Part 45

556. The neglect of the burden of a charge, while the honour of it is retained, is a constant theme of denunciation by our author: cp. iii. 116, and below, ll. 655 ff.

557 ff. With this account of the labourers cp. _Mirour de l’Omme_, 26425 ff. It is noticeable that there is nothing here about the insurrection.

593. Cp. _Metam._ vi. 318.

597. H punctuates here ‘salua. que.’

613. A quotation from _Pamphilus_: cp. _Mirour_, 14449.

659. _maioris_, ‘of mayor.’

693 f. Cp. _Aurora_, f. 36,

‘Dupla die sexta colleccio facta labore Ostendit quia lux septima nescit opus.’

703. The capitals which mark the personification of ‘Fraus’ and ‘Vsura’ are due to the editor. ‘Fraus’ corresponds to ‘Triche’ in the _Mirour de l’Omme_: see ll. 25237 ff.

731. _Nonne_, used for ‘Num,’ as also in other passages, e.g. vi. 351, 523, vii. 619.

745 ff. Cp. _Mirour de l’Omme_, 25741 ff.

In l. 745 SG have the reading ‘foris’ as a correction from ‘foras.’

760 ff. Cp. Chaucer, _Cant. Tales_, C 472 ff.

775. See note on l. 280.

785 f. The readings ‘fraus’ for ‘sibi’ and ‘surripit’ for ‘fraus capit’ are over erasure in CG.

812. ‘Thethis,’ (‘Thetis,’ or ‘Tethis’) stands several times for ‘water’ (properly ‘Tethys’): cp. vii. 1067. The line means that the water is so abundant in the jar that it hardly admits the presence of any malt (‘Cerem’ for ‘Cererem’).

835 ff. It is difficult to say who is the bad mayor of London to whom allusion is here made. The rival leaders in City politics were Nicholas Brembre and John of Northampton. The former was lord mayor in the years 1377, 1378, and again in 1383 and 1384, when he was elected against his rival (who had held the office in 1381, 1382) in a forcible and unconstitutional manner which evoked many protests. Brembre, who belonged to the Grocers’ company, represented the interests of the greater companies and was of the Court party, a special favourite with the king, while John of Northampton, a draper, engaged himself in bitter controversy with the Fishmongers, who were supported by the Grocers, and was popular with the poorer classes. In the _Cronica Tripertita_ Gower bitterly attacks Brembre (who was executed by sentence of the so-called ‘Merciless Parliament’ in 1388), and we might naturally suppose that he was the person referred to here; but that passage was written before the political events which led to that invective and in all probability not later than 1382, and the references to the low origin of the mayor in question, ll. 845-860, do not agree with the circumstances of Nicholas Brembre. Political passion in the City ran high from the year 1376 onwards, and the person referred to may have been either John of Northampton or one of the other mayors, who had in some way incurred Gower’s dislike: cp. _Mirour_, 26365 ff.

877. Cp. _Conf. Amantis_, v. 7626,

‘It floureth, bot it schal not greine Unto the fruit of rihtwisnesse.’

915 f. Ovid, _Tristia_, i. 5. 47 f.

922. Cp. Prov. xxv. 15, ‘lingua mollis confringet duritiam,’ and the verses at the beginning of the _Confessio Amantis_,

‘Ossibus ergo carens que conterit ossa loquelis Absit.’

953 f. _Ars Amat._ ii. 183 f., but Ovid has ‘Numidasque leones.’

957 f. _Rem. Amoris_, 447 f. (