEE cide l*lelel dwt de TL et PE et Lz tte] dell dl dole dole *lo] le [elle] ol *] sleet [ole eled [*] +L

eT

Co LTT TTT EEE se

Gol aicch att| le]apt sce| Gor | wlelslely] [el [le] de] llettesheit dele delete [sesle]*]

Pe qecbac ahhh See Jo tse | el | det*] det dele] dt [el delsteedete tle] | Le] |

ceo (HT wa EEE st

A LTTE EE EE H oO LC | leleltel | [el*]e fale] ele] sls] [#]*/+] *] [+] #] #] [+] *]*]+] *] [4] «

Dt ett tt EE de F ODES aa oes Wie | —Hel+] [al [loll fell *] [ole] *| ol *] [ele] [of #[ ele] | ele

spotted tT delet L dete] tL ded lel ded [etl] el [ole] lolol el el VoL | fete] dot eet fel det Let [ed [el s*l*lefe [ed [*] [le] =|

M ———————E

Me PLETE9ETT EEE ELT EE EE EE EE EE Cardiff | ——_ EES (_(_W TT PLEASE NOTE: The verses are numbered as in the edition in Chapter IV.

, Horizontal lines indicate that the given section is missing in the manuscript. For the Cardiff manuscript, see Chapter I, p. 47 and n. 166.

ATTACHED MS SERMONS

IN45FASCICULUS 36 40 50 55|| 56 61| FM MORUM SERMONS

a|

er oe B3 eee SSS SS 2 0 {

eee: ae ee eee ee Se 0 | Jo

BEEEEEEEEGEGEEEEUUD Bl EEE TTT ETT EET defBGGHOG letefef] Emam oe | Be

TEE TT ETT TET ELT TT JR —— || 9 os | Bs

[el] s|*] *]4/+]«[ale[e] [e/a] elelele ll s/*lelelele |] 496 | 12

LEE LT defefele] [delet ls detetelef 6 | 23

[+] | #] #] #/#/ [+/+ ]*|*]*[ | «]*/*/*/*/*|———— 51.0 TR

EEE TELL ET te lel lele 3 [co

lets) tel [ [*fsl*{*]*{a] | [*l*{*[*[*[l fell || 376 | Gol

clel*l TT T+] +t [+[+[+|+/*[*{*] | | ————]] 32,0 | Go

TEEE TET ETT EEE, TEP ;-e-— | oo fA HELL TL LELT Li EEL ET LE _-F |, 9)

eee eee eee eee:

LILLE eL Tey Ee] PT F-PePE=|| 4 es = [+]+[*[«/«]«]*]«/«]«]*] +] «| *]/*/*/*[«[¢]/———_ |] 510 | LC

ee el

+ [[ele[e[=]*]*[*]e[e[e[a{a{elelelelel*l le] ff | 482 | Wd

m[efmlmlele]*/*[*f*le] [fe TL Cd tet tele 42 5B

TTT EET Ty dL yeLE ETT ET TR [| 30 Et

leat [mlefm lle le]e]elel [ole*[*] [eet | | dete |] 394 Se

bell fmt | [elalefelale] [ [olole lel e le le lefe 376 TLETELELLELEL EET ETT LT EET Peo | Mo

$$$ || *[*l*l*[e[*]] 0 6 | Caraitt

108 ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM

What could account for this extremely diverse distribution? It is plausible to think that the scribes of Mo (a German friar) and of M (probably a Spaniard) omitted all English verses because they copied the work for use in non-English-speaking countries; at least Friar Johannes Sintram clearly had a text before him that contained English verses which

he chose to omit. Similarly, one might suggest that the abbreviated | versions B2, Pe, and A lack all English verses because their scribes were as little interested in the vernacular poems as they were in the stories (B2, Pe) or in the doctrinal matter (A) which they left out. But on the other hand,

the scribe of D, who produced a similarly abbreviated text, did copy a small number of verses; and the real problem is to find what causes or motivations must have been responsible for the wide variety of such apparently individual selection we encounter in manuscripts that preserve some but not all verses. I do not think this state can be explained by simple scribal loss during the course of the work’s textual history. Instead, one might think that some scribes were not interested in English - verses that are merely tacked on to the Latin text, whereas of necessity they had to copy items which were integral to a story or the context. Yet this is by no means consistently the case, as the very diverse preservation of items 23, 26/27, 32, 45, 47, and 52 in manuscripts of the “occasional verses only’? group shows. In some cases it looks as if a scribe or his predecessor in the textual transmission had begun his work by copying all the English verses but sooner or later stopped doing so (L1 and perhaps Li), or—conversely—began to copy virtually all the items only after he was half-way through his text (B1). It is of course possible that an extant copy was made from two exemplars, one with, the other without English verses. But by and large I think we must conclude that in their decision as

to what verses they would or would not copy the scribes were guided by capriciousness or by reasons which we can no longer fully recover. During its transmission in the fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries, _ Fasciculus morum was very much a “living” text: Together with a strong

commitment to copying the inherited material, the manuscripts also display a certain freedom on the part of their scribes to add, delete, or change words and phrases and to include glosses or marginalia. This freedom, I believe, is responsible for the inclusion of several items that. were clearly not part of the common tradition. They are Verses 6, 8, and _ 18, each preserved in only one manuscript; and Verse 27, preserved in a small group of manuscripts that also in other ways stands textually apart. Just as individual scribes felt no constraint against adding a verse at these points, so, I think, were they also free to omit at others. Is it possible, then, that the entire collection of English verses represents

ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM 109

later scribal additions rather than the work of the original author of Fasciculus morum? One or two scholars have indeed held that the English verses crept into the text only at the end of the fourteenth or even during the fifteenth century.*® I would strongly argue, however, that the majority, — if not all, of the fifty-one verses which form a “‘common tradition’’ were present in the original text of the work as written near the beginning of the fourteenth century, for the following reasons:

(1) The verses contain a number of archaic words and word forms which were current in the thirteenth but eventually disappeared in the

fourteenth century. Even though our knowledge of Middle English linguistic chronology is at best spotty and feeble, it would still seem safe

to consider forms like mest (No. 4) and such words as *rinen (No. 1), vn-wrest (No. 4), heren (No. 9), nemen (No. 21), ferly (No. 33), sleythe (in the sense of “prudence,” No. 39), smacken (No. 43), luper (No. 44), and

others, as archaic by 1380. The evidence already provided by modern | dictionaries is further strengthened by the textual variants found in several manuscripts whose scribes were clearly not at ease with a term they

encountered in their model and who, therefore, replaced it with a more up-to-date word. I shall discuss this phenomenon further later on. (2) A number of English verses are integral to the Latin context in which they appear, whether this is some doctrinal matter or a story (Nos. 23, 32, 45, 47).17 Without these verses, the exposition or exemplum would

simply lose its point. Since there is no evidence that such passages are later additions, the respective English verse must have been used by the original author. Manuscripts which lack the English, if they contain the respective passage, fill in the gap with a vague “‘etc.”” or an awkward

Latin paraphrase, both of which are clearly secondary makeshifts, as will | be seen from the ‘““Comments”’ to these verses in Chapter IV. (3) Occasionally, a phrase from an English poem that has no Latin equivalent in the context is repeated or echoed in the subsequent Latin text. Verse 25, ““Trewe loue among men,”’ concludes the chapter on how charity is hindered by worldly desire and greed. The poem’s last line, 16 See especially the unsupported statement that ‘“‘the treatise underwent revision, including the addition of many English poems, none of which appear in the earlier manuscripts,’ by Theodore Silverstein (ed.), English Lyrics before 1500, York Medieval Texts (Evanston, Illinois, 1971), p. 76. See further my discussion of the date

of FM in Chapter I, pp. 26-34. 17 Tn my earlier discussion of the relation of the English verses to their Latin

context, in ‘“‘English Verses,’’ I included among “‘integral’’ verses the present No. 37, which could be considered merely tacked on. Conversely, I did not discuss No. 32, which is clearly an integral part of the story. See also above, p. 101.

110 ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM Bote trewe loue of herte went is away,

is then alluded to in the opening sentence of the next chapter: “‘ Restat autem iam quarto et ultimo videre quomodo hec caritas sic elongata possit recuperari”’ (“‘In the fourth and last place it remains to be seen how this love thus departed may be recovered’’).*® An even more obvious case is Verse 52 (the four contradictoria), whose individual lines are commented on in the following development.*®

(4) The most spectacular proof that English verses were present in the original text of Fasciculus morum derives from an examination of Nos. 26-27. Verse 27, a couplet, is unique to Co.Li.C, a group of manuscripts which in many ways stands textually apart from the ‘common tradition”

of the text; among other peculiarities, the group omits most English verses, including No. 26. On the other hand, No. 27 is not found outside this group. The context of Verses 26-27 is the exemplum of the knight who

fought for his beloved lady who remained ungrateful and denied him access to her door, even when he was wounded to death. The knight then sent her a written message, expressed in a Latin distich taken from Ovid. The distich is translated into two English couplets, Verse 26, after which the exemplum is allegorized: the knight is Christ, the lady is man’s soul,

and so forth. In the moralization, the beginning words of the English verse (No. 26) are quoted again. It is at this point that Group Co.Li.C, instead of merely quoting part of 26, has Verse 27, which begins with the

same words as 26 (““Behold my woundes’’) but continues differently. What happened is quite clear. In copying a manuscript which lacked Verse 26 at the point of its first and complete citation but which retained the quoted opening words in the moralization, a scribe in the manuscript , tradition before Co.Li.C replaced the quotation with a couplet of his own, now Verse 27. In fact, several extant manuscripts that are not of the Co.Li.C group preserve exactly the textual state of such a defective exemplar behind this group: they lack 26 yet quote its beginning in the moralization, with the telling reference “ut supra” (B1, L3, A, Et). Hence we must conclude that Verse 26 existed originally, following its Latin model, and was omitted by some scribe(s) or lost in the long history of textual trans-

mission. The almost paradigmatic case of Verse 26 convinces me that,

' rather than being added to the Latin text during the later part of the fourteenth century, the common English verses of Fasciculus morum were present in the original form of the work. 18 R, fol. 41v; the italics are my own. The verb e/ongari occurs once earlier in the

chapter ending with Verse 25, but in a series of three verbs: ‘“‘Unde hec est causa quare caritas impeditur, elongatur, et destruitur”’’ (fol. 41r). 18 See the ‘‘Comment”’ to Verse 52 in the next chapter.

ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM 6 Ii1 That the text of the English verses underwent changes during the century

and a half of its transmission—as one would expect it to have done—can | also be seen in its orthographic, phonological, morphological, and lexical variants. I have collected and present in Appendix B what features seem distinctive enough to furnish a hint at the dialects of our manuscripts. Yet with respect to the phonological and morphological variants a good deal of caution is in order. Fasciculus morum provides too little material for a reliable dialect analysis: Manuscript R, for example, gives us a total of only 233 English lines (as printed) 1n the verses within the handbook. In addition, the well-known mixing of dialect forms and the absence of consistent spelling habits common to most Middle English texts combine with the difficulty which copyists of Latin sermon manuscripts generally had with occasional passages in the vernacular to produce a good deal of phonological and morphological inconsistency within individual manu-

scripts. In WI, for instance, the ending of the third person singular present indicative appears as -e3, -ys, -ip, -ist, and -p in one and the same stanza (No. 55); or BI, in the first couplet of No. 34, offers two different dialectal forms for the present plural of to be:

: Porow ferly dep to-gederys arn falde Bope yvyl lyf and yvyl dep pat bup cald.

Yet by its very inconsistency the latter example is instructive, since the phrase pat bup is an addition peculiar to B1 and may therefore be taken as a telltale sign of the manuscript’s provenance. Another suggestion deriving from such variations is the strong possibility that the English poems included in the original version of Fasciculus morum may have come from different dialect areas. The just quoted couplet (No. 34) seems

to preserve original arn; but No. 17 (We ben executors ...’’) just as clearly preserves original ben. Similarly, the past participle seems originally

to have been with i- in No. 15, but without i- in No. 25—a difference which perhaps reflects different dialects as well as different metrical requirements. I suspect, therefore, that the unknown author of Fasciculus morum created some English verses in his own dialect and incorporated others with slightly different dialect features as he found them; and that in several manuscripts both kinds of verses underwent a variety of morphological changes, even though such a development is extremely hard to

trace and its results may not yield very strong evidence for a decisive classification of the dialects in the extant manuscripts. That the English texts remained thus “‘alive’’ and subject to changes can be seen more definitely in their lexical variations. Quite evidently—as it happened normally in medieval texts—the various copyists of Fasciculus

112 ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM | morum were often faced with an English word they found either illegible or unintelligible. Some of them would simply copy what they saw, without understanding or worrying further about it. Others, however, would make an attempt at interpreting what was before them. In doing so they might add a gloss. B1, for example, interprets the adjective hying with the phrase _or spedely y-do (No. 46.1). An even better illustration is furnished by No. 44. Here R glosses smackyng with or tasting, and the latter form becomes the exclusive reading in B1 and Sp, whereas two other manuscripts replace smack yng with smellyng. On occasion a scribe interpreted the unintelligible by reference to the Latin text on which the English verse was based. Thus,

the phrase god to here (“‘to praise God’’), which evidently was not under- | stood by Gol and V, is here changed to in godes here (“in God’s ear’’)

| following the Latin in aure dei. The scribe of Sp particularly seems to have checked his English verses against their Latin originals, as is shown by his using tochen (for tetigit) instead of the nonsense transmitted in No. 1.1, and by his replacing No. 7 with a completely new translation (No. 8) of the two Latin lines which, in No. 7, were not really translated at all. How various scribal attempts at solving a common problem have led to various results can be seen in a number of verses. A good example is

No. 20.4: Oe | |

Lethe pat bonde [or onde] and sende vs loue! “Loosen that bond [or diminish that malice] and send us love!”

Clearly, lethe was not understood by a number of scribes. Some, who perhaps found something like the graph Jiye in their models, copied the verb as Jay (W1) or hye (LC). Others, more intelligently, substituted a new

verb, /itle, instead (B3, L2, Go2, E). A second example, even more illustrative, is No. 40: Sithyn law for wyll bygynnyt to slakyn And falsehed for sleythe is i-takyn, Robbyng and reuyng ys holdyn purchas And of vnthewes is made solas, Engelond may synge alas, alas!

Sleythe (line 2) must originally have had a morally positive meaning—not merely “‘adroitness”’ but “‘ prudence,” the cardinal virtue, as the term is used in No. 59. But by the time the text was copied by V, its meaning had

rewritten as: ,

clearly deteriorated to “trickery,” and the whole line was accordingly And falsed and scleght for trewth es takyn.

~ ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM 113 Line 4 posed a similar problem with the noun vnthewes (“vices”), which

is variously replaced with alle maner synne (L2), vnclennes (Gol, V)

of both.

wantonese (Jo, E, B1), or foul fals lecchery (B3).2° This change no doubt can be explained as replacing a more general with a more specific term (in the last three instances), or as lexical updating (in L2), or as a combination

, Consequently, the form of the English verses as they have been preserved in several manuscripts reveals a process of updating: When a particular manuscript was copied, certain words were evidently no longer

in use, at least in a given area, and were therefore replaced by more current terms.** There are about a dozen of these:?2 *rinen, “to touch”’ (1.1);?8 onwrest, “wicked, evil; idle” (4.2); elde, “‘old age” (11.2); leben, “to loosen” (20.4);?4 nemen, “to take” (22.2);?° loken, “‘to keep, observe (a holy day)”’ (22.3);7° ferly, ‘““sudden”’ (34.1); sleythe, ‘‘ prudence”’

(40.2);?” unthewes, “vices” (40.4);?8 smackyng, “tasting”? (44.4); luper, “evil, good-for-nothing”’ (45.3); hyen, “to hasten”’ (46.1). Several of these words occur frequently in twelfth- and thirteenth-century works but seem

to have disappeared during the fourteenth century in texts other than 20 Notice that the noun unthewes also appears in No. 11.2, where it caused a similar problem. 21 Manuscripts that update English words fairly frequently are B3 and L2 (closely related); Gol and V (also closely related); and to a lesser extent, B1, E, and Sp. .

22 The variant readings for these and other “updated”? words can be found with the texts in the following chapter. 23 See the discussion at Verse 1. 24 According to the Middle English Dictionary (lethen, 1.b; Fasc. L4, p. 909), the phrase Jeben bondes was in use during the thirteenth century and until about 1325.

25 Nemen in the Second Commandment (not to take God’s name in vain) is

peculiar to FM (Verse 22.2) and to the similar verse (Index 1129) in Cambridge, , Trinity College, MS 323, of the thirteenth century. All other texts of Index 1129 and all other versifications of the Decalogue (Index 3731; 176; MS Egerton 655; Speculum Christiani) and ME prose versions have take. A peculiar wording (“‘name’’) occurs in the Chester Plays, V, 7: “My name in vayne name not yee”’ (ed. R. M. Lumiansky and D. Mills; EETS, ss, 3, London, 1974, p. 79). 26 Loke for the Third Commandment (to sanctify the Sabbath) is unique to FM among short versifications of the Decalogue. Other renditions use wite, yeme, kepe, hold, hallow, and honour. MED under loken, 11a, gives no witness for this usage (“‘to observe a holy day’’) later than the Ayenbite (1340). 27 Sleythe seems to have been used for the cardinal virtue of prudence in the first half of the fourteenth century, but not beyond 1400; see Oxford English Dictionary, and Hans Kasmann, Studien zum kirchlichen Wortschatz des Mittelenglischen, 11001350 (Tiibingen, 1961), pp. 250-251. 28 For the history of vunthewes, see Kasmann, ibid., pp. 273-274.

114 ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM Fasciculus morum. As already mentioned, this fact speaks strongly for the presence of the respective verses in Fasciculus morum at the date of its composition, i.e., shortly after 1300. It also reflects the attitude of later scribes and users of Fasciculus morum for whom these poems were no sacred texts but useful and handy devices in their ongoing work of preaching whose linguistic form had to be kept up to date.?° 2. THE ORIGINALITY OF FASCICULUS MORUM

We noticed earlier that in their indebtedness to Latin sources and in the variety of their functions the English verses of Fasciculus morum follow

closely common practices observable in other sermon literature of the period. The same adherence to common traditions appears in the fact that Fasciculus morum versifies favorite themes which not only recur but stand

out in contemporary preaching. Thus, the wretchedness of this world under the rule of Fortune is the subject of five poems (Nos. 36-39 and 41). Even more numerous are verses dealing with death and warning man to be ever mindful of his end; thirteen items make this their topic, nearly one fourth of all the English poems in the handbook (Nos. 13-16, 18, 19, 34, 35, 43, 49, 50, 54, 55). On a more positive note, the appeal of the suffering Christ for man’s love also appears, in a cluster of four verses (26-27, 29,

30, 31). The collection of English poems in Fasciculus morum, then, partakes fully in the larger themes that were common in late medieval preaching, devotional literature, and the religious lyric.®°

One can even point at very specific Latin verses which Fasciculus morum shares with similar preaching aids. The two Latin hexameters translated in No. 2, for example (“ Hostis non ledit ... ’’), are also quoted in the sermon collection made by Bishop John Sheppey, in a collection of sermon material (MS Harley 7322), in Holcot’s commentary on the Book of Wisdom, in Bromyard’s alphabetical handbook, and elsewhere. In my 2° The process of updating can also be observed, for example, in the interlinear glosses of Handlyng Synne (ed. F. J. Furnivall, EETS 119 and 123, London 19011903); in manuscripts of The Castle of Love, ed. Kari Sajavaara, The Middle English _ Translations of Robert Grosseteste’s ‘“‘ Chateau d’Amour’’, Mémoires de la Société ~ Néophilologique de Helsinki 32 (Helsinki, 1967); and between the two versions of The Charter of Christ, see M. C. Spalding, Middle English Charters of Christ, Bryn Mawr College Monographs 15 (Bryn Mawr, 1914), p. Ixxxi. °° See the discussions by Rosemary Woolf, The English Religious Lyric in the Middle Ages (Oxford, 1968); Douglas Gray, Themes and Images in the Medieval English Religious Lyric (London, 1972); and G. R. Owst, Literature and Pulpit in Medieval England, 2nd revised edition (Oxford, 1961).

ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM 115 **Comments” to the English verses I will indicate what other occurrences of the respective verse or its source I have found, in order to suggest how common specific items were. The same is, of course, also true of certain

prose passages that have been translated into English verses. Job’s reflection on mortality (“Homo natus de muliere...,” Job 14:1-2; Verse 15), a similar warning from Ecclesiasticus 7:40 (‘‘Memorare novissima tua...,’’ Verse 19), and Christ’s words from the cross taken from Lamentations 1:12 (‘O vos omnes...,” Verse 30) are commonplaces which it will take only a few minutes’ reading to encounter in any late medieval sermon collection.

Given these various traditional features which Fasciculus morum shares with other preaching aids, one may wonder if the actual English lines, too, were common property. Should we think of them as so many snatches that, once they had dropped in a moment of happy inspiration from the lips of some anonymous preacher, flew on the wings of memory

from pulpit to pulpit or were carried by itinerant friars from convent to convent, until they eventually found their way into a collection of common-

places such as Fasciculus morum? This is, on the surface, an attractive view, plausible in its realism and strengthened by the fact that certain

English rhyme words recur with great frequency, especially in metrical divisions.*+ But closer comparison of the English verses in Fasciculus

morum with similar poems found elsewhere reveals that so simple a picture is inaccurate. Of the fifty-five verses under consideration, some twenty do indeed occur in the same form outside this handbook, as the references to “‘separate occurrences”’ in the following chapter will show. But of these poems only five were unquestionably current, in precisely this

form, when Fasciculus morum was written and can therefore be safely considered as having been borrowed rather than created by its author. One of them, the message about long-sleepers (No. 45), is recorded in an anthology dating from about 1260. Another verse, the well-known stanza on Lady Fortune (No. 37), has likewise been preserved in early manuscripts besides Fasciculus morum, and its independent existence is further shown by its being introduced in Fasciculus morum as “‘an old proverb.” Finally, three other verses (Nos. 5, 6, and 23) are similarly introduced as if they were well-known sayings and are indeed found outside Fasciculus morum at an early date. Apart from these five verses, however, the evidence that English lines in Fasciculus morum were borrowed from existing poems

is considerably less definite than one would wish. For instance, two stanzas (Nos. 13 and 29) also appear as parts of independent longer poems. 31 For example, nede/spede and adjectives ending in -ful.

116 ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM While it is fairly clear that these poems are the result of additive expansion, it is not at all clear whether they borrowed their material from Fasciculus

morum or rather from a common tradition that lies behind them as well as behind Fasciculus morum and which today is no longer directly access- __ ible. The same would be true of a verse (No. 24, repeated as 51) which occurs verbatim also in Grimestone, and likewise of several other items that occur outside Fasciculus morum in a form that is only partially identical (Nos. 9, 17, 55). Finally, the remaining ten of the twenty verses that are | also found outside Fasciculus morum can with varying degrees of certainty be shown to have been copied from our treatise (Nos. 12, 22, 26, 35, 47, 50; 38, 48, 53) or to have been directly associated with it (54). Proof of such borrowing from Fasciculus morum rests largely on the verbal similarity of the context in which the respective verses appears, and it may help our understanding of the interdependence of preaching aids to examine one

such case of borrowing, together with the respective context, more carefully. Three English verses in Fasciculus morum (Nos. 38, 48, and 53) appear

in the same form also in MS Harley 7322 but nowhere else. This volume comprises several originally distinct manuscripts, all containing various preaching materials.°* The relevant sections, dating from approximately 1360, contain not only the three verses and their immediate Latin contexts, but also several stories which are likewise found in Fasciculus morum. These passages are verbally so similar to Fasciculus morum as to put a close relationship between the two works beyond doubt. As an illustration I quote the text surrounding Verse 53. In MS Harley it forms a complete and independent section, which is here reproduced in its totality.

Fasciculus morum MS Harley 7322 Narrat enim Seneca libro 6 Declamacionum, Narrat enim Seneca libro 6 Declamacionum

capitulo 8, quod antiquitus lex erat ta- capitulo 8, quod lex erat, lis quod mulieresintemplodeemini- quod mulieres ministrantes in templo dee strantes forent caste. Sed aliquando con- Vestis essent caste. Casus contigit

5 tigit quod una literata earum scripsit quod una literata de eis scripsit talem versum: “‘ Felices nupte, moriar tale verbum: “‘ Nupcie, moriar

quia nubere dulce.”’ quia nubere dulce est.” Anglice sic: pat ys mery to bea wyfe, For hit is mury to beon a wif, -Dye y woll and lese my lyfe. ich wolle leose my lif.

10 Quo percepto accusatur tanquam incesta, Accusatur igitur incesta, et hoc probatur in ipsam. Nam quia ipsa et racio est quod verum sit, quod per

| nupcias affectat, predicat illas esse hoc affectas nupcias et predicas etas

| felices. Item in hoc quod dicit, ‘‘moriar,” esse felices. Item in hoc quod dicis, “‘moriar,”’ : videtur illam affirmare eas consecutu- videtur quod tu affirmas te consecutu-

166-179. ,

32 The manuscript is briefly described and analyzed in Herbert, Catalogue, pp.

ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM 117 15 ras / quod affectat. Item quere utrum ram et affectas. Item aut iuras iurat expertisnupciis velinexpertis. expertis nupciis aut inexpertis. Si primo, sequitur quod est incesta. Si Si primo, sequitur quod eris incesta. Si secundo, mendosa est, et per consequens secundo, mendosa es, et per consequens

| indigna ministrare in templo tante dee. indigna ministrare dee Veste.

20 Secundum autem Ysidorum, Ethimologia- Moraliter ista dea Vesta secundum rum libro 8, capitulo 11, ista dea Vesta Ysidorum, Ezhim. libro 8, capitulo 11,

[MS: Veste] fuit ipsa terra, que varijs fuit terra quod variis vestita est herbis, plantis, arboribus, vestita herbis sit, plantis,

et ceteris. Et bene potest signare nostram et huiusmodi. Et bene potest significare 25 naturam terream, que transfertur in temp- naturam nostram terrenam, que transfertur lum, idest in celum, ubiquodam modo dei- intemplum, idest in celum, ubi quodam ficatur in Christo. Et certe ista domina modo in Christo deificatur. Certe ista non vult habere ministros nisi castos. domina non vult habere nisi castos miniQuid ergo dicam deillis qui non tantum stros. Quid ergo dicam de illis qui non 30 cogitant corde sed eciam exprimunt ore tantum cogitant corde set eciam exprimunt quam dulce sit peccatum luxurie, et to- ore quam dulce sit peccatum luxurie, et tota die deilla materia feda loquuntur ? ta die istius materie locuntur ? Unde vix Vix enim est aliquis popularis qui sciat est aliquis qui sit loqui

loqui aut trufare in cantus insolentes vel artru/fare [sic] quam de 35 componere nisi deilla materia. Quero ista materia. Quero ergo ergo an tu qui dicis te velle luxuriari, an tu qui dicis velle committere luxuriam, an dicis verum an non? Si sic, iuxta Apos- aut dicis verum aut non? Sic si sit, iam

tolum Eph. 5iam mechatus es in corde ergo mechatus est in corde tuo, I Eph.

tuo, et per consequens non ministratu- 5. 40 rusintemplo dei, sed omnino expellendus. ,

Sinon, ergo mentitus es, quod grave pec- Sinon, ergo mentitus est, quod grave catum est, et maximein viro perfecto, peccatum est, et maxime in viro profecto cuiusmodi est clericus cuiuscumque con- cuius est clericus culuscumque condicionis. Item non solum mentiris, verum dicionis. Propterea non solum mentiris 45 eciam ad peccatum uxorem trahis et ex- set eciam proximum ad peccatum trahis et

citas. Dicit enim Apostolus ad Cor. 15: excitas, iuxta istud Cor. 15: |

*“‘“Corrumpunt bonos mores colloquia “Corrumpunt bonos mores colloquia prava.”’ Et per consequens a communione prava,’’ Unde expellendus est a templo et

templi [expellendus es].%% communione Christi.**

The two versions are obviously copies of the same text. Their verbal identity appears not only in the narrative about the Vestal virgin, but beyond in its moral application and the biblical quotations. What variants occur are slight differences in word choice, phrasing, and word order, such as are common in any late medieval text that has a rich textual history, including Fasciculus morum. In addition, the text of Harley 7322 is rather corrupt: necessary words are omitted (lines 6, 9) or drastically misspelled (lines 12, 34). A more curious phenomenon Is the use of the second person singular in lines 12-19, which may have been caused by the scribe’s antici-

pating the use of the second person singular in the following moral application, lines 20-49. The same mixture of verbal agreement and scribal variation occurs also in the passages surrounding the other two English verses shared by Fasciculus morum and Harley 7322, and further in some twenty passages 33 R, fols. 142v—-143r.

84 MS Harley 7322, fols. 45v—46r.

118 ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM

without English verses that occur in both works. In several cases, the stories utilized in these passages are also told in other preaching aids of the early fourteenth century, such as Holcot’s Moralitates, the collection called Convertimini, Bromyard, and the Gesta Romanorum. Evidently, these tales were in oral circulation and were, during the first half of the fourteenth century, written down in various forms by various authors.*° But their form in Fasciculus morum and Harley 7322 is verbally so similar and

at the same time distinctly different from other versions as to suggest either that Harley 7322 utilized Fasciculus morum, or that both works | depend on a common source. Since no such source (which should present the respective passages verbatim as Fasciculus morum and Harley 7322 do)

is known; since Fasciculus morum is the earlier, the more carefully designed, and the more “‘literary”’ of the two works; and since Harley 7322 shows strong indications of an oral style, which suggests that its sermons, exempla, and notes may have been copied from reportationes— it is most likely that Fasciculus morum itself is the source for the respective passages in Harley 7322, including the three English verses.*® Nevertheless, Harley 7322 contains a good many more English verses than these three—over eighty in all—, of which nearly three fourths are unique to this manuscript. This phenomenon: that a sermon book with a large number of English verses contains some that are also found elsewhere but has many others which are peculiar to itself, is characteristic not only of Harley 7322 but of other preaching aids as well. In Bishop Sheppey’s sermon collection (MS Merton 248) I count thirty-five English items,°’ of which only five have so far been found elsewhere—three of them in a collection of sermon material made near the end of the fourteenth century,*® the fourth in Grimestone. Similarly, Friar John Grime35 Of the works mentioned, Convertimini also shows surprising similarities with FM, against Holcot, Bromyard, and the Gesta Romanorum. These relations can be studied further when a critical edition of FM is available. 86 Tt should be noted that several stories in FM with English verses that also appear in Harley 7322, where they lack the English (i.e., material at Nos. 2, 28, 31, 33), are in the latter manuscript not verbally identical with FM. This is particularly noteworthy regarding the Roman prophecy (FM Verse 33) and Acontius and Cydippe (FM Verse 28). 87 My count is based on the items listed in Index and Supplement and on an examination of the manuscript. 38 The three (Index 3803, 3699, and Supplement 3246.5) occur also in Cambridge, , University Library, MS Ii.III.8. For this manuscript, see P. C. Erb, ‘“‘ Vernacular Material for Preaching in MS. Cambridge University Library Ii.III.8,’’ Mediaeval Studies 33 (1971), 63-84, and Theo Stemmler, ‘‘ More English Texts from MS. CUL. Ti. 111.8,” Anglia 93 (1975), 1-16.

ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM _ 119

_ stone’s commonplace book contains 246 English items.°® Of this large number only twenty-seven occur elsewhere (one appears twice in Grimestone, as Nos. 39 and 92, and is here counted twice); four of these are shared with Harley 7322, one with Merton 248, and two with Fasciculus

morum.*° ,

Such statistics must, of course, be taken with a grain of salt, since further search in sermon manuscripts may bring new items or additional occurrences to light. Nevertheless, the picture that has emerged will essentially remain unchanged: preaching aids composed in the fourteenth

century include some English verses that apparently were common property; but they also present a much larger number of verses that are unique to each work. This observation applies fully to Fasciculus morum.

I am convinced that its anonymous author, while incorporating some vernacular verses which he found ready-made either in written sources or in oral circulation, also composed others himself. My argument for the originality of Fasciculus morum receives further support from the appearance of multiple translations of the same model. We noted earlier that specific Latin verses or prose passages were great favorites with medieval preachers who quote them again and again, and that a number of them were translated into English verse—not once but

several times, in different forms.*! It is not unusual to find a Latin sententia to have been independently translated in half a dozen or more different poems. Fasciculus morum fully shares in this process. At least eight of its English poems are versions of Latin sources for which different

translations exist elsewhere (Nos. 8, 19, 22, 29, 30, 31, 43, 50). They include such favorites as “In cruce sum pro te” (No. 29), the poem **Homo, vide quid pro te patior’’ by Philip the Chancellor (No. 31), the | biblical “‘Memorare novissima tua” (No. 19), and a very popular verse rendition of the Decalogue (“Unum crede deum,”’ No. 22). Now, it is remarkable that in every case of multiple translations Fasciculus morum has its own rendition, which in its wording, rhymes, and often length unmistakably differs from the others. It would seem that its author, while sharing the interest of other preachers in favorite quotations, made his

own independent translations. | |

I would therefore claim that whoever composed Fasciculus morum drew some of his English material from common traditions, whether those 39 See Wilson, Grimestone.

. 40 They are, respectively, Wilson, Nos. 39, 107, 155, and 215 (also in Harley 7322); No. 229 (also in Merton 248); and Nos. 87 and 133 (in FM Verses 24/51 and 9). Notice that Wilson’s No. 164 also appears in Lincoln Cathedral MS 44. #1 See above. pp. 89-90.

120 ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM were written or oral, but also provided a good number of verses of his own making. This combination is, I believe, also reflected in the Latin phrases which link the English verses to their Latin context. Although the transi-

tional phrases vary somewhat from one manuscript to another, in their form as well as their very presence, one can nevertheless observe with a sufficient degree of regularity that English verses which translate a Latin source text are either added to it without any transitional phrase (e.g., Nos. 1 and 2) or, more often, linked by means of a simple “‘ Anglice”’ or ‘“‘ Anglice sic”’ (e.g., Nos. 9, 11, etc.).*? English verses that are only loosely

based on the preceding text or have no verbal basis in it tend to be introduced with a complete sentence, such as “ Unde dicitur Anglice”’ or

: “Et ideo dicitur Anglice sic” (e.g., Nos. 16, 12, 13). There is, however, a good deal of overlap between these two groups, even in the same manuscript.

More revealing are longer transitional sentences which lead to English verses that have no verbal basis in the Latin context and, at the same time, are also not integral parts of a story. Two poems are introduced with a first-person singular verb. The prayer to alleviate envy (No. 20) is linked by “‘ And thus I can say in English, as it seems to me”’ (“Et ideo sic Anglice possum dicere ut michi videtur”’).4° Quite similarly, a complaint

verse on the disappearance of true love (No. 25), equally without verbal basis in the Latin, is introduced with the words: ‘‘But I fear that I can say...” (“Sed timeo quod dicere possum”’).** It should be stressed that the phrase possum dicere occurs fairly often in late medieval sermons, especially in remarks about contemporary abuses as it does in these two poems, and that it must not necessarily signal the preacher’s authorship. But on the other hand, neither of these two poems has been found in any text other than Fasciculus morum, which makes it more than likely that these verses originated with the author of this work. In contrast to these two stanzas are four poems whose introductory sentences suggest that they were borrowed from elsewhere. The poem on

Lady Fortune is presented as “an ancient proverb” (“est antiquum proverbium sic canens,” No. 37). The other three poems are all introduced with the remark, ““Whence someone has said in English’ (“Unde quidam *2 But notice that where R has no transitional phrase, some other manuscripts may have “‘ Anglice”’ or “‘ Anglice sic.’”? Conversely, where R has such a phrase, some of the other manuscripts may lack it. There is no regularity in this. #8 Of the manuscripts that have Verse 20, B3 and Go2 omit “‘possum dicere ut

michi videtur.”’ , *4 All manuscripts with Verse 25 and even Mo have this introductory sentence.

ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM 121 dixit Anglice”’). These are a complaint at the moral decay of the present age (No. 40),*° a moral poem warning of the consequences of lechery (No. 54, using the present-tense dicit or ait), and the well-known verses on the ,

“Signs of Death’ (No. 55). It is worth noting that not only their introductory formula but also their peculiar verse forms suggest their derivation

from a native, vernacular tradition. The first and the third certainly have English analogues dating from the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. However, these analogues are no more than analogues that may or may

not be related to a common ancestor. As they stand, in their precise linguistic form, the three poems in Fasciculus morum are unique to this work, including the lines on the “‘Signs of Death.”’ One might even think that while they versify commonplaces, their actual, concrete form is the work of the author of Fasciculus morum. But whatever the precise extent of his own verse-making may have been, our analysis reveals that the author of Fasciculus morum has left a considerable and diversified corpus of English poems representative of vernacular verses that were used in prose sermons during the fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries. Some of them stem from a native English tradition, such as popular proverbs, proverbial sayings, message verses in exempla, and probably one or two genuine poems. Others derive from the learned tradition of formulating didactic material, meditative or rhetorical | commonplaces, or the punch line of a story in verse, first in Latin and then in an English translation. Much of it was common property, even if its existence outside this handbook has not been recorded or discovered. But it seems equally clear that a good many English verses have come from the

very quill of the unknown preacher who compiled this “bundle of virtues.”

3. PREACHERS’ VERSES AND THE ENGLISH RELIGIOUS LYRIC

If the texts here edited from Fasciculus morum are compared with the best religious lyrics written in Middle English, they will, on their esthetic merit alone, hardly qualify for admission to a Golden Treasury of World

Poetry or The Oxford Book of English Verse. Their shortness, lack of artistry, and general poetic unambitiousness make them at best third- or fourth-class citizens in the kingdom of lyrics. If some of them have been included in scholarly anthologies of Middle English poetry, it is, one *5 12 has an interesting expanded form which interprets the verse: “‘Unde quidam metrice conquerendo de rapina iudicum et advocatorum, divitum et dominorum Anglice sic ait.”

122 ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM suspects, not for their intrinsic poetic value so much as for their historical importance. With the evidence about their function, preservation, popularity, and originality before us, we may now ask what light Fasciculus morum can shed on the place which these and similar verses occupy in the history of the English religious lyric. In what is surely the most substantive and important contribution to the subject published in recent years, Rosemary Woolf has approached the English religious lyrics of the Middle Ages as essentially meditative poems

which must be seen within the history and conventions of medieval devotion. Accordingly, Miss Woolf groups the poems by the main subjects of medieval meditation and traces them as directly as possible back to specific meditative commonplaces, such as various formulations of Christ’s appeal from the cross, complaints of the Virgin, warnings to keep death in mind, and the like.** We have noticed earlier that many of these commonplaces are indeed represented in Fasciculus morum. Here we must add that the respective verses often appear in the simplest, shortest, most closely translated, and least adorned form of all the various versions in which the specific commonplace was expressed in the course of Middle English literature. In my comments on the individual poems edited in the next chapter I present evidence which will put the verses from Fasciculus

morum in relation to commonplace Latin source texts as well as Middle English analogues or parallels found outside this work. In some cases,

Fasciculus morum contains a unique rendering of a favorite Latin commonplace which was very often quoted in sermons and manuals but

translated only here, such as “Hostis non ledit’? (No. 2; other unique | translations of favorite passages are Nos. 10, 11, 14, 28, 33, 34, 41, 42). In other cases, where a Latin commonplace led to multiple translations, the version in Fasciculus morum is not only different from the others (as has

been stated earlier) but in its linguistic and metrical form noticeably simpler and closer to the original (although in some instances also more artistic).47 A good example are the meditative verses by Philip the Chancellor, ‘Homo, vide quid pro te patior”’ (No. 31). The eight Latin lines were Englished at least in eight different forms, but only Fasciculus morum manages to render them in the same number of lines, whereas the other versions need at least ten and as many as sixteen verses. The same closeness to the Latin source, in terms of length and wording, appears also in the renderings of such other meditative commonplaces as “In cruce sum pro te’’ and ““O vos omnes” (Nos. 29 and 30), of a very popular versification 46 Woolf, Religious Lyric, esp. pp. 1-19. 47 See some comments in ‘“‘ English Verses,” pp. 232-233 and 244.

ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM 123 of the Decalogue (No. 22), and of several other favorite Latin quotations

(Nos. 8, 19, 43, 50). : Even if evolutionary judgments of this kind must be viewed with some caution, it nevertheless stands to reason that their simplicity of form and

linguistic closeness to their models, combined with the early date of composition, make it very likely that the English verses of Fasciculus morum

stand at the beginning of a literary development which eventually led to

the lyric gems produced by John Grimestone or Lydgate. Certainly, Fasciculus morum is the earliest work that offers a rich and fairly comprehensive collection of meditative commonplaces in English verse.

Another important insight furnished by Miss Woolf’s study of the religious lyrics is her emphasis on their indebtedness to specific Latin

texts. This point is amply supported by the evidence from Fasciculus | morum and similar preaching aids, where a very large percentage of English

verses are directly translated from Latin sources. Given the growing ignorance of Latin among contemporary scholars, it is well to stress this fact once more, and it is well to voice a gentle reminder that even the most |

learned students of Middle English lyrics who fully understood their dependence on Latin models did not always realize how close and precise that dependence was.*® The more one immerses oneself in the relevant 48 Two examples will suffice: (a) In discussing poems on ‘*The Three Sorrowful

Things,” Carleton Brown, in EL XIII, pp. 172-173, prints a Latin poem of four hexameters (‘“‘Sunt tria que vere faciunt me sepe dolere’’) which, he says, “‘occurs only in Latin MSS.” and ‘‘seems to be a translation of the corresponding English verses, rather than their source.’ R. Woolf mentions the same Latin poem but seems more convinced that the English ‘‘is the rendering of a Latin aphorism”’ (p. 86; cf. p. 349, n. 1). In fact, the English lines are beyond question translations of a Latin poem, but one which differs from the four lines Brown quoted and which in several manuscripts appears next to the English. The English poem in Grimestone’s common- } place book (Wilson, No. 239; Index 3969) is preceded by the two hexameters: Sunt tria ve que mestificant me nocte dieque:

? Hinc quia migro, nescio quando, deveniam quo. Neither C. Brown nor R. Woolf nor E. Wilson saw the Latin couplet (MS Advocates

18.7.21, fol. 154v, top of col. b; I am grateful to Professor Robert E. Lewis for independently verifying its presence). The same Latin lines (Walther, Proverbia, 30850) appear in MS Merton 248, fols. 166v,b-167r,a and Worcester Cathedral, MS F.126, fol. 27v,b, in each case with a different English translation following them (Index 3713 and the text printed above, Ch. II, p. 85, respectively). Obviously it is this Latin couplet which forms the direct source for the English versions. (b) R. Woolf quotes an interesting ‘‘scrap of English (also with Latin translation): ‘Pe name Ihesu honi [sic] is in mupe, murie drem in ere, michel blisse in herte’”’ (p. 373, n. 2). The English is, of course, the direct translation, not the source, of the Latin commonplace, ‘Jesus mel in ore, in aure melos, in corde jubilus,”’ from St. Bernard, Sermones in Cantica, XV, 6 (PL 183:847).

124 ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM manuscripts, the stronger grows one’s sense of this relation; and I am certain that other readers of these neglected and not always very exciting texts will be able to offer concrete and better information where my own

discussion has left question marks. ,

As to the main subjects which Miss Woolf discerns in medieval |

meditation and in the Middle English religious lyric: Christ’s Passion, the Last Things, especially death, and the Blessed Virgin, Fasciculus morum , offers both more and less. Of the three subjects, the first two are indeed very

well represented: The book contains at least four poems dealing with , Christ’s Passion and at least thirteen concerned with man’s death. The third subject, the Blessed Virgin, appeats once in a prayer to “Mary, mother of mercy” (No. 10). But it is curious that no poem in Fasciculus morum deals with Mary’s Joys or her presence at the cross, which were both favorite topics in medieval meditation and art. Such relative neglect may well be a characteristic trait of Fasciculus morum and its author, for while the Virgin’s compassion for mankind is mentioned here and there, it usually appears as only a constituent part of a larger issue*® and is never truly highlighted. If one may say so, in Fasciculus morum the Blessed Virgin definitely takes second place.

On the other hand, the poems gathered in this work cover a good many more subjects than Rosemary Woolf has focussed on: the evils of pride, the need to discipline children, the degeneracy of the times, true love, Fortune, and others. This does of course not mean that Fasciculus morum treats more subjects in its verses than critics have realized; what it

does mean is that by defining “religious lyric” as “meditative poem,” Miss Woolf automatically excludes moral-didactic poems on the topics listed. Preaching aids, such as Fasciculus morum and similar works studied

in Chapter II, are full of ‘“‘meditative poems’’; in fact, for fourteenthcentury poetry they are the most important vehicles that have conveyed meditative poems to us. But at the same time they also carry without discrimination a good proportion of other, more didactic verses, many of which are by no means wholly devoid of verbal skill and poetic appeal.

This is, naturally, what one would expect to find in a sermon. It is _ supposed to kindle sentiments of love and fear and devotion, but it is likewise expected to teach the faith and to exhort its audience to shun vice “9 By “‘constituent part of a larger issue’? I have in mind the inclusion of a commonplace of Marian devotion into a larger image, as, for example: the “‘appeal of the Virgin to her son by baring her breast”? appears in FM as part of the image of the Ship of Faith, on which Mary is the mast. See my article “‘A Latin Miracle with Middle English Verses,’ Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 72 (1971), esp. p. 79.

ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM 125 and practice virtue. Hence the greater variety of subject matter found in _ the poems which were made to achieve these purposes. Hence also the great variety of functions which we found such verses to carry out in sermons. To view them all as mnemonic devices, as memory verses, is by

far too narrow, for we have seen that a good number were used not to help remember certain matters but to summarize, to furnish structure, or to create rhetorical emphasis. In a way, of course, any catchy rhyme may linger in one’s memory, often even against one’s will, and may thus prolong the impact of a sermon beyond its moment of delivery. But this more diffuse psychological effect is not what critics normally think of when speaking about mnemonic verses or aides-mémoire. Their use in sermons, in oral delivery, also accounts for their relative

formal simplicity. Yet stylistic artlessness does not prevent them from being pleasing, effective, even forceful. The purpose for which they were created demanded a simple vocabulary, economy of diction and style, an occasional display of verbal wit, and a rhythm that would strongly underline the movement of the poems’ thought as it appears in their syntactic structure.°° A good many verses of Fasciculus morum possesses exactly

such qualities.°1 What we should realize is that they cannot be fairly judged by an esthetic of the lyric, nor on the other hand by an esthetic of the epigram. Theirs is the art of the punch line. Although she never very clearly distinguishes between meditative lyric and sermon verse, Miss Woolf many times explains formal rudeness in a poem that by its subject matter belongs among meditative lyrics by relegating it to preaching verses. An item in Grimestone’s commonplace book on the theme “‘Ecce sto ad ostium et pulso,”’ for example, is felt to

be “‘an unpleasing poem” and consequently put away “as a convenient , versification of various sermon themes”’ (which it is certainly not).°? Miss

Woolf’s genuine difficulty here stems from her terminology: The label ‘meditative poem” not only implies certain attitudes on the part of the poet from which “brisk didacticism”’ and “ practical advice”’ are excluded,

but it also carries with it connotations of intimacy, delicacy, and fervor which of course are missing in large numbers of preaching verses. The question which her evaluation of individual poems in the light of the - meditative tradition thus poses is a historical one: how are we to envision the actual use of these religious poems? Were “‘ meditative lyrics”’ indeed used in true meditation? Were they whispered or sung in the stillness of a 50 Examples of successful use of rhythm are Verses 20, 25, 40, and 49. 51 Examples are Verses 12, 19, 20, 29-31, 34~36, 42, 54, and others. 52 Woolf, Religious Lyric, p. 51.

126 ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM hermit’s or nun’s cell? Were they recited from the pulpit? And finally, was their function at all different from that of verses cited in sermons? _ The surest way to provide an answer would be by studying the manuscript context in which “‘ meditative poems” have been preserved. For the earliest religious lyrics, unfortunately, this approach is quite inconclusive since English lyrics of the thirteenth century have been preserved either in

very random ways that yield no information about their actual use, or in important collections whose authorship, association, and precise purpose are all matters of great controversy.®? It is not until the first half of the fourteenth century that one comes across sizeable bodies of poems about whose function there can be no doubt. These are the verses in sermons and preaching books such as Fasciculus morum.

In Western culture, to meditate means to think intensely about a given object (which may be a person, an event, a statement, or a mere image or fiction) so as not only to gain insight but also to obtain vivid appeals to one’s senses (primarily the sense of sight) through one’s imagination, to experience strong emotions (hatred, love, fear, joy, hope, etc.), and to direct one’s will toward certain goals and strengthen it in its resolve.5* As an actual exercise or practice, meditation certainly differs from a sermon in many ways, including the intensity and duration and the degree of individual imagination and originality with which the meditating person on the one hand and the listener on the other reflect upon a

given object. But in their purposes the two activities are much alike. Though a sermon pursues additional aims besides appealing to the audience’s emotions and thus directing its will to the good, surely this is

one of its primary goals. Concrete evidence that fourteenth-century preachers in their sermons strove for the same goals as did formal medita— tion is not wanting. The long section on love in Fasciculus morum, for

example, again and again recommends meditating on Christ’s passion. For instance: Love that has been lost may be recovered . . . if man diligently attends to, and within himself continually thinks about, what love Christ has shown us, not only in His blessed Incarnation but also His cruel Passion... . If we are willing to meditate on (discutere) this love constantly in our mind 53 Such as MSS Digby 86 and Cambridge, Trinity College 323, which are discussed in Karl Reichl, Religidse Dichtung im englischen Hochmittelalter (Munich,

1973), pp. 73-79 and passim. | |

54 Cf. the fine discussion by Louis L. Martz, The Poetry of Meditation, rev. edition (New Haven, 1962), pp. 13-22.

ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM 127 and heart, indeed if we have become true children of God, we will naturally find again the love thus lost.®°

The pages which follow specify at great length why Christ shed His blood, on what day, how, and where, at what hour and at what age He suffered, by whom He was accused, and how many times He was scorned.®° A similar recommendation to “consider’’ >” Christ’s suffering can be found preceding

Verse 21. Meditation on death, the second major topic of Miss Woolf’s study, is likewise enjoined on several occasions. For instance, the author of Fasciculus morum tells us that humility can be obtained by meditation on death (memoria mortis), to which is devoted an entire chapter, including five English verses (Nos. 14-17, 19). Avarice, too, may be overcome by the

thought of death, for: As Augustine says: “The sickness of greed can never be better curbed than when one meditates in advance (premeditatur) about the day of one’s death.”’ And St. Jerome says: ‘‘ He who envisions himself (cogitat) about |

to die, and how all his goods must be left to the world, easily scorns everything.” >®

The text then specifies the physical narrowness of the grave®® and continues with further commonplaces on memoria mortis. Thus, not only is meditation on the standard subjects recommended throughout Fasciculus morum, but nearly all the meditative commonplace passages discussed by

Miss Woolf, and several others in addition, are quoted here, with or without English verse renderings. The same is true of actual contemporary sermons. 55 ‘‘Restat autem iam quarto et ultimo videre quomodo hec caritas sic elongata possit recuperari. Revera hoc modo: Si enim homo diligenter attenderet et penes se iugiter deliberaret qualem caritatem Christus nobis ostendit, non tantum in sua benedicta incarnacione verum eciam in sua crudeli passione... . /Igitur, si hanc caritatem iugiter tam mente quam corde discutere velimus, revera si veri filij dei fuerimus, caritatem sic elongatam naturaliter reperiemus.’’ R, fols. 41v—42r. 56 R, fols. 42r—47r.

57 Considerare is very frequently used in FM for what clearly means “‘to meditate

on.’? For the simple act of directing the reader’s attention to a subject (“let us consider’’), the handbook uses other verbs, such as videndum or notandum or sciendum est. 68 “Bene ait Augustinus: ‘Avaricie,’ inquit, ‘morbus nunquam melius compescitur quam cum dies mortis premeditatur.’ Et ideo dicit beatus Jeronimus: ‘Facile,’ inquit, ‘contempnit omnia qui se cogitat moriturum et omnia bona concessa mundo relinquenda’.”’ R, fol. 83r.

5° “Quod quidem sepulcrum satis est strictum, nam eius altitudinem cervix mencietur cum naso, pectus cum tergo latitudinem (idest, duo latera), sed longitudinem caput cum pedibus. Et ideo ad mundane glorie extinccionem [MS: extensionem] semper est mors ante oculos premeditanda.”’ Ibidem.

128 ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM It appears, therefore, that the meditative poems which lie behind the Middle English religious lyric “lived”’ in sermons; or in other words, that the medieval religious lyric owed a very great debt to the creative impulse and delight which preachers took in using verses in their sermons. For further proof, one might point out that meditative poems of the simplest kind have been preserved predominantly in sermon manuscripts. For

example, the Latin commonplace attributed to St. Bernard: “The memory of Christ’s passion draws out tears, floods the eyes, wets the face, and sweetens the heart,” ®° whose idea Miss Woolf calls ‘‘the cornerstone of the Middle English Passion lyrics,’’®! was rendered in English verses that evidently enjoyed a great popularity and that are known today from nine different manuscripts.°? The form closest to the Latin reads: pe munde of Cristes passion, Pat was hure alre ransun, Teres hit tolle3, Eches hit bolle3, _ Nebbes hit wete3, And hertes hit swete3.°° Of the nine manuscripts at least seven are definitely collections of sermons.** , 60 ** Memoria passionis Christi. lacrimas elicit. oculos infundit. facies humescit. corda dulcessit’’; Oxford, St. John’s College, MS 190, fol. 232r, followed by the English verse rendering quoted next. See also Brown, EL XIII, p. 211. |

, 81 Woolf, Religious Lyric, p. 21. , , 82 Index and Supplement, which list only a total of four appearances, give two

entries, 1977 and 3433, but there is no good reason for thus dividing the nine extant versions, because the differences between the two groups (including the first lines) are not any greater than differences between individual versions within each group. Actually, the version of the first manuscript listed under Index 1977 has the same beginning as Index 3433. See further note 64.

, 83 Oxford, St. John’s College, MS 190, fol. 232r. 64 (1) Cambridge, Gonville and Caius College, MS 408, fol. 135v. A thirteenth-

century Dominican collection of sermon material. (2) Cambridge, St. John’s College, MS 62, fol. 126v. Thirteenth-century sermon materials. (3) Oxford, St. John’s College, MS 190, fol. 232r. Written in the margin next to a.‘‘Sermo tempore penitencie.”’ The next four occurrences are in a sermon on “‘Quia amore langueo,”’ preserved in: (4) Oxford, Balliol College, MS 149, fol. 31v. Probably Oxford sermons, copied after 1381, perhaps by a secular priest. (5) Oxford, Magdalen College, MS 93, fol. 152v (new foliation). John Dygoun’s notebook of sermon material. (6) Cambridge, University Library, MS Kk.IV.24, fol. 144r. Fifteenth-century sermons. (7) Dublin, Trinity College, MS 277. Fifteenth-century theological excerpts. The two remaining manuscripts in which the verse does not appear strictly in a sermon context are: (8) Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Laud Misc. 112, fol. 275v. Marginal, in a thirteenthcentury manuscript from the Benedictine Cathedral priory of Ely; see also p. 131 and

ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM 129 The close links between preaching and meditation, and the appearance of early meditative verses in sermons, must, however, not obscure the very

marked differences that exist between preaching verses and what Miss Woolf considers genuine meditative poems. I have elsewhere stressed that the religious lyrics of MS Harley 2253, many of which deal with the same themes, are essentially different from verses that occur in contemporary

sermons with respect to their length, their metrical complexity, their verbal art, and their occasional use of courtly or Romance conventions

(such as the nature introduction, the pastourelle form, etc.).°> This observation can be extended to many other “meditative poems,” and in fact R. Woolf does precisely that, especially in her discussion of earlier lyrics on death.®* There is, moreover, an additional element to these aspects which sets preaching verses that were used in the first half of the

fourteenth century so sharply apart from earlier and contemporary meditative poems that it could fairly be used as a touchstone: the presence of a meditating “‘I”’ whose reaction to the subject of meditation—Christ suffering, man’s sinfulness or death, Mary’s joys and mercy—is recorded in intimate and “personal”’ tones. This element can be expressed in very simple terms, as in what may be the earliest meditative poem in Middle English: Nou goth sonne vnder wod——=se—’ Me reweth, Marie, pi faire Rode; *®”

or it can pervade long but intense prayer-like lyrics: Al vnreken ys my ro, Louerd crist, whet shal y say ?° note 75. (9) Oxford, Ashmole MS 360, fol. 145r. The verse appears in a collection of sentences from the Fathers. The manuscript has been associated with a Franciscan

house: see Reichl, Religidse Dichtung, p. 91, following N. R. Ker. | 65 “*The Harley Lyrics and Contemporary Preaching,” a paper given before Section 2 at the annual meeting of the Modern Language Association, Dec. 26, 1975. The paper is to be published in a volume edited by R. H. Robbins.

68 See, for example, her remarks on length (pp. 106f.), verbal play (p. 106), complex meter (pp. 58, 107), and Romance conventions (pp. 57, 65, 109), and her frequent distinctions between “‘literary’’ and ‘‘didactic”’’ style (pp. 96ff.).

8? Index 2320, found in the Speculum ecclesie by St. Edmund (died 1240), a treatise which gives instructions on meditation. The earliest manuscripts which preserve the English poems are French versions of St. Edmund’s ‘‘ Merure,”’ written in the second half of the thirteenth century. The work must have been composed ca. 1220. See Sister Helen P. Forshaw (ed.), Edmund of Abingdon, Speculum Religiosorum and Speculum Ecclesiae (London, 1973), pp. 15-16 and 93. 88 Index 968, from Harley 2253; ed. Brown, EL XIII, No. 88, lines 49-50.

130 ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM or penitential lyrics like the famous “‘No more ne will 1 wiked be.’ ®? In Fasciculus morum, such a meditating voice is totally lacking. The poems dealing with Christ’s passion, for instance, are all addresses from Christ

to man, which the preacher quotes to his congregation: “Behold myne woundes”’ (No. 25), “‘Behold my woundes wide, man” (No. 26), “‘A, 3e men pat by me wendenn’”’ (No. 30), “‘Beholde, man, what I dree”’ (No. 31). Not a single line reverses this process by addressing Christ, as does the poem “‘Worldes blisce, haue god day”’: Ha, Iesu! pin holi hefd Wit ssarpe pornes was by-weued... .”°

Much less does Fasciculus morum contain more complex forms dealing with the same meditative situation, such as dialogues between Christ on the cross and the Virgin. Such absence of an intimate, personal, prayer-like tone characterizes not only Fasciculus morum but also the other preaching aids composed in the same period which quote large numbers of English poems, notably MSS Merton College 248 and Harley 7322. The corpus of over 170 poems preserved in the three works contains only two apparent exceptions to this rule, and these turn out not to be genuine exceptions if

they are examined more closely and in their context.”4 Quite typically, then, verses used in actual preaching during the first half of the fourteenth century completely lack the intimate and personal tone created by the

voice or stance of a meditating “‘I”’. | :

This is not true of John Grimestone’s commonplace book (written in 1372), which collects over 200 English poems for use in preaching and

comprises a large number of genuine meditative lyrics, including the

burden, ,

touching addresses of the Virgin to Christ in the cradle (the lullabies) or on the cross, or man’s address of the suffering Christ with its powerful Lu[uJeli ter of loueli ey3e, qui dostu me so wo? Sorful ter of sorful ey3e, pu brekst myn herte a-to.”2

To be sure, we are here in the presence of a true and great poet. But I _ wonder whether this difference between Fasciculus morum and its contem-

89 Index 2293; ed. Brown, EL XIII, No. 66. |

: 7 Index 4221; ed. Brown, EL XIII, No. 58, lines 9-10.

"I Index 1749, in Merton 248 (ed. Brown, RL XIV, No. 35), a prayer for mercy, has similarities with a penitential lyric but is more probably a liturgical prayer in a curious litany-like form; it and the surrounding sermon need further study. Other poems in Merton 248 translate Latin hymns. For Index 1847, in Harley 7322, see my remarks in *“‘The Harley Lyrics,” cited above, note 65. 72 Index 3691; ed. Brown, RL XIV, No. 69.

ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM 131 poraries on the one hand and Grimestone and later sermon verses on the other does not also indicate a change in preaching style. It may well be that

genuine meditative poems in English originating in the first half of the thirteenth century formed a tradition that ran alongside preaching verses,

which in the early fourteenth century lacked the intimate and personal tone | of meditations, until the two traditions somehow fused in the second half of the fourteenth century, perhaps under the influence of mystical poets such as Richard Rolle and his followers. However tentative such chronological statements must be, the change itself can be seen almost paradigmatically in the form of such a simple poem as “‘pe munde of Cristes passion”

quoted a few pages earlier. The version printed there comes from a collection of sermons made about 1300. There the Latin source passage

and the English verse rendering make an objective statement about © Christ’s passion and its effects. But in a sermon from the end of the fourteenth century this statement is, as it were, personalized by various means, primarily the possessive adjectives: Beatus Augustinus sic: “‘Memoria passionis tue, 0 bone Ihesu, lacrimas allicit, oculos confundit, faciem umtat [sic], et cor dulciat.” The mynde of by swete passyon, Ihesu, terys hyt tellys, myn eyes hyt bollyth, my vesage hyt wetyth, and myn herte swetyth.”°

This “sweetening up,”’ as it were, of the traditional verse agrees well with

the affective mysticism of a more baroque quality which this entire sermon (““Amore langueo’’) possesses, and which is generated, for example, by the introduction of details about Christ’s passion that have no | base in the sober evangelical narratives.”* It cannot be claimed that this verse evolved in time from an “‘objective’’ to a more “ personalized”’ form; in fact, its earliest preserved form is very much like the one just quoted.”®

What can be claimed is that in the context of actual sermons" the “‘per738 Cambridge, University Library, Kk.IV.24, fol. 144r,b.

74 For example: The hooks at the end of the scourges with which Jesus was struck; the legend of Mancus or Malcus, one of His scourgers; the Virgin’s suffering when she saw Christ carrying the cross (from the ‘‘Evangelium Nazarenorum’’); the tearing of Christ’s skin when the scarlet cloak was taken off again, etc.

78 In MS Laud Misc. 112, printed by Woolf, Religious Lyric, p. 373, n.2,a | thirteenth-century “‘learned monastic manuscript”’ from Ely. The early date of the verse is also indicated by its use of the older word /eres, “‘cheeks,”’ for vesage/vysage.

76 MS Ashmole 360 (thirteenth century) has the verse in a series of Patristic quotations, without “sweet” or ““my”’; ed. Brown, EL XIII, No. 56(A). Cambridge,

century.

132 ENGLISH VERSES OF FASCICULUS MORUM |

sonalized’’ form does not make its appearance until late in the fourteenth

Rosemary Woolf’s approach to the Middle English religious lyric as meditative poetry has brought much light to the modern reader’s understanding and appreciation of its subject. But being primarily an esthetic, evaluative approach it leaves many questions about the history of these poems, their original functions, the conditions of their creation, and the reasons for their preservation unanswered. It also tends to neglect wide areas of poetic activity by its distinction between “‘literary”’ and “‘didactic”’

styles or between the “religious”? and the “moral” lyric—distinctions which no medieval author would have thought of. As we look at the documents that have preserved medieval poetry for us—in the case of this study, Latin sermon books—, we notice that lyric poems make up a large field where religious-meditative lyrics stand next to moral-didactic verses of many kinds, and next to them what, rightly or wrongly, has been called “‘nolitical verse.”” These labels do not matter so much, but our realization of the variety and vitality of this poetic output does. And to this variety, as well as to one of its major sources, Fasciculus morum is a prime witness.

St. John’s College, MS 62 (thirteenth century, sermon material) equally has neither ““sweet’’ nor “‘my’’; ed. Brown, ibid., No. 56(B); Cambridge, Gonville and Caius

| College, MS 408 (thirteenth century, sermons) gives an abbreviated form, also without ‘“‘my’’: ‘‘Horum dulcis memoria lacrimas alicit, oculos suffundit, vultum humectat, corda dulcorat. Anglice: teres tollet, eyne bollet,

, loeres wetet, - and herte swetet”’ (fol. 135v).

The other four versions, including the one quoted from Cambridge, University Library, MS Kk.IV.24, occur in a sermon “‘Quia amore langueo”’ preserved from a time after 1381.

| Chapter IV

THE TEXTS

THE FOLLOWING EDITION of all English verses found in the extant copies of

Fasciculus morum is based on Bodleian Library, MS Rawlinson C.670 (R). My choice of this manuscript has been determined by the desire to have as

base a text which contains the largest number of English verses. Strictly

interpreted, this principle leads to a choice between R and LC (both preserving 51 verses). Though the textual differences between these two are not very striking, R has an edge over LC because it presents fewer garbled lines (see, for instance, the readings in LC at 13.7, 14, 16.4, 39, 50.4, 54.8, and 55.14; one or two other garbled passages occur but are not recorded here). In addition, in LC verse 38 is incomplete, and other verses in it show traces of lexical updating (10.3 and 13.7). On the positive side,

R is a reasonably good text and not worse than equally good texts with fewer English verses. Apart from these considerations resting on the state of the English texts, R is also a good choice for base because, as far as can be told at this point, its Latin preserves the original form of Fasciculus morum faithfully. Though not free from scribal errors, it is reasonably well executed and has been carefully corrected by its medieval scribe. The English text of R is here reproduced exactly. Verses 8, 11, 18, 27, and 56-61, which do not appear in R, are taken from other manuscripts as indicated in the proper places. In a number of cases where R clearly 1s in error, I have adopted a reading from other manuscripts and indicated this

fact by enclosing the respective emendation in the text within square brackets. I have expanded abbreviations used in the manuscripts and indicate this by italics, and I have introduced line divisions and punctuation. Although the English verses in R are mostly written as prose, with only a few exceptions, the scribe clearly aimed at marking the beginning of the lines by using capital letters, usually touched with red. I have, consequently,

used capitals at the beginning of lines consistently, but have elsewhere followed R’s practice of capitalization. An occasional hook at the end of the suffix -yng has been disregarded, since it seems purely decorative. Similarly, crossed -// is consistently printed as -//; in only one case, in R, does it rhyme with -/le (22.9). The apparatus cites all variants except those of spelling or of inflec-

tional endings. Since the latter may be of some limited importance in determining the regional provenance of several manuscripts, I have 133

134 TEXTS summarized such evidence in Appendix B. Regarding the “Foster Numbers,”” see my comments in the Introduction, especially note 9; I

have introduced a new numbering because of additional items and because Miss Foster had included in her verses several unrhymed items (see below, p. 203). For each English verse I list all the manuscripts which contain it. Information about previous editions of a given verse can be found in Index and Supplement; here I indicate only those editions which have printed the verse from manuscripts other than R. I should point out, however, that a number of verses have been printed since the appearance of Supplement, normally from manuscript R: Theodore Silverstein in his anthology English Lyrics before 1500 (Evanston, 1971) published 13 items (Nos. 9, 10, 13, 17, 25, 28, 30, 31, 37, 38, 40, 45, and 50, with a number of

errors); Rosemary Woolf, in The English Religious Lyric in the Middle

, Ages (Oxford, 1968), printed and discussed six poems from Fasciculus morum (Nos. 10, 19, 26, 30, 31, and 55); and I quoted 19 verses, most of them with Latin context, in my essay “‘English Verses” (Nos. 2, 4, 9, 11, 15, 16, 21, 23, 24, 25, 29, 34, 35, 36, 37, 45, 47, 49, and 52). I have not listed material printed by David Jeffrey, for the reasons given in Chapter

III. In the section labeled “Context” I indicate book and chapter of Fasciculus morum where the verses occur (see further the synopsis given in

Appendix A) and provide the immediate Latin context, following the

editorial principles set forth in note 1 on p. 1. In my “Comment” I discuss the relation of each English verse to its context and provide information that might elucidate the popularity and history of the English verses as well as their Latin models.

1. THE VERSES |

| , He pat hem reuen, hoe reuen ful sore. | Amende py lyf and synne no more.

Lest he eft so ryue pe, | Pat pou be war, I rede pe. (R, fol. 8r)

LINE |: whole line] he pat pe thorgh smote, he smote ful sore, B3. L2. he that toche

he toche ful sore, Sp. reuen] rewe, LC; rewith, Li. E; ruyth, L1; ruthe, Jo; reuthyd, Go2. hoe] he, L1. Li. Jo. LC. Go2; hym, E. reuen (2)] rewe, LC. E. Go2; rew, Li; ruyt, L1; rueth, Jo.

TEXTS 135 LINE 3: whole line] lest he of eft so smyte pe, B3. L2 (he offte off smyte). lest that he

smyte the, Sp. he] 3e, Go2. Li. Jo. heeft]eft he,E. eft] ofte, L1. Go2. Li. Jo (ost); of-pe, LC. ryue] ruue, L1; rewe, Go2. Li. LC; rue on, Jo. E (rewe on).

LINE 4: pat] om., Jo. , Index 1150. Foster No. 1. |

MSS: (1) B3, fol. lv. (2) L1, fol. 50r. (3) L2, fol. 1v. (4) R, fol. 8r. (5) Li, fol Iv. (6) Go2, fols. 1v-2r; printed in James, Catalogue, 2:414, and in Register, 1:205. (7) Jo, fol. 34v. (8) LC, fol. 156v. (9) E, fol. 5r. (10) Sp, fol. 2r.

No separate occurrence. |

Context. The first chapter of the treatise (I, 1), on sin and vices in general, ends with the warning that all creation—the elements, animals, angels, and heavenly bodies—carries out God’s vengeance on the sinner, as is proven by examples from Scripture. Therefore, ‘‘ne ergo deus ipse per suas creaturas pro peccatis de nobis sicut de predictis vindictam capiat, caveamus, iuxta illud metrice dictum:

Qui tetigit, te[ti]git; tu desine vivere prave. Si feriat, feriat; virga secunda cave.

He pat....

Et hec generaliter ad presens dicta sufficiant”’ (R, fol. 8r). , Comment. The two English couplets are clearly based on the preceding two Latin lines, whose grammatical structure—i.e., the alternation between a third-person subject in the first halves (tetigit, feriat) and a second-person subject in the second halves of the lines (desine, cave)—they imitate. The

person addressed obviously is the sinner being called to repentance. As obviously, the third person spoken about in line 3 of the English is God, who will punish evil. But who is the subject of the first English line? As the line stands in R and other “vulgate’’ manuscripts, it appears to mean, “‘They who

repent, [should] repent bitterly!’’ (or, ““He who...”). But this meaning ~ departs significantly from the Latin model and destroys the parallel structure

of the lines. Moreover, the line clearly gave the scribes difficulty, as the variants indicate. Unfortunately, in this instance the Latin source offers little

help, since the exact meaning of “‘qui tetigit, tetigit’’ remains unclear. This , half line also shows important variants: qui tetigit tetigit] si tetigit tanget, C. Gol. Et. Pe (tangat). L3 (tangit); si tetigis tangat, W2; quem teduit tedeat, Li. Go2. The distich occurs outside FM, but only in one appearance as far as I know: | Qui tegigit tegigit. tu desine vivere parue. Ne feriat feriat. uirga secunda caue. (Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, MS 361; cf. James, Catalogue, 2:193. Listed by Walther, Proverbia, 24858). I suggest that line 1 of the English is the result of corruption and reinterpretation. Assuming that the original form of the Latin first half-line was Qui

136 TEXTS , tetigit tetigit, we may conjecture that line 1 of the original English text used a form of the verb rinen (OE hrinan), richly attested in both Old and Middle English and often used to translate Latin tangere. An early scribe who failed to recognize the verb interpreted it as a form of reuen (OE hreowan, “‘to rue, grieve’’). His mistake is reflected in all manuscripts except B3, L2, and Sp,

whose scribes turned to the Latin model and made a new translation (or . rather, two; see the variants) closely following the meaning of fetigit. In line 3, ryue may well be the original (from ON rifa, ME riven, “‘to tear, cleave’’); its graphic similarity to rinen and reuen (from both hreowan, “to rue,”’ and réofan, “to break, rend’’) would of course have contributed to the confusion. The process of reinterpretation took a different direction in Go2 and Li,

| where the English: *““He pat hem reuthyd / rewith, he rewe / rew ful sore” (““He who grieves, or has grieved, let him grieve sorely’’) led the scribes to remake the Latin into quem teduit tedeat. A somewhat subtler reinterpretation of the puzzling Latin sentence may appear in L3, C, Pe, Gol, W2, and Et (“If He has struck, He will strike again’’); see their variants above.

2

| Pe fende oure foe ne may vs dere, But 3yffe we bowen hym for fere.

| He is a lyon bote pou withstond

And ferde as a flye 3yf pou ne wonde. (R, fol. 8v) dere: to hurt, injure, frighten. ferde: frightened, afraid. LINE 1: ne may vs] may not vs, B3. L2; may vs naght, D. LINE 2: but 3yffe] but, L2. hym] to hym, B3. L1. L2. Li. Go2. Jo. E. Sp. LINE 3: bote] bot yf, Jo. Sp. pou] 3e, LC; we, Sp. LINE 4: and ferde as a flye] nowght worth a flye, B3. L2. a] inserted in R; om. in all

other MSS except B3. L2. E. 3yf pou ne wonde] etc. Sp. pou] 3e, LC. ne

wonde] withstonde, D. | — Index 3339. Foster No. 2.

MSS: (1) B3, fol. 2r. (2) L1, fols. 50v-Sir. (3) L2, fol. 2v; printed in Gray, Selection, No. 77(b). (4) R, fol. 8v. (5) Li, fol. 2r—v. (6) Go2, fol. 2v. (7) Jo, fol. 35v. (8) LC, fols. 156v—157r. (9) D, fol. 2r. (10) E, fol. 6r. (11) Sp, fol. 3r. No separate occurrence.

Context. Pride of heart (I, 3) or vain thoughts are the devil’s messengers. He who harbors them harbors the devil himself. ‘‘ Et ideo si eius suggestionibus adquiescamus, tanquam leo rugiens irruit in nos. Sed si ei resistamus, tanquam

muscam ipsum effugare possumus et in omnibus actibus vincere, iuxta illud metrice dictum:

TEXTS 137

Hostis non ledit nisi cum temptatus obedit. Est leo si cedit; si non, quasi musca recedit.

Pe fende.... Et ideo faciamus sicut bonus miles...” (R, fol. 8v). Comment. The English translates two Latin leonine hexameters which versify the preceding prose illustration. The Latin verses are very common. Walther, Proverbia, 11230 C, lists only one manuscript; but they also occur in

Bromyard, “‘Temptacio,” T. I, § 27 (fol. 577r,a; second line only); MS Rylands lat. 201, front flyleaf; Harley 7322, fol. 43r; Merton 248, fol. 89v; | Peterhouse 211, fol. Ir; Peterhouse 42, fol. 106r; Cambridge, St. John’s College 257, fol. 80v; Holcot, In Sapientiam, lectio 32 (fol. 53v,a) and lectio 128 (fol. 192v,b); Speculum Christiani (ed. G. Holmstedt, EETS 182, London, 1933), p. 203, with a very clumsy prose translation (p. 202).

3 The synne of pryde nys no3t in schroud, But in herte pat is to proude.

(R, fol. 9r) |

Let pin herte helde and hit pe schal lyke, [quod Hendyng].

helde: to bow, incline.

LINE 1: the] pi, LC. nys] is, Li. Gol. Go2. LC. E. Sp. V. schroud] schoude, Sp (cf. 13.3).

LINE 2: but] but ys, L1. LC. Sp; it ys, Gol. V; but it is, Li. Go2. proude] prow, LC.

LINE 3: let] om., Sp. pin] possibly pou, R. helde] 3elde, E. hit] om., Gol. V. pe schal lyke] sall be lykyn, Li; sall pe lyke, Sp. schall] wolde, LC. quod hendyng] after line 1, R; without endying, Go2 (on erasure); quod W. V; qwath, Li; and beld, Sp. Index 3463. Foster No. 3. MSS: (1) L1, fol. 51r. (2) R, fol. 9r. (3) Li, fol. 2v. (4) Gol, fol. 14r. (5) Go2, fol. 2v. (6) LC, fol. 157r. (7) E, fol. 6v. (8) Sp, fol. 3v. (9) V, fol. 2r; printed in Register, 2:6 (incomplete).

No separate occurrence. ,

Context. In the chapter on Superbia cordis (1, 3): “‘Et ideo pre ceteris circumstanciis [magis] est timenda superbia cordis. Unde Augustinus [read Anglice]: The synne. ... Secundum autem Ancelmum De similitudinibus, sic est de corde hominis sicut de molendino...” (R, fol. 9r). Comment. The English verses are not verbally based on the preceding Latin text and appear either without any transitional phrase (Gol, LC, Sp, V) or with a simple, ‘‘Et ideo dicitur’’ (E), ‘“‘unde dicitur’’ (Go2, Li), or “unde

138 TEXTS Anglice”’ (L1). R’s “Unde Augustinus”’ must derive from wrong expansion of an abbreviation. The third line, separate from the couplet and attributed to Hending, is very similar to one of Hending’s Proverbs: ‘‘ Let lust overgon, and eft hit schal pe liken,’ which is quoted in Ancrene Wisse and elsewhere; see Whiting, Proverbs, L. 591. Here the proverb has evidently been transferred from a warning against rash action to one against pride.

| Who-so spekyth [oft] Of pyng pat is vn-wrest Pouh hit seme soft When he spekyth mest

He schal hit heren on [loft]

When he wenyth lest. Et ideo: let py tonge rest and pe schall nou3t rewe, quod Hendyng.

(R, fol. 10r) |

vnwrest: wicked, but occasionally also idle (cf. The Owl and the Nightingale, ed. Grattan and Sykes, EETS, es, 119, London, 1935, line 178). on loft: aloud or

above, in heaven. ,

LINE 1: preceded by Pe tonge brekith bone and hath hym-selue noon, Li. Go2. oft] om., R. LINE 2: pyng pat is] thynges pat er, V; thynges pat ys, Gol. is vnwrest] now is reste,

E; is nou3t wost, Li. Go2. ,

LINE 3: hit] they, V. seme] semep, LC. LINE 4: he] add it, Li. Go2. |

LINE 5: on] of, Gol. loft] lest, R. LC. LINE 7: whole line] om., Li. Go2. et ideo] and perfor, W1; om.,E. tonge]om.,Gol. pe] pou, Gol. LC. V; 3e, B3. schall] om., E. schall nou3t] ne schal nouth, L1. WI1; ne schall, L2; ne sall itte, V. hendyng] W. V (cf. 3. 3). Index 4143. Foster No. 4. MSS: (1) B3, fol. 2v. (2) L1, fol. 52r. (3) L2, fol. 3v. (4) R, fol. 10r. (5) Li, fol. 3r.

(6) Gol, fol. 14v. (7) Go2, fol. 3v. (8) LC, fol. 157v. (9) W1, fol. 161r: _ printed in Register, 1:451. (10) E, fol. 7v. (11) V, fol. 2v. No separate occurrence: but see ‘‘Comment.”’ Context. The first kind of Superbia oris (1, 4) is multiloquium. “‘“Nam ut dicitur Eccli. 20. capitulo [20:8]: ‘Qui multis verbis utitur, ledit animam suam,’ quia in multiloquio non deerit peccatum. Et ideo dicitur [Anglice, margin]: “Who-so ....’ Unde Prov. [13:3] dicitur. . . . Dicit enim sapiens ille Cato...” (R, fol. 10r).

TEXTS 139 Comment. The English verse has no verbal base in the Latin text, although it is reminiscent of the biblical: ‘‘Beware ye of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy. ... For whatever things you have spoken in darkness, shall be published in the light: and that which you have spoken in the ear in the chambers, shall be preached on the housetops”’ (Luke 12:1-3), not quoted here. The lines function as a proof-text against the vice of speaking too much, in a series of similar proof-texts which also includes the proverb

attributed to Hending (line 3). The latter is not found in the major collections. ,

Whiting, Proverbs, T. 375, quotes only this passage. In two manuscripts this proverb (‘Let thy tongue rest”’’) is omitted and seemingly replaced by a different one put at the beginning of the verses: “‘ The

tongue breaks bone, though itself has none.” This is a richly attested proverb, current in English from the Proverbs of Alfred on and included in The Proverbs

| of Hending (MS Harley 2253); see Whiting, Proverbs, T. 384, and Supplement _ 3792.5 (to which these two manuscripts should be added). Its popularity may have been guaranteed by similar biblical sayings: “‘ Lingua mollis confringet duritiam”’ (Prov. 25:15) and “‘Plaga autem linguae comminuet ossa”’ (Eccli. 28:21); cf. A. Taylor, The Proverb (Cambridge, Mass., 1931), pp. 58-59. A medieval Latin version of the same idea is: “‘Os frangit glossa, licet in se non habet ossa’’; see Walther, Proverbia, 20408 and similar forms, to which add MS Peterhouse 104, fol. 212r.

5

| Se and here and holde pe stylle, 3efe pou wolte lyue and haue py wylle. (R, fol. 10r) LINE 1: se and here] here and se, B3. Li. Gol. Jo. W1. V. hold] ber, W1. LINE 2: wolte] wyll, B3. Li. Gol. Jo. LC. V. Index 3081. Foster No. 5. MSS: (1) B3, fol. 3r. (2) L1, fol. 52v. (3) L2, fol. 3v. (4) R, fol. 10r. (5) Li, fol. 3v. (6) Gol, fol. 14v. (7) Go2, fol. 3v. (8) Jo, fol. 36v. (9) LC, fol. 157v. 10) W1, fol. 161v. (11) E, fol. 8r. (12) V, fol. 3r; printed in Register, 2:6. With a rich independent tradition: see ““Comment.”

Context. The third kind of Superbia oris (I, 4) is evil speech or malilo-

quium. “‘Eph. 4 [:29] dicitur: ‘Omnis sermo malus non procedat de ore vestro.’ Et Jacobus 1° [:19]: ‘Sit omnis homo velox ad audiendum, tardus ad loquendum.” Unde bene anglice dicitur: ‘Se and here... .’ / Unde legitur de quodam sene angelos vidente...” (R, fol. 10r—v). The context of this and the following verse is discussed in Chapter I, pp. 50-51 and note 175.

Comment. The verse is not based on the Latin text and forms one

140 TEXTS authority among several others. It is proverbial (see Whiting, Proverbs, H. 264) and occurs commonly as the speech of the third cock in the very popular tale of ‘‘The Three Cocks” incorporated in Gesta Romanorum (Oesterley, cap. 68;

Herrtage, No. XLV) and similar collections (Tubach, No. 1134); see also ‘*Unrecorded,’”’ No. 59, and A. Taylor, ‘*‘ Audi, Vide, Tace,’ and the Three

Monkeys,” Fabula 1 (1958), 26-31. The verses also appear independently in various collections of proverbs, in this as well as slightly different forms. Frequently they are based on, or translated into, a Latin hexameter, “‘ Audi, vide, tace, si vis vivere in pace” (Walther, Proverbia, 1720 and others). They are quoted, together with a reference to the exemplum, in a fifteenth-century moral poem (Index 240) printed in Brown, RL XV, No. 182, lines 45-48. See also A. G. Rigg, A Glastonbury Miscellany of the Fifteenth Century (Oxford, 1968), pp. 56-57 Undex 3715), and the following item, Verse 6.

76

| | Here and see and say noght. ,

Be wyse and ware and telle noght. _

Goo forthe by thingus and stele noght. — (R, fol. 10v)

MS; (1) R, fol. 10v. , Separate occurrences: see ‘‘Comment.”

Context. Verse 5 is immediately followed by a story which further illustrates the value of silence: ‘* Unde legitur de quodam sene angelos vidente

letantes quando audivit fratres [canceled ?] de deo loquebatur. Sed quando vero de mundanis loquebatur vidit eos quasi maculatos et manus ad ora

ponentes quasi stercoratos [sic]. Quod intelligens tribus annis portabat lapidem in ore, ut disceret taciturnitatem. Unde beato Arsenio fuit dictum: ‘Here and see...’ ‘Si vis salvari, fuge, tace, quiesce’”’ (R, fol. 10v). - Comment. The quoted text preceding this message verse condenses and conflates three different tales preserved in the Vitas Patrum: the vision of rejoicing angels, etc. (VP, III, 36; PL 73:762. Tubach, No. 245; further occurrences are listed in Welter’s edition of Tabula exemplorum, p. 117); the report of a desert father (named Agathon in VP) who carried a stone in his mouth for three years (VP, V, 7; PL 73:865. Tubach, No. 4627); and the answer given to Arsenius (as quoted in the text) to his question how he might be saved (VP, III, 190; PL 73:801). All three tales were very popular. The message to “‘Arsenius,’’ for example, with the Latin words ‘“‘fuge, tace, quiesce”’ is reported in Ancrene Wisse, but without English verses (ed. Mabel Day, EETS 225, London, 1952, p. 72).

The English verses, which are found only in one manuscript, were

TEXTS 141 evidently suggested by the angelic message to Arsenius. Their first two lines are proverbial (Whiting, Proverbs, H. 264) and appear in The Proverbs of Wisdom and elsewhere. Although they occasionally contaminate No. 5 (as for example in MS Harley 7333, fol. 180v: ‘“‘Here and see and sey nowte, / Penne pu must have all thi wille,’’ in Gesta Romanorum), they apparently constituted a separate

tradition in proverbial literature. On the form of proverbial sayings that rhyme on “nought,” see Curt F. Biihler, “A Middle English Medical Manuscript from Norwich,” in Studies in Medieval Literature: In Honor of Professor Albert Croll Baugh, ed. MacEdward Leach (Philadelphia, 1961); repr. Buhler, Early Books and Manuscripts: Forty Years of Research (New York, 1973), p. 545.

7|| Pruyde pat is ouergart Algate hap vnquart

: At pe latter ende. For when pryde gop byfore, , euer more, , Wende houSchame hesewyth wende. (R, fol. 12v) , ouergart: (1) excessive; (2) pride, arrogance. vnquart: trouble, misfortune. LINE 1: ouergart] owgard, D; vngart, Gol. V. LINE 2: vnquart] om., D. LINE 3: whole line] om., Li. latter] lat, LC; last, E. ende] ende fo (or so), E. LINE 4: when] where, Li. LINE 5: sewyth] shewes, B3; folowos, Li; foloweth, Gol; felueth, V.

LINE 6: hou] where, Li. Gol; wer-so, V; when, E. he] a, W1; we, LC. wende (2)]

add quod Endyng, D. Index 2775. Foster No. 6. MSS: (1) B3, fol. 4v. (2) L1, fol. 5Sr. (3) L2, fol. Sv. (4) R, fol. 12v. (5) Li, fol. Sr. (6) Gol, fol. 15v. (7) Go2, fol. 5v. (8) LC, fol. 158v. (9) W1, fol. 162v. (10) D, fol. 4v. (11) E, fol. 10v. (12) V, fol. 4r. No separate occurrence.

Context. The English verses conclude the chapter on Superbia operis (I, 5), in which the author had discussed pride in clothing, in knowledge, in bodily beauty, in power and rank, and finally in nobility (generis nobilitas). ““Ab huiusmodi ergo superbia caveamus, quia precedente superbia semper pro fine sequitur confusio, prout metrice dicitur: Si tibi copia, si sapiencia formaque detur, Sola superbia destruit omnia si commitetur.

Anglice sic: ‘Pruyde...’”’ (R, fol. 12v).

142 TEXTS Comment. The English translates and versifies the thought of the Latin sentence before the two hexameters but not the hexameters themselves (for which see Verse 8). Many occurrences of an English proverb “Pride goes before and shame comes after” are attested in Whiting, Proverbs, P. 385, but none is close to the verses in Fasciculus morum.

87

If pu be rych and wyse also |

And of bewte fressh perto, |

Pes virtuse pride wyll sone vndo If hit ones be knyt perto.

| (Sp, fol. 7v) MS: (1) Sp, fol. 7v. No separate occurrence.

Context. These lines occur instead of No. 7 in one manuscript; see above.

Comment. Verse 8 closely translates the Latin hexameters quoted in **Context”? of Verse 7. The Latin verses were very popular; see Walther, Proverbia, 29238. They occur, inter alia, in Richard Wethringsette’s ‘‘ Qui bene presunt’’ (MS Digby 103, fol. 13v,a) and in the Versarius of William de -Montibus; in Nicholas de Bozon (Contes moralisés, p. 18, with note), Jacques

de Vitry, Vincent de Beauvais, and in many Latin sermon manuscripts preserved in England. They were even carved into the wall of a loggia in the Krak des Chevaliers; see Paul Deschamps, Les Chateaux des Croisés en Terre Sainte, 1: Le Crac des Chevaliers (Paris, 1934), planche cxiv, A, and pp. 218-— 219, listing further appearances. A different English translation appears in Grimestone’s commonplace book:

, [3e]f pu be riche, and wys in lore, In tunge gracious, [PriJde destruizet pis an more, For he is venimous.

Advocates MS 18.7.21, fol. 143v; Wilson, Grimestone, No. 223. The Latin verses are also quoted in the “‘ Middle English Sermons” edited by Woodburn O. Ross (EETS 209, p. 68), where they however are rendered into English

prose.

9 Ne monnes steuen but gode wylle, No murthe of mouth but herte stylle,

| TEXTS 143 No cry but love ne oper bere Nys murthe ny song god to here. (R, fol. 13r) steuen: voice. here: to praise. LINE 1: ne] no, B3. L1. L2. Li. Go2. Jo. E. Sp; non, LC. W1; nogth, Gol. V (nowght). monnes] mowthes, Li. Go2. god] godis, the -is expunged, W1; gud, corr. from

god, 2: Jo.murthe] |. LINE myth, Go2. ,

LINE 3: bere] bererys, Go2. oper] nojer, Gol. V; o3ir, Go2. LINE 4: whole line] etc., Sp; pis myrth soundes in godes here, Gol. V. nys] om., Go2

(see line 3); is, Li. miurthe] om.,E. god] om., B3. LC.

Index 2298. Foster No. 7. |

MSS: (1) B3, fol. 4v. (2) L1, fol. 55v. (3) L2, fol. 6r. (4) R, fol. 13r. (5) Li, fol. Sv. (6) Gol, fol. 16r. (7) Go2, fol. 6r—v. (8) Jo, fol. 38v. (9) LC, fol. 159r. (10) W1, fol. 162v; printed in Register, 1:450. (11) E, fol. 11v. (12) Sp, fol. 8v.

(13) V, fol. 4v. |

Separate occurrence: MS Advocates 18.7.21, fol. 93r. Wilson, Grimestone, No. 133. The second couplet differs: Noz loud cri, ne non hey lay, ‘But priue bidding is godis pay.

In the section on Oracio, with the same Latin distich.

Context. The first species of pride is hypocrisy and specifically oratio clamorosa (1, 7), which leads to three evils. “‘Tercium, quod aliquando iuxta illum perfecte orare volentem impedit, iuxta illud Matth. [6:6]: ‘Cum oraveris,

intra in cubiculum.’ Nam deus non verborum sed cordis est auditor, iuxta illud: Non vox sed votum, non musica cordula sed cor, Non clamor sed amor sonat in aure dei. |

Anglice sic: ‘Ne monnes steuen. .. .” Unde Crisostomus...” (R, fol. 13r). Comment. The two English couplets directly translate the Latin distich preceding them. The final phrase, “‘sonat in aure dei,’’ appears more literally translated in the variant noted. In Grimestone’s version the second couplet differs from Fasciculus morum but shares its free rendering of “‘sonat in aure dei.”” The Latin distich is richly attested; see Walther, Proverbia, 18723, to which may be added Giraldus Cambrensis, Gemma ecclesiastica, II, 19 (ed. Brewer, p. 260); Rigg, A Glastonbury Miscellany, p. 64; and Bromyard, who

10 |

quotes it in garbled form (‘‘Oracio,” O. V, § 15; fol. 385v). For a brief consideration of rhetorical devices used in the Latin and in the English respectively, see “‘English Verses,’”? pp. 232-233.

Mary, moder of grace, we cryen to pe, Moder of mercy and of pyte,

144 TEXTS , Wyte vs fro pe fendes fondyng And helpe vs at oure last endyng; 5 And to py sone oure pes pou make, Pat he on vs no wreche take.

Alle pe halewen pat / aren in heuen, ,

| To 30w I crye with mylde steuene.

Helpe pat Cryst my gult for3zeue, 10 And I wol him serue why! pat I leue. (R, fols. 15v—16r) LINE 1: whole line] om., Jo. to] vnto, L1.

LINE 2: whole line] moder of merci hey and also of pite, Go2. LINE 3: wyte] qwyth, Go2. E (qwhyte); put, Gol. LC. V; defend, Jo. LINE 4: oure last] onlaste, W1. LINE 5: and] om., E. pou] to, LC; tho, E. LINE 6: whole line] pat of ous wreche take, W1. on] of, B3. L1. L2. Gol. Go2. Jo.

W1.E. vs] om., Jo. LINES 7—8 reversed, Gol. V.

LINES 7-10 separated by Latin context, E. : LINE 7: pe] 3e, E.

LINE 8: I] om., L1. LINE 9: my] may, LC. gult] sune, E. LINE 10: and I wol him serue] and wel wol y sere hym, W1. and]om., V. and I]

pat, B3. L2. I] om., B3. Gol. I wol] swilke, Jo. whyl pat] whil, all other MSS (whylys, V).

Index 2114. Forster No. 8. MSS: (1) B3, fol. 6v. (2) L1, fol. 59r—v. (3) L2, fol. 8r—v. (4) R, fols. 1Sv—16r.

(5) Gol, fol. 17v; printed by Robbins, Modern Philology 36 (1939), 345 (with two errors). (6) Go2, fol. 9r. (7) Jo, fol. 40v. (8) LC, fol. 160r—v. (9) WI, fol. 164r. (10) E, fols. 14v—15r. (11) V, fol. 6r.

No separate occurrence.

Context. The chapter on humility before God (I, 9) recommends that if we have offended Christ so gravely that we fear to approach Him, we should do as the man who, having incurred the anger of an earthly king, sends gifts to the queen, then to the counts and barons and other members of the royal household, and asks for their intercession. So should we ask the Blessed Virgin, who will hold her protective mantel between us and Christ’s wrath. ““Et tunc dices: ‘Maria mater gracie, mater misericordie, tu nos ab hoste protege, in hora, etc. Mary, moder of grace... .’ / Et postea accedendum est

ad comites...et similiter damicellas de camera regine, et dicatis: ‘Omnes sancti.” Tandem pauperes pedites sunt placandi...’’ (R, fols. 1Sv—16r).

Comment. The English lines translate two Latin prayers, the first addressed to the Virgin, the second (lines 7—10) to all the saints, as the context

shows clearly. Only one manuscript (E), however, separates the two English

TEXTS 145 prayers. All manuscripts quote only the beginning of each prayer in Latin. The first apparently comes from the Admonitio morienti attributed to St. Anselm: “‘ Maria, mater gratiae, mater misericordiae, tu nos ab hoste protege, et hora mortis suscipe: per tuum ergo, Virgo, filium, per Patrem et Spiritum sanctum, praesens adsis ad obitum meum, quia imminet exitus”’ (PL 158: 687). See also André Wilmart, Auteurs spirituels et textes dévots du moyen dge latin

(Paris, 1932), p. 498. The Latin prayer is quoted in the Corpus MS of the _ Ancrene Wisse (ed. J. R. R. Tolkien, EETS 249, London, 1962, p. 26) and referred to by Bromyard (“‘ Maria,”’ M. III, § 4; fol. 306v: **Tu nos ab hoste -_- protege et in hora mortis suscipe’’). A medieval French version is given by J. Sonet, Répertoire d’incipit de priéres en ancien francais (Geneva, 1956), No. 1101 (fifteenth century). For an account of the genesis of the English prayer, see R. Woolf, Religious Lyric, pp. 119-120.

I] Wo-so woneth hym nouth to gode frust al in is 3outhe, | Vnthewes to leue were to hym in helde ful vnkwthe. (L1, fol. 64r) wone: to accustom. helde: old age. LINE 1: wo-so] he pat, LC. woneth] preceded by wonth, canceled, in L1. hym]om., B3. frust al in is 3outhe] all hijs yowpe frust in ys 3outhe, LC. al] om., E. LINE 2: vnthewes] yuel pewes, LC; vnnethe, E; vn pys wise, W1. in helde] in his

elde, W1; in age, E. ful} wel, W1.

Index 4156. Foster No. 9. , MSS: (1) B3, fol. 9v. (2) L1, fol. 64r. (3) L2, fol. 1lv. (4) LC, fol. 162r. (5) WI, fols. 165v—166r; printed in Register, 1:451. (6) E, fol. 19v.

| No separate occurrence. Context. Humility before one’s parents (I, 11) implies the obligation on the parents’ part to administer proper correction to their children. The point is proven by several authorities: ‘‘ Dicitur enim quod nova testa capit, invete-

rata sapit. Et metrice dicitur sic: , Qui non assuescit virtuti dum iuvenescit, A viciis nescit discedere quanto senescit.

Anglice sic: ‘Wo-so. .. .” Unde Prov. 22: ‘Adolescens iuxta viam suam...’”’ (L1, fol. 64r). Comment. The English lines are a fairly close translation of two Latin hexameters quoted before. For the latter, see Walther, Proverbia, 24381, who cites a rich tradition, to which can be added Holcot, In Sapientiam, lectio 176 (fol. 260v,b); and Convertimini, MS Royal 7.C.i, fol. 117r,a. The same idea

146 TEXTS

12 |

occurs in several English proverbs listed under Whiting, Proverbs, Y. 29, though none of these is really close to the lines in Fasciculus morum.

Chaste3 3oure chyldren quyl pay ben yonge, Of [werk], of dede, of speche, of tonge. For if 3e lett hem be to bold, Pay wol yow greve when pay ben old.

Lef chyld lore behoueth, quod hendyng. | (R, fol. 19v) LINE 1: chaste3] add we, expunged, W1. 30ure] oure, L1. L2. pay] you, Jo. LINES 2-3 reversed, LC.

LINE 2: werk] lokyng, R; werkis, Sp.

LINE 3: lett] betyn, W1; suffer, Sp. be to bolde] to be to bolde, LC; to be boolde, E. Sp. LINE 4: pay] hym, Wl. pay wol] he wo, LC. LINE 5: whole line] om., Gol. V. Sp. quod hendyng] gud endyng, Jo; quod endyng, LC.

Index 594. Foster No. 10. MSS: (1) B3, fol. 9v; printed in Little, Studies, p. 151 (incomplete). (2) L1, fol.

64r. (3) L2, fol. 12r. (4) R, fol. 19v. (5) Gol, fol. 19v. (6) Jo, fol. 44r. (7) LC, fol. 162r. (8) W1, fol. 166r; printed by Wilson, Library, Fourth Series, 2 (1922), 163; Register, 1:451; Owst, Preaching, p. 272 (all with errors). (9) E, fol. 20r. (10) Sp, fol. 16v. (11) V, fol. 8v.

Separate occurrence: (12) Lincoln Cathedral, MS 234, fol. 164r, in a Latin sermon on the Fourth Commandment. Same text as printed above, with werk in line 2, but without line 5. Printed in Owst, Preaching, p. 272, n. 4

Context. The lines follow a short distance after Verse 9, still in the section of proof-texts on the need to discipline children (I, 11). ““Et ideo dicitur Proverbiorum [Eccli. 30:1—2]: ‘Qui diligit [corr. from diliget] filium, assiduet ei flagella, quia confusio patris est filius indisciplinatus. Qui docet

filium, laudabitur.” Unde Anglice dicitur: ‘Chaste3....’ Unde narratur de quodam divite...” (R, fol. 19v). Comment. The two English couplets versify the idea expressed in the preceding discussion but have no verbal source in the Latin text. Whiting lists several proverbs on this topic (Proverbs, C.199, 200, 210), but none are close parallels. The saying attributed to Hending is well attested, in the Proverbs as well as other works, including Piers Plowman; see Whiting, Proverbs, C.216.

It is quoted in Latin in Sheppey’s sermon collection: ‘‘Wlgariter dicitur: Carus filius caris indiget dogmatibus”’ (MS Merton College 248, fol. 142r).

TEXTS 147 13 Wreche mon, why art pou prowde Pat art of erthe maket? Hedure ne brou3test pou no schroude, But pore pou come and naket. 5 When py soule is faren out, Py body with erthe yraked, Pat body pa[t] was so ronke and loude Of alle men is hated. (R, fol. 20r) rake: to cover, bury. ronke: strong, brave, proud. LINE 2: whole line] pat of erthe is maked, Go2. pat] thow, Sp. LINE 3: ne]om., LC. W1.Sp. noschroude] neyper clout neschroud, Go2. schroude] shrede, E; schowde, Sp (cf. 3.1). LINE 4: pou come] om., LC. LINE 5: py] pe, LC.

LINE 6: py body] of py body, R. Go2. body] add and, Go2. with] in, E. LINE 7: pat(1)] pe, Go2; pi, Sp. body pat] om., LC. pat(2)] pas, R; py, WI. ronke] rond, Go2. ronke and loude] stowte and prowte, LC; rial in route, Sp.

LINE 8: men is] men he ys, W1; schal be, Go2. .

Index 4239. Foster No. 11. MSS: (1) B3, fol. 10r. (2) L1, fol. 65r; printed in Brown, RL XIV, p. 237. (3) L2, fol. 12v. (4) R, fol. 20r. (5) Go2, fol. 13v. (6) LC, fol. 162v. (7) W1, fol. 166r. (8) E, fols. 20v—21r. (9) Sp, fol. 17r—v.

Separate occurrence: The eight lines are incorporated as the sixth stanza into the B-version of ‘‘Erthe upon Erthe’’ (MSS: Lambeth Palace 853, fol. 35; Laud Misc. 23, fol. 1llv; Cotton Titus A. XXVI, fol. 153v; Cambridge Trinity College 181, fol. 170v). For the texts, see Hilda M. R. Murray, EETS 141 (London, 1911), pp. 15, 17, 19, and 48.

Context. One of the considerations that may lead man to humility is fragilitas vitae (I, 12). A number of authorities are quoted, including: “* Dicit enim Bernardus: ‘Unde superbis, homo, filius terre, pater vermium, frater -talparum? Tuum robur infirmitas, tue / divicie paupertas, honor tuus dedecus,

gaudium tuum luctus...’ [several other quotations follow, attributed to Bernardus and Gregorius]. Et ideo dicitur Anglice sic: ‘Wreche mon....’ Unde legitur in Gestis Alexandri... (R, fols. 19v—20r). Comment. Lines 1-4 of the English verses may have been inspired by the

cited quotation attributed to St. Bernard, which however occurs at some | distance before them. They form the last in a series of proof-texts on the frailty of man. Very similar in its inspiration and actual wording is Grimestone’s No. 226 (Index 3903).

148 TEXTS 14 Pe flesches lust may pou nou3t o lyue bettur quenche Bote aftur py deth which pou be3 euer-more be-penche. (R, fol. 20v) LINE 1: pe] pi, Gol. Jo. E. V. _ flesches] fleschly, Jo. LC. E. lust] lustes, E. o lyue]

only, LC; om., Gol. Jo. V. bettur] om., L2; bett, LC. , LINE 2: whole line] pan of pi dede euer-more thenk, Gol. V; bot eftyr pi dede-day ay

forto thenche, Jo; bot of pi dede pou euermore to penke, LC. bote] then, E. deth] day, W1; dede day, Jo. which] what, B3. L1. be3] art, B3; best, E. be-penche] thenche, B3. L1. L2. W1; to thenche, E. _ Index 3350. Foster No. 12. MSS: (1) B3, fol. 10r. (2) L1, fol. 65v. (3) L2, fol. 13r. (4) R, fol. 20v. (5) Gol, fol. 20r. (6) Jo, fol. 44v. (7) LC, fol. 163r. (8) W1, fol. 166v. (9) E, fol. 21r. (10) V, fol. 9r. No separate occurrence.

Context. The second consideration that may lead man to humility is memoria mortis (I, 13). This chapter contains Verses 14-18. ‘*‘ Memorare novissima tua,’ tuxta consilium Sapientis [Eccli. 7:40], ‘et in eternum non peccabis.’ Unde metrice dicitur:

Non aliter poterit melius caro viva domari _ Mortua qualis erit quam semper premeditari. Anglice sic: ‘pe flesches lust .. .’; scil., quam breve est tempus incertum, et - quam vile est corpus mortuum”’ (R, fol. 20v). Comment. The Latin hexameters, of which this is a close translation, were very popular. Walther, Proverbia, 17219a, lists only one manuscript, to which should be added: London, Society of Antiquaries, MS 101, fol. 29r; Arundel 248, fol. 68v; Oxford, Magdalen College 93, fols. 130r and 136v; Cambridge, Gonville and Caius College 408, fol. 110r; Cambridge, University

Library Kk.IV.24, fols. 228r and 267r; Ff.1I.17, fol. 63r (and other MSS of Primo listed in Traditio, 30 [1974], 352f.); Holcot, In Sapientiam, \ectio 12 (fol.

21v). The two hexameters are a versification, perhaps made in the thirteenth century, of a prose sentence usually attributed to St. Gregory: “‘ Non poterit melius domari caro viva quam cogitando qualis erit mortua.’’ Thus in Bromyard, ‘“ Mors,’’ M.XI, § 102 (fol. 346r), and ‘‘ Mundicia,’”? M.XII, § 9 (fol. 356v); and in Primo, Cambridge University Library, MS Ff.1.17, fols. 8v,b, and 63r (before the verse).

15 Mon iboren of wommon ne lyueth but a stounde. In wrechednes and in wo ben his dayes i-wounde.

TEXTS 149 He spryngus out as blossome and sone falles to grounde, And wendes away as schadewe pat no wey is ifounde. (R, fol. 20v) LINE 1: wommon] a woman, Jo; _ ne] om., Jo.

_ LINE 2: in(2)] om., LC. his] all hys, Jo. LC. i-wounde] went, W1.

LINE 3: he] ho, Wi. spryngus] sprykes, L2. as] as a, B3. W1. and] pat, Go2. falles] talli, LC.

LINE 4: and] om., Go2. as] asa, Go2.W1. no wey] now, W1; non, B3; neuer, L1. Jo. LC; nonwes, L2; nowise, Go2. Index 2058. Foster No. 13. MSS: (1) B3, fol. 10r. (2) L1, fol. 65v. (3) L2, fol. 13r. (4) R, fol. 20v. (5) Go2, fol. 13v. (6) Jo, fol. 44v. (7) LC, fol. 163r. (8) W1, fol. 166v; printed in Register, 1:451 (without line 4). _ No separate occurrence.

Context. See Verse 14. The text there quoted continues: “‘ Quia iuxta Job

{14:1-2]: ‘Homo natus de muliere, etc. [i.e., brevi vivens tempore repletur multis miseriis. Qui quasi flos egreditur et conteritur, et fugit velut umbra, et

nunquam in eodem statu permanet].’ Anglice: ‘Mon iboren....’ Nam cum magno labore agitatur...’’ (R, fol. 20v). Comment. The four mono-rhyming lines represent a fairly close verse translation of the biblical passage quoted immediately before them. Although the biblical sentence appears very frequently in medieval sermons, no other verse rendering in English is known.

16

, Was per neuer caren so lothe As mon when he to put goth And deth has layde so lowe.

For when deth drawes mon from opur, |

pe suster nul not se pe brother, , Ne fader pe sone 1-knawe. (R, fol. 20v) LINE 1: was per] waster, E; naster, B3. L1. L2. W1. neuer] euer, L2. LINE 2: to] to the, E.

LINE 4: for when deth] dep for wanne, LC. mon] py manne, LC. from opur]to pe erthe, L1; for euer, W1. LINE 5: pe] pi, L1; om., LC. nul] wul, L2. LC. E. pe(2)] pi, LC.

LINE 6: fader] pe fader, LC. pe sone] pe pi sone pe, L1; pe sonne pi, LC. |

| 150 TEXTS Index 2283. Foster No. 14. MSS: (1) B3, fol. 10v. (2) L1, fol. 66r. (3) L2, fol. 13r. (4) R, fol. 20v. (5) LC, fol. 163r. (6) W1, fol. 166v. (7) E, fol. 21v.

No separate occurrence. .

Context. This stanza follows shortly after Verse 15. The warning to remember death is continued with the simile of an extinguished candle (which smells badly), which is substantiated with four hexameters that are frequently found in medieval treatises (“‘ Vilior est humana caro.. .’’; cf. Walther, Initia, 20331, and Proverbia, 33353) and the following quotation: “‘ Unde Bernardus: ‘Cum homo,’ inquit, ‘moritur, nasus frigescit, facies pallescit, nervi atque vene rumpuntur, cor in duas partes dividitur. Nichil est horribilius cadavere illius.

In domo non dimittitur, ne familia moriatur. In aqua non proicitur, ne inficiatur. In aere non suspenditur, ne ille corrumpatur. Sed tanquam venenum pestiferum in fovea proicitur, ne amplius appareat; terra circumdatur, ne fetor

ascendat; firmissime calcatur, ne iterum assurgat, sed ut terra in terram maneat et amplius visus hominis illud non aspiciat.’ Unde Anglice dicitur: “Was per....’ Et ideo dicit Beda...’ (R, fol. 20v), The “Signs of Death” mentioned here occur in English in Verse 5S.

Comment. The English poem renders very freely the thought of the preceding quotation attributed to St. Bernard. The italicized sentence in Latin clearly inspired lines 1-3, whereas the remainder of the quotation may have furnished the thought for lines 4—6 (i.e., that the corpse is shunned by all and

firmly buried away from society); compare “‘ut...amplius visus hominis illud non aspiciat’’ with the verbs se and i-knawe in lines 5-6. For a very similar development of the same topic, see stanza 22 of Index 4144, printed by

W. Heuser, Die Kildare-Gedichte (Bonn, 1904), p. 138. The idea that the human corpse is not given to water or air (or fire) but placed in the earth so that it may not be seen any more was a favorite topos for Thomas Brinton, who used it in sermons 6, 10, 11, 12, 57, and 79 (ed. Sister Mary Aquinas Devlin; London, 1954, pp. 10, 41, 45, 263, and 358). This Latin text is used a second time in Fasciculus morum before Verse 55, again together with the “‘Signs of Death,” which are there rendered in English.

17 In Anglico sic primus: 1 We ben executors of pis dede, But of pis mone what is oure rede?

Secundus: ,

3 Take to pe and I to me, | Pe dede kepes of no mone.

TEXTS 151 Tercius:

5 By vs oure dyner who-so wol, Pe dede schal quyten al pe fulle.

(R, fol. 21r) |

LINE 1: executors] secturs, Jo; assecutures, B1. W1. L3 (qassecuturos); assectors, LC;

exassecutours, L1. pis} pe, Jo. Sp; is, W1. LINE 2: but] now, B3. L2. pis] pe, Gol. W1. is]om.,L2. oure] 3oure, B1. L3. Li. Gol. Go2. Jo. LC. E. Sp. V; py, W1. LINE 3: I] per(?), LC.

, LINE 4: whole line| pe ded 3euyth nou3t of this money, Li. Go2; pe dede nedes no : mone, Gol. V; pe dede kepep haue non monay, WI. of] om., E. Sp. LINE 5: by vs] by, E; ber vs, LC; be vs, L2; beys, W1; byes, Sp; byse, Gol; bryngyth,

, Go2; bryng, Li; aray, V. who-so wol] when 3e will, Li. Go2. LINE 6: whole line] pe ded it sall white and pat is skill, Li; pe deede it schal qwytin as it is skele, Go2; thys ded sal want all pe full, V; pe deyd shall pay for euer deyle,

Sp. pe dede] pis pe dede, L1; thys dede, W1. E. schal] add pay, canceled, R. quyten] quante, Gol. al pe fulle] for all pe folle, B3; al pe folle, L2; all at pe ful, B1. L3. Jo.

Index 3863. Foster No. 15. MSS: (1) B1, fol. 132v. (2) B3, fol. 10v. (3) L1, fol. 66v. (4) L2, fol. 13v. (5) L3, fol. 10v. (6) R, fol. 21r. (7) Li, fol. 12r. (8) Gol, fol. 20v. (9) Go2, fol. 14rv. (10) Jo, fol. 45r. (11) LC, fol. 163r. (12) W1, fol. 166v. (13) E, fol. 22r. (14) Sp, fol. 18v. (15) V, fol. 9v. Separate occurrence: see *‘Comment.”’

Context. The chapter on memoria mortis (I, 13) contains a story about a rich cleric in Paris who during his lifetime had his own tomb built, on which he depicted himself surrounded by his three executors with inscriptions that appear in the English verses. ‘‘ Unde narratur de clerico Parisius commorante, famoso et divite, qui in memoriam mortis sue ipso vivente fecit fieri sepulcrum suum. Supra pro epitaphio fecit depingi ymaginem sui ipsius [quasi morientis], ad cuius pedes eciam depinxit genus nummorum decurrencium in [illa] civitate aut terra. Ad caput autem et ex utraque parte dicte ymaginis fecit depingi suos executores suas manus sic extendentes, unam scil. versus pecuniam et aliam versus socios. Quorum primus dicit in gallico: De ceo mort sumus executors,

Mais de co money quei from nus?

Secundus sic: Pren ta part et ieo la moye,

Ly mort n’ad cure de monoye.

Tercius sic: Kyke noster dyner achatera?

Ceo mort issi le quitera. |

In Anglico sic. Primus: ‘We ben. . . .” Unde pro omnibus istis est sciendum .. .” (R, fol. 21r).

152 TEXTS Comment. Apparently the English inscriptions closely translate French verses. Both French and English verses appear in: B1. L1. L3. R. Gol. Jo (French incomplete). LC. W1. E. V; the English verses without the French in:

| B3. L2. Li. Go2. Sp. The inscriptions are given in an awkward Latin prose translation in M and Mo (with a German verse translation at the bottom of fols. 11r—10v). The story is told without the inscriptions (i.e., the text ends with ‘““versus socios’’) in: B4. Co. C. A. H. W2. Et; it is entirely omitted in B2. Pe. CC. D.

Basically the same story appears in a sermon of Cambridge University Library, MS Ii.III.8, fol. 74v, printed by Erb in Mediaeval Studies 33 (1971), 77-78. But here the rich man is not specified as a Parisian cleric. The inscriptions

are given only in English. They differ somewhat from Fasciculus morum, but their rhyme words are fairly close (they are the same in lines 1-4). A fourth inscription is added, bearing a speech by the rich man himself. Tubach, No. 4896, lists only one FM manuscript. Dishonest executors were a frequent butt of medieval exempla; Tubach, No. 1933, indicates several variants of a tale which similarly involves three executors; one of its variants (two priests and a layman) also appears in FM (V, 24).

18

M—Merowre of gostly schewyng. O —Orologe pat wyl wake fro slepyng. R—Robbowre (°% deth of al erthely pyng.

S —Somenour to pe heye dom comyng. (C, fol. 23r, lower margin)

Index 2190. |

MS: (1) C, fol. 23r. | No separate occurrence.

Context. Verse 17 is immediately followed by a moralization of the letters M-O-R-S: “‘Unde pro omnibus istis est sciendum quod in illo verbo ‘mors’ sunt 4 littere correspondentes pro 4 verbis et proprietatibus mortis

cuiuslibet. Isti littere M hec proposicio correspondit: ‘Mors est mirum speculum.’ Secundo, pro illa littera O correspondit ista proposicio: ‘ Mors est orologium.’ Tercio, pro illa littera R correspondit ista proposicio: ‘Mors est raptor rapiens.’ Quarto, pro illa littera S correspondit ista proposicio: ‘ Mors est citator circuiens’” (C, fol. 23r). At the bottom of the page, in the same hand, the English lines, followed by: “Nota quod quamvis citator scribatur per C, tamen eius anglicum scribitur per S, et sic tenet propositum etc.” Comment. These lines, a marginal item occurring in only one manuscript, render in English the Latin moralization of the four letters which appear in the Latin word for “‘death.’’ Medieval preachers were fond of this technique of

TEXTS 153 amplification, in both Latin and the vernacular, as I discussed in Chapter I, p. 57, and note 190. Grimestone, for instance gives an English scheme on D-E-T-H (Wilson, Grimestone, No. 122). MS Harley 7322 has an English acrostic on L-O-V-E on fol. 145r Undex 1634) and one on M-O-R-S, which is different from that in FM, in Latin and English, on fol. 124v Uindex 3325).

Fasciculus morum presents another acrostic, on C-O-R, but without English verses: someone deeply concerned about his eternal fate is told that, if he wants to be saved, he must offer God three things: ‘“‘The new moon, the

roundness of the sun, and the fourth part of a wheel (rote).”’ The riddle is solved by an angel who explains that it refers to C-O-R (“‘heart’’). See also Owst, Preaching, p. 329. This acrostic is used in later additions to Odo of Cheriton (cf. L. Hervieux, Les fabulistes latins [Paris, 1896], 4:374); Convertimini (MS Cotton, Vitellius C.XIV, fol. 152r); Bromyard, ‘‘Cor,’”’ C.XIV, § 15 (fol. 104r,a); MS Harley 7322, fol. 15v; MS Royal 8.F.vi, fol. 13v; Cambridge, Trinity College, MS 42, fol. 17r—v, and MS 351, fiyleaf.

19 Haue mynde on pyn [ende], And euer fro synne pou myght wende. (R, fol. 21v) LINE 1: haue] haue pou, Jo. LC. mynde] in mynde, L1. on] of, B3. L2. Gol. Jo. E.Sp. V. ende] endyng, R. LINE 2: ever] om., Gol. W1. Sp. V. myght] may, B3. Gol. Jo. Sp. V. Index 1127. Foster No. 16. MSS: (1) B3, fol. 11r. (2) L1, fol. 67r. (3) L2, fol. 14r. (4) R, fol. 21v. (5) Gol, fol. 20v. (6) Jo, fol. 45v. (7) LC, fol. 163v. (8) W1, fol. 167r. (9) E, fol. 22v. (10) Sp, fol. 19r. (11) V, fol. 10r. No separate occurrence.

Context. In the moralization of the letters M-O-R-S (see the preceding

item): “‘Secundo mors assimilatur orologio.... Sed quia orologia habent diversos cantus, ideo istius orologii mortis cantus est ille: ‘Memorare novissima

tua, et in eternum non peccabis.’ Anglice sic: ‘Haue mynde....’ Sed quod dolendum [est], pauci hunc canticum aut intendunt...”’ (R, fol. 21v). Comment. The couplet is a versified translation of Eccli. 7:40 quoted before it. Whiting, Proverbs, E.87, gives a number of proverbial expressions of the same thought, several of which are, or may be construed to be, rhymed. A couplet in Grimestone clearly translates the same biblical text: Haue det3 in mende. Neuere sal senmne pi soule schende.

(fol. 87r; Wilson, No. 119).

154 TEXTS 20 Sithen pis world was ful of onde, Trewth and love has leyn in [bonde]. Wherfore pou lord pat art aboue, Lethe pat bonde and sende vs loue. (R, fol. 32v) onde: envy. lethe: to loosen, free.

LINE 1: ful] foul, W1. of onde] on stounde, Go2. onde] corr. from bonde, R; honde, B3. L1. L2. LC; wonde, WI1. LINE 2: leyn] layde, LC. in bonde] in bounde, R. L2; ybounde, W1; bounde, Go2. LINE 4: lepe] lipe, L1; litle, B3. L2. Go2. E; lay, W1; hye, LC. bonde] honde, B3.

LI. L2; onde, E; londe, W1; bonepe, LC; hate, Go2. vs] om., W1. loue] add Amen, B3.

Index 3147. Foster No. 17. MSS: (1) B3, fol. 17v; printed in Little, Studies, p. 155 (with errors). (2) L1, fol. 83r. (3) L2, fol. 23v. (4) R, fol. 32v. (5) Go2, fols. 26v—27r. (6) LC, fol. 169r.

(7) W1, fol. 172r. (8) E, fol. 37v. | No separate occurrence. ,

Context. The first chapter on envy (III, 1) ends after giving several ) biblical examples of this sin: “‘Sic ergo patet quid est invidia, quia pessima filia diaboli est de prosperitate proximi dolens et de malo gaudens. Et ideo sic

anglice possum dicere ut michi videtur: ‘Sithen pis world ...’”’ (R, fol. 32v). Comment. The twc English couplets form a complaint and prayer dealing with the general theme of the degeneracy of the times, specifically the enslavement of fidelity and love by envy. They are not verbally based on the

preceding text, although much earlier in the chapter several allusions to contemporary social abuses due to envy were made. Manuscripts which lack

| the English verses normally conclude the chapter with “‘ gaudens.”’

— 2) | Loue god pat loued the, Pat for pe tholed deth on tree And broght pe oute of helle. Loue hym with hert, sowle and poght Pat pe now has / wel derre boght Pen any tonge can telle.

, (R, fols. 37v—38r)

TEXTS 155 LINE 1: god] add pu, B3. L2. Gol. LC. W1. Sp (before god); add pu man, L1. Go2; add man, E; add now, Jo. loued] louith, L1. LC. Sp (-es). LINE 2: whole line] ffor the he sufferd dethe vp-on a tree, L1. Go2 (on pe); and for the suffurd dethe on tree, E; pat for pi loue dyed on tre, W1. Gol. V;; ffor pe he deyd on pe tree, Sp. tholed deth] dolede de, LC. LINE 3: broght] boght, Gol. Sp. V. LINE 4: sowle] with soule, B3. L2. W1. Sp; and saule, Jo. LC. LINE 5: whole line] which he hathe derer boughte, L1; ffor he the hathe dere abowtht,

__E; pat with his blode so dere pe boght, Sp. has] om., Jo; after dere, Gol. V. now] om., LC. wel] ful, Go2. derre] the second -r- supplied interlin., R; dere,

B3. L2. Gol. Go2. Jo. LC. W1. E. Sp. V. :

LINE 6: whole line] pat no tong it may tell, Sp. pen] pat, Jo. con] may, Gol. LC. Index 2002. Foster No. 18. MSS: (1) B3, fol. 20v. (2) L1, fol. 90r. (3) L2, fol. 28r. (4) R, fols. 37v—38r. (5) Gol, fol. 30r. (6) Go2, fol. 32v. (7) Jo, fol. 51v. (8) LC, fol. 171v. (9) W1, fol. 174v. (10) E, fol. 44r. (11) Sp, fol. 39r. (12) V, fol. 21r. No separate occurrence.

Context. The chapter on the love of God (III, 7) introduces the three . manners in which man is to love God, according to Matth. 22:37: “‘ Hijs ergo tribus modis illum pre ceteris diligere debemus et tenemur ex precepto evangelij:

primo toto corde, considerando quomodo cor suum permisit pro nobis perforari; secundo in anima, considerando quomodo suam [animam] pro suis amicis deo Patri commendavit; tercio in mente, considerando quomodo sua

mentali intencione omnes salvare peroptavit. ‘Loue God....’ Et de ista dileccione...” (R, fols. 37v—38r). Comment. Only the fourth line of the English verses has a verbal basis in the preceding text (italicized); the remainder is a free expansion.

22 |

Take no god but oon in heuen. Neme nou3t his name in ydel steuen. Loke ry3t wel pyn halyday.

, Py fadur and moder pow worshyp ay. 5 Loke pou be no monsleere. Of fals wytnes noo berere. Pou shalt do no lecherye. Ni no pefthe of felonye.

Pin ney3borus godes pou ne wyll. |

10 Ny wyf ne dou3tur for to spylle. (R, fol. 39r) neme: to take. loke: to guard, keep.

156 TEXTS

LINE 1: take] worschip, Gol. V. , |

Gol. V. ,

LINE 2: neme] take, B3. L2. Gol. V; neuynn, Jo. LINE 3: loke ry3t] kepe pou, B3. L2; kepe, Jo; kepe ryght, B1. L3. LC. E; loue ryth,

LINE 4: py] om., E. and] py, Bl. L2. L3. Jo. LC. W1. pow] om., B3. Gol. V. LINE 6: whole line] ne fals wytnes berer, B3. L2. Gol (nor no...); ne fals wotenysse non pow bere, LC; of no fals wyttenes berrare, V. LINE 8: whole line] no theft of thyng that lyes the by, B3. L2 (thyff).

LINE 9: godes] good, B3. E. B1 (gud). Gol (gud). pou ne] pou shall not, B3. L2;

ne pou, L3; in no, Gol. V.

LINE 10: whole line] his wyf his doughter pou shall not spille, B3. L2; dou3tur] add

: ne maydene moren, L3. spylle] add: Thes been the hestes of grettest mede. /

Kepe hem well 3if thou wultt spede, E. ;

Index 3254. Foster No. 19. MSS: (1) B1, fol. 143r. (2) B3, fol. 21v; printed in Little, Studies, p. 150, n. 1. (3) L2, fol. 29r. (4) L3, fol. 24r. (5) R, fol. 39r. (6) Gol, fol. 30v. (7) Jo, fol. 52v. (8) LC, fol. 172r—v. (9) W1, fol. 175r; printed by Wilson, Library, —

: Fourth Series, 2 (1922), 263-64. (10) E, fol. 45v. (11) V, fol. 21v. Separate occurrence: (12) London, Gray’s Inn, MS 15, fol. 72v. With the additional couplet as in E, the second line reading: ‘‘Wyt hem wel and pou - schalt spede.”? Occurs after a Latin treatise on the Decalogue; see Neil R. - Ker, Medieval Manuscripts in British Libraries, 1: London (Oxford, 1969), p. 63. The English is followed by the same Latin verses as in FM; it was printed with errors by Owst in Dublin Review 176 (1925), 279.

Context. The verses conclude the chapter on the love of God (III, 7), which is said to consist primarily in keeping His commandments. “‘ Unde hec

precepta continentur in hijs versibus: , Unum crede deum, ne iures vana per ipsum, Sabbata sanctifices, habeas in honore parentes, Non occisor eris, fur, mecus, testis iniquus, _ Non alij nuptam, nec rem cupias alienam. /

Take no god...” (R, fols. 38v—39r). : Comment. The English lines on the Decalogue roughly translate four Latin hexameters. The latter were very popular; see Walther, Initia, 19669 and 9121. Equally popular were English renderings of the Decaloque: over thirty different forms are listed in Index and Supplement, and an additional one has been noted in “‘ Unrecorded,”’ No. 3. Of these, more than a dozen versify the Ten Commandments in ten lines. As in FM, the English version in Cambridge, Trinity College, MS 323 (Index 1129), is preceded by the Latin verses ‘“‘ Unum crede deum.”’ The different versions of Index 1129 are printed and discussed by Reichl, Religiése Dichtung, pp. 334-337. Like FM, the Trinity version has the archaic verb neme (“‘take’’), but not the equally archaic verb Joke (“‘keep’”’), which seems to be unique to FM in renderings of the Third Commandment. FM is also verbally closer to its source, ‘‘ Unum crede deum,”’ than Index 1129

TEXTS 157 by translating the nouns occisor and testis iniquus literally, as mansleer and fals witnes berere, respectively. All this suggests that the English verse rendering of

early date. , |

the Decalogue in FM, based on the Latin hexameters, is of a comparatively

23 Now ich haue pat I wyle, Goddus grame on py byle.

(R, fol. 40v) ,

grame: anger; grief; harm. LINE 1: I(2)] om., L2.

| LINE 2: goddus] Cristis, V. Gol (Crist). on] in, W1. E; enn, L3. py] his, LC.

Index 2329. Foster No. 20. , : MSS: (1) B1, fol. 144r. (2) B3, fol. 22r. (3) L2, fol. 30v. (4) L3, fol. 25v. (5) R, fol. 40v. (6) Gol, fol. 31v. (7) Go2, fols. 35v—36r. (8) Jo, fol. 54r. (9) LC, fol. 173v. (10) W1, fol. 176r. (11) E, fol. 48r. (12) Sp, fol. 43r. (13) V, fol. 23r. Separate occurrences: see ‘“Comment.”’

Context. Love of one’s neighbor (III, 8) must be pure. Feigned love is like the behavior of people who guard an orchard diligently at harvest time but abandon it unheeded as soon as they have picked its fruit: ‘“‘Et ideo est de | talibus sicut de pomerio fructuoso, quod tempore fructus diligenter custoditur et frequenter visitatur, sed ablatis fructibus sine custodia relinquitur. Revera sic est de ficta caritate. Dum enim aliquis talis mundanus fictus amicus ab

aliquo [aliquid] desiderat, dileccionem simulat, blanditur, adulatur. Sed habito [et] optento [or read habito optato?], dicunt illud Anglicum: ‘Now ich haue....’ Sed certe ista non est perfecta caritas’’ (R, fol. 40v). Comment. The English couplet has no verbal basis in the Latin simile. It is quoted as an integral part of the discourse, appropriate to the description of a person’s behavior who drops his mask of feigned friendship. The couplet is part of a common English proverb: When I wowe,

Gold in my gloue;

When I have that I wylle, Goddys grame to thy bylle.

See Whiting, Proverbs, G.317; Supplement 4020.6; and further occurrences listed in “‘ Unrecorded,”’ No. 87. Manuscripts that lack the English proverb either omit it with its introductory phrase (“‘dicunt illud Anglicum’’) and , instead finish the sentence with ‘“‘eum contemnit”’ (B2. Pe) or with a simple

158 TEXTS , ‘‘etc.” (CC). Or they omit the entire sentence, from “Sed habito”’ on (L1. B4. A. H. W2. Et). Or else they paraphrase the English lines with a more or less awkward Latin translation (Co. Li. C. M. Mo); see “English Verses,” pp. 237-238.

24 Form A

Loue god ouer alle pyng.

, Sethen py-selfe with-outen synnyng. | Sethen pi frend as kynde pe teches, After py fo with-outen wreche.

(R, fol. 41v) ,

LINE 1: loue] loue thou, E. god] add pou man LI. LINE 2: sethen] om., Gol; then, V. withouten] add ony, Jo. synnyng] lesyng, Gol. WI. V. LINE 3: kynde] godd, Sp. pe] om., Go2. LINE 4: after] afterward, L1. Go2. withouten] add any, L1.

Form B

Where he lofe god ouer all thyng, Kepe hym-self with-oute synnyng.

Where he lofe his frend os kynde doth teche, And wylle his foo no maner of wreche. (B3, fol. 22v) LINE 3: kynde] loue, L2. LINE 4: wylle] om., L2. of] om., L2.

Index 2001 A. Foster No. 21A. | | MSS: Form A: (1) L1, fol. 94v (follows after Verse 25). (2) R, fol. 41v. (3) Gol, fol. 32r. (4) Go2, fols. 36v—37r (follows after Verse 25). (5) Jo, fol. 55r. (6) LC, fols. 173v-174r. (7) W1, fol. 176v. (8) E, fol. 49r. (9) Sp, fol. 44r. (10) V, fol. 23v. Form B: (11) B3, fol. 22v. (12) L2, fol. 31r.

Separate occurrence: Grimestone cites a very similar quatrain in the section **De hostibus’’ (Wilson, Grimestone, No. 87): Homo [or hoc?] debet diligere, viz. God ouer alle pingge, Him-self withouten wemme of senningge, His euenecristene as kinde pe wile teche, Pi fo withouten wiling of oni wreche.

(fol. 64v) ,

TEXTS 159 Context. Charity is hindered by worldly desires and greed (mundi cupiditas et avaritia; III, 9). At the end of the chapter the author abruptly turns to the question how one can find love: “‘Siquis ergo cupit invenire amorem fidelem, unde sibi coronam tanquam floribus preciosissimis et mellifluis sibi parare voluerit, vadat ad cor suum, et si ibi ista quatuor invenerit sine ficcione vel falsitate, certe [MS: certum] illum lucratus est: Si diligat deum

super omnia; secundo, animam sine peccato postea; si tercio proximum amicum in deum [sic]; et quarto, inimicum propter deum. ‘Loue god... .’ Et certe sic faciens inveniet quadrifolium illud amoris veri’ (R, fol. 41v). Notice that in L1 and Go2 the English Verse 24 follows after 25, with this transitional

note: “Sed karissimi de quatrifolio veri amoris secundum latinum prius positum sic dicitur anglice: Loue god...” Comment. Both forms of Verse 24 versify the traditional four kinds or

directions of love discussed in the preceding Latin prose, although the traditional phrasing in deo—propter deum is preserved but translated quite differently (lines 3-4). Notice that the fourfold scheme is here called quadrifolium amoris, an image apparently responsible for the ‘‘wreath of precious flowers’? mentioned earlier. The image and the English verses are used a second time in FM, in Verse 52. Quadrifolium, ‘“quatrefoil,” the plant Paris quadrifolia, is commonly called “‘trew-love”’ in Middle English. Two manuscripts of FM (L1. Go2) in fact gloss quadrifolium thus at this point in the text. The trewlove is often found in sermons and in the visual arts as a symbol for Christ’s love of mankind or, as here, for the four loves man should have. For instance, a sermon on “Amore langueo,’? which contains much English material, develops an exemplum in which an unfaithful but repentant wife (the soul) sends her husband-knight (Christ) a golden heart, from which grows “‘unum trewloue

| cum quatuor follis,’’ each of which bears an inscription given in Latin and English Undex 830; and see “‘ Unrecorded,’’ No. 16). The four leaves of this trewlove are, in the moralization of the story, said to be “‘dilectio dei super omnia, dilectio proximi, dilectio animi sive anime tue, et dilectio inimici”’ (Cambridge University Library, Kk.IV.24, fol. 145r,b). A different trewlove, moralized with reference to penitence, appears in a poem of the Vernon MS and elsewhere (Index 1718). A longer poem of the mid-fourteenth century applies the four leaves to the Trinity and the Blessed Virgin: The Quatrefoil of Love, ed. Gollancz and Weale (EETS 195; London, 1935). For other aspects of the trewlove, see Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, line 612; and Chaucer’s The Miller’s Tale, line 3692.

25 Trewe loue among men pat most is of lette, In hattes, in hodes, in porses is sette.

160 TEXTS | , Trewe loue in herbers spryngeth in may,

(R, fol. 41v) ,

, Bote trewe loue of herte went is away. ,

LINE 1: among men] om., B3. L2. pat most] per nogth, Gol; pat noght, V. most is] is most, Jo. of lette] forlete, W1. LINE 2: whole line] in hattes, in hodys in pursys sett, B3; in hattis and in hoodis hit ys y-set, L1; in hattys in powches in hodys is sett, V; in hat3 in purse3 in hode3

is sett, Gol. in(2)] and, L2. Jo. LC. in porses] om., Jo. is] er, Sp; i, L2. LINE 3: herbers] gresses, B3. L2; herbes, L1. Gol. Go2. LC. W1. E (herebes). Sp. herber, V. in(2)] on, LC; no, Gol. LINE 4: of] in, B3. L1. L2. Go2. went is away] is fer went away, B3. L2; ys wynd away, LC; vaniseth away, L1. Go2 (wansyth); when it is away, Gol. V. away] way, WI. Index 3802. Foster No. 22. MSS: (1) B3, fol. 22v. (2) L1, fol. 94v (before Verse 24). (3) L2, fol. 31r. (4) R, fol. 41v. (5) Gol, fol. 32r. (6) Go2, fol. 36v (before Verse 24). (7) Jo, fol. 55r. (8) LC, fol. 174r. (9) W1, fol. 176r. (10) E, fol. 49r—v. (11) Sp, fol. 44r. (12) V, fol. 23v.

No separate occurrence. : Context. Verse 25 follows immediately upon the text quoted for No. 24 (except in L1 and Go2; see under Verse 24) and concludes the chapter (III, 9): *“*,.. quadrifolium illud amoris veri. Sed timeo quod dicere possum: ‘Trewe loue...’”’ (R, fol. 41v).

Comment. The two couplets, which belong to the tradition of moral complaints at the evil times, were clearly suggested by the preceding image of |

| 26

quadrifolium, “‘trewlove,” the plant, discussed above; but otherwise they have

no verbal base in the context. Of the manuscripts which omit this English verse, it is worth noting that Mo has the introductory sentence: ‘‘Sed timeo quod dicere possum, etc.”; and Pe gives instead: ‘“‘Caritas est elongata et quasi perdita,”’ which seems to be a free rendering of line 4 of the English poem.

Form A

Beholde myne woundes, how sore I am dy3th, For all pe wele pat pou hast I wan hit in fy3t.

I am sore woundet, behold on my skyn. | Leue lyf, for my loue let me comen in. (R, fol. 43r) dy3th: treated.

| | TEXTS 161 LINE 1: beholde] lop(?) byholdit, W1. woundes] add wyde, W2. how] om., Jo. sore] om., B3. L2; for pe, Sp; add pat, D. LINE 2: for] om., W2. pe wele pat pou hast] pi wele, B3. L2. pe] py, W1. Jo. LC. D. wele] welpe, LC. Sp. V; wyl, Jo. Iwan] y awn, Jo. hit] om., B3. L2. Gol. Sp; the, E; tham, V. in fy3t] wyth rygth, Gol. W1. V; in si3t, Jo; on fy3t, LC. LINE 3: am] om., LC. sore woundet] woundyt sore, W2; for-wondyt, Jo. on] om., B3. L2. Gol. W1; now, Sp; in, D. LINE 4: whole line] and for my loue pou lete me in, B3. L2. leue lyf] gentyll lefe, W2. lyf for my] om., Sp. comen] om., Jo.

Form B

, (Expanded, apparently in eight lines) Behold my woundys in thys caas, How sor I am dyhte, For all pe welthe pat pou has I wan tham with ryghte. I am ful soor I-woundyd, Behold my dulfull skynne. Der leman, for my lof Latte me cum Ine.

_ (V, fol. 24v)

Index 498. Foster No. 23. MSS: Form A: (1) B3, fol. 23v. (2) L2, fol. 32r; printed in Gray, Selection, p. 124 (with errors and without identification). (3) R, fol. 43r. (4) Gol, fol. 33r. , (5) Jo, fol. 56r. (6) LC, fol. 174v. (7) W1, fol. 177r. (8) W2, fol. 44r—v. (9) D, fol. 21r—v. (10) E, fol. 51r. (11) Sp, fol. 45v. Form B: (12) V, fol. 24v. All these manuscripts repeat the beginning, ‘‘ Beholde myne woundes,”’ in the moralization of the exemplum which follows a few lines later in the text. The following MSS give only this reference, in English: (13) L3, fol. 27v. (14) B1, fol. 145v. (15) A, fol. 8v. (16) H, fol. 26r. (17) Et, fol. 24v. A different form, occurring in the moralization only, is Verse 27. Separate occurrence: (18) Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, 392, fol. 255r—v, in a sermon on Christ’s passion. The immediate context is verbally the

same as in FM. |

Context. Christ’s passion (III, 10) should stir us to love Him more deeply. “Absit ergo quod sibi ingrati simus sicut fuit quedam puella amico suo, de quo hic narratur. Unde narrat Virgilius Eneydos et similiter commentator super Alexandrum magnum, 1. 9 et 6 [var. libro 5 cap. 6] de Enea, quomodo amore cuiusdam puelle exarsit in tantum ut seipsum pro ipsa depauperando humiliaret atque eam ditando exaltaret. Quod et factum est. / Accidit ergo quodam die cum de quodam bello pro ea rediret, vulneribus

sauciatus vix semivivus evasit. Accessit ergo ad eam tanquam ad tuciora |

162 TEXTS refugia confidenter, eo quod illam tantum pre ceteris dilexisset et seipsum depauperando eam exaltasset. Sed ipsa tanquam ingrata portas seravit et aditum constanter sibi negavit. Quo facto, secundum Ovidium Metamorf., ei

sic scripsit infortunium suum allegans: Cerne cicatrices, veteris vestigia pugne. Quesivi proprio sanguine quicquid habes.

fi.e., Amores, III, viii, 19-20] , Beholde myne woundes. ... , Spiritualiter loquendo, iste miles Eneas Christus est...’ (R, fols. 42v—43r). The following moralization contains quotations of Apoc. 3:20, “‘Ecce sto ad ostium et pulso,” and Cant. 5:2, “‘ Aperi mihi, soror mea, amica mea, columba mea.” Comment. The lines form a message verse in an exemplum on the theme of Christ the Lover-Knight. The tradition and this particular story have been discussed by R. Woolf in Review of English Studies N.S., 13 (1962), 1-16, and again in Religious Lyric, p. 50. The first English couplet freely translates a distich from Ovid’s Amores; the second expands the thought with reference to Christ the lover standing at the gate of the heart and asking to be let in. The Ovidian lines evidently had much appeal for medieval preachers. I

have found them, outside FM and works clearly influenced by it, in an anonymous sermon on St. Barnabas: “‘Volo pro te, Ihesu, omnia gravia sustinere. Nolo a gratiarum actione cessare, quia tu, deus, dicis: Cerne cicatrices...”’ (MS Bodl. 649, fol. 220r); in Bishop Sheppey’s collection, following immediately upon the two hexameters translated in Verse 29 (‘In cruce sum’’; Merton 248, fol. 123v); and in Convertimini, MS Royal 7.C.i, fol. 116v,b: ““Narrat Ouidius ... Applica ad Christum et peccatorem ingratum.” The Latin distich is also quoted ‘in a retelling of the Christ-Knight exemplum in the Middle English treatise Dives and Pauper; here it is rendered into somewhat clumsy English lines that differ from FM: Byhold my woundys and haue theym in thy thought, For al the goodis that be thyne with my blode I haue theym bought.

(1975), 264. | Ed. Pynson (London, 1493), reprinted with an introduction and index by Francis J. Sheeran (Delmar, N.Y., 1973), p. 321. See also F. J. Sheeran, “‘Ten

Verse Fragments in Dives and Pauper,’ Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 76

| 2/1

Be-hold my woundes wide, man, and se _ My blood pat i schedde in batayl for the. (Co, fol. 43v)

TEXTS 163 Listed in Index with 498. MSS: (1) Co, fol. 43v. (2) Li, fol. 31r. (3) C, fol. 41r—-v.

Context. The exemplum of the Christ-Knight, quoted in the preceding entry, is moralized: Ungrateful man excludes God from his heart, yet Christ continues to stand at his door and to call. “Sic ingrate eum excludit homo. Non obstante tanquam gratissimus et fidelissimus cessare pulsando non desistit [et] clamare: ‘Beholde....’ O ergo, anima humana, erubesce.. .”’ (Co, fol. 43v). Comment. In the moralization of the exemplum the first line of Verse 26

is quoted again, in all manuscripts listed at No. 26. Three MSS, however, which do not contain Verse 26, replace the quotation at this point with a couplet of their own, the present item. For further discussion of this situation, see Chapter ITI, p. 110.

28 By dedes of [dyane] I swere to the Her-aftur to take and wedde the. (R, fol. 44r) LINE 1: whole line] by pe ath pat I swere to pe, Gol. W1. V (be thys othe I swer to

the). dedes] bedes, Sp. dyane] dayne, R. |

LINE 2: and] and to, D. pe] me, WI. Index 565. Foster No. 24. MSS: (1) B3, fol. 24v. (2) L1, fol. 97v. (3) L2, fol. 33v. (4) R, fol. 44r. (5) Gol, fol. 33v. (6) Go2, fol. 39r. (7) LC, fol. 175r. (8) W1, fol. 177v. (9) D, fol. 23r.

(10) E, fol. 52v. (11) Sp, fol. 47r. (12) V, fol. 25v. ,

No separate occurrence.

Context. The homiletic development that Christ’s passion should move us to compassion and to deeper love (III, 10) contains the story of the successful wooing of Cydippe by Acontius, by means of a trick: He sends her an apple on which he has written a marriage vow and hopes that she will read it out aloud,

thereby obligating herself to marry him. ‘‘ Narrat autem Ovidius in epistulis suis quod iuvenis quidam nomine Achoncius amore cuiusdam virginis quam cum de amore frequenter rogasset, ipsam difficilem reperit supra modum. Quod ipse moleste ferens istam cautelam exogitavit: Accepit pomum pulcherimum et in illo quoddam obligatorium scripsit de nupcijs cum ea contrahendis, cogitans et sperans quod, si ipsa obligatorium illud perlegeret, quod ex tunc teneretur ipsa secum sponsalia contrahere, vi scilicet illius lecture. Fuit ergo forma scripture talis: Iuro tibi sane per mistica sacra Dyane

| Me tibi nupturam sponsam comitemque futuram. —

164 TEXTS , , Anglice sic: ‘By dedes....’ Istud ergo pomum in quodam loco ubi ipsa continue conversabatur, scil. in templo Dyane dei sui [read dee sue]

proiecit...’’ (R, fol. 44r). ,

Comment. The English couplet briefly translates two Latin hexameters. The story itself derives from Ovid, Heroides, ep. 20 and 21, and is alluded to in Tristia, III, x, 73-74. But the Latin verses are not found in either place; they

may have been influenced by Ep. II, 42 (‘Et per taediferae mystica sacra deae’’). The story with the Latin hexameters but without English occurs also in MS Harley 7322, fol. 156v, where the lovers are unnamed, the Vestal temple is located ‘“‘in monte Palladur ubi nunc est villa que vocatur Chestisbury,”’ and

the whole story is attributed to “‘Beda in prologo de ymagine mundi”’; Tubach, No. 5081.

29 I honge on cros for loue of the.

Lef py synne for loue of me. , Mercy aske, amende pe sone, — And I for3yf pe pat is mysdone. (R, fol. 45r)

LINE 1: on] on pe, W1. W2. Sp. for] for pe, W1. LINE 2: whole line] om., W1. LINE 3: aske] pou aske, Go2.

LINE 4: I] om., Go2. pe] om., B3. L2. Go2. LC. W2. Sp. Index 1321. Foster No. 25. MSS: (1) B3, fol. 25r. (2) L2, fol. 34r. (3) R, fol. 45r. (4) Go2, fol. 40r. (5) Jo, fol. 57v. (6) LC, fol. 175v. (7) W1, fol. 178r. (8) W2, fol. 47r. (9) Sp, fol. 48r. Separate occurrence: see “Comment.”

Context. At the end of the chapter on Christ’s passion (III, 10), the author develops the point that on His cross Christ abolished our servitude by giving His body as a charter .““Dicit ergo Christus: In cruce sum pro te; qui peccas, desine pro me. Desine, do veniam, dic culpam, retraho penam.

Anglice sic: ‘I honge....’ Sic ergo patet primo quare pro nobis sanguinem suum fudit”’ (R, fol. 45r).

Comment. Two English couplets translate two Latin hexameters closely. For the rhetorical skill of the translation compared with that found in the Latin, see my comments in “English Verses,’ p. 233. The Latin verses, spoken by Christ from the cross, were very popular (though they are not

listed by Walther) and are found in sermons, collections of proverbs, and on

, , TEXTS 165 flyleaves. Besides the manuscripts quoted or listed in Carl Horstman, Yorkshire —

Writers (London, 1895-96), 1:434, and 2:457; F. J. Furnivall, Political, Religious, and Love Poems, EETS 15 (rev. ed., London, 1903), p. 141; M. Day (ed.), The English Text of the Ancrene Riwle, EETS 225 (London, 1952), pp. xxlif.; and Brown, RL XIV, p. 261; I have found them also in: MSS Rylands lat. 201, front flyleaf; Cambridge, Trinity College 323, fol. 25r (see Reichl, Religidse Dichtung, pp. 95 and 299); Trinity Hall 25; Harley 655, fol. 292r;

Arundel 248, fol. 68v; Merton 248, fol. 123v. -

These hexameters were translated or paraphrased in English in various forms: Index 3846 (Grimestone, two couplets); 4185, stanza 8 (final stanza of a poem on the Seven Deadly Sins, not in all manuscripts; see H. A. Person, Cambridge Middle English Lyrics, revised edition [Seattle, 1962], No. 8 and note); 2080 (expanded); 2689 (five lines); 3845 (Lydgate, expanded). All these

have been printed. R. Woolf discusses the Latin and some of the English

verses briefly in Religious Lyric, p. 219. ,

The four English lines—in the exact form as in FM with only lef of line 2 replaced by forsake—were incorporated in the B and C versions of the (Long) Charter of Christ: Index 4154 (nine MSS, lines 323-326) and Index 1174 (one MS, lines 483-486); see F. J. Furnivall (ed.), The Minor Poems of the Vernon

MS., Part Il, EETS 117 (London, 1901), pp. 652 and 653; and M. Caroline Spalding, The Middle English Charters of Christ (Bryn Mawr, 1914), pp. 72-73.

30

A, 3e¢ men pat by me wendenn, Abydes a while and loke on me, 3ef 3e fyndenn in any ende

Suche sorow as here 3e se on me. , (R, fol. 45v) LINE 1: a] all, Gol. W1. E. V; om., Sp. 3e] pe, Gol. W1. pat]om.,LC. by me] be the waye, E. Sp. LINE 3: whole line] loke where 3e con knowe or fynde, B3. L2. 3e] pou, W1. ende] om., Gol. V; other, E. LINE 4: whole line] swych peyne as 3e fynde in me, Go2. as here 3e se on me] os I suffre vpon pis tre, B3. L2; als ye may se in me, Sp. here] om., Gol. W1. Sp. V. Index 2596. Foster No. 26. MSS: (1) B3, fol. 25r. (2) L2, fol. 34v. (3) R, fol. 45v. (4) Gol, fol. 34v. (5) Go2, fol. 40v. (6) LC, fol. 175v. (7) W1, fol. 178r. (8) E, fol. 54r. (9) Sp, fol. 48v. (10) V, fol. 26v. No separate occurrence: but see ““Comment.”

Context. The chapter on the manner of Christ’s passion (III, 11) describes Christ’s carrying the cross, being nailed to it, and addressing man-

166 TEXTS kind. ‘‘Bene ergo potest Christus dicere illud Thren., ‘O vos omnes qui transitis per viam, attendite et videte si est dolor,’ etc. [i.e., sicut dolor meus]. ‘A, 3e men... .’ Et certe, omnes pene predicte non tantum gravant illum sicut ingratitudo hominis, quem tantum dilexit et diligit” (R, fol. 45v). Comment. As Nos. 29 and 31, these verses treat a favorite devotional

topic, Christ’s lament from the cross and His appeal to mankind. They , translate fairly closely Lamentations 1:12, quoted before them. Independent translations of the same biblical verse are Index 4259 (MS Harley 7322), 4263 (Grimestone, expanded; see Wilson, No. 211; and Stemmler, Anglia 93 [1975], 4, No. 5), 110 (expanded), and Supplement 3905.5 (printed in Gray, Selection, pp. 112-113), all of which have been printed. Another version, not listed in Index or Supplement, appears with the Latin quotation in MS Bod. lat. theol.

d.1, fol. 127r: ,

Stand and behold, euerj man, yif per be any swilk sorowe alse myn al ane. The topos is discussed by Woolf, Religious Lyric, pp. 43 and passim.

3] Byholde, mon, what I dree,

| Whech is my payne, qwech is my woo. | To the I clepe now I shal dye,

By-se the wel, for I mot go. 5 Byholde pe nayles pat ben withoute, How pey me porlenn to pys tre. Of all my pyne haue I no doute But 3if vnkynde I fynde the. (R, fol. 45v) dree: to suffer, endure. jporlen: to fix with a nail. LINE 1: byholde mon] lo man by-hold, W1. what] what peyne, B3. L2. dree] dere, WI. LINE 2: whech is my payne] om., LC; wyche my payn ys, W1. payne] gref, B3. L2. LINE 3: whole line] to pe I call for peI dy, Sp. clepe] crye, E. I shal] schal y, W1. LINE 4: whole line] behald and se for me most go, Sp. by-se pe] beheld, Go2;

bysep, LC. .

LINE 6: whole line] qwow pei ben pyrlyd to pe tre, Go2; how y [pei?] me bere to pis

tre, W1. to pys] vntoa, Sp. |

- LINE 7: doute] poute, LC. LINE 8: whole line] bot y vnnkynde finde pe, W1. 3if] lest, B3. L2. I fynde] fynd y, LC.

Index 495. Foster No. 27.

TEXTS 167 MSS: (1) B3, fol. 25v. (2) L2, fol. 34v. (3) R, fol. 45v. (4) Go2, fol. 41r. (5) LC, fol. 176r. (6) W1, fol. 178v. (7) E, fol. 54v. (8) Sp, fol. 48v. No separate occurrence: but see ““Comment.”

Context. This item follows upon the text quoted for Verse 30 and concludes the chapter De modo passionis Christi. ““Et ideo quidam devotus hominem ingratum loco Christi sic redarguit: Homo, inquit, vide quid pro te pacior, Si est dolor sicut quo crucior. Ad te clamo, qui pro te morior.

| Vide penas quibus afficior.

Vide clavos quibus confodior. Cum sit dolor tantus exterior,

Interior est planctus gravior , Tam ingratum dum te experior.

Byholde, mon...” (R, fol. 45v). Comment. The ‘‘quidam devotus”’ is Philip the Chancelor, whose poem

forms a favorite devotional topos, often found in Latin manuscripts. For example, Hugh of Hartlepool quoted it (in Latin only) in his sermon preached on Good Friday, 1291, at the Grey Friars in Oxford (see Little and Pelster, Oxford Theology and Theologians c. A.D. 1282-1302 [Oxford, 1934], p. 201). It also appears in Holcot, In Sapientiam, l\ectio 137 (fol. 207r,b); MSS Harley 7322, fol. 159v; Cambridge, Queen’s College 13, fol. iii,v; Trinity College 1149, fol. 8r. The rendering in FM follows the Latin closely; see the (rather negative) comments by Woolf, Religious Lyric, p. 38. The eight Latin lines were translated or expanded in English verses in at least seven different forms besides that of FM: Index 1902, 2042, 2047, 2502 (printed by Erb in Mediaeval Studies 33 [1971], 74), 3109 (Grimestone; Wilson, No. 202), 3826, and 3827; all have been printed. These renderings vary from 10 to 16 lines.

| 32

Here is comen pat no mon wot. 3e, 3e, pe deuel in py eye and row forth pe boot. (R, fol. 64v) LINE |: is] add one, CC. no] om., Go2. LINE 2: whole line] he payth best for hys frawt, row forth pe bote, B1 (preceded by: Et alius quia de eius largitate expertus hoc modo respondit). 3e 3e] 3e, L3. Jo (a). CC. LC. W1. E. Sp; o0m.,Gol. Go2. W2. Et. V. pedeuel]dew, W1. py] pe, W2.

eyeJes, L3. and] om., Gol, Go2. CC. W2. Et. Sp. V; lat, Jo. pe boot] bat, Jo.

168 TEXTS , | Index 1204. Foster No. 28. ,

MSS: (1) B1, fol. 157v. (2) L3, fol. 43v. (3) R, fol. 64v. (4) Gol, fol. 45r. (5) Go2, fol. 59r. (6) Jo, fol. 79r. (7) CC, fol. 77r. (8) LC, fol. 185r. (9) W1, fol. 186v. — (10) W2, fol. 70v. (11) E, fol. 78r. (12) Et, fol. 36r. (13) Sp, fol. 69r. (14) V, fol. 38v. No separate occurrence.

Context. The chapter on the Holy Trinity (III, 23) contains a joke about a traveler who arrives at a lake and calls for a boat to be ferried over. When the boatman asks who he is, he replies, ““Why do you ask for my name? Nobody knows me.”” The boatman then speaks the first English line to his |

companion, who laughingly responds with the second. “Narratur enim iocose de quodam existente super ripam maris et pro schapha proclamante. Quem cum nauta quidam interrogaverat quisnam esset et ipse respondisset: ‘Ut quid nomen meum queris, cum nemo noticiam mei habet?’ dixit autem nauta ad socium: ‘Ecce vis mirum audire: Here is comen pat no mon wot!” Et alius quasi de eo non curans sed subridendo hoc modo respondit: ‘3e, 3e, pe deuel. .. .” Et sic illum p[ret]ermittentes ad loca nociora remigabant.”’ The story is then moralized: The boatmen are human souls rowing their boats (i1.e., bodies) on the ocean of this world. The unknown caller is the Holy Trinity, ““cuius noticiam aut nomen si queratur, respondit illud Exodi [i.e., Judic. 13:18], ‘Quare queris nomen meum quod est mirabile,’ quasi diceret, ad noticiam mei, quomodo scilicet sum deus trinus et unus, nunquam in hac vita nisi enigmatice et in fide ecclesie deveniet homo, nec unde sum, unde veni,

aut quo vado, aut ex quibus procedo...”’ (R, fol. 64v). Comment. The English lines occur as speeches in a Latin story involving a nemo-joke. They form an integral part of the story, without Latin counterparts, suggesting that the original of the story was in English. Some manu- , scripts which lack the two English lines simply omit them and thereby miss the

pun (B4; H; L1, with “etc.” in place of the second line; A, with ‘quasi nichil ei respondet’’). Others attempt to substitute a Latin equivalent: Co, Li, C replace the second English line with “transeamus hinc,’”’ while Mo gives a complete if clumsy substitution: ““‘Vis mirum audire? Hic venit huc quod nullus de eo 3it [for scit].’ Vel sic: ‘Iste ad tantam etatem venit et tamen adhuc nemo de nomine nec de eo aliquid scit.’ Et alius quasi de eo non curans sed subridendo hoc modo respondit: ‘Forte ipse est dyabolus vel eius pedellus

vel eius nuncius.’ Et sic...’ (Mo, fol. 39v). The story is only alluded to, without conversation, in B2, Pe; it is entirely omitted in B3, L2, D, M.

The curse “The devil in your eye!’’ occurs in the Towneley Secunda Pastorum, line 217 (ed. A. C. Cawley, The Wakefield Pageants in the Towneley

Cycle [Manchester, 1958], p. 49); and in Hoccleve’s poem ‘‘ Against Wide Robes and Long Sleeves,” line 7 (ed. F. J. Furnivall, EETS, es, 8 [London, 1869], p. 105).

, TEXTS 169 [Oure] wysdam pis world hap byraft, Pes of londe is loste and lafte, Pe kyndam of Rome bet3 for-lore With swerd, hongur and fuyre per-fore. (R, fol. 68v) LINE 1: whole line] thys world oure wysdom vs has bereft, V; wysdam the warlde has

reft, Sp. oure] pure, R; pur al oure(?), LC. pis] pe, B1. hap] hap vs, B1. Gol (vs has). V. LINE 2: whole line] rest and pes of lond is left, V; pece of contre is lost, Sp. and lafte] om., Gol. LINE 3: pe] om., Gol. bet3] schal be, LC. E; schal, W1; is, B1. Gol. LINE 4: and] om., B1.

Index 2729. Foster No. 29. MSS: (1) B1, fol. 159v. (2) B3, fol. 38v. (3) L2, fol. 55r. (4) R, fol. 68v. (5) Gol, fol. 47r. (6) LC, fol. 187r. (7) W1, fol. 188v. (8) E, fol. 82v. (9) Sp, fol. 73r. (10) V, fol. 41r. No separate occurrence.

Context. The first of four properties of avarice (IV, 2) is continuous strife (labor in perquirendo). Greed is never satisfied; from it spring battles, wars, dangers, and mishaps, and it destroys truth and knowledge. Thus, to modern times can be applied the message which a Roman senator found on the city gate. ‘‘Et ideo timendum est ne modernis temporibus dici posset quod quondam dictum erat et revelatum cuidam senatori Romano querenti causam a deo suo quare tot miserijs infestabantur, sicut per bella, pestilencias, et fames.

Cui responsum erat quod iret ad portam ciuitatis et diligenter inspiceret que ibi scripta inveniret. Qui cum ibi acessisset, has litteras sic invenit: SSS. PPP. RRR. FFF. Quorum intellectum cum non intellexisset, iterum deum consuluit pro intellectu, et hoc modo sibi responsum fuit:

, Seculum sapienciam sustulit. Pax patrie perditur. Regnum Rome ruet,

Ferro, fame, flamma.

Anglice: ‘Pure [read: Oure] wysdam....’ Nonne hijs diebus simili modo seculum cum eius cupiditate et avaricia veram sapienciam abstulit ab hominibus?...”’ (R, fol. 68v). Comment. The English lines closely translate the Latin interpretation of an inscription. This exemplum (Tubach, No. 1150) is widespread; it occurs in

170 TEXTS MS Harley 7322 and in the Gesta Romanorum and was copied, presumably from FM but without the English verse, by Chartham (Lambeth Palace MS 78, fol. 282v). Sometimes the initials appear on rings (e.g., Merton 248, fol. 73r) or are written on leaves by the Sibyl (e.g., Merton 248, fol. 98r; Bodl. 649, fol. 179v), and on occasion the Venerable Bede is credited with interpreting the cryptic message (Merton 248, fol. 73r; Brinton, Sermo 12, ed. Devlin, 1:47).

, The origins of this story go at least back to the ninth century. See P. Lehmann, Pseudo-antike Literatur des Mittelalters, Studien der Bibliothek Warburg 13 (Leipzig/Berlin, 1927), pp. 28-29 and 101-102; and A. Ebel, Clm 17142: Eine

Schaftlarner Miscellaneen-Handschrift des 12. Jahrhunderts, Miunchener Beitrage zur Mediavistik und Renaissance-Forschung 6 (Munchen, 1970), pp. 58-59. A similar series of initials appears in Eton College MS 21, end flyleaf.

34

Form A | Ppourgh ferly deth to-gedur arn fald Bothe euel lyf and euel deth cald.

I rede such lyf pou forsake,

Wyth suche deth lest pou be take. |

(R, fol. 69v)

fald: felled, struck down. /ferly: sudden. _ Notice Laj3amon’s Brut, line 3407: Pz com pe ferliche ded and falde hine to grunde. Ed. G. L. Brook and R. F. Leslie, EETS 250 (London, 1963), pp. 178-179. LINE 1: arn fald] is falle, Sp.

LINE 3: pou] be, Sp. |

LINE 2: whole line|om., W1. bothe]om.,Sp. deth]y, LC. cald] pat bup cald, B1.

LINE 4: lest pou be] pou be, Gol; pou be not, V.

Form B ,

Thorw sodayn deth be hennes cald Euyl lyf and euyl / deth fald. Euyl lyf than we forsake, Lest euyl deth vs hen take.

(B3, fols. 38v—39r)

LINE 4: hen] henne, L2.

TEXTS 171 Index 3716. Foster No. 30. MSS: Form A: (1) B1, fol. 160r. (2) R, fol. 69v. (3) Gol, fol. 47v. (4) LC, fol. 187v. (5) W1, fol. 189r. (6) E, fol. 83v. (7) Sp, fol. 74r. (8) V, fol. 41v. Form B: (9) B3, fols. 38v—39r. (10) L2, fol. 55v. No separate occurrence.

Context. The development of the prophecy of the preceding verses (No. 33) leads to a discussion of evil judges, whose miserable ends are illustrated by several exempla. The first climaxes with the remarks made by two companions when they come across the fetid remains of a wicked Parisian judge who has been reduced to dust. ‘*‘ Attendunt tales ergo quod narratur de quodam tali advocato Parisius qui, ut semper consueverat, propter munera semel proposuit contra personas innocentes et religiosas false stare. Cuius nomen erat Johannes vel Willelmus Male Mortis. Accidit ergo ut quadam / die cameram suam intravit, [ut studeret] quo melius cavillaciones et raciones veritati contrarias ad dampnum eorum proponeret. Cumque in crastinum ad comparendum vocaretur nec inveniretur, socij e1us hostium camere fregerunt et ecce subito eum a demone strangulatum invenerunt et corpus eius totum redactum in pulverem. De cuius fetore multi accedentes interierunt. Unde unus literatus de socijs metrice sic ait:

Morte cadunt subita Mala Mors simul et mala vita.

- pourgh ferly deth.... Cui alius metrice respondit sic:

Hanc vitam vita, ne moriaris ita.

Irede...”

(R, fol. 69r—v).

Comment. The two couplets translate faithfully the punning speeches of the Parisian /itterati; see my comments in “English Verses,” p. 244. The story of the bitter end of Jean or Guillaume Malemort, a lawyer at Paris, is fairly popular (see Tubach, No. 3002) and can be found in very different versions.

In Cambridge University Library MS Kk.IV.24, fol. 142r, for example, Willelmus has become a thieving seneschal who is carried off into the air by a demon-—‘“‘and after a while his bones came falling down, stinking very badly, and a voice was heard in the air saying, ‘Morte cadit....’’’ I have also found

the story in Merton 248, fol. 43v; Oxford, Trinity College 42, fol. 13r; and Lambeth Palace 78, fol. 283r (copied from FM and conflated with the following

story). The Latin distich is often preserved without the story; see Walther, Proverbia, 15240 and 15232 (only one manuscript each); Bromyard, “* Mors,” M.XI, § 95 (fol. 345r); and Harley 655, fol. 291v. Form B of the English verses seems to be the result of updating. Perhaps the pun “‘euel deth cald”’ (i.e., ‘“‘the one named Evil Death’’) was no longer understood, which led to extensive rewriting of the two couplets.

172 TEXTS — | Alas, alas, pat I was boren,

| For dome with dome I am for-loren.

| (R, fol. 69v) LINE 2: with] by, B3. L2.

Index 142A. Foster No. 31A. MSS: (1) B1, fol. 160r. (2) B3, fol. 39r. (3) L2, fol. 55v. (4) L3, fol. 47v. (5) R, fol. 69v. (6) Gol, fol. 47v. (7) LC, fol. 187v. (8) W1, fol. 189r. (9) E, fol. 83v.

(10) Sp, fol. 74r. (11) V, fol. 41lv. Separate occurrence: (12) Worcester Cathedral, MS F.126, fol. 28r. Printed in “*The Gay Carol and Exemplum,”’ Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 77 (1976), 90.

Context. Thestory and Verse 34 are immediately followed by a reference to another exemplum of a false judge. “‘Hic nota narracionem de illo falso iudice nomine Gayus, qui tandem captus a demonibus horribiliter clamavit et sic dixit:

Heu, heu, prodolor; sicut iudicavi, sic iudicor!

Anglice sic: ‘Alas, alas...’, quasi diceret: ‘Sicut false innocentes iudicavi propter munera, sic tuste iam iudicor a deo. ..’”’ (R, fol. 69v). Comment. The English couplet translates the one-hexameter dying speech in an exemplum which apparently enjoyed some popularity in England

and was taken into FM in an abbreviated form (“‘Hic nota”). For other versions of the story as well as the Latin or English verses, see Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 77 (1976), 85-91. The translation is close and imitates the Latin

word play in its own fashion, as I have pointed out in “English Verses,” p. 233. The first English line is a cliché and appears in many works, as do very similar Latin exclamations. For a different ‘“‘ Alas!’’ verse in FM, see No. 47.

Pat mantel pe kyng to Vifride lente, With hap hit come, with hap hit wente. (R, fol. 71v) LINE 1: pat] pe, B1. Sp. pe] pat pe, B1. Sp. V; pat, Gol. W1. VIfride] Wilfride,

Gol. W1 (Wilfrid); vnfride, E; wulfryde, B1; wolfryd, V. , LINE 2: come] add and, B1.

TEXTS 173

Index 3287. Foster No. 32. , MSS: (1) B1, fol. 161v. (2) B3, fol. 40v. (3) L2, fol. 58v. (4) R, fol. 71v. (5) Gol, fol. 49r. (6) Jo, fol. 88v. (7) LC, fol. 188v. (8) W1, fol. 190r. (9) E, fol. 86v. (10) Sp, fol. 76v. (11) V, fol. 43r. No separate occurrence.

Context. The discussion of the third of the four properties of avarice:

the pain caused by losing one’s temporal possessions (dolor temporalia amittendo; IV, 4), leads to a lengthy moralization of an image of the World, which has several inscriptions. One of these teaches that in heavenly things there is no fable or deceit, whereas worldly things pass away like a shadow and _ fail and deceive us every day like a ioculator. This leads to a long story about *‘quidam ioculator Ulfrido nomine,”’ who lived in great poverty and ardently desired worldly riches. One day the devil approached him, disguised as Lady Fortune, and sent him to “‘Rex Attrides’”’ with a ring and a message from Fortune. Attrides gives Ulfrid a magic mantle which produces riches, provided Ulfrid does not exult in his good fortune. Ulfrid becomes very rich, until one day at a feast with his friends he wears the mantle and “‘begins to exult some-

what in his mind.” At once, his riches and the mantle disappear. Thus it happens to all covetous and greedy men. “‘Revera, quando magis de mundi clamide gloriantur, omnia in momento aufert ab illis et nudos, sicut prius invenit illos, derelinquit. Sicut de illo Vlfrido actum est, de quo sic metrice dicitur: Vifridus clamidem quam susceperat per Attridem Servavit pridem. Casus dedit, abstulit idem.

Pat mantel...”

(R, fol. 71r—-v). ,

Comment. The English verses tersely translate two Latin hexameters

| 37 |

which summarize the story at whose end they appear. The tale seems to have

been little known; it is not listed by Tubach, nor are the verses listed by Walther. I have found the story outside FM only in Chartham’s Speculum

parvulorum (Lambeth Palace 78, fol. 282r), evidently copied from FM, where no English is given and the ioculator is named Vinfridus; and in Bromyard, ‘* Avaritia,’”? A.X XVII, § 60 (fol. 66r), where the ioculator is unnamed.

The lade dame Fortune is bothe frende and foo, Of pore hoe maketh riche and ryche of pore also.

} Hee turneth woo to wele and wele also to woo.

Ne trust noght to his word, pe whele turneth so.

| (R, fol. 72r)

174 TEXTS

LINE 1: dame] of, Gol. V. bothe] om., Jo. LINE 2: whole line] om., Go2; of rych scho makys pore of pore ryche also, Sp. hoe] the o supplied interlin., R. and ryche of pore also] of ryche pore also, B3; and [of ryche pore also, B1; and rych pore also, Jo. LC. D. E; om., Gol. W1. V. LINE 3: whole line| she turnyp wele to wo and wo to wele also, B1. hee turneth woo to wele] om., Gol. W1. V. and wele also to woo] and wele to wo also, D; and wele scho turnes to woo, Gol. V. LINE 4: whole line] traystes not to hyr worde scho will hym turne so, Gol; trayst notte to hyr word sche wyll hyr whel turne so, V; ne trosthe pou nowth to pys werld sche wil pe turne so, Go2; bot trast not to hys worde pe whyles he turnes soo, Jo; ne tryst powe not to her worde pe whele sche turneth soo, E; tryst nat

, peron for hyt ys sone a-go, B1; no tryst noght to hyr wordes whyls scho turnes so, Sp; cf. Lambeth 78: No tryste now to thys worlde ys whyle he turneth soo;

CUL. Oo.7.32: No trist no man to pis wele pe whel it turnet so. trust] trest , pow, LC. noght] no pyng, W1; now, D. to his word] to thy wordl, D. whele] wel him, L2. W1; wyle he, LC. D. turneth] add hym, B3. L2 (before 7 turneth). Index 3408. Foster No. 33. MSS: (1) B1, fol. 161v. (2) B3, fol. 40v. (3) L2, fol. 58v. (4) R, fol. 72r. (5) Gol, fol. 49r. (6) Go2, fol. 65v. (7) Jo, fol. 88v. (8) LC, fol. 188v. (9) W1, fol. 190r. (10) D, fol. 32v. (11) E, fol. 86v. (12) Sp, fol. 76v. (13) V, fol. 43r. Separate occurrences: (14) Lambeth Palace 78, fol. 282r (copied from FM).

, (15) Cambridge University Library, Oo.7.32 (a roll, ca. 1325); printed in Register, 1:199; Heuser, Kildare-Gedichte, p. 173; Brown, RL XIV, No. 42; Sisam, Oxford Book of Medieval English Verse (Oxford, 1970), No: 288; Gray, Selection, p. 148; and elsewhere. (16) Ghent, University Library 317,

: end flyleaf (saec. xiv); printed in Logeman, Archiv 87 (1891), 432; Brown, RL XIV, p. 260. Also appears as stanza 4 of Index 2025, ‘‘Lollai, lollai, litil child.’’ This is the most frequently anthologized poem from FM. _

Context. Immediately after the context of Verse 36 follows: ‘‘Unde de illa domina Fortuna est antiquum proverbium sic canens: ‘The lade dame Fortune... .’ Non est ergo dolendum de amissione temporalium fortuitorum | que modo sunt, modo non sunt, modo habundant, modo deficiunt’’ (R, fol.

72r). |

Comment. The English poem is not based on the Latin context. It is

introduced as an “‘ancient proverb,’’ and the independent tradition as well as the difficulty scribes had with the fourth line reflect its long history. One would assume the original form of line 4 to have been something like: *Ne trust noght to pis world, pe whele turnep so. Do not trust in this world, the wheel turns so much. Clearly, scribal confusion of world/word and the different semantic possibilities of whele (“‘ wheel,” “while,” and even ‘‘ well-being’’) account for the different

readings that appear in the manuscripts, including the alternation in the _ possessive adjective (his/hire). The Ghent MS presents a substantially different line (““ Noman trou dam fortune for algates yt thar be so”’).

| TEXTS 175 | The version preserved on a roll in Cambridge University Library, contem- porary with FM, is virtually identical with that of FM. The Ghent MS contains also a quatrain in French and a Latin distich, both dealing with the same idea of English Verse 37 but without being verbally very closely related to the

English quatrain there, whose first three lines are identical with No. 37. Further, the quatrain appears with the first line changed as stanza 4 of ~“Lollai, lolilai, litil child’? index 2025, the Kildare MS):

Ne tristou to pis world, hit is pi ful vo, Pe rich he makip pouer, pe pore rich al so; Hit turnep wo to wel and ek wel to wo—

, Ne trist no man to pis world, whil hit turnip so.

, Lolliai, lollai, litil child, pe fote is in pe whele;

pou nost whoder turne to wo oper wele. | , (Ed. Brown, RL XIV, p. 36).

7 Even though the sentiment of these lines is commonplace, a verbal reminiscence of No. 37 can be detected in a verse of MS Harley 7322, an inscription on an image of Apollo:

, Trist nout to p[i]s wonder world pat lastit bot a wile. — (Line 5 of Index 4224; ed. Furnivall, EETS 15, p. 263) Another reminiscence (of line 3) appears in the poem “‘Opon a somer soneday,”’ at the meeting with Fortune:

Pe whel 3e tornep to wo, fro wo into wele pat were | | (Line 42 of Index 3838; ed. Robbins, HP, p. 99) Some manuscripts that lack the English substitute a different saying in ‘Latin; e.g., Co, Li, C: ‘‘ Nec vita nec fortuna perpetua est hominibus, ut dicit Seneca in epistulis” (C, fol. 64r). Friar John Sintram, not wanting the English verses in his copy, replaced them with ‘‘Regno, regnabo, regnavi, sum sine

regno”’ (see Verse 38; Mo, fol. 44r). In contrast, the scribe of M translated the |

, English verse into clumsy Latin:

, — Cuilibet est amica fortuna et inimica; frequenter dictat paupertatem [sic], seppe destruit divitem;

, bonum ad malum ducit et malum ad bonum reducit;

ideo non credas per mundum, quia forte te deseret mundus.

, (fol. 63v).

| Kyng I syt and loke aboute, , |

oe To-morn I may ben with-oute.

| 176 #£TEXTS Wo is me, akyng I was. ,

| Pis world I loued, but pat I las.

7 , 5 Nou3th longe gon I was ful ryche, But now is ryche and pore ylyche. _ I shal be kyng, pat men schull se,

(R, fol. 72r) |

When pe wreche ded shal be. |

LINE 1: kyng] om., Gol. and loke] and I loke, Gol. LINE 2: to] tho, Go2. ben] beholden, Gol. V; be alden, W1. withoute] al way oute, Go2; all with-owt, Jo. LC. E. Sp; wo out, L2.

‘LINE 3: I] and, Go2.

LC. E. Sp. ,

LINES 4—5, to I was: om., Gol.

LINE 4: loued] loue, L2. but pat I] and Lit, B3; and hit I, L2. but pat I las] but pat nou3t was, Go2; perfor alaase, V; bot pus alas, Jo. pat] hit, W1. I las] alas,

LINES 5-8: om., Jo. LC; in order 7-8, 5-6, B3._ ,

LINE 5: longe gon] go longe, Go2. gon] agon, B1. B3. L2.E; R seems to have an a inserted between lines, after ylyche and underneath longe; synn gone, Sp. |

LINE 6: but] om., B1. ryche and pore] pore and ryche, B1. B3. ryche and pore ylyche] pore and rychelesse, Sp. LINE 7: men schull] man schal, Go2. schull] may, W1.. LINE 8: whole line] but os a wrecch I schall ded be, B3. L2. pe] pou, B1. Gol. Go2.

WI1.E. V;I, Sp. shal] shalt, B1. ,

Index 1822. Foster No. 34. | MSS: (1) B1, fol. 161v. (2) B3, fol. 40v. (3) L2, fol. 58v. (4) R, fol. 72r. (5) Gol, fol. 49r. (6) Go2, fol. 65v. (7) Jo, fol. 89r. (8) LC, fol. 188v. (9) W1, fol. 190r. (10) E, fol. 86v. (11) Sp, fol. 76v. (12) V, fol. 43r. Separate occurrence: (13) Harley 7322, fol. 79r, in a section on pictura de Fortitudine. The Latin verses here begin: ‘‘Glorior elatus, descendo minorificatus, / Infimus axe teror, rursus ad alta feror. / Rex presens. .. .”’ Printed in T. Wright and J. O. Halliwell, Reliquiae antiquae, 1 (London, 1845), 64; Furnivall, EETS 15, p. 251; Sisam, Oxford Book of Medieval English Verse,

No. 86. |

Context. The text quoted in No. 37 continues: “Prout ascendendo in rota illa a domina Fortuna revoluta de diversis depingitur. Quorum primus

suppremus ait: | Rex presens regno, possum fore cras sine regno. Secundus: Heu mihi, regnavi; quid prodest id quod amavi? Tercius: | Nuper dives ego; vix mea membra tego. Quartus: Sum regnaturus cum sim miser moriturus.”

, TEXTS 177 [Sic primus Anglice: Kyng...? normally follows at this point. In R it appears a few lines later, clearly by mistake.] (R, fol. 72r). Then the moralization of the image of World continues. Comment. The four English couplets translate four Latin lines spoken by four kings in different positions on the Wheel of Fortune (not three kings, as previous editors have thought). The Latin verses were common and are often found preceded by two additional lines beginning “ Glorior elatus,”’ as in MS 13; see Walther, Initia, 7251, and Proverbia, 10344. This poem is an expansion of an equally popular line, “‘Regno, regnavi, sum sine regno, regnabo,”’ which is often found in this or a different order in medieval literary works (including

FM, in IV, 12) as well as in inscriptions on wheels of Fortune depicted in manuscript illuminations (cf. Walther, Proverbia, 7035 and 26495). Well known pictures of Fortune’s wheel with these inscriptions appear in Carmina burana, the Holkham Bible, a manuscript of Gregory’s Moralia (Rylands lat. 83), and

Cambridge, St. John’s College, MS 256. There is a rich literature on the : subject; see especially the recent discussion by F. P. Pickering, Literature and Art in the Middle Ages (Coral Gables, Florida, 1970), pp. 168-222, with plates, and Appendix B. The reference in FM to pictorial representations (“‘de diversis depingitur’’) is thus literally accurate. Bromyard similarly refers to a picture of Fortune painted on walls (‘‘ Mundus,” M.XIII, § 3; fol. 358r), as does Brinton (sermons 6, 25, and 36; ed. Devlin, I, 10. 99. 154). The whole passage including the Latin verses was copied by Chartham but without the English verses (Lambeth Palace 78, fol. 282r). For the possible relation between FM and Harley 7322, see Chapter III, pp. 116-118. The speech of the fourth king presents a slight difficulty. The Latin line clearly means: ‘‘I shall rule when I, a wretch, shall die” (or, “‘shall die as a wretch’’). Only two FM manuscripts read sis instead of sim (B1, Gol). In the

English translation, however, the manuscripts are about evenly divided in rendering this clause either in the first/third or the second person singular (pe wreche vs. pou wreche). It would appear that the original translation read: *When I [or y] wreche ded shal be

and that the letter y was at some point wrongly interpreted as ). As in other instances, Sp has corrected the error by going back to the Latin.

39 Form A

All monkyn tornth in well, and pat on wonder gyse: For wethen hit come, a3eyn hit wente to dwelle on all wyse. (R, fol. 72v)

178 TEXTS LINE 1: in well] in wele, B3. W1; in weel, L2; to wele, E; to wyl, LC. wonder] a wonder, LC. E; gyse] wyse, LC. LINE 2: for wethen] ffro when, B3; ffro whom, E. wethen hit come] were pat comen,

W1. wethen] when, LC; wheyne, L2.

Form B | |

Al man-kynde ys turnyd and went,

| And pat yn wondyr gyse.

, For wennys hyt com, a3en hyt wente, _ Hyt abydyth yn noyn a fyse. (B1, fol. 162r)

_ Index 191. Foster No. 35. , MSS: Form A: (1) B3, fol. 40v. (2) L2, fol. 59v. (3) R, fol. 72v. (4) LC, fol. 189r. (5) W1, fol. 190r. (6) E, fol. 87v. Form B: (7) B1, fol. 162r. No separate occurrence.

Context. In the continuing moralization of the image of World (IV, 4), the moral is drawn that covetous people should often be reminded of their death. In the circle of life, all men must return to earth. ‘‘Respice ergo, o avare, terram ad quam redire necesse est in giro, de qua venisti, iuxta illud metricum:

Vertitur in giro natura, sed ordine miro. Unde dat hec esse, dat ad illud redire necesse.

Anglice: ‘All monkyn. ...’ In tercio autem fronte mundi...” (R, fol. 72v). Comment. The English couplet (or quatrain, as in B1) translates two Latin hexameters fairly closely. The latter without the English appear also in Lambeth Palace 78, fol. 282v (copied from FM), but I do not know of any

other occurrence.

40 Sithyn law for wyll bygynnyt to slakyn | And falsehed for [sleythe] is i-takyn, Robbyng and reuyng ys holdyn purchas

_And of vnthewes is made solas,

5 Engelond may synge alas, alas!

(R, fol. 74v)

| sleythe: prudence. vunthewes: vices. ,

, TEXTS 179 LINES 1-2: om., Sp. __ LINE 1: sithyn] sythen pat, B3. bygynnyt] bygynne, B3. LINE 2: whole line] and falshed and scleght for trewth es takyn, V. sleythe] scheythe, R; slynesse, B1. is i-takyn] now is taken, Gol. i-takyn] turned and taken, L2. LINE 4: whole line] and foul fals lecchery is pryuy solas, B3; and alle maner synne mad solas, L2; and wantomnesse ys holdyn solas, B1. vnthewes] witthewys, W1;

vnclennes, Gol. V; wantonese, Jo; on wantownes, E. made] mayden, Jo; maden, LC. E. LINE 5: Engelond] perfore we, Sp. Engelond may] now may Ingelond, B3; penne may yngelonde, B1. synge] say and syng, Gol; say, Sp. V. alas alas] alas, B1.

B3; add etc., B3. Gol. V. |

Index 3133. Foster No. 36. MSS: (1) B1, fol. 163r. (2) B3, fol. 41v; printed in Little, Studies, p. 155, n. 3. (3) L2, fol. 60v. (4) R, fol. 74v. (5) Gol, fol. SOr; printed in Robbins, HP, No. 58. (6) Jo, fol. 92r. (7) LC, fol. 190r. (8) W1, fol. 191r. (9) E, fols. 89v—90r.

(10) Sp, fol. 79r. (11) V, fol. 44v. , No separate occurrence: but see “Comment.”

Context. The first species of avarice is rapina or extortion (IV, 5). The chapter deals with several contemporary abuses and finally speaks of tyrannical lords who by force and intimidation compel religious to promote their children

and relatives. If asked with what conscience they can do so, these lords will reply that they may legitimately accept what is offered to them freely. “‘Sic ergo patet quod huiusmodi responsiones non valent quando exercetur potestas pro iusticia. Unde quidam dixit anglice: ‘Sithyn law...’”’ (R, fol. 74v). Comment. These verses, which have no verbal basis in the Latin text, though they may have been evoked by the phrase “‘potestas pro iusticia,”’ belong to laments at contemporary evils, specifically of the ‘“‘ World-UpsideDown” type. A stanza with a very similar rhetorical pattern (but rhyming aaabb) and ending with ‘‘penne schall Englonde mys-chewe”’ is Index and Supplement 4006. Another analogue to the last line occurs in.a “political”

4]

poem of A.D. 1448: “‘“England may synge well away”’ (Supplement 556.5). For the verbal updating of sleythe and unthewes, see my earlier discussion in Chapter III, pp. 112-113.

Form A

Pis world fyle ys and clansyt lyte. Of fylpe perinne who may be quyte?

| (R, fol. 81v)

LINE 1: pis] the, E. fyle ys] ys foul, LC. E. Sp; vs foules, B3. L2. W1. LINE 2: may] om., B3. L2. quyte] whit, Sp.

180 TEXTS Form B

, Thys wordle vs defylyp |

, And clansyth but alyte. | Of filpe pat ys perynne

Who can hym best quyte?

(B1, fol. 166v) ,

Index 3649. Foster No. 37. MSS: Form A: (1) B3, fol. 45v. (2) L2, fol. 69r. (3) R, fol. 81v. (4) LC, fol. 193v. (5) W1, fol. 194v. (6) E, fol. 98v. (7) Sp, fol. 83v. Form B: (8) B1, fol. 166v. No separate occurrence.

Context. In the chapter on why avarice should be shunned (IV, 10), the third reason is that it makes its followers foul, ugly, and tainted. The development of this point contains a story involving the question put to a saint how one can live in the world without being defiled. ‘‘ Unde fertur quod quidam correptus a quodam sancto qui [read quod?] mundi feditatem relinqueret et vite puritati se daret. Qui super hoc admirans respondit dicens: Mundus non mundat, sed mundus polluit omnes. Qui manet in mundo, quomodo mundus erit? Anglice sic: ‘pis world . . . quasi diceret: ex quo deus ipse mundum detestatur et tamen sine mundo vivere non possumus; nec mirum cum omnia in mundo

sordescunt”’ (R, fol. 81v). The story continues with No. 42.

Comment. The English couplet (or perhaps quatrain, in B1) translates a Latin distich faithfully. The distich is richly attested; see Walther, Proverbia, 15647, to which may be added Merton 216; and Cambridge, Trinity College

42 : Form A

1157, fol. 54r (collection of proverbs). ,

The ryche ne rychesse god ne hatyth, But who-so for rychesse god forsakyth. (R, fol. 81v)

LINE 1: ryche] ryght, E. rychesse] ryches, B3. Sp; pe richesse, W1. , LINE 2: who-so] he so, W1; theym that, Sp. rychesse] riches, B3. W1. Sp.

Form B Neiper pe rychesse Ne pe ryche man God ne hatyp,

Oo | TEXTS 181. | But hem pat for rychessis |

| God forsakyp. , , , (B1, fol. 166v)

Not in Index (perhaps considered part of Verse 41). MSS: Form A: (1) B3, fol. 45v. (2) L2, fol. 69r. (3) R, fol. 81v. (4) LC, fol. 193v. (5) W1, fol. 194v. (6) E, fol. 99r. (7) Sp, fol. 83v. Form B: (8) B1, fol. 166v.

No separate occurrence. |

Context. The conversation of No. 41 continues: ‘‘‘Sed ego vivo in mundo. Quid ergo faciam?’ Qui respondit: Nec deus odit opes nec detestatur habentes. Sed qui divicias preposuere deo. Anglice sic: ‘The ryche. .. .” Exemplum aliud videmus.. .”’ (R, fol. 81v). Comment. As Verse 41, the couplet translates a Latin distich faithfully. For the latter, Walther, Proverbia, 17493a, lists only one manuscript (Rylands lat. 394, a collection of proverbs).

43 That y 3af, pat ys myn. Pat I eet, pat was mynn. That I lefte behynde me, Who hit schall haue I con no3t se. (R, fol. 82v) LINE 2: whole line] pas was myn pat I ette, B1. eet] 3ete, L2; hete, W1. LC. LINE 3: that] but pat, B1. Go2. lefte] let, Go2. behynde] be kynd, W1. LINE 4: whole line] I ne wot qwos it schulden be, Go2; wo, WI. hit] om., Gol. hit

schall] sal it, LC. Sp. I con] can I, Gol. V. Index 3273. Foster No. 38. MSS: (1) B1, fol. 167v. (2) B3, fol. 46v. (3) L2, fol. 70r. (4) R, fol. 82v. (5) Gol, fol. 54r. (6) Go2, fol. 76r. (7) Jo, fol. 103v; printed in Reichl, Religidse Dichtung, p. 498. (8) LC, fol. 194r. (9) W1, fol. 195r. (10) E, fol. 100v. (11) Sp, fol. 85r. (12) V, fol. 50r. No separate occurrence. Index entries 11 and 12 are erroneous. But see ‘‘Com-

ment” and further at Verse 50. ,

Context. The same as of Verses 41-42. The chapter ends with a story illustrating the relative eternal value of worldly possessions and of alms, in a

_ message brought by a dead friend. ‘“‘Unde narratur de quodam, qui post

a 182 TEXTS mortem cuidam amico apparens et, cum ille quesisset qualiter cum illo erat, ex quo tam potens fuit [in] seculo, qui respondit sic metrice dicens: , Sunt mea si qua dedi; fuerant mea si qua comedi.

_ Si qua remanserunt, nescio cuius erunt,

82v). ' ow ,

quasi diceret: Ea que dedi pro deo iam iuvant; ea que comedi iuverunt; sed ea

que remanserunt, quis potest capere, capiat, etc. ““That y 3af...’’’ (R, fol.

. a Comment. The English quatrain translates a Latin distich faithfully. The | | distich was quite popular; see Walther, Proverbia, 30764, and add: Peterhouse 194, at end; Harley 2316, fol. 32v (collection of proverbs). In Pembroke 32, fol. 153r (sermons by Peter Lugdunensis), the Latin verses appear as follows and are provided with a different English rendering: “‘Quidam mortuus fuit

; Rome, cum quo inventi fuerunt hii duo versus:

-. Sunt mea si qua dedi; fuerant mea si qua commedi.

, | Res mihi se rapuit, si qua retenta fuit. | — Anglice: _ Ppat ich et, pat ich habba [exp.] hadde.

, Pat ich gaf, pat ich habbe. _ a

Pat ich ay held, pat i nabbe [Supplement 3272.5].”’ ,

A slightly expanded version is Index and Supplement 3274 (three MSS).

, B1 brings the English lines immediately after the Latin distich. After | “‘capiat’’ it then adds: ‘‘Chache who so pat may.” _ The message of these verses is the same as of No. 50, which has led to” some confusion even though the latter, in Latin and in English, is a distinctly different verse. Further discussion in Chapter I, pp. 29-34.

44

| | Ronde in schapyng, | | | || |Pynne in pe bakyng, : Whyte in pe seyng, | |

Swete in pe smackyng or tasting |

5 On pe to halfe wel y-wrete,

| | 7 (R, fol. 88r) ] — On pe toper halfe pynne ysmete. ,

LINE 1: in] in pe, B3. L2. Gol. LC. W1. V. , ,

LINE 2: pe] om., B1. bakyng] makyng, Sp. | LINE 3: pe] om., B1. Sp. seyng] semyng, Sp. LINE 4: smackyng] smellyng, Gol. V. pe smackyng or] om., B1. Sp. _ or tasting]

om., B3. L2. Gol. LC. W1. E. V. a :

LINES 5-6: On that halfe smethe I smyte / And on that other halfe well i-wryte, E.

, TEXTS 183 LINE 5: on pe to halfe] in on syde, BI. pe to [metanalysis of pet on]] pe on, B3; pon,

L2; pe ton, Gol; on, W1; that, LC. E. wel] om., Sp. LINE 6: on pe toper halfe] in pat oper syde, B1. toper] other, B3. W1. Sp; pat oper, L2. halfe]om.,Gol.V. pynne] smethe, B1. B3. L2. Gol. LC. W1. V; om., Sp.

Index 2832. Foster No. 39. | , ,

MSS: (1) B1, fol. 170v. (2) B3, fol. 49v. (3) L2, fols. 76v-77r. (4) R, fol. 88r. |

(5) Gol, fol. 57r. (6) LC, fol. 196v. (7) W1, fol. 197v; printed by Wilson, — Library, Fourth Series, 2 (1922), 264. (8) E, fol. 107v. (9) Sp, fol. 90v. (10) V, fol. 54r. No separate occurrence.

Context. The discussion of the nature of accidia (V, 1) includes the sin of those who are negligent in hearing Mass. This in turn leads to a digression on the qualities of a good priest, on the form and substance contained in the Sacrament of the Eucharist, and on the virtues of the Mass. Under the second topic occurs a listing of various mirabilia of the consecrated host, which is followed by: “Et nota quod [in] isto sacramento benedicto ista sex considero, scil.: In figura rotunditatem, , In| Inpressura tenuitatem , aspectu albedinem, In gustu dulcedinem, In una parte dulcis descripcio, In alia parte levis percussio.

Ronde in pe schapyng.... Primo dico quod videmus in isto sacramento in figura rotunditatem in signum [quod debemus esse] rotundi ad omnes per amorem et caritatem .. .”’ (R, fol. 88r).

Comment. The English verses—such as they are—translate six short Latin lines faithfully. They form an initial divisio or summary of six physical qualities of the Host, which are then moralized individually. This schema in

Latin and English is, to my knowledge, unique. A different one of seven qualities, which are moralized as being opposed to the seven deadly sins, is more popular and may have influenced Verse 44:

Candida, triticea, tenuis, non magna, rotunda, , Expers fermenti, non mixta sit hostia Christi.

| These verses are widespread; see Walther, Initia, 2350 and 8487, and Proverbia,

11224a. One might add Richard Wethringsette’s Summa brevis (MS Royal 4.B.viii, fol. 232v,b); MSS Oxford, University College C.71, fol. 18r; Cambridge, Trinity College 1149, p. 5; and schematically in B.L. Addit. 10392, fol. 4r. They also appear with an English rendering in couplets in a metrical homily on the Feast of Corpus Christi (Index 4250).

184 TEXTS 45

- Longe-slepers and ouer-lepers, |

I holde luper hyne. |

_ For-skyppers and ouer-hyppers, I am no3t heren, 5 Ne pey ben myne.

But pey sone amende, ,

Thay shullen to hell pyne. | (R, fol. 90r, written as 7 lines) luper: wicked, worthless, sluggish. hyne: servant.

LINE 1: and ouer-lepers] ouerhippers, Sp. | LINE 2: for-skyppers] by-fore-skyppers, B1; for-kippers, B3. and ouer-hyppers] ouerlepers, Sp.

LINE 3: whole line] om., Et. holde] holde hem, B1. Gol. CC. W2. V._ luper] yuel, L3. LC. E. LINE 4: whole line] I hem not here, Gol. Go2. Et. V. (B12); I am I no3t here, W2. LINE 5: ne] but, B1. B3. ben] ben nou3t, Go2. CC; om., W1. ben myne] noght

mynde, Sp (d exp.).

LINE 6: pey] that, E. sone] hem, Bl. W2. amende] hem amende, Go2; amend hem V.

| LINE 7: to hell pyne] with me to pyne, B1; go to pyne, V. to] tyl, LC. hell] om.,

Gol. W2. Et. |

Index 1935. Foster No. 40. ! _ MSS: (1) B1, fol. 172r. This and the following versions except 14-15 were | printed in Reichl, Religidse Dichtung, pp. 321-323 (with several misreadings in 10). (2) B3, fol. Sir. (3) L2, fol. 80v. (4) L3, fol. 63r. (5) R, fol. 90r. (6) Gol, fol. S8v. (7) Go2, fol. 84r. (8) CC, fol. 116v. (9) LC, fol. 197v. (10) W1,

, fol. 198v. (11) W2, fol. 99r. (12) E, fol. 110v. (13) Et, fol. 49v. (14) Sp, fol. 93r. (15) V, fol. 56r.

Separate occurrence: (16) Cambridge, Trinity College, MS 323, fol. 28r (ca. 1260). (17) Lambeth Palace, MS 78, fol. 277r; apparently copied from FM, with context. _ ,

Context. Sloth in priests (V, 3) takes several forms, one of which is saying Mass or the Office without devotion and omitting syllables and whole words. Their fate is shown in the story about a tavern-haunting, negligent priest who thus used to “‘syncopate”’ his prayers. An ‘‘anchoress of holy life,”’ who later told the story to the bishop of Worcester, had observed the priest

for some time and had asked God in her prayers to show her whether the priest’s service pleased Him. God’s answer forms English Verse 45. ‘‘Cum ergo tales ad ecclesiam vel oratorium veniunt, nulla interveniente devocione , cum tedio et anxietate dei officium sincopando ruminant, [per] quod deum

TEXTS 185 offendunt et seipsos a merito evacuant. Unde quedam anachorita sancte vite semel narravit cuidam episcopo Wigorniensi de quodam sacerdote tabernario et guloso, qui ibidem sedere volebat [var. solebat] aliquando usque ad mediam noctem, diu scilicet potare, et tarde cubare, et de mane nimis dormire, et ad

ecclesiam indissolute [var. dissolute, indissute] venire, ibique indistincte officium psallere, sincopando et festinando in tantum quod uno versu semidicto a clerico alium inchoavit [MS: alijs invocavit], et sic de alijs similiter. Quod tandem admirans dicta domina deo frequenter supplicabat ut aliquatenus ostenderet si eius obsequium deo placeret. Unde quadam die [var. nocte], dum

se oracioni dedisset, audivit vocem venientem et ei sic anglice dicentem:

‘Longe-slepers. .. .’ Et ideo contra tales dicitur in Psalmo...” (R, fol. 90r). Comment. The English lines, a ‘‘message verse,”’ have no verbal basis in the Latin context. The story is told in 23 manuscripts; it is omitted in B2, Pe, A, D, M. Six manuscripts that have the story without the English verse quote

God’s answer in Latin (“Non placet mihi obsequium...,’? Co, Li, C) or paraphrase it (“quod non,” B4; “quod non placuit Christo oracio illius presbiteri,’’ L1) or offer a clumsy Latin translation (Mo; see Wenzel, “‘ English Verses,’ p. 240). Two manuscripts simply omit to say what words the divine voice spoke (Jo, H). Notice that in B1 the lines could be spoken by the devil.

The English lines refer, not to dancing clerics (as Silverstein seems to believe), but to priests who skip syllables and words in reciting their liturgical

prayers, as the context makes clear—a favorite clerical branch of the sin of sloth. Words like ouer-leper and for-skypper often occur in macaronic verses - directed against this fault. For example: Ecclesiae tres sunt, qui servitium male fallunt: Momylers, forscyppers, ovrelepers non bene psallunt. See Wright and Halliwell, Reliquiae antiquae, 1:90; also in Bromyard, “‘Ordo clericalis,’’ O.II § 26; see Supplement 707.5. A different verse, also containing **Momeler, forskypper, forereynner, sic et overleper,” is Supplement 1214.9, often printed. See also Supplement 1655.5. Such sinners, just as jangling women in church, are of special interest to the devil Tutivillus, on whom see Wenzel, The Sin of Sloth (Chapel Hill, 1967), pp. 113, 153-154, 245, nn. SOff.; to which

should be added R. Wildhaber, Das Siindenregister auf der Kuhhaut, F. F. Communications 163 (Helsinki, 1955).

Verse 45 without lines 2b (or 2a?) and 3 is recorded in Cambridge, Trinity College MS 323, a miscellany of prose and verse in Latin, French, and

English, written about 1260. Here the verse appears without the story. See Reichl, Religidse Dichtung, pp. 321-325. The story without the English lines occurs also in a second treatise on the vices contained in W1. This version remarks about the anchoress: *‘Quamdam vocem de sursum audiebat in anglico dicentem, quia nullum ydioma preter

, anglicum sciebat”’ (fol. 63r). The three nouns used for people who skip words and syllables are tradi-

186 TEXTS ~ tional, almost technical terms, found in other tags (see above) and elsewhere. The phrase luper hyne, “sluggish fellow,’’ appears in Towneley, Secunda Pastorum, line 147 (ed. Cawley, p. 47).

MG

, Hool and hyyng, | _ Sope and sorowyng. | | (R, fol. 100r)

LINE |: hyyng] helyng, Gol; hastyng, V; add or spedely y-do, B1. and] om., L3. Index 1223. Foster No. 41. MSS: (1) B1, fol. 178r. (2) B3, fol. 57v. (3) L2, fol. 99v. (4) L3, fol. 71r. (5) R, fol. 100r. (6) Gol, fol. 64r. (7) Jo, fol. 129v. (8) LC, fol. 202v. (9) W1, fol. 204v. (10) E, fol. 125v. (11) Sp, fol. 105r. (12) V, fol. 64v.

No separate occurrence.

100r). , ,

Context. The chapter on “how confession should be, on the part of the confessor as well as on that of the penitent” (V, 12), sets out: “Et nota quod ex parte confitentis erit integra et festina, “‘hool and hyyng,’ vera et amara, sope and sorowyng.’ Primo ergo dico quod confessio erit integra ...”’ (R, fol.

Comment. The short couplet summarizes the qualities of a good confession, which are directly translated from the Latin. The topic is a commonplace one and often expressed in Latin hexameters. The very influential

work “Poeniteas cito,” for example, lists 14 qualities (“Integra sit culpe confessio, mundaque, vera...,’> PL 207:1153); these recur in William de Montibus, Versarius (B.L. MS Addit. 16164, fol. 65v) and in Wethringsette’s Summa brevis (MS Royal 4.B.viii, fol. 234r,b). Another poem of four lines (Integra, certa, frequens.. .’’) lists 12 qualities. A different one of four lines (“Sit simplex, humilis confessio...’) with 17 qualities appears in Hugo of Strasburg, Compendium theologicae veritatis, V1, 26 (in Albertus Magnus,

Opera omnia, 34, ed. S. C. A. Borgnet [Paris, 1895], 225). , Though discussions of the qualities of confession and accompanying memory verses usually present a larger number of qualities, shorter series are by no means uncommon. The penitential treatise by Guy of Southwick, for instance, contains 5: “in simplici humilitate, veraciter, nude, plene, et integre”’ (ed. A. Wilmart, Recherches de théologie ancienne et médiévale 7 [1935], 350ff.).

Caesarius of Heisterbach also gives four: “‘festinata, nuda, integra, debita”’ (Dialogus miraculorum, WH, 1; ed. J. Strange [Cologne, 1851], 1:111). Brinton was fond of a short series, including three to five members: ‘‘ Voluntarie sine coactione, nude et aperte sine celacione, integre sine divisione, et festine sine more dilacione, et summe sine decepcione”’ (Sermon 19; cf. sermons 20, 32,

, TEXTS 187 87, 90, 99; ed. Devlin, pp. 75, 81, 132, 398, 409, 457). A treatise on confession in MS Bodl. 857 also lists four: “‘Amara, festina, frequens, et integra’’ (fol. 115r), but here “bitterness”’ has five qualities, and integritas similarly contains

eight more qualities, including veritas. Likewise, a Middle English sermon lists four: pura, vera, integra, plena (ed. Ross, EETS 209 [London, 1960], pp. 178-179). Occasionally, such series are rendered in English verse or rhyming phrases: see Stemmler, Anglia 93 (1975), 8, No. 14; and Richard Rolle, The Form of Living, ch. vi (ed. H. E. Allen, English Writings [Oxford, 1931], p. 100; from the Compendium theologicae veritatis). The four qualities specified in FM are then individually developed in the

course of the chapter (to fol. 102v). MS Co adds the list of qualities from the Compendium theologicae veritatis, in Latin, in the text immediately after the normal four qualities.

47 Alas, alas, pat I was born, Bope lyf and sowle y am for-lorn! (R, fol. 104v) LINE 1: pat] that ever, L1.

LINE 2: bope] om., Sp. bope lyf] body, L1; bot, Jo. lyf] body, B1. am for-lorn] haue lorne, W2.

Index 142B (and Supplement 141.5). Foster No. 31B. MSS: (1) BA, fol. 1811. (2) B3, fol. 60v. (3) L1, fol. 171r. (4) L2, fol. 109v. (5) L3, fol. 75r. (6) R, fol. 104v. (7) Gol, fol. 67r. (8) Go2, fol. 100v. (9) Jo, fol. 136r. (10) CC, fol. 141v. (11) LC, fol. 205r. (12) W1, fol. 206v. (13) W2, fol. 115r. (14) D, fol. S6v. (15) Et, fol. 58v. (16) Sp, fol. 110v. (17) V, fol. 68v.

Separate occurrence: (18) Lambeth Palace Library, MS 78, fol. 219v; copied from FM, with context. (19) Lincoln Cathedral, MS 234, fol. 163r, in a sermon on the First Commandment. Line 1: pat euer. Printed in Owst, Preaching, p. 273, n.3.

Context. A story in the chapter on the evils that arise from delay of confession (V, 13), dealing with a virgin who dies in the reputation of sanctity but

is heard to exclaim these words after her death. “Consimiliter narratur de quadam virgine devota in reputacione hominum et sancta, que tamen infirmitate preventa moriebatur. Post cuius sepulturam accidit cito post, quod iacente sacerdote confessore eius in ecclesia vocem horribiliter audivit in hijs verbis

lugentem sic: ‘Alas, alas... .’ Ad que verba...” (R, fol. 104v). The story continues: The priest hears the same words two more nights. In the third, he sees two horrible black demons carry the girl off. He learns that she used to

murmur against her mother but did not think that it was a grave sin. ,

188 TEXTS Comment. The English couplet, a ‘“‘message verse,’ has no verbal basis in the context and is an integral part of the story. Manuscripts that lack the English words paraphrase the lament in three different Latin forms, sometimes with rhyme (E, Co, Li, C; M; Mo); see my discussion in “‘ English Verses,”

p. 239. In three MSS the exclamation is simply omitted, either with “etc.” _ (B4) or without anything (A, H). Two MSS omit the entire story (B2, Pe).

The origin of this exemplum (Tubach, No. 1442) is probably Odo of Cheriton, Parabolae CXXXI (ed. Hervieux, Fabulistes, 4:315), with the Latin exclamation:

Ve mihi! ve mihi! quod unquam fui nata;

48

tam corpus quam anima utraque sunt dampnata.

This exclamation in shortened form (“‘Heu, heu, quia fui nata, quia corpore et anima sum dampnata’’) is used by M.

The pattern of the English as well as the Latin complaint was quite popular. See Verse 35, and Index 3901, Supplement 1218.5, and similar verses.

Fyre, watur, wynd and lond

Y wylne to haue in my honde. 7 Byd faste and y come sone; Yf pow sorow, pe tyt py bone.

, 5 Whyle pou bydde, redy y am; When pou leuyst, y go pe fram.

| [Smertly] I helpe [and non] forsake, , Gladly y fy3t pe maystry to take. (R, fol. 110v)

tyden: to befall, happen. LINE 1: wynd] R corr. from waynd. LINE 2: to] to to, B1; om., Sp. V.

LINE 3: byd] byddyp, B1. LINE 4: whole line] yf pou be sory y graunte py bone, B1; if thowe be sory, soner shall

thowe haue thy bone, Sp. pe] pou, B3. W1. pe tyt py bone] per is pi bone,

Gol. V. py] om., L3; pe, Go2. ,

LINES 5-6: pou... pou... pe] ye... 3e... 30w, B1. B3 (pe, first; second corr. to 3e).

L2. Gol. W1. Sp. V; pei... pei... heem, Go2. LINE 5: bydde] prayen, B1. Sp. _redy] a redy, B1.

|LINE | TEXTS 189 6: leuyst] rest, Bl. LC; noyn, B1. ,

LINE 7: smertly] om., R; a noyn, B1. andnon]anon,R. non] noght, W1; no man,

LINE 8: whole line] gladli in fight mastrie to take, W1. fy3t] om.,L3. pe] om., Go2.

to] I, Jo. take] make, Gol. Index 798. Foster No. 44. MSS: (1) BI, fol. 184v. (2) B3, fol. 64v. (3) L2, fol. 124r. (4) L3, fol. 79v. (5) R, fol. 110v. (6) Gol, fol. 69v. (7) Go2, fol. 107r—v. (8) Jo, fol. 144v. (9) LC, fol. 207v. (10) W1, fol. 209v. (11) Sp, fol. 118r. (12) V, fol. 72v.

Separate occurrence: (13) Harley 7322, fol. 155v. Major variants: 2 wylne] desire; 4 whole line] yif pou sorwe onli for me sikerly pou tit pi bone; 8 gladli] blepeli. Printed in Furnivall, EETS 15, p. 262.

Context. The use and benefits of prayer (V, 20) are demonstrated by an image of Prayer with inscriptions. *“‘ Fertur autem quod antiquis temporibus a commentatore Iuvenali[s] Oracio depingebatur ad modum hominis pulcherrimi, habentis corpus igneum et caput in celum erectum, super unam lanceam rectam et altissimam, cum quatuor angelis illam supportantibus et rotulum in manibus singulis tenentibus condiciones oracionis continentem. In quorum primo rotulo scribebatur sic:

Terris, igne, mari, ventis peto dominari. | Anglice sic: ‘Fyre, water... .’ In secundo:

| Roga [var. Vir pete], sum presto; si plangas, cercior esto. Anglice sic: ‘Byd faste. ...’ In tercio: Si petor, accedo; sin autem, exinde recedo. Anglice sic: ‘Whyle pou bydde. .. .” Quarto:

Adiuvo frequenter [var. ferventer], non desero, pugno libenter. _ Anglice sic: ‘{Smertly] I helpe. .. .” Spiritualiter autem loquendo.. .” (R, fol. 110v). The image and its inscriptions are then moralized at great length, to the end of the chapter.

Comment. The four couplets translate four Latin hexameters faithfully but by no means slavishly. Moralizing the details of a painting or statue in this fashion was a favorite device in late medieval preaching. It frequently served to structure the following discourse and made use of metrical inscriptions, as I

discussed earlier (Chapter I, pp. 57ff.; Chapter II, pp. 74ff.). |

This particular image of Oratio (Tubach, No. 3896) and its Latin verses — (which are not listed by Walther) also appear in Holcot (cf. B. Smalley, English Friars and Antiquity in the Early Fourteenth Century [Oxford, 1960], p. 180,

: n. 2), in the Gesta Romanorum (ed. Oesterley, No. 255), and in MS Harley 7322, fols. 155v—156r. Only the last version contains the same English verses as FM and is, in its wording, almost identical with FM, in contrast to Holcot

190 TEXTS | |

a 49 Oo

, and Gesta Romanorum. I have discussed the relationship between Harley 7322

and FM in Chapter III, pp.116ff. |

_ When pou py lyfe vp-holdyste, |

, Pynke wan pou arte oldyste, — _ And do gode at pe gate.

When pou with deth vnboldeste 5 [pou shalt not pou pou woldest, ] For pan is al to late.

B3. | | L2. ,

| (R, fol. 114r) , , |

vnbolden: to grow feeble. ,

LINE 1: when pou py] man pat, B1. B3. L2. Go2. LC. W1. vp-holdyste] vt-holdest, LINE 2: pynke] penke pe, LC. arte oldyste] acoldyst, B1. W1; coldest, Go2; atoldest,

LINE 3: pe] pi, B1. B3. L2. Go2. LC. W1.

LINE 4: deth] dest, W1. |

LINE 5: whole line] om., R, here supplied from B3; pan schal nougth pou powh pou

| woldest, Go2. pou] yf, W1. shalt not] ne schuld, LC. LINE 6: is al] hyt ys, B1; it is al, LC.

Index 2077. Foster No. 46. - MSS: (1) BI, fol. 186v. (2) B3, fol. 67r. (3) L2, fols. 130v—131r. (4) R, fol. 114r. (5) Go2, fol. 111v. (6) LC, fol. 209v. (7) W1, fol. 211v.

No separate occurrence. :

Context. Almsgiving, the third major kind of satisfaction, is compared to a seed (V, 24), which is sown in front of the sower, not behind his back. Thus, man should give of his goods where he can see, not behind his back, i.e., not leave his goods after his death to his heirs, who will grasp them without care for their relative’s eternal welfare. Help yourself while you can! “‘Et sic anima a bonis meritoriis relinquitur supervacua, et iuste, quia noluit seipsam

iuvare quando potuit. Et ideo vulgariter dicitur: Who-so woll no3t when he may, He schall no3t when he woll[de].

Ideo bene dicitur in Anglico: ‘When pou... .’ Unde narratur de quodam in

extremis laborante...’’ (R, fol. 114). |

Comment. The six-line stanza has no verbal basis in the Latin but was evidently suggested by the preceding English proverb which is quoted in it (line 5) and thus applied to almsgiving. Both proverb and stanza function as

, TEXTS 191

opportunity. , _

proof-texts in the exhortation to use one’s goods profitably while one has the

| Verse 49 is very reminiscent of The Proverbs of Hending, in its metrical form, its connection with a common unrhymed proverb, and its content. It may be compared with the following:

Riche and pouer, yung and olde,

, Pe wil ye habet youre tung i wolde, Be youre sowil bote; |

Wan pe wenit allirbeste , , To habbe lif and hele and reste, Pe ax is at rote.

, ‘“Wo-se nel wan he mai, he ne scel nouth wan he wolde,’ quod Hending. ‘Al to late, al to late, Wan pe deth is at pe yate,’ quod Marcol. This stanza appears in all three major manuscripts of The Proverbs of Hending (Index 2817), but is followed by the two quoted proverbs only in Cambridge University Library, MS Gg.I.1 (ed. G. Schleich, Anglia 51 [1927], 268-269). The Hending stanza without any proverb appears separately also in Grimestone (Wilson, No. 120), in a thirteenth-century treatise on the vices (see ‘*Unrecorded,”’ No. 51), and in MS Royal 8.E.xvii (ca. 1300). The English proverb which precedes Verse 49 (“‘Who-so woll no3t.. .’’) is very common and richly attested from ca. 1000 on; see Whiting, Proverbs,

W.275. It is often cited in Latin homiletic texts, as for instance: B.L. Addit. 33956, fol. 102v; Bodl. lat. theol. d.1, fols. 92r, 138v, and 165r.

50 Pat y spende pat y had. Pat y 3eue pat y haue. Pat y kepte ys lost fro myne. / For [pat] I warnyt now y pyne. (R, fols. 115v—116r) warnen: to refuse.

LINE 1: spende] spended, L2; 3ete, Co; hete, E; het, C. pat(2)] om., L2. W1. LINE 2: pat(2)] om., L2.

LINE 3: kepte] wist, L2. Go2. W1. ys lost fro myne] pat y lost, B1. Co. C. LC. E; is noght myn, Sp. ys] patis, Jo. ys lost] I les, Go2; I lost, W1. LINE 4: whole line] that I warnid I bye, Co; that I warnet that I by, E. C (aby); ffor y

wernyd y am pynyd, Bl; om., Wl. pat] om., R. now y pyne] no3t I spyne, LC. y(2)] ys, with -s expunged, R. Index 3275. Foster No. 47 MSS: (1) B1, fol. 187v. (2) B3, fol. 68r. (3) L2, fol. 133r—v. (4) R, fols. 115v— 116r. (5) Co, fol. 143r. (6) C, fol. 108r. (7) Go2, fol. 113v (see Ch. I, p. 32 and

, 192. TEXTS , ~ “Comment” below. (8) Jo, fol. 152r. (9) LC, fol. 210v. (10) W1, fol. 212r.

(11) E, fol. 171r. (12) Sp, fol. 124v.

Separate occurrence: (13) Oxford, Magdalen College, MS 13 (= m1), fol. 102r;

copied from FM. See “Comment.” ,

Context. The discussion of almsgiving continues with what may impede it (V, 25). After seven impediments, an exhortation follows: “‘Igitur amoveamus huiusmodi impedimenta ...,” in the course of which the following story

of four rings with inscriptions found in an ancient tomb occurs: “ Fertur autem in gestis Romanorum quod quidam predives palacium construere volens de sub terra in quodam sarcophago [MS: satophago] cuiusdam antiquitus sepulti iuxta ossa sua quatuor anulos invenit sic inscriptos. Nam in primo scribebatur sic:

Quod expendi habui. Pat y spende pat y had. Quod donavi habeo. Pat y 3eue pat y haue. Quod servavi perdidi. Pat y kepte ys lost fro myne. / ~ Quod negavi punio. For [pat] I warnyt now y pyne.

Moraliter autem loquendo, prima particula est quasi de se satis plana...” (R, 115v—116r). The four inscriptions are then moralized (cf. Chapter I, p. 29).

Notice that the arrangement of the Latin and English inscriptions is unusual. Normally the English lines are written together after the four Latin inscriptions. | Comment. The English lines translate faithfully and clumsily four Latin inscriptions in a popular exemplum (Tubach, No. 4175). I have analyzed variant versions of the story and its Latin verses at some length in Chapter I,

pp. 29-34. ,

Verse 50 is very similar to Verse 43, and the latter may be responsible for the variants 3et/hete/het (meaning “‘ate”’ and translating comedi) for spende in line 1; see above, pp. 32, 181. A different rendering of the Latin lines (“Quod

Supplement 1924.3. ,

expendi habui,”’ etc.) appears on medieval and Renaissance tombs; see The English verses found in m1 (i.e., MS 13) translate the inscriptions as

they appear in what I have called the ““Common Type” of the exemplum (Chapter I, p. 31). They read:

I spende, I gife, I welde, I werned myne, I had, I haue, I lost, I pyne. Pat I spendud pat I hadde. Pat I gife pat I haue. Pat I welde I lost from myne. For pat I werned now I pyne. (m1, fol. 102r)

The two initial lines also appear in Go2, where they read:

, , I spendyde, I 3yue, I kepyde, I wernde. I hadde, I haue, I lost, I punys [!].

TEXTS 193 SI Pow loue god ouer all ping,

Sypyn py selfe with-owte synnyng. ,

| Sypyn py frende as kynd pe teche, Pan py foo with-outen wreche. (R, fol. 128v) LINE 1: pow loue] loue pou, Go2. ouer] of, W1. LINE 2: sypyn] be, Gol. V. py] pe, Wl. synnyng] schyndyg, W1. LINE 3: Sypyn] after, Bl. kynd pe] kynd te [canceled] pe, R; kynyng, B3; kuyng, L2; kyng pe, W1. pe] it, Go2. LINE 4: pan] and penne, B1. B3. L2. Gol. Go2. W1. Sp; and, V. Index 2001 B. Foster No. 21B. MSS: (1) B1, fol. 196r. (2) B3, fol. 75v. (3) L2, fol. 152v. (4) R, fol. 128v. (5) Gol, fol. 79v. (6) Go2, fol. 129r. (7) Jo, fol. 170v. (8) LC, fol. 217v. (9) W1, fol. 218v. (10) Sp, fol. 138v. (11) V, fol. 87r. Separate occurrence: Grimestone, MS Advocates 18.7.21, fol. 64v, in section De hostibus (Wilson, No. 87). See above, under Verse 24.

Context. The devil—the third of the Three Enemies of Man—is overcome by charity (V, 36). The Romans are said to have painted an image of Amor, to which they brought four things; an eagle, a lion, an olive branch, and a peacock. ‘“‘ Primo aquilam, que alcius volat, in signum quod deum supra omnia, ut predicitur, debemus diligere. Secundo offerebant leonem, qui forte

animal est, in signum quod peccatis resistendo teipsum fortissime diliges. Tercio optulerunt olivam virentem, in signum quod sicut arbor illa nunquam marcescit, sic nec amor tuus erga proximum in caritate. Et quarto pavonem, cuius natura est quod in maiori eius pompa glorians de pulcritudine pennarum suarum, quando scilicet promcior est ad vindictam, si bene tunc aspiciat pedes, tota sua pompa ac appetitus vindicte cessat; in signum quod quamvis corde

contra amicum [var. inimicum] exaltatus fueris vindictam optans, si tunc oculum cordis ad terram et pedes defixeris, intime scilicet cogitans quod terra es sicut ipse, mox perversa voluntas cessabit [MS: cessabat] et inimicum diliges propter deum.... Et certe, si sic feceris, tunc gestas coronam de quadrifolio fidelis amoris: ‘Pow loue god. .. .” Habita autem hac caritate, dictum hostem levissime devinces...”’ (R, fol. 128v). Comment. These verses are the same as No. 24, here used in a different

context but—as in No. 24—called “‘quadrifolium fidelis (veri in No. 24) amoris.’’ The verses summarize the four kinds of love found in the allegory of

the preceding text, whose underlined phrases are the verbal basis for the : English lines. See further the Comment to Verse 24.

The image or statue of Love to which the four sacrificial gifts were brought is found elsewhere in contemporary preaching aids; see Chapter I,

194 TEXTS , | : 52

note 201. But the four gifts seem peculiar to FM and may have been added from a different exemplum.

| That lawe hath noo ry3te, / Pat [strength] hath no my3t,

Pat wysdom is foly, | And holynysse is trechery.

, (R, fols. 138v—139r) LINE 1: whole line] om., CC. that] om., Bl. hath] ne hath, Gol. V; nas, W1. LINE 2: pat] om., B1. Co. Sp. strength] trewpe, R. my3t] rygth, L2.

LINE 3: pat] om., B1. Co. foly] no fole, W1. }

LINE 4: and] pat, Gol. Go2. CC. V. holynysse] helenisse, W1. is] om., Jo. W1. Sp.

Index 3282. Foster No. 48. |

MSS: (1) B1, fol. 202v. (2) B3, fol. 83r. (3) L2, fol. 171v. (4) L3, fol. 100v. (5) R, fols. 138v—139r. (6) Co, fol. 200v (marginal, marked for insertion); printed

in Register, 1:525. (7) Gol, fol. 86r. (8) Go2, fol. 141r. (9) Jo, fol. 185r. (10) CC, fol. 202v (only lines 2-4, in the development). (11) LC, fol. 223r.

, (12) W1, fol. 223v. (13) Sp, fol. 15ir. (14) V, fol. 95r. :

No separate occurrence. |

Context. In the chapter on the first species of lechery, fornication (VII, 7), the moralized story of Hero and Leander leads to a discussion of four “opposites”? or abuses by sinful love. “‘Et ideo, ut mihi videtur, iam propter illud peccatum tam commune verificantur quatuor contradictoria, scilicet

_ That lawe..../ Primum patet de lege et precepto dei, quando dicitur simpliciter, ‘Non mechaberis... .? Secundo eciam iam patet verificatum, scil. ‘Pat trewth [sic] hap no my3t,’ de Sampsone fortissimo, / Iudicum [13-16], cuius fortitudo per

mulierem nulla facta est. Tercium eciam patet, ‘Pat wysdom is foly,’ de Salomone rege sapientissimo, propter mulieres ydololatriam committente, per quod stultus factus est. Quartum eciam patet in David rege sancto, scil. ‘Pat holynisse ys trechery,’ quem propter suam sanctitatem elegit deus iuxta cor suum, quando Uriam dolose fecit interfici propter Barsabie, uxorem eius.. .”

(R, fols. 138v—139v). ]

Comment. The English verses have no basis in the Latin text. On the

contrary, they summarize four points which are then developed in Latin, much like a sermon division. The four “contradictions” they formulate are some of the subversions effected by carnal love of women which can be found throughout

medieval literature and as late as Milton’s Paradise Lost, VIII, 551-556. In

TEXTS 195 the development, standard biblical examples for strength, wisdom, or holiness who were subverted by foolish love are cited. Notice that in the development the English lines are quoted again, and in MS CC the English can be found

only here, not at the beginning of the section. Manuscripts which lack the English altogether either omit to specify the ‘“‘quatuor contradictoria”’ or list them in Latin; for example: “lex non habet iusticiam, . . . fortitudo non habet

potestatem, . . . sapiencia habet stulticiam, ... sanctitas non habet equitatem” _ (M, fol. 129v).

53 Pat ys mery to be a wyfe. Dye y woll and lese my lyfe.

| (R, fol. 142v)

LINE 1: pat] yt, B3. L3. W1. Sp; ffor hyt, B1. Gol. Go2. V. a] om., B3. LINE 2: and lese] and leue, Sp; a lebe, L3.

Index 3281, and Supplement 827.5. Foster No. 49. | , MSS: (1) B1, fol. 204v. (2) B3, fol. 86r. (3) L2, fol. 176v. (4) L3, fol. 103v. (5) R, fol. 142v. (6) Gol, fol. 88r; printed in Robbins, SL, p. xxxix. (7) Go?2, fol. 145r. (8) LC, fol. 224v. (9) W1, fol 225r. (10) Sp, fol. 155v. (11) V, fol. 98r.

_ Separate occurrence: (12) MS Harley 7322, fol. 45v. Printed and discussed in Chapter III, pp. 116ff. The verse was also printed in Herbert, Catalogue, p. 170 (line 1 only); Furnivall, EETS 15, p. 250.

Context. Five reasons are given why lechery should be detested. The first, that it causes dishonor to God (VII, 12), includes a classical story about a Vestal virgin who expressed her desire to be married in writing. “‘ Narrat enim Seneca, libro sexto Declamacionum, capitulo 8°, quod antiquitus lex erat talis -quod mulieres in templo dee ministrantes forent caste. Sed aliquando contigit quod una literata earum scripsit talem versum:

Felices nupte; moriar quia nubere dulce.

Pat ys mery.... Quo percepto, accusatur tanquam incesta...” (R, fol. 142v). Further text

above, pp. 116ff. _

Comment. The English couplet translates a Latin hexameter from Seneca, Controversiae, VI, 8; ed. H. J. Miiller, LZ. Annaei Senecae patris Scripta quae mansuerunt (Vienna, 1887), p. 264. Seneca’s work was well known

in the fourteenth century. It was not only commented on by Nicholas Trivet (MS Royal 15.C.x1i) but is very frequently quoted in sermon manuscripts written in England. The “case” of the Vestal virgin (Tubach, No. 3178) also appears in Harley 7322 (with English, see above); Bishop Sheppey’s collection

196 TEXTS

54 |

(MS Merton 248, fol. 72v; without English); and Holcot, In Sapientiam, lectio 5 (fol. 9v; without English).

Who-so leuyth in flescly wyll And hit ne woll no3t lete,

, , Aftur hym schall like ille

Pat [here] powte hym so swete. 5 Lechery woll py sowle spylle, Pat is so vn-to-mete. Whan pi body lype in erpe stille, Pe sowle mote all bete. (R, fol. 146r) vuntomete: immoderate, immodest (?). beten: to atone for.

LINE 1: in] at, B1. fllescly] flesshis, B1. B3. W1. LINE 2: whole line] and nel hit nat lete, B1; and he it wul no3t lette, LC; and pat ne wyl notte lette, V. hit] pat, V. ne] om., W1. LINE 3: schall] shal hit, B1. like] lykyng, W1. LINE 4: whole line] pat euer he thogth so suete, Gol. V (pat heer); pat he so pouthe , swete, B3. W1; pat he thowght it so swete, L2; pat raper hym po3te swete, B1; pat hyt pouth hym so swet, LC. here] he so, R. - LINE 5: py] po, V; pe, B3. LINE 6: So vn-to-mete] vn-mete, B3. W1; to pe vnmete, B1; now suete and dere, Gol.

Vv. .

LINE 7: pi] om., B3; pe, W1; p®, V. lype]is, Gol. V. in]in pe, W1. in erpe stille] -ouer style, CL. —

LINE 8: whole line] pe schal sall be all to bette, LC; than sall pe sowle all beer, V. pe]

py, B1. bete] be bete, R; balys bete, B1; bere, Gol; add etc., B3. :

, Index 4134. Foster No. 50. MSS: (1) B1, fol. 206v. (2) B3, fol. 89r. (3) L2, fols. 180v—181r. (4) R, fol. 146r. (5) Gol, fol. 90v; printed by Robbins, Philological Quarterly 35 (1956), 91. (6) LC, fol. 226r—v. (7) W1, fols. 226v—227r. (8) V, fol. 101r.

Separate occurrence: (9) W1, fol. 96v (the treatise before FM): Who-so lyuith in flescheliche lust

, And vol hit nou3t let, After hym hi schal lykyn ille Pat raper pou3t swete. Hordum wol manys saule spille With pine pat ys vn-mete. Pat bodi lith in erpe stille, Pat saule mot albete.

, TEXTS 197 Context. Continence or chastity, the virtue opposed to lechery (VII, 17), is compared to a certain ignescent stone (teribulus) which is either male or female. It produces fire only when the male and the female approach each other. Hence, living close to women is conducive to lechery and an obstacle to a life with God. “‘Unde Jeronymus: ‘Non potest,’ inquit, ‘cum deo habitare qui feminarum accessibus deputatur. Prodolor,’ dicit ipse, ‘quod pro delectacione momentanea se obligat homo ad eterna supplicia!’ Unde quidam sic

anglice ait: | Whosse leuyth.. .”’ ,

(R, fol. 146r; end of chapter).

Comment. Although the thought of the English lines reflects the quotation from St. Jerome, it has no verbal basis in the Latin text. Manuscripts

without English simply omit the verse. | 55 When pe hede quakyth

And pe lyppis blakyth , } And pe nose sharpyth |

And pe senow sta[r]kyth 5 And pe brest pantyth And pe brepe wantyth And pe tepe rately3t And pe prote rotelip And pe sowle is wente owte, 10 Pe body ne tyt but a clowte.

_ [And after be hyt in pe pyte | And with erth fast ydit.] Sone be it so stekenn Pe sowle all clene ys for3zetenn. (R, fol. 148v)

starken: to become stiff. rotelen: to make a rattling sound. steken: to shut up, enclose. tyden: to befall, to come as its portion.

LINE |: pe (in all lines)| pi, Gol. Sp. V. hede] om., Sp. |

LINE 4: whole line] and thi face charkes, Sp. starkyth] stakyth, R; scharpip, W1; strarkyth, V. LINE 6: whole line] om., Sp. brepe] brest, W1. LINE 7: and] whanne, BI. LINE 8: rotelip] ratelp, W1; rakelth, V.

LINES 9-10: Thenne pe sowle fro pe body ys fet / And pe body yn a clout fast ys y-knet, B1; and thy breth wendyth oute / and thy body botte a clowte, V.

198 TEXTS , LINE 9: is] om.,.W1.. out] and, LC. sis | LINE 10: whole line] pi body hath bot a clout, Gol. Sp (hath noght bot). pe body]

off pe body, B3. L2. LC. ; ,

LINES 11-12: om., R, here supplied from B3. , LINE 11: whole line] and anoyn after buryd yna put, Bl. in pe] ina, L2. Sp; ona, LC.

in pe put] doun i pyth, Gol; down putte, V. , ,

LINE 12: ydit] cluth, Gol; clowte, V; ys det, B1; hydde, LC; dyt, Sp. LINE 13: whole line] sone so it be in erthe i-loken, Gol. V; thenne a-noyn be hyt so be

reke, B1. so] om., LC. ,

LINE 14: whole line] body and sowle yclene for3ete, B1; thi sowle sone shall be

forgottenn, Sp. pe] py, W1. all clene] full son, V. .

Index 4035. Foster No. 51. i :

MSS: (1) B1, fol. 208r. (2) B3, fol. 91r. (3) L2, fol. 183v. (4) R, fol. 148v. (5) Gol, fol. 91v; printed by Robbins, Mediaeval Studies 32 (1970), 292-3. (6) LC,

fol. 227v. (7) W1, fol. 228r. (8) Sp, fol. 162v. (9) V, fol. 102v.

| Separate occurrence: (10) MS Harley 2247, fol. 212r. See “‘Comment.”’

Context. One of the ways in which one may preserve continence is the reflection that our flesh will revert to dust (VII, 19). This includes considering the Signs of Death: “Et nota quod signa mortis secundum beatum Jeronimum sunt hec: ‘Quando nasus frigescit, facies pallescit, oculi tenebrescunt, aures

surdescunt, nervi et vene rumpuntur, cor in duas partes dividitur. Nichil vilius vel abhominabilius cadavere mortuo. In domo non permittitur, ne eius fetore familia moriatur; in aere non suspenditur, ne inficiatur; in aqua non proicitur, ne illa corrumpatur. Sed quid? Revera terra foditur et in terram proicitur et tanquam venenum mortiferum, ne amplius compareat, a terra cooperitur.’ Unde quidam anglice sic dixit: ‘When pe hede....’ Satis ergo patet, quomodo ad observanciam puritatis valent tam ciborum abstinencia quam eciam mortis memoria...” (R, fol. 148v). Comment. The English passage is patterned after the quotation attributed to St. Jerome (already used earlier, before Verse 16) but is not strictly based on it. The “‘Signs of Death”? are a commonplace in medieval medical and homilectic literature, which gave rise to a number of diverse renderings in Middle English verse and prose, surveyed by Robbins in Mediaeval Studies 32 (1970), 282-298, and by Woolf, Religious Lyric, pp. 78-82. Robbins speaks of eight versions of Verse 55 that have been preserved independently (p. 293 and notes 38-39). But this form of the “‘signs of Death” does not merely “‘omit ‘pi teth ratelet’’’; it also omits the rattling throat as well as lines 9-14 of the FM verse and instead adds the hollowing of the eyes as one of the signs, as well as Latin tags clearly intended as part of the individual lines (not “‘rubrics,” as Robbins claims). Hence, these eight versions are quite different from Verse 55 and demand a separate entry in Index/Supplement.

On the other hand, Index 4035 does occur outside FM with only minor variations in the collection of Middle English sermons of MS Harley 2247. There it is found in the funeral sermon, which is lacking in the otherwise

| | TEXTS 199 similar collection of MS Royal 18.B.xxv. This version has not been noted by _ Robbins, although it was published in Steckman’s dissertation (p. 943; see |

Chapter I, p. 43). It reads: | , |

/ ... whan bere apperith in py body tokenys and singnes pat pou maiste well knowe pat pou art atte pe pyttes brynk. pat is to say,

; whan pi quaketh. | pihandes lippes[sic] blaketh. a| thyne hede rokkyth | nose droppith. , pypyshynnes sharpith.

,. pi synewes starkith. pi brest pantith.

| py breth wantyth.

Thy tethe rattlyth. _ Thi prote rotelyth. |

, Anon pou thenk-kest pyn hert wolde brast,

| for py life may not last.

Transcribed from Harley 2247, fol. 212r, where it is written as prose.

Panne schal stynte that now is kud, Panne schal seme that now is hud, |

| Panne schal dere that now liketh,

| : Panne schal like that now nyeth. | oe |

| : Oo (Co, fol. 229v) | | semen: to appear. nyen: to annoy, displease. * LINE 1: panne schal] pou schalt, L3. schal] schal it, Gol. V. | LINE 2: seme] shewe, Sp. | | ,

LINE 3: dere] noy, L3. B1 (newe, corr. to nyee3th in margin). liketh] is likud, L2. Sp;

likud, B1. L3; lykyd, W1; lik‘, card. ,

LINE 4: whole line] om., W1. panne] and panne, Gol. V; pat L3. now] om., Sp. nyeth] swikith, B2; aswykyth, V; is wykked, Gol; is nyede, L2. nyedde, B1 (corr. in margin); are noyed, Sp; displesyth, card.

7 Index 3518. Foster (Sermons) No. 1. MSS: (1) B1, fol. 210r. (2) B2, fol. 183r. (3) L2, fol. 194r. (4) L3, fol. 110r. (5)

Co, fol. 229v. (6) Gol, fol. 93r. (7) W1, fol. 229v. (8) Sp, fol. 169r. (9) V, fol. —--: 105v. (10) card (= Cardiff, Public Library, MS 3.174), fol. 238r.

No separate occurrence. :

,,

2002S TEXTS © | | Context. Sermon III, Second Sunday of Advent. “‘ Circa ergo istum diem

iudicii et illius adventum quatuor specialiter considero, scil. , Que modo apparent, tunc cessabunt.

Que modo latent, tunc patebunt.

| Que modo placent, tunc nocebunt. Que modo nocent, tunc placebunt.

5/ |

Anglic sic: ‘Panne schal stynte. ...’ Primo...” (Co, fol. 229v). : Comment. The two English couplets translate the Latin divisio of the

— sermon faithfully. |

| In herte clene and buxum,

| In speche mylde and louesem,

| In dede fre and gladsem. _ (Co, fol. 231v)

LINE 3: in] and in, L3. Index 1490. Foster (Sermons) No. 2. —

| MSS: (1) B1, fol. 211v. (2) B2, fol. 184v. (3) L2, fol. 195v. (4) L3, fol. 111v. (5) Co, fol. 231v. (6) Gol, fol. 94v. (7) W1, fol. 230v. (8) D, fol. 97v (only: In _herte clene, etc.). (9) E, fol. 277v. (10) Sp, fol. 171r. (11) V, fol. 107r. (12) card, fol. 240v.

No separate occurrence. | | Context. Sermon VIII, on the Feast of St. John the Evangelist. He was rightly called ‘“‘Johannes”’ or ‘‘graceful’? because he possessed the virtues expressed in the triplet. ““Si ergo de illo nomine loqui velimus ac de isto

Johanne, quomodo scilicet hoc nomen sibi imponitur, quare coram deo graciosus ostenditur, considerandum quod tria in isto invenio, que probant illum satis convenienter “‘Johannem”’ sive “‘graciosum”’ appellari. Nam ipse

fuit corde mundus et humilis, ore pius et affabilis, opere largus et hillaris. Anglice: ‘In herte. .. .’ Et revera ista tria unumquemque vivencium temporibus istis probant graciosum, si sit hillaris ...’’ (Co, fol. 231v). Comment. The three lines translate the Latin sermon division faithfully.

Now ys tyme to sle and tyme to hele, _

Tyme to geder andtymetodele. = (Co, fol. 237r)

TEXTS 201 LINE 1: to sle] to fle, L3. card. LINE 2: tyme] now ys tyme, B1.

Index 2340. Foster (Sermons) No. 3. MSS: (1) B1, fol. 215r. (2) B2, fol. 188v. (3) L2, fol. 205r. (4) L3, fol. 116r. (5) Co, fol. 237r. (6) Gol, fol. 97v. (7) E, fol. 284v. (8) V, fol. 111r. (9) card, fol. 242v. No separate occurrence.

Context. Sermon XXV, First Sunday in Lent. The “‘tempus acceptabile”’ of the sermon text can be understood in four ways, treated in various chapters of the fifth book of FM. ‘Unde de istis quatuor temporibus dicitur Ecclesiastes 3 [:3.5]: ‘Est tempus occidendi,’ scil. per penitenciam et contricionem; ‘est tempus sanandi,’ scil. per voluntariam satisfaccionem; ‘est tempus colligendi,’ per plenariam confessionem; ‘est tempus spargendi,’ per elemosinarum ‘est largicionem. ‘ Now ys tyme. .. .” Unde de istis . . .”” (Co, fol. 237r). Comment. The couplet translates the Latin quotations from Ecclesiastes 3:3 and 5, which summarize the divisions of the theme.

59 Pe wey of slythe and of [sothenesse], Pe / wey of streyngthe and of mekenesse.

(Co, fols. 237v—238r) |

slythe, sley3the: prudence; see discussion in Chapter ITI, p. 112.

LINE 1: slythe] fleythe (?), L3; Co writes slyche, but confusion between t and c is typical of this manuscript. Sothenesse] sethenesse, Co. LINE 2: mekenesse] methefulnes, L2; sobirnes, B2. Gol. V. Index 3496. Foster (Sermons) No. 4. MSS: (1) B2, fol. 189r. (2) L2, fol. 206v. (3) L3, fol. 116v. (4) Co, fols. 237v238r. (5) Gol, fol. 98r. (6) E, fol. 285v. (7) V, fol. 112r. (8) card, fol. 247v. No separate occurrence.

Context. Sermon XXVII, Third Sunday of Lent. Man stands at a crossing of roads, all four of which can lead to salvation. “‘ Et sunt iste quatuor via prudencie, via veritatis, via constancie, via sobrietatis. Pe wey of slythe.. .” Que quidem vie sunt quatuor virtutes cardinales .. .”’ (Co, fols. 237v—238r). Comment. The couplet translates a fourfold Latin division of via, which is part of the development of the sermon. On account of the rhyme as well as the |

Latin source (sobrietatis), one would expect the last word of line 2 to be * mepenesse, derived from OE. mzp, “‘measure,”’ from adj. mzte, “‘moderate, etc.”’ But such a noun form seems to be unattested in Old and Middle English.

202 TEXTS 60 As moche as was hys worschep, 3ut more was hys schamschep. (Co, fol. 238v)

schyp). | |

LINE 1: moche] mekel, E. Sp. V. as (2)] om., D. Sp. hys] om., L2. LINE 2: 3ut] and yet, Sp. schamschep] shenshippe, B2. L2. Gol. D. V. card (schynIndex 400. Foster (Sermons) No. 5. _ MSS: (1) BI, fol. 216r. (2) B2, fol. 189v. (3) L2, fol. 208r. (4) L3, fol. 117r. (5) Co, fol. 238v. (6) Gol, fol. 98v. (7) D, fol. 110r. (8) E, fol. 286v. (9) Sp, fol. 180r. (10) V, fol. 112v. (11) card, fol. 248v. No separate occurrence.

Context. Sermon XXX, on Palm Sunday. The sermon theme as well as the liturgy for this Sunday speak of Christ’s glory and ignominy. “ Unde potest thema sic dici in Anglico: ‘As moche. ...’ Quia gloria mundana.. .”’

(Co, fol. 238v).

Comment. The couplet is a free, rhyming translation of the sermon theme given at the beginning of this sermon: “‘Secundum gloriam eius multiplicata est ignominia eius” (I Maccabees 1:42). The rhyme words worschep—schamschep appear also in a Latin Palm Sunday sermon of the later fourteenth century: “‘ Christus imperator noster hodie fuit receptus cum magna populi exultacione; et ideo hodie fiebat processio in signum exultacionis, In tokne of gladnesse and worschepe. Et postea legebatur passio in signum quod feria sexta proxima Christus illum honorem [read: dishonorem] sustinuit ab eodem populo, Muche schanschype’’? (Worcester Cathedral MS F.126, fol. 29r,b).

61 Cryst pat deide on [pe] rode [Is] owre lombe and ester fode. (Co, fol. 239v)

LINE 1: on] opon, B2. Gol. V. pe] re, Co. , ; LINE 2: whole line] es offyrd uppe oure estyr fod, V. is] om., Co; he ys, Bl. and] ~ oure, B2. L2. Gol. card. ester] esterus, Co. card; aster, L2; offerd, Sp. Index 621. Foster (Sermons) No. 6. MSS: (1) B1, fol. 216v. (2) B2, fol. 190r. (3) L2, fol. 210r. (4) L3, fol. 118r. (5)

TEXTS 203 Co, fol. 239v. (6) Gol, fol. 99r. (7) E, fol. 287v. (8) Sp, fol. 181r. (9) V, fol. 113r. (10) card, fol. 249v. No separate occurrence.

Context. Sermon XXXII, on Easter Sunday. After the sermon theme, -“Jesum queritis Nazarenum crucifixum”’ (Mark 16:6), has been developed, the following is added: “‘Item, quia omni die dominica a Pascha usque ad Ascencionem inter seculares habetur Epistula hec: ‘Expurgate vetus fermentum’ [I Cor. 5:7], assumi potest hoc thema: ‘Pascha nostrum immolatus est Christus’

[ibidem]. Anglice sic: ‘Cryst pat deide....’ Unde quomodo fuit immolatus, nota...’ (Co, fol. 239v). Comment. The couplet freely translates the quoted theme from I Cor. 3:7.

2. OTHER ENGLISH PHRASES

In addition to the verses so far presented, the manuscripts of Fasciculus morum contain a number of unrhymed English phrases and single words. The more interesting among the latter were listed and discussed by Frances A. Foster in her article ““Some English Words.”? Such vernacular words may appear as glosses of Latin words (for example: “vesces, anglice fyches”’;

‘‘incantatores..., anglice felsters’’; “‘...comparatur cuidam reparatori vasorum qui dicitur tynker vel glodier’’) or as integral parts in their Latin sentence (for example: elues; eluenlonde; fare-welle, pou haddest; Fryday). Professor Foster, in working toward an edition of Fasciculus morum, also included several English phrases in her list of verses which, however, lack

, rhyme. Although they have been included in the Index, I have omitted them from the preceding edition of genuine verses. Since they have some interest as

vernacular proverbial sayings used in fourteenth-century preaching, I add them here but without full documentation. They are taken from MS R. A

He may be py bote and bote py synne. bote(2)] bete, B3. L2. Gol. W1. Sp. V; bat, Jo; saue, B1. synne] bale, B3.

Index 1141. Foster No. 42. |

MSS: (1) B1, fol. 178v. (2) B3, fol. 58r. (3) L2, fol. 101r. (4) L3, fol. 71v. (5) R, fol. 100v. (6) Gol, fol. 64v. (7) Jo, fol. 130v. (8) LC, fol. 203r. (9) W1, fol. 205r. (70) E, fol. 126v. (11) Sp, fol. 106r. (12) V. fol. 65r.

In stressing the advantage of confessing one’s sin soon (V, 12), the author reminds his audience of the example of the hart: When this animal is wounded,

it hastens to a spring where it bathes and refreshes itself (cf. Psalm 41:2).

204 TEXTS ‘*Et nota quod natura cervi est [quod] quando sagittatur, si evadere potest,

_ querit statim herbam bitonie, cuius natura est secundum medicos ferrum

B,|

extrahere et sanare. Sic tu, peccator, cum vulneratus fueris sagitta peccatorum,

queras herbam bitonie; hec est illa in qua est remedium contra peccatum,

idest sacerdotem. Ipse enim potest esse bitonia tua. Anglice: ‘He may be. ...” Et sic sanaberis”’ (R, fol. 100v).

Goode bydder, goode werner.—

| | To gode bydder fre 3euer. —

LINE 1: whole line] god byddes a gode werneris, Gol; god byddyp, god wornep, B4;

goode bydders god wernyp, B1; goode beggers han goode warners, Et; gud byddyng has gud warning, V;0m.,Jo. goode]a goode, L1 (both times). Go2; to gode, B3. L3. W1; to a goode, CC; in(?) goode, L2. bydder] asker, L1. Go2. LINE 2: whole line] to-goode bydders god goodelich 3euyp, B1; to god byddyp fre peuer, B4; aske and haue, L1;0m.,Gol. V. to] om., W2.Jo;toa,Sp. bydder] byddyth, Go2. Et. fre]a good, Sp. fre 3euer] for-3euyth, Go2. 3euer] 3euyth, Et.

Index 1003. Foster No. 43. MSS: (1) B1, fol. 184r. (2) B3, fols. 63v—64r. (3) B4, fol. 49v (fairly corrupt). (4) L1, fol. 176v. (5) L2, fol. 122r. (6) L3, fol. 79r. (7) R, fol. 109v. (8) Gol, fol. 69r. (9) Go2, fol. 106v. (10) Jo, fol. 143r. (11) CC, fol. 150r. (12) LC, fol. 207v. (13) W1, fol. 209r. (14) W2, fol. 121r. (15) Et, fol. 62r. (16) Sp, fol. _ 116v. (17) V, fol. 72v. Separate occurrence: (18) Oxford, Magdalen College, MS 13, fol. 95r; copied from FM, with context.

The second reason which compels us to pray is our own need (V, 18). Christ is a generous giver, in contrast to the popular saying that every good asker finds a good refuser. ““Ipse enim plus paratus est dare quam tu audes

petere. Et ideo bene dici potest Rex Assuerus, qui Hester parva petenti respondit: ‘Et si dimidium regni pecieris, impetrabis’ [Esther 5:3]. In eo autem fallit illud verbum rusticanum: ‘Goode bydder, goode werner,’ sed eius contrarium verificatur, scil. ‘To gode bydder fre 3euer.’ In cuius signum .. .” (R, fol. 109v).

The introductory phrase “‘illud verbum rusticanum”’ makes it clear that at least the first English line was proverbial; but no such proverb is listed by Whiting—common Middle English proverbs agree with the second, not the first line (e.g., Whiting, Proverbs, A.211, A.212, A.215). However, exactly the same proverb has been preserved in French, in sermons by Nicholas de Biard,

Jean Gerson, and others: , | | A bon demandeur

Bon [var. sage] escondisseur.

| , TEXTS 205 Cf. Louis Mourin (ed.), Six sermons francais inédits de Jean Gerson (Paris, , 1946), p. 312, with further occurrences listed on p. 266, n. 1. For a Latin sermon which is surprisingly like the quoted text from FM, see B. Hauréau, Notices et extraits de quelques manuscrits latins de la Bibliothéque Nationale, 4 (Paris, 1892), 83. Incidentally, C. S. Lewis quotes a modern version: ‘“‘Them

C,

- as asks don’t get”; A Grief Observed (London, 1961), p. 38. The English proverb is quoted a second time in Sermon XXXVII, for the Fifth Sunday of Easter: “Et ideo in illo fallit illud: ‘Euery god bidder schal haue a god werner,’ et eius oppositum verificatur. Et hoc patet .. .”? (Co, fol. 240v). Present in twelve manuscripts; major variant: bidder] asker or begger.

, _ Who-so woll no3t when he may, He schall no3t when he [wolde].

LINE 1: whole line] he pat doth noth when he may, Gol. V. no3t] om. W1. LINE 2: whole line] etc., L2. W1; he schal etc., L3. wolde] woll, R. Index 4151. Foster No. 45. MSS: (1) B1, fol. 186v. (2) B3, fol. 67r. (3) L2, fol. 130v. (4) L3, fol. 82v. (5) R, fol. 114r. (6) Gol, fol. 71lv. (7) Go2, fol. 111v. (8) Jo, fol. 149v. (9) LC, fol. 209v. (10) WI1, fol. 211v. (11) V, fol. 75v.

For context and comments, see Verse 49. D Jambe leue.

Voluntary poverty in the following of Christ (IV, 12) was practiced by the

Apostles and other saints. St. Peter, for instance, followed his master so eagerly that he was crucified upside-down. ‘‘Revera sic fecit beatus Petrus. Nam tantum post Christum festinavit quod cecidit Jambe leue, hoc est, quod elevatus fuit tandem in cruce sicut Christus, pedibus tamen erectis et capite submisso”’ (R, fol. 84r). The vernacular phrase occurs in fifteen manuscripts. | The expression, which may be either French or English, is well attested in both languages; see Middle English Dictionary ‘‘jaumbe-leve.’’ With its , literal meaning “feet up”’ or “‘upside-down”’ it occurs also in the thirteenthcentury treatise on the vices Quoniam (see Traditio 30 [1974], 352f.), in the long development of pertinacia, the thirteenth branch of pride. The context is much like FM: “‘Petrus tantum properavit quod cecidit iambe leue, quasi ex transverso positus in cruce’”’ (Durham Cathedral, MS B.I.18, fol. 35r,b).

E For schamely hit poket [add out, B1]. Answer of a friar or wise man to a young woman who excused her pregnancy by blaming predestination; see Chapter I, p. 56. ‘‘Quidam sunt, et

206 TEXTS | maxime muliercule, que respondent quando queritur ab eis quare sic fecerunt quando venter earum incipit tumescere et inflari, respondent [added in margin] quod oportuit eas ita facere, nam predestinatum erat hoc illis ante tunicam vel camisiam. Sed certe bene posset talibus responderi sicut quondam quidam

frater tali fornicarie respondit: ‘Vere, filia,’ dixit, ‘ipse qui formavit istud sacculum hoc modo supra ventrem tuum pessimus scissor fuit, for schamely hyt poket’”’ (R, fol. 101v). The story is told in illustration of the point that confession must be truthful and frank, not self-excusing (V, 12). It appears a second time in the development of the truth that lechery causes the divine law to have no right (cf. Verse 52; VII, 7). Here the witty reply is attributed to *“‘quidam sapiens” (R, fol. 139r). For poket, see Foster, ““Some English

Words,”’ p. 154.

F , Oo

: _ A, baly, mercy! a, baly, mercy! | | Gluttons make a god of their belly, according to Philippians 3:19. The | , kitchen is their temple or church, the table their altar, roast meat their sacrifice, and their grace before meals is, ““Oh, that I had two stomachs,”’ but after-

wards, “‘ Ah, belly, mercy!”’ (R, fol. 131r; VI, 2). , , Some manuscripts give a different set of prayers in English: Before the meal, “‘A god, merci, how lang schal we faste?”’; after the meal, “God, mercy, how my bely hakyth!”’’ (Co, fols. 176v—177r; C, E). The English in either form

is present in 21 manuscripts, including two which otherwise omit English phrases and verses: M (misreading baly as heli) and Mo (adding in the margin

, the German equivalent, “‘ Ach, myn buoch’’). ge | _ The same passage on the religion of gluttons, with the English exclamation, appears in MS Harley 7322, fol. 70r—v.

Appendix A | SYNOPSIS OF FASCICULUS MORUM IN THE EXTANT MANUSCRIPTS, Fasciculus morum is divided into books (called

particulae or partes) and chapters (capitula). The chapter division is normally indicated by enlarged initials, rubrics, chapter numbers, or running titles in the top margin, or a combination of these devices. It is also reflected in the

table of contents and the subject index, when present, and in references to , Fasciculus morum in the accompanying sermon outlines as well as in separate sermons. The numbering of the chapters, however, is very diverse, especially in the longer books. Particula VII, for instance, contains 7, 9, 10, 11, 21, or 22 numbered chapters in the various manuscripts. The diversity can be explained

as(1)follows: | The author of the work divided each of his announced seven parts

into two,sections, one dealing with a chief vice, the other with the opposite virtue (see his “Introduction,” reproduced on p. 1). He begins each section with a formal divisio that enumerates and announces the topics to be treated in the respective section. For example, Part VII begins:

Ultimo iam sequitur pertractare de luxuria, que tercia filia carnis est et pessima, cum suis membris. Ipsa enim tanquam publica meretrix cum nullo veretur commisceri, unde merito execrabilis iudicatur. Secundo de elus contrario, scil. de continencia et puritate cum suis membris. Circa luxuriam sic intendo procedere: Primo, quid sit et quomodo diffinitur; secundo, de eius occasionibus et ex quibus oritur; tercio, que sunt eius species illam consequentes; quarto, quare illam execrantur Dominum

timentes. (R, fol. 134v) ,

duced: ,

After the section on luxuria, then, the treatment of chastity is similarly intro-

Contra autem hoc vicium cum suis miserijs se offert domina Castitas sive Continencia tanquam illius contraria et expugnatrix ad modum quo pugil in duello socium aggreditur, mutulando, excecando, occidendo [dimicat],

donec illud verbum odiosum, scil. “‘creaunt,’’ dixerit. Sic continencia luxuriam aggreditur et devincit. De qua sic intendo procedere: Primo, quid sit et cui comparatur; secundo, a quibus et quomodo adquiritur; tercio, de eius effectu et quomodo terminatur. (R, fol. 144v)

(2) The topics thus announced are not only strictly followed in the development, but they are clearly marked at the beginning of their respective chapters, at least verbally and often (though not consistently) also with the number already given earlier. For example, the last subject of chastity begins, ‘“‘De effectu continencie et eius fine iam ultimo est advertendum quod... (R, fol. 149v). 207

208 APPENDIX A | (3) When chapters are actually numbered in the margin, however, the numbering runs straight through each particula, not through its two main sections (vice and virtue) separately. (There are some exceptions, but they are not followed consistently.) Part VII, therefore, would have at least seven chapters. (4) This general structure, which is so far clearly conceived and marked,

becomes more complicated and thereby disturbed by the introduction of subdivisions and further subtopics in the text. These may or may not be treated in separate chapters, and the choice depends apparently on their length. Frequently two shorter subdivisions are put into one chapter; conversely, a long subdivision that perhaps has several parts of its own may be broken up into two or even more chapters. This is precisely the point at which

individual manuscripts diverge in their practice of dividing chapters and

numbering them. | |

(5) The resulting disagreement among the extant manuscripts is further

increased by: (a) complexities in the overall structure of a particula which make it very easy for reader or scribe to lose track of the orderly development (thus especially in Parts III and V, as discussed in Chapter I, pp. 11—12);(b) discrepancy between marking off chapters (by such devices as indentation, enlarged capitals, rubrics) and counting them as separate chapters; (c) discrepancy between the

chapter division found in the text and that of the separate table of chapters where one exists; and (d) occasional inability to count.

As a result of such diversity among the manuscripts and of the inconsistencies within individual copies, I find it inadvisable simply to reproduce

the chapter division and numbering of any one actual manuscript. The following conspectus is, therefore, I hope, a reasonable compromise. In it I follow the logical structure furnished by the divisiones at the beginning of the sections and by the smaller divisions. I include only those subdivisions that are sufficiently long to occupy separate chapters. Numbers on the right are

, those found in the partitiones of the text. On the left I supply my own chapter numbers, primarily in order to facilitate references in my discussion; and I

Prologus Tr add the number of the folio in MS R on which the respective chapter begins.

Introductio. De peccatis in generali. 1 Tr

PARTICULA I |

SUPERBIA ,

De vitiis et virtutibus in speciali. 2 8r

1. a corde 3 8v

1. Superbie diffinicio et proprietas 2. Unde progreditur:

2. ab ore 4 10r 3. ab opere. Five kinds / , 5 10v 3. Quare sit detestanda 6 12v

SYNOPSIS OF FASCICULUS MORUM 209

-jactancia , 7 = 13r

4. Que sunt eius membra: ypocrisis, inobediencia, vana gloria,

| deo 9 14r , 2. ecclesie 10 17r parentibus 11 § 18v HUMILITAS

1. Qualis sit, et quare imitanda 8 13Vv 2. Quibus sit humiliandum:

, 3. Que inducunt humilitatem:

1. Proprie fragilitatis consideracio 12 19v 2. Memoria mortis 13. 20v 3. Iudicii manifestacio 14 1 22r

IRA ,

4. Reproborum damnacio16 15 23v 23r | 4. Que sit merces humilium PARTICULA II

1. Que Quemala est eius proprietas 1223v 2. facit eius iniquitas 24r 3. Que sunt eius membra: Odium, vindicta 3 24r 4. Quare omnino detestanda est 4 25r PACIENCIA 1. Quid sit et anecessaria quo sumitur 2. In quibus est5 627IVv 27Iv

quomodo terminatur 7 29v

3. De eius membris (compassio, pietas, pax, tranquillitas) et

PARTICULA III :

1.et (Jater Quid sit 1 30v 2.) quibus comparatur 2 32v Murmur, detraccio 334r 33r mendacium 4 adulacio 5 35r CARITAS ,

INVIDIA

2. (later as 3.) Que sunt eius membra et quare detestatur:

1. Quid sit et quomodo diffinitur 6 36r

2. In quo consistit et firme stabilitur:

210 APPENDIX A

1. Dileccio dei 7 37r 2. Dileccio proximi 8 39r

3. Que illam impediunt et unde elongatur 9 4ir

4. Quomodocaritas sicelongatarecuperatur:Perconsideracionem 10 4lv passionis Christi:

1. Quare sanguinem suum fudit |

2. Quo die, quo modo, quo loco 11 45r

3. Qua hora, qua etate, quo tempore 12 46r

| 4. De quibus accusabatur et quociens illusus est 13. 47r 5. De misterio et forma crucis et eius virtute 14 48r

Christus caritatem suam eciam aliis modis nobis manifestavit: 15 49v 1. Per suum ingressum in hunc mundum.

Triplex adventus Christi , —=16 = «Sir Christus venit tribus modis 17 54r Per suum progressum in hac vita 18 55r

Per suum egressum de hac vita: 19 56r De sua benedicta passione De sua benedicta resurreccione 20 56v De sua ascensione 21 59r De Spiritus Sancti missione | 22 62r De benedicta Trinitate _ 23 ~=—s«6AV PARTICULA IV

AVARICIA

1. Quid sit et quomodo diffinitur 1 67v

2. De eius proprietatibus et a quibus progreditur: 2 68r 1. Labor in perquirendo 2. 69v 3. Timor Dolor in in possidendo amittendo 43 70v

1. Rapina 5 T2v 4. (later as 3.) Usura87 76v 75r 5. Simonia 6. iuste Sacrilegium | 4. Quare contempnitur91079r 80r 3. De eius membris, sex: |

2-3. Prodicio, dolus et mendacium 6 74v

CONTEMPTUS MUNDI Consistit in tribus:

1. In dominice passionis recordacione 11 82v

2.. in certe mortis consideracione in voluntarie paupertatis dileccione

VOLUNTARIA PAUPERTAS

1. Quid sit et quomodo diffinitur 12 83v

2. A quibus illam sequi exemplum accipitur 3. Que mala eveniunt suis contemptoribus 4. Que bona eveniunt suis amatoribus

SYNOPSIS OF FASCICULUS MORUM 211 PARTICULA V

ACCIDIA

1. Quid sit et quomodo diffinitur 1 85v

2. De eius proprietate et quibus comparatur 86r

misse 87v

Que sit virtus misse, panis et aque benedicte 2 87r 1. De sacerdote missam cantante

, 2. De forma et materia corporis de quo fit sacramentum

3. De virtute misse 88r Circa panem et aquam benedictam , 89v

Accidia non tantum in minoribus sed eciam in maioribus 3 89v

3. Quare sit odiosa et iuste execratur 4 90r OCCUPACIO SANCTA Occupacio activa (seu temporalis) et contemplativa (seu spiritualis) 5 90v

I.Partes De penitencia in generali 6 92r penitencie in speciali: 7 = 92v 1. Contricio: 1. Quid sit et quomodo adquiritur

2. De quibus conterendum est et quare debet conteri 8 94v

3. Que mala eveniunt conteri differentibus 9 96v 4. Que bona eveniunt vere conterentibus 10 98r

2. Confessio:

1. Quid sit et quibus confitendum ordinatur 11 99r 2. Qualis debet esse, et cuius virtutis est 12 100r 3. Que mala eveniunt confiteri differentibus 13 102v

3.Primo Satisfaccio: | modo = iusticia — 15 105v 4. Que bona eveniunt vere et cito confitentibus 14 104v

Secundo modo = tercia pars integralis penitencie 16 107v 1. Quid sit et quomodo diffinitur

1. Oracio:

2. Que sunt eius species et a quibus adimpletur 17 107v 1. Qualis debet esse

2. Que compellunt ad orandum 18 109v 3. Quociens sit orandum, et qualiter 19 109v

4, Que bona confert oracio 20 110r

3.1. Quid Elemosina: | sit et de quibus facienda 22 Illlv

2. Ieiunium: refers to book on Gula 21 11iIr 2. Quibus comparatur et quibus eroganda 23-24 11lv

3. Que illam impediunt 25 114v

4. Que bona per illam eveniunt 26 116v II. 1.Pugna contra tres hostes 27 116v Mundus Debellatur per Fidem:

1. Quid sit et in quibus consistit 28 118r

2. Quomodo mundum expugnat et prosternit 29 120r

212 APPENDIX A | — Qui istam fidem impugnant 30 121r Quomodo mundo per Prudenciam est obviandum 31 123v

1. Quid sit

2. In quibus consistit

Quomodo in antiquis viguit 124r 2.3. Caro 7 32 124v

Contra hunc hostem Spes se opponit , 33. 124v

3.Comparaciones Diabolus | 35, 126r 127v Contra hunc hostem Temperancia se opponit 34 125v

Contra hunc hostem Caritas se opponit 36 «©128r Contra hunc hostem Fortitudo se opponit 37 129r PARTICULA VI

GULA

1. Quid sit et quomodo diffinitur 1 130v

2. Que sunt eius species (preponere, laute, nimis ardenter, nimis

studiose) et ex quibus cognoscitur _ 2 130v

3. Quare contemptibilis est et 1uste contempnitur 3 132r

SOBRIETAS ABSTINENCIA 1. A quibus est et abstinendum 4 133r | 2. Dedifferencie abstinencie(i.e., various motivations forabstinence) 5 133v

3. De utilitate ieiunii et abstinencie 6 134r PARTICULA VII

LUXURIA , 1. Quid sit et quomodo diffinitur 1 134v

1. Visus 2 134v 2. 3..Colloquia Tactus 43 135v_ 136r

2. De eius occasionibus et ex quibus oritur:

4. 136v 5. Osculum Factum 65 137r 1. Fornicacio ,87140r 138r 2. Stuprum 3. Adultertum 9141Ir 140r 4.: Incestus 10 5. Sodomia 11 142r

3. Que sunt eius species:

4. Quare deum timentes illam detestantur:

1. Quia Quia angelis deo iniuriosa 12 142v 2. odiosa 13. 143r 3. Quia proprio subiecto perniciosa 14 143r

SYNOPSIS OF FASCICULUS MORUM 213

4. Quia proximo nocet 15 143Vv 5. Quia est obsequium diabolo 16 144r CASTITAS

1. Quid sit et cui comparatur 17 144v

2. A quibus et quomodo adquiritur: Continencia superbi 18 146r

continencia cupiditatis 146v , , continencia castitatis 147r et quomodo adquiritur 19 147r

3. De eius effectu et fine 20 149v Ends on fol. 150v ,

| BLANK PAGE

| Appendix B SELECTED DIALECT FEATURES IN THE FOLLOWING I have summarized the evidence for a number of selected

dialect features. These are: |

(1) The reflex of OE @ represented by mest/most, in Verse 4, line 4. (2) The distinction an/on represented by: mon (13.1), ronke (13.7), wan (26.2), honge (29.1), mon (31.1), longe (38.5), monkyn (39.1), con (43.4), lond (48.1), honde (48.2). (3) The reflex of OE y,¥, represented by: pryde (7.1 and 4), murthe (9.2 and 4), gult (10.9), furst (11.1), put (16.2), luper (45.3), mery (53.1), and pyt (55.11).

(4) The variation such/sych/swylk, in 30.4 and 34.3-4. (5) The variation siben/sine, in 20.1, 24.2-3, 40.1, and 51.2-3. (6) The variation any/ony/eny, in 21.6. (7) The verb ending of the third person singular present indicative, as shown in some 25 forms. (8) The verb ending of the plural indicative, as shown in 30.1, 3—4. It should be noticed that some scribes may have considered some of these forms subjunctive. (9) The past participle with or without the prefix i-, as shown in 13.2, 6, 8; 15.1; 15.2 and 4; 25.2; 40.2; and 44.5-6. (10) The present plural ending of to be, as shown in: 10.7, 12.1, 12.4, 17.1, 31.5, 34.1. All occurrences for each manuscript are listed. (11) The form of the pronoun she, as shown in 37.2—3. (12) The form of the pronoun they—them-theirs, as shown in 12.1 and 45.5-7. (13) The variation of the auxiliary schall/sall, as shown in 45.7.

Bl (2) longe, long, hond, but can, mankynde.

(7) -yth, -yp. | (3) gilt; luper, murie, put. ,

(4) suche. (5) syppe (40.1), sypyn (51.2), sythen (51.2). (9) With 1- (40.2, 44.5-6).

(10) aren (10.7), arn (34.1); ben (17.1). ,

(12) pey—hem-herys (45).

(11) she.

(13) shulle.

(1) mest.

, B3

, 215

216 APPENDIX B

(6) any. | Ll

(2) on regularly, but man (13.1), rank.

(3) pryde, pit (16), pyte (55), lither, myry; murth, furst. | (4) suche. , ,

(5) sithen (20), sythen (40), sithyn (51).

(7) -ys, -es; -et (41.1, 54.1); -eth (42.1, 55). (8) wende (30.1).

(9) With i- except sett (25.2). ,

(10) be(n) regularly. (11) he.

(12) pei/he-—hem (12); pay—heren (45).

(13) shall.

(1) mest. (2) on. (3) pruyde, pruyd, murthe, frust; pyt, gylt. (5) sithen. (6) any. (7) -et, -eth, -et3; springes (15.3), wendys (15.4). (9) With i-, including isett (25.2). (10) arn (10.7); be(n) (12.1, 12.4, 17.1). (12) thei/hi-hem (12).

(1) mest. , (4) soche. | L2

(2) Normally on, but can. (3) myrth, pyt, lyther, pryde, pruyde; furst, gult, mury.

(5) sithen (51.2-3), sethyn (20.1), stihen (sic, 40.1).

(6) ony. (7) -ith, yth, -eth, -et, -et3; springes (15.3), wendes (15.4). (8) wende. (9) With i-, except taken (40.2). (10) arn (10.7); ben (12.4, 17.1), be (31.5, 34.1), beo (12.1). (11) he. (12) pei/hey, hy—hem (12); thay/pei—heren (45). (13) schall.

(1) mest. | R

(2) Normally on, but wan. (3) murthe, gult, put, luper; pruyde, pryde; mery. (4) suche. (5) sithen (20.1), sethen (24.2-3), sithyn (40.1), sypyn (51). (6) any. (7) -yth, -yt, -eth; springus, falles, wendes (15), drawes (16.4) kepes (17.4),

teches (24.3). , ,

SELECTED DIALECT FEATURES 217 (8) wendenn, fyndenn, se. (9) With i-, except: sette (25.2); mixed in Verse 13.

| Gol ,

(10) aren (10.7, 34.1); ben (12.1, 12.4, 17.1, 31.5). , (11) hoe, he.

(12) pay/pei—hem (12); pey—heren (45).

(13) shullen.

(1) most. ,

(2) lond, honde; wanne, can. (3) -y-. (4) swylk. (5) syn(e) (24.3, 40.1); sythen (51.3). (6) any.

(7) -yth, -eth; sounes (9.4), springes (25.3), makes (37.2) turnes (37.3), bygynnes (40.1), leues (54.1). (8) wendenn, fyndenn, sen. (9) No 1-, in 25.2, 40.2, 44.5-6. (10) are (10.7, 12.1!), ere (34.1); ben (12.4, 17.1). (11) sche (2), scho (3-4). (12) pei-hem (12 and 45).

(13) schul. , , , Go2 (1) most. (2) man, hange; longe, lond, hond. (3) pride, gilt, lythyr, myth (sic); merthe (9.2), mery. (4) swych. (5) sethyn (20.1, 24.2-3).

(6) ony. , (9) Noi-. — (7) -yth, -ith. (8) wende, fynde, fynde; abydyth and lokyth for the imperative in line 2.

(11) (12) pei sche. (45). | , (10) arn (10.7); ben (17.1, 31.5). (13) schul.

Jo

|. (3) (2)myrthe, can,gylt.hange, lande; honde. , (5) sithen, sythen (24.2-3), senn (40.1). (6) any.

(7) -es, -1S, -ys. , (9) itaken (40.2); born (15.1); sett (25.2).

(12) pai—pam (12). | (10) ar (12.4); ben (10.7), be (12.1), bene (17.1). (11) ho (2), he (3-4).

LC , (4) suche. ,

218 APPENDIX B.

(1) most. | : |

(2) man, wan, kan; hong, lond, hond, monkynde. ,

(3) pryde, gylt, pyt (55.11); pute (16.2), furst, morpe, murthe; mery.

(6) any.

(5) sithen (51.3), sythen (20.1, 24.2-3, 40.1), syppen (51.2).

(7) -yt, -et, -yth, -eth; wones (11.1). (8) wendep, fynde, sen; abydep in line 2 (imperative). (9) Withi-, including y-sete (25.1); mixed in Verse 13 (makede, raked, I-hatede).

(10) arn (34.1); otherwise bene (10.7, 12.1, 12.4, 17.1) and bup (31.5). (11) he.

(13) schal. , wil | oe

(12) pay—ham (12); pay—heren (45). |

(1) most.

(2) Normally on, but man, rank.

(3) Consistently u except gylt, lyther.

(4) such(e). (5) sethen (20.1), sepene (24.3), sythyn (40.1), sythen (51.2-3). (6) eni. (7) -es, -e3, -ys, -is; but also -yt, -it, -ip, -yp, -ep.

(8) wendyn. oO , (wryten, y-smithen). oe

(9) With 1- in 15.1, 40.2; without in 13.2,6,8; 15.2,4; 25.2; mixed in 44.5-—6

(11) heo (2). —

(13) sall. | ,

~ (10) arn (34.1); otherwise ben (12.1, 12.4, 17.1, 31.5), bet (10.7). . | (12) thay/pey—him (12); pay—paris (45).

(1) mest. :

E

(2) an, but long. (3) pryde, myrth, first, pit, pytte.

(4) syche (30.4), suche (34.44). ,

(5) senn (20.1), sen (24.2-3); synthen (40.1). ,

(7) -es,fynde, and -yth, (8) -ys, wend, see.-eth. . ,, (6) any.

(11) sche. , , (9) With i- in 44.5-6; without in 25.2, 40.2; mixed in 13 (I-maked, I-raked, hated).

(10) are (10.7), arn (34.1); ben (12.1, 12.4, 17.1, 31.5). , ,

(12) thay/they/thei-them (12); thay—herne (45). | (13) schul.

SELECTED DIALECT FEATURES 219 Sp

(2) Regularly an (but hyng for hang). (3) pride (8.3), myrth, pyt; lethyr, mery. :

(4) swylk (30.4), seche (34.3-4). (5) syne. (7) -es, -ys, consistently. (8) wyndes, fynde. (9) Without 1-. (10) are (12.4, 17.1!); be (12.1, 31.5).

(11) scho. ,

(1) mest. ,

(12) pei—peym (12); pai—thaires (45).

(13) shall.

Vv

(2) wan, lang, can; lond, hond. (3) pryd, myrth, gylt; ledyr, mery.

(4) swylk. |

(S) syn (24.3, 40.1); sethen (51.3). (6) any. (7) -yth, -eth, and -ys, -is, -es.

(8) wendyn, fynd, se.

(9) Without i-. |

(10) er (10.7, 34.1), ar (12.1!); be (12.4), ben (17.1). (11) sche. (12) they—them (12); they/he (line 4)-them (45). (13) sul.

~ BLANK PAGE |

INDEX OF SUBJECTS AND AUTHORS Abdy, Robert, 24 Bateson, Mary, 25 Accidia. See Sloth Beatitudes, 10

Acclom, Thomas, 20 | Bede, Venerable, 150, 170

Acrostic, 57, 105, 152 Beichner, P. E., 63

Adam of Aldersbach, 62 Belle, Michael, 16 Aegidius Aurifaber, 38 Benedictines, 10, 19, 93

Agathon, 140 Benrath, G. A., 65 Alanus of Lille, 67, 69, 93 , Benton, G. M., 45 : Albumasar, 87 Bernard, St., 35, 44, 123, 128, 147, 150 Alexander of Hales, 65 Biblical epic, 63

. Alexander of Stavensby, 97 Biblical quotations, 81-82, 86, 94, 97, 101 Alexander of Villedieu, 61-63 Bonaventure, St., 16

Allegory, 57 Boniface VIII, 66

Allen, Judson B., 75 Boort, Henricus, 35 Almsgiving, 11, 53, 57, 181, 190, 192 Borland, C. R., 20 Ancrene Riwle (or Wisse), 46, 65, 138, Boyle, Leonard E., 28, 30, 59, 64

140, 145, 165 Bozon, Nicholas de, 142 Anselm, St., 50, 137, 145 Brewer, Derek S., 43 | Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, 65 Bradshaw, Henry, 17, 23

Apollo, 175 Brewer, J. S., 10

Aquinas, St. Thomas, 27, 62 Brinton, Thomas, 35, 150, 170, 177, 186

Armor, 46 Bromyard, John, ix, 29-32, 56, 59, 66, 69, Arnulf of Louvain, 62 89, 92, 95, 97-98, 114, 118, 137, 143, Arnulf of Orleans, 63 145, 148, 153, 171, 173, 177, 185

Arsenius, 140 Brown, Carleton, ix—x, 2-4, 70, 74, 91, Art of preaching, 10, 47, 49, 51, 57, 67, 123, 129-132, 140, 165, 175

68, 96 Brunanburh, battle of, 66

Articles of Faith. See Creed Buhler, Curt F., 141

Assheridge, Bucks., 23 Burton, William, of Lindley, 18

Augustine, St., 127, 131 Bury St. Edmunds, 94

Aulus Gellius, 58 Caedmon, 63 : Augustinians, 92-93

Avarice, 10, 12, 127, 159, 169, 173, 178— Caesarius of Heisterbach, 186

180 Cambridge: Pembroke College, 24;

Ayenbite of Inwit, 113 Queen’s College, 24; University Library, 23

Bacon, Roger, 10, 36, 68, 87 Cambyses. See Exempla: Cambyses flays

Baldwin, John W., 36, 62 unjust judge Bale, John, 25, 38-39 Candle, 52, 150

| 221

Bannister, H. M., 21 Canterbury, St. Augustine’s, 25 Bannockburn, battle of, 66 Capgrave, 20 Basevorn, Robert de, 47-49 Cardyff, Thomas, 14

222 INDEX OF SUBJECTS AND AUTHORS

Carmina burana, 177 Cursus, 75, 78 —

Carol, 102-103 Cutler, John C., x, 3 Castell de Wyroull, 92

Castle of Love, The, 114 Dance, 85

Cat, 74 , Darlington, county Durham, 25 Catechetical matters, 64, 69 Dean, Ruth J., 21

: Cato, 138 Death, 12, 53, 58, 75, 104, 114, 122, 124, Charity. See Love 127, 129, 148, 150-153

Charland, Th.-M., 47, 49, 57 Decalogue, 10, 14, 64, 69-70, 104, 113, Charter of Christ, 12, 164-165; as title, 119, 123, 155-157

114 Degeneracy of the times, 124. See also

173, 177 Devil, 12

Chartham, William, 42, 50, 56, 93, 170, Complaint poem ,

Chastity, 10, 197, 207 Dialects, 111, 215-219 Chastizing children, 42, 50, 104,124,146 Dialogue poems, 130

Chaucer, 30, 47, 87, 94, 159 Didactic poems, 124, 132

Cheney, C. R., 65 Dieta salutis, 15, 26, 42, 49 Chester Plays, 113 Dives and Pauper, 162

, Chester, Ricardus, 15 Distinctio, 75-76

Christ: appeals from the cross, 104,114, Divisio, 12, 48, 68, 75, 78, 80, 82-83, 86, _ 122,166—167; as knight, judge, teacher, 88, 99, 105, 115, 183, 200-201, 207 physician, 82-86; life of, 11; passion Dobson, R. B., 25

167 Dode, 25 Chronicles, 42, 65-66 , Dokett, Andreas, 24 , of, 11, 124, 126, 128, 130, 161, 163-165, | Docking, Thomas, 65

Chrysostom, St. John, 47, 143 Dominicans, 41, 45, 56, 91, 93-94, 98, 128

Cicero, M. Tullius, 75 Donatus, 69

Circumstances of sin, 69 Dorchestre, Thomas, 24 Classical quotations, 68 Doyle, A. I., 6, 24-25

Clement IV, 66 Droitwich, 92

Colchester, 16, 41 Durham, cathedral, 25

Collationes (by Cassian), 42 Dygoun, John, 42, 77, 92-93, 128

Complaint poem, 104, 121, 154, 160, 179

Concordantia vocalis, 47 Ebel, A., 170

Confession, 44, 64, 69-70, 88, 104, 186- | Ede (Edaeus), John, 38-39

187, 203, 206 Edgar, King, 66

Considerare, 127 Edmund, St., 129 Continence, 48 Edward I, 26, 28, 34, 66

Contrition, 64 Edward II, 27—28 Convertimini, 15, 19, 58, 74, 90, 93, 118, Edward III, 27 © 145, 153, 162 Elvenlond, 45 Cor (acrostic), 153 Ely, 131

Corpus Christi, Feast of, 183 Emden, A. B., 17, 19, 23-25, 39, 44, 64, Coventry, 21, 40-41 91

Coxe, H. O., 14-16 Enfield, 24

Craster, H. H. E., 13 Envy, 10-12, 27, 120, 154 Creed, 10-11, 64, 88 Erb, Peter C., 91, 118, 152, 167

Crowns, 58 _ Erbe, T., 44 | Cursor mundi, 63 Eucharist, 76. See also Host; Mass

INDEX OF SUBJECTS AND AUTHORS 223

Evrard the German, 61 Floyer, J. K., 19 ,

_ Excoriacio, 57 | Fool, wise, 56. See also Exempla: wise Executors, 152. See also Exempla: Cleric court-fool

in Paris Fordun, John de, 89 .

Exempla, 14-15, 17-18, 20-21, 28, 38,43, Forshaw, Helen P.,129 45-46, 51, 55-56, 69, 71-73, 91-93, 97, | Forte, Stephen L., 41, 45, 56

103, 108, 118, 152; Acontius and _ Fortitude, 176 Cydippe, 118, 163; adulterous knight Fortune, 103-104, 114-115, 120, 124, at Kenilworth, 26, 28, 40, 55; anchoress 173-177 receives message about negligent priest, Foster, Frances, A., ix, 2-4, 6, 21, 26—27,

28, 55, 184-185; bailiff seen in hell, 134, 203, 206 41, 55; Cambyses flays unjust judge, Foster Numbers, 3, 134 88, 97, 100; Christ the lover-knight, 3, Foston, 17-18 11, 45, 104, 110, 159, 162-163; clericin Fourth Lateran Council, 9 Paris designs his tomb, 151; desert Francis, St., 9, 13, 39-40, 92 father carries stone in mouth, 51, 140; Franciscans, 4, 10-11, 13, 22, 30, 40, 91,

desert father sees angels rejoice, 51, 93-94, 102, 129 140; devil Gerard, 97; Dionysius the Frank, Grace, 97 tyrant, 12; envious neighbors in hell, Freidank, 96

43-44; false judge Gayus, 46, 85-86, Friar miscellanies, 90 , 172; ferrymen, 55, 168; good liquorin Friars, 66, 69, 115 foul vessel, 42; hermit is given three Furnivall, F. J., 41, 165, 189, 195 choices of sin, 72; Hero and Leander, Fytzthomas, William, 25 194; inscriptions on sarcophagus, 2834, 47, 73, 192-193; Julius Caesar, 46; Gaveston, Peter, 27 knight vows to build monastery, 55; Geoffrey of Vinsauf, 61

lecherous couple strangled, 84; minstrel George I, 16 , Ulfrid, 55, 72, 103, 173; mutilated Gerson, Jean, 74, 204—205 Christ-Child, 41, 44-45, 55; Parisian Gesta Alexandri, 147

lawyer, 88, 171; power of the crucifix, | Gesta Romanorum, 29-32, 34, 42, 56, 59,

40; pregnant girl, 12, 56, 205-206; 118, 140-141, 170, 189-190 punishment of prince, 28, 38, 56; Ghellinck, J. de, 61-62 Roman prophecy, 118, 169-170; seem- Gibbons, A., 23 ingly devout virgin murmured against Gifts of the Holy Spirit, 10, 64 mother, 42, 187-188; slanderer with | Giraldus Cambrensis, 143 tongue on fire, 38, 43-44; three cocks, Gloss, 47

140; toad in tomb of glutton, 12; Glutton, 12, 59, 206 Trojan War, 11; two merchant com- Gluttony, 10, 12, 72 panions, 40, 45; Vestal virgin, 116, Gneuss, Helmut, 70

195; wise court-fool, 44, 55 © Grafton, Richard, 25, 39

Faith, 12 Gratian, 62 Fasciculus, as book-title, 35-36 Gray, Douglas, ix, 4, 75, 114, 166 Fasting, 11 Greene, Nicholas, 14 , Felton, John, 13, 44, 74 Gregory the Great, St., 55, 147-148, 177 Gransden, Antonia, 65

Flattery, 58 Gren, Richard, 24

Flemmyng, Robert, 16 Grimestone, John of, x, 1, 69, 89-91, 96,

Flesh, 12 98, 116, 118, 123, 125, 130-131, 142-—

Flores historiarum, 66 143, 147, 153, 158, 165-167, 191, 193

224 INDEX OF SUBJECTS AND AUTHORS

Grisdale, D. M., 68, 98 , Incarnation, 11

Grosseteste, Robert, 16, 18 | Inscriptions, 58, 73-75, 104-105, 152, 159,

Griindel, J., 69 169-170, 173, 175, 177, 189, 192. See Gunner, W. H., 23 | also Exempla: cleric in Paris; inscrip-

Guy of Southwick, 186 tions onsarcophagus; Roman prophecy

Gybbe, William, 20 Institutiones (by Cassian), 42

Haines, Roy M., 92 Jacob, E. F., 23

Handlyng Synne, 41, 114 Jacques de Vitry, 63, 142

Harrsen, M., 22 , Jambe leue, 205 .

Hart, 203-204 James, M. R., 16-17, 20, 24—25, 43, 73,

Harwood, William, 13 , 92-94, 135

Hauréau, B., 73, 205 Januensis (i.e., Jacobus de Voragine), 14,

Heete, Robert, 23 19, 93

Hélinand, 88 , Jeffrey, David L., 4, 102-103, 134

Henry III, 26 Jennings, Margaret M., 10, 96 Herbert, J. A., ix, 18, 41, 55, 58, 91,116, Jerome, St., 127, 197-198

195 Johannes Major, 38

Herebert, William, 70, 90 John, St., the Evangelist, 200

Herodotus, 88 John, of Sanday, Beds., 24 Hervieux, L., 153 | John of Freiburg, 28

Herzog, Reinhart, 63 John of Garland, 61 Hessler, L. B., 65 John of Wales, 10, 28, 95-96

Heuser, W., 150 Johnson, Maurice, 20 Higden, Ranulph, 10, 89, 96, 100 | Jokes, 56, 168

Hinnebusch, W. A., 94 Joys of heaven, 64

Hoccleve, 168 Judge, 82, 171 Holcot, Robert, ix, 15-16, 21, 29, 33, Justice, 12, 58

58-59, 89, 114, 118, 137, 145, 148, 167, Juvenal, 58, 189 , ,

189, 196 Juvencus, 63

Holkham Bible, 177

Holler, William, 17, 23 Kasmann, Hans, 113

Holy Orders, 64 | , Kartschoke, Dieter, 63

Hope, 12 156 Horace, 65, 68-69 Klopsch, Paul, 67

Holy Spirit, 11 Ker, Neil R., 6, 18, 20, 23, 25, 40, 92, 129,

Horstman, Carl, 165 Knowles, David, 23

Host, qualities of, 70, 104, 183 Konrad von Mure, 96

Hugh of Hartlepool, 167 , Krak des Chevaliers, 142

Hugh of St. Victor, 61 , Kronbichler, Walter, 96 Hugo of Strasburg, 186 Hugo of Trimberg, 61

Humbertus de Burgo, 41, 44 La3amon, 170 Humility, 10, 48, 75, 84, 127, 144-145, Lamb of God, 81-82

147-148 Lanercost Chronicle, 66, 73 Hunt, R. W., 14 Langosch, K., 61 Hymns, 70, 88, 90, 103 Langton, Stephen, 64, 74, 97 Hypocrisy, 143 Lawerne, John, 19, 62 Lawisby, John, 25

, INDEX OF SUBJECTS AND AUTHORS 225 Lechery, 10, 12, 56, 69, 84, 121, 194-195, Melton, William, 92

207 Memory verses, 67, 69-70, 86, 88, 104,

Lecoy de la Marche, Albert, 86, 88 125 Lehmann, Paul, 35, 170 Message verses, 73, 88, 94, 97, 104, 121,

Lepar, Richard, 17-18 162, 185, 187 Lewis, C. S., 205 Metrical homilies, 6

Lhotsky, A., 66 Middle English Dictionary, 3, 113

Liber Eligii de mirabilibus mundi, 19 Mifsud, G., 91

Liber exemplorum, 45, 72 Milton, 194 Life of St. Kentigern, 71 | Miracles, 55

Lisbon, 21, 41 Miracles of Our Lady, 20, 55 55, 65, 72, 92, 102 Moore, John, 16

Little, Andrew G., ix, 2, 4, 26-28, 40,45, Mirk, John, 43-44, 46, 99. , Lives of the Fathers. See Vitae Patrum Moorlay, Laurence, 25

Locus amoenus, 46 Morawski, Joseph, 96 London, 21, 40-41; Elsing Spital in, 24 Motrin, L., 74

Long, Mary McD., 99 Multiple translation, 81, 89-90, 98, 119, Long-sleepers, 115, 184-186 122-123, 153, 156, 165-166

Love, 10-12, 58, 75, 104, 110, 120, 124, Murphy, James J., 49 , 126, 153, 155-157, 159, 161, 163, 193 Musicae Guidonis regulae rhythmicae, 61

Lullaby, 130 Mynster, John, 25

Lumen animae, 22 Mysticism, 131 Luther, Martin, 96

Lychilfeld, 40 Nares, R., 18 Lydgate, 90, 123, 165 Neuhous, William, 21 Lynn, 81 Nicholas de Biard, 204

| Nicols, N. H., 24 |

Lyttleton, Thomas, 24 Nicholaus de Furno, 19

Macer floridus, 61 , Norwich, 17, 41, 45 , , Mackinnon, H., 64 Nota historiam, 46 McKisack, May, 27 Macray, W. D., 15 , Obedience, 48 Madan, F., 13 Occupation, 10, 12 Madden, F., 18 Odo of Cheriton, 153, 188 Madre, Aloys, 22 Odo of Meung, 61 Malcolm, James Peller, 24 Olyphant, Thomas, 20 | Malemort, 171 Oppression of poor, 50 Marbod of Rennes, 61 Orchard, 157 Marchall, Thomas, of Barton, 17 Ovid, 63, 68, 110, 162-164

Margaret, St., 78 Owl and the Nightingale, The, 97, 138

Margery Kempe, 65 | Owst, G. R., ix, 2, 67-68, 73, 86, 92, 114,

Martz, Louis, 126 | 153, 156, 187

Mass, 42, 183-184 Oxford, All Souls College, 23; Balliol

Matrimony, 64 College, 24

Matthew of Vendome, 61 . , Matthew, F. D., 10 Pains of hell, 64, 70

Maximian, 63 Parkes, Malcolm B., 37, 49 Meditative lyric, 122-132 Pater Noster, 10, 14, 20, 64 Meier, Ludger, 22 , Patience, 10, 48

226 INDEX OF SUBJECTS AND AUTHORS

Pauli, Johannes, 88 Prudence, 12, 113 , Pelster, F., 30 , Ptolemy, 87

Penance, 10-12, 159 Purity, 48 ,

Penitential lyric, 130 | : 49, 94 ~ *Quoniam ut ait sapiens,”’ 31-32, 94, 205 , Person, H. A., 165 Peter, St., 205 Raine, James, 19, 24-25. Peraldus, William, 10, 15, 20, 24, 26, 36, Quatrefoil, 12, 159-160, 193

Peter the Chanter, 35-36, 62-63 © Raymund of Pennaforte, St., 62

Peter Lombard, 62 - Regimen sanitatis Salerni, 61

Peter Lugdunensis, 182 Reichl, Karl, 126, 129, 156, 165, 185

Peter Riga, 63 Rhyme, 78 Petersen, T. C., 22 | Ricardus de Pissis, 21,37

, Pfander, Homer G., 2, 49, 68, 82, 103 Richard of Thetford, 57 Philip the Chancellor, 119, 122, 167 Rigg, A. G., 140, 143

Phillip, Nicholas, 92 Rings, 29-34, 170, 192

, Phoenix, 35 Ripon, Robert, 45, 98

Pickering, F. P., 177 , Robbins, R. H., ix—x, 3-6, 67, 71, 89-91, **Picture,” 22, 57-59, 74-75, 103, 176, 175, 198-199

189, 193 , Roberts, Ph. B., 64, 74, 86, 97

Pierre d’Ailly, 80 Rochester Priory, 95

Piers Plowman, 146 Rogerius de Burbache, 40 | |

Pliny, 87 Rolle, Richard, 131, 187

Poeniteas cito, 186 Ross, Woodburn O., 49, 98, 142, 187

Polheim, Karl, 75 Rouse, Richard H., 49 , ‘Political poems, 132, 179 | | Poorter, A. de, 57 Sacraments, 14, 17, 64

Poverty, 10, 48, 84, 205 Sacrilege, 56 ,

Powell, Susan, 44 St. Edmund’s Abbey, 49 , Prayer, 11, 58, 70-71, 85-86, 88, 99, 101, Saints’ legends, 55

, 103-105, 154, 189, 204 Salopia. See Shrewsbury

_ Preachers’ tags, 5, 67 Same, Robert, 25 , Pride, 10, 12, 50, 103, 124, 136-139, 141, Sampson, F. (or J.), 15

143 } Schavaldours, 27

“Primo videndum est,” 69, 148 Schneyer, J. B., 49, 86 !

Proba, 63 Searle, W. G., 24 Prologue, 34 Seed, 57, 190 Proof texts, 47, 96, 103-104, 139, 191 Selke (Selk, Silk), Robert, 15, 19-20, Proverbs, 51, 72-74, 87, 94-98, 101, 36-37, 39, 49 |

103-104, 115, 120-121, 139-142, 146, Seneca, 89, 116, 175, 195 153, 157, 164, 174, 180, 190-191, 203— Serlo of Wilton, 88 | 205; “Cat lufat visch,’” 74; ““Goode Sermon: antetheme, 48, 96; collections,

, bydder, goode werner,” 204-205; 43-45, 131, 198; conclusion, 46, 48; , ““He may be py bote,”’ 203; ‘““Who-so development, 48; division, see divisio;

woll no3t,” 190-191, 205 language, 57, 86-87; macaronic, 70, Proverbs of Alfred, 95, 139 , 87; outlines, 13, 42, 47, 49-50, 101, Proverbs of Hendyng, 95, 104, 137-139, 105; popular, 50—51, 80; processus, 77,

146, 191 79; reportatio, 86, 118; theme, 48,

Proverbs of Wisdom, 141 76-77, 80, 88, 105, 202-203

INDEX OF SUBJECTS AND AUTHORS 227

Servasanto de Faenza, 14 Ten Commandments. See Decalogue

Seven deadly sins, 9-10, 12, 64, 165, 183 Terribulus, 51, 197 | Sharpe, R. R., 23 Theobald of Monte Cassino, 61 Sheeran, F. J., 162 Thomas de Whitchurch, 40 Sheppey, John, 6, 91, 93, 114, 118, 146, Thomson, S. H., 16

162, 195 Thorndike, L., 61

Shield, 26, 44, 53 Three Enemies, 12, 46, 85. See also Devil;

Shrewsbury, 37, 40-41 Flesh; World Sibyl, 170 Three Sorrowful Things, 85, 90, 123 Signs of death, 44, 121, 150, 198-199 Thrupp, Sylvia L., 24 Silverstein, Theodore, 4, 109, 134, 185 Tiger cubs, hunted with mirrors, 45

Similes, 51-54, 65, 103 Tithing, 50

Sin, 74,135 _ Titulus verse, 71, 73, 75 Sintram, Jonannes, 22, 108, 175 Todd, H. J., 18

Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, 159 Towneley Plays, 168, 186

Sisam, Celia, and Kenneth, 4 Tractatus de mirabilibus mundi ad mores Sloth, 6, 10, 12, 29, 56, 65, 183-184 applicatis, 19

Smalley, Beryl, 58-59, 75, 189 Trevisa, John, 89, 100 | Smithers, G. V., ix Trew-love. See Quatrefoil

Sobriety, 10 Trinity, Holy, 11, 168 Sonet, J., 145 Trivet, Nicholas, 195 Song, 84, 86-87, 94, 102-103 Tubach, Frederic C., x, 41, 71-72, 88, 97, Sow, 74 140, 152, 164, 169, 171, 173, 188-189, Speculum Christiani, 18, 113, 137 192, 195

Speculum sacerdotis, 42 Turner, Richard, 19

Spiser, John, 15, 37 | Tutivillus, 185

Steckman, Lillian L., 43-44, 199 Tymms, Samuel, 25 Stegmiiller, Francis, 62

-Stemmler, Theo, 31, 92, 118, 166, 187 Updating, linguistic, 109, 111-114, 133,

Stoddard, Yvonne, 2 179

Stone, 79

Stone, R. K., 65 Valerius Maximus, 88

Story, Edward, 24 104, 191 | Stories. See Exempla , Villa-Amil y Castro, J., 21 Stoneham, Robert, 23 Vices and virtues, 9, 14, 19, 22, 35, 64,

Strength, 12 Vincent of Beauvais, 63, 142 Subject index. See Tabula Virgil, 45, 63, 161

Summa Astesana, 28 Virgin Mary, 122, 124, 144

- Summarizing verses, 71, 86, 88, 97, 125 Virtues, 10, 12, 46 , Swetstock, John, 92 Virtues of the Mass, 21 Syon Monastery, 25 Visio Pauli, 17 Vitae Patrum, 42, 51, 55, 140 Tabula, 13, 36—37, 49-50

Tabula exemplorum, 140 Walafrid Strabo, 61 Taylor, Archer, 97, 139-140 Waldeby, John, 92

Taylor, John, 100 Waleys, Thomas, 57 Teetaert, A., 62 Wallace, William, 66

Temperance, 12 Walther, Hans, x, 66-67, 69-70, 88-89, Temptation, 46 135, 137, 139-140, 142-143, 145, 148,

228 INDEX OF SUBJECTS AND AUTHORS

, 189 , stone , Walther—continued Wilmart, André, 145

, 150, 156, 164, 171, 173, 177, 180-183, Wilson, Edward, x, 91. See also Grime-

Ward, H. L. D., 91 Wimbledon, 90

Warde, William, 16 Winchester, 13, 23 Wareyn, Thomas, 17 , Windsor, 14

Warinus South, 40, 55 Woolf, Rosemary, 3, 89, 100, 114, 122—

Warkeworth, John, 17 132, 134, 145, 162, 165-167, 198

Webhrli, Max, 63 Woolley, R. M., 19

Weiss, Roberto, 16 | Worcester, 40-41, 184 Weldon, George, 16> Works of mercy, 10, 54 Wetheringsette, 25 World, 12, 58, 114, 173, 178 Wethringsette, Richard of, 64-65, 69, 93, Worthington, Thomas, 24

142, 183, 186 Wrath, 10, 12, 65

, Whiting, Bartlett Jere, x, 74, 95-96, 138— Wyclif, John, 10, 65 142, 146, 153, 157, 191, 204

Wildhaber, R., 185 York, 41

William de Montibus, 64, 93, 142, 186 ,

William of Auvergne, 57 Zumthor, Paul, 67

INDEX OF FIRST LINES Included are the first lines, in shortened form, of the English and Latin verses quoted, with the exception of the sermon divisions and sermon themes found on pp. 76-85. Alphabetization follows modern spelling.

ENGLISH

A gulden begh in a soghes wrot, 74 , A, 3e men (No. 30), 73, 104, 114-115, 119, 122, 125, 130, 134, 165 Alas, alas, pat I was boren (Nos. 35 and 47), 72, 86, 101, 104-105, 108-109, 114, 116, 125, 134, 172, 187 All monkyn tornth in well (No. 39), 102, 109, 114, 133, 177-178

As moche as was hys worschep (No. 60), 105, 133, 202 , Beholde, man, what I dree (No. 31), 73, 102, 104, 114, 118-119, 122, 125, 130,

-:134, 166-167

133-134, 160-163 Blysse and Ioye and heryng, 71 |

Behold myne woundes (Nos. 26-27), 73, 101-102, 104, 108, 110, 114, 116, 130,

By dedes of dyane I swere to the (No. 28), 104, 118, 122, 134, 163-164 Chaste3 3oure chyldren (No. 12), 101-102, 114, 116, 120, 125, 146 Cryst pat deide on pe rode (No. 61), 105, 133, 202-203 Erthe upon erthe, 147 Egge oure hertes, lord of myth, 85 Euereches kokewoldes dore stondep anyne, 84 Fyre, and colde, 70 Fyre, watur, wynd and lond (No. 48), 102, 104-105, 116, 188-189 God wyth hys angelis y haue y-lorne, 74 Haue mynde on pyn ende (No. 19), 102, 104, 114-115, 119, 123, 125, 127, 134, 153

He pat hem reuen (No. 1), 104, 109, 112-113, 120, 134 Here and see and say noght (No. 6), 101-102, 104, 108, 115, 140

Here is comen pat no mon wot (No. 32), 101, 104, 108-109, 167-168

Hool and hyyng (No. 46), 102, 104-105, 112-113, 186 , I dye for sorowe, 72 I honge on cros for loue of the (No. 29), 73, 104, 114-115, 119, 122, 125, 134, 164

I spende, I gife, 192 If pu be rych and wyse also (No. 8), 98, 104, 108, 112, 119, 123, 133, 142 229

230 INDEX OF FIRST LINES In herte clene and buxum (No. 57), 105, 133, 200 Kyng I syt and loke aboute (No. 38), 104, 114, 116, 133-134, 175-176

~ Lollai, lollai, litil child, 174-175 |

Longe-slepers and ouer-lepers (No. 45), 73, 101-102, 104, 108-109, 113, 115, 134, 184-185 Loue god ouer alle pyng (No. 24) 101, 104, 116, 119, 134, 158 © Loue god pat loued the (No. 21), 101-102, 109, 127, 134, 154 Mon iboren of wommon (No. 15), 102-103, 111, 114-115, 127, 134, 148-149 Meni man syngat, 95 Mary moder of grace (No. 10), 104, 122, 124, 133-134, 143-144 ~ Merowre ys deth (No. 18), 101, 105, 108, 114, 133, 152

Ne monnes steven (No. 9), 109, 116, 119-120, 134, 142-143 |

No more ne wil i wiked be, 130

Nou goth sonne, 129

Now ich haue pat I wyle (No. 23), 101, 104, 108-109, 115, 134, 157

Now ys tyme to sle (No. 58), 105, 133, 200 ,

Now that I have cape and hood, 97—98 ,

Oure gladness of herte, 84 , ,

Oure wysdam pis world hap byraft (No. 33), 104, 118, 122, 169 |

Pruyde pat is ouergart (No. 7), 101-104, 112, 141 , Riche and pouer, yung and olde, 191 Ronde in schapyng (No. 44), 102, 104, 109, 112-113, 182-183

Se and here and holde pe stylle (No. 5), 51, 73, 101-103, 115, 139 Sithyn law for wyll (No. 40), 101-102, 104, 112-113, 121, 125, 134, 178-179 Sithen pis world was ful of onde (No. 20), 101-102, 104, 112-113, 120, 125, 154 Summer is icumen in, 1 Tak no god but oon in heuen (No. 22), 104, 113, 116, 119, 123, 133, 155 That y 3af, pat ys myn (No. 43), 102, 104, 109, 114, 119, 123, 181-182 Pat y spende, pat y had (No. 50), 102, 104, 114, 116, 119, 123, 133-134, 191-192

173 |

, Pat ys mery (No. 53), 89, 104, 116-117, 195 That lawe hath noo ry3te (No. 52), 101-102, 105, 108, 110, 134, 194 Pat mantel pe kyng to Vifride lente (No. 36), 72, 103-104, 114, 125, 134, 172-— Pe fende oure foe (No. 2), 104, 114, 118, 120, 122, 134, 136. Pe flesches lust (No. 14), 102-103, 114, 122, 127, 133, 148 Thy kyng is wode and fowle doth fare, 71 The lade dame Fortune (No. 37), 97, 101-103, 109, 114-115, 120, 134, 173-175 Pe munde of Cristes passion, 128, 131 The ryche ne rychesse god ne hatyth (No. 42), 104, 122, 125, 180-181

The synne of pryde (No. 3), 101-102, 104, 137 , Pe wey of slythe (No. 59), 105, 112, 133, 201 Panne schal stynte that now is kud (No. 56), 105, 133, 199

Pis world fyle ys (No. 41), 104, 114, 122, 179-180 |

Pre weyis per ben, 85 , Pow loue god ouer all ping (No. 51), 101, 104, 116, 119, 193

INDEX OF FIRST LINES 231

Pu wysdom pat crepedest, 86 , Ppourgh ferly dep (No. 34), 104, 111, 113-114, 122, 125, 134, 170-171 Trewe loue among men (No. 25), 101, 104, 109-111, 120, 125, 130, 134, 159-160

Undyrstande what thow were and art, 73

Opon a somer soneday, 175 ,

Was per neuer caren so lothe (No. 16), 101-102, 114, 120, 127, 133-134, 149 We ben executors (No. 17), 101, 104, 111, 116, 127, 134, 150-151

Wat ys he pat comep so bryth, 84-85 When pe hede quakyth (No. 55), 103, 111, 114, 116, 121, 133-134, 197-199 When pou py lyfe vp-holdyste (No. 49), 101-102, 104, 114, 125, 134, 190 Whil pat 1 was sobre, 72 Quosabet longe ligge in sinne, 95 Who-so leuyth in flescly wyll (No. 54), 101-102, 114, 116, 121, 125, 133, 196 Who-so spekyth oft (No. 4), 101-102, 104, 109, 113, 134, 138 Wo-so woneth hym nouth (No. 11), 102, 113, 120, 122, 133-134, 145 Wille Gris, Wille Gris, 73 Worldes blisce, haue god day, 130 Wreche mon, why art pou prowde (No. 13), 101-102, 114-115, 120, 133-134, 147

LATIN

Major meditative commonplaces are included.

Audi, vide, tace, 140 | | Catus amat piscem, 74 , Candet nudatum pectus, 90, 94 Candida, triticea, 183

Cerne cicatrices, 162 Defecit gaudium cordis nostri, 84, 90

— Ecce sto ad ostium, 125 , Ecclesie tres sunt, 185 Emineas, cum femineas, 66 Excita, Domine, corda nostra, 85, 99 Felices nupte, 116, 195 Gloria, laus et honor, 71 Glorior elatus, 176-177 Heu, heu, prodolor, 86, 172 Homo natus de muliere, 115 Homo, vide quid pro te patior, 119, 122, 167 Hostis non ledit, 114, 122, 137 Ignis et algor, 70 In cruce sum pro te, 119, 122, 162, 164-165

232 INDEX OF FIRST LINES

In figura rotunditatem, 183

Integra, certa, frequens, 186

Integra sit culpe confessio, 186 , , Ira, furor, trabs est, 65 Jesus mel in ore, 123

Iuro tibi sane, 163-164 | Maria mater gracie, 144-145 Memorare novissima tua, 90, 98, 115, 119, 148, 153 Metra iuvant animos, 67

Morte cadunt subita, 171 Mundus non mundat, 180 Non aliter poterit melius caro viva domari, 148 Non vox sed votum, 143 O Sapiencia, 71, 86 O vos omnes, 90, 115, 122, 166

Que modo apparent, 200 | Qui non assuescit virtuti, 145

Qui tetigit, tetigit, 135 Quod expendi habui, 29-32, 192 Regi sponsa datur, 66 | Regno, regnabo, regnavi, sum sine regno, 175, 177 Rex furit, hec plorat, 71 Rex presens regno, 176-177

Seculum sapienciam sustulit, 169 ,

Sede sedens ista, 88 ,

Si tibi copia, 98, 141-142 : , | Sit simplex, humilis confessio, 186 Sobrius quando fui, 72 Sunt mea si qua dedi, 182 Sunt tria ve, 123; see also 85, 90 (Three Sorrowful Things) Terris, igne, mari, 189 Vifridus clamidem, 173 Unum crede deum, 119, 156

Vertitur in giro, 178 , ,

Vexilla regis prodeunt, 70, 90

Vilior est humana caro, 150 ,

INDEX OF MANUSCRIPTS CITED For manuscripts of Fasciculus morum, see pp. 13—22 and passim.

CAMBRIDGE University Library 82, Fasciculus Corpus Christi College 361, 135; 392, morum

161; 423, 75; 392, 45, 76 Eron, Eton College 2/, 170; 34, FasciGonville and Caius College 71, culus morum Fasciculus morum; 351, 73, 94-95; GHENT, University Library 317, 174 359, 79; 364, Fasciculus morum; 408, LEICESTER, Wyggeston Hospital /.D.50/

94, 98, 128, 132, 148 — XTTT/3/1, 40

- Jesus College 13, 92 LINCOLN, Cathedral Library 44, 93, 119,

257, 92; 258, 31 187 | Peterhouse 42, 137; 104, 139; 194,182; LONDON |

Pembroke College 32, 182; 100, 94-95; and Fasciculus morum; 234, 42, 146,

200, 10; 210, 31; 211, 137; 213, British Library Fasciculus morum; 255, 64 —Additional 6716, Fasciculus morum;

Queen’s College 13, 167 10392, 183; 15123, 36; 16164, 186; St. John’s College 62, 128, 132; 159, 22572, 74; 33956, 191; 44055, 22; Fasciculus morum; 255, 94; 257, 137, 46919, 90

177 —Arundel 248, 148, 165

Trinity College 42, 153; 181, 147; 323, —Cotton Titus A.XXVI, 147; Cotton 1, 90, 113, 156, 165, 184-185; 351J, Vitellius C. XIV, 153 153; 1149, 74, 167, 183; 1157, 180 —FEgerton 655, 113 ©

Trinity Hall 25, 165 —Harley 331, 76; 655, 76, 165, 171;

University Library Dd.X.15, Fasci- 665, 93; 868, 44; 913, 1, 90; 1316, culus morum; Ff.I.17, 69, 148; Fasciculus morum; 2247, 43-44, 46, Gg.I.1, 191; Gg.VI.16, 99; fi.JIL8, 99, 198-199; 2253, 90, 129, 139; 31, 91, 118, 152; Kk.IV.24, 35, 45, 2316, 72, 75, 91, 182; 4894, 45, 98; 75, 77, 79, 92, 128, 131-132, 148, 7322, 44, 58-59, 90-91, 114, 116—

159, 171; Oo. VII.32, 174 119, 130, 137, 153, 164, 166-167,

CANTERBURY, Cathedral Library D.14, 170, 175-177, 189-190, 196, 206;

Fasciculus morum 7333, 141 }

CARDIFF, Public Library 3.174, 47, 199- —Lansdowne 210, 89

203 —Royal 4.B.viii, 57, 64-65, 69, 183,

DUBLIN, Trinity College 277, 128 186; 7.C.i, 49, 145, 162; 7.D.i, 41,

DURHAM 45, 56; 7.E.iv, see Index of Subjects Cathedral Library A.IV.5, 62; B.I.18, and Authors: Bromyard; 8.E£.xvii, 30, 94, 205 a 191; 8 F.vi, 153; J11.B.iii, 49; University Library Cosin V.iv.2, Fasci- 15.C.xii, 195; 18.B.xxiii, 98; 18.B.

culus morum xxv, 43-44, 99, 199 EDINBURGH Gray’s Inn /5, 156

Advocates Library 18.7.2], 1, 91, 96, Lambeth Palace 78, 43, 71, 73, 92, 123, 142-143, 193. See also Index of 170-171, 173-174, 177-178, 184,

, 233

Subjects and Authors: Grimstone 187; 853, 147

234 INDEX OF MANUSCRIPTS CITED

LONDON—continued —poet.a.I (Vernon MS), 159

St. Paul’s Cathedral 8, 72, 78, 92 —Rawlinson C.534, 94; C.670, FasciSociety of Antiquaries /01, 148 _ culus morum; poet. 118, 20 MADRID, University, Library of the —Selden supra 64, 38-39 Faculty of Law 1167.3, Fasciculus Corpus Christi College 2/8, Fasci-

morum | culus morum | ,

MANCHESTER, Rylands Library latin 83, Lincoln College 52, Fasciculus morum 177; latin 201, 137, 165; latin 394, Magdalen College 13, 42, 92, 192, 204;

181 93, 42, 77, 128, 148

New York, Pierpont Morgan Library Merton College 248, 70, 77-78, 80, 91,

298, Fasciculus morum 118-119, 123, 130, 137, 146, 162, OXFORD 165, 170-171, 180, 196

Ashmole 360, 128, 131 New College 92, 91

Balliol College 27, see Index of Subjects St. John’s College 190, 128

and Authors: Holcot; 149, 128 Trinity College 42, 81, 171 Bodleian 152, 20; 187, Fasciculus University College C.71, 183 morum; 332, Fasciculus morum; 410, PHILADELPHIA, University of Pennsy]l-

_ Fasciculus morum; 571, 96; 649, 72, vania Library latin 35, 44 75, 80-81, 92, 162, 170; 687, SPALDING (Lincs.), Gentlemen’s Society Fasciculus morum; 692, 62; 857, 77, M.J.B.14, Fasciculus morum

80, 92, 187; 859, 95 VATICAN, Ottoboni 334, 20; Ottoboni 626,

— Digby 86,90 Fasciculus morum; Reg. lat. 106, 36 —lat. theol. d.1, 75, 80, 82, 92, 166,191 | WorcesTER, Cathedral Library F.19,

—Laud Misc. 23, 147; 77, 92; 111, Fasciculus morum; F.126, 71, 82-86, Fasciculus morum; 112, 128, 131; 90-91, 123, 172, 202; 0.3, Fasciculus 213, Fasciculus morum: 568, Fasci- morum; Q.46, 30, 34 culus morum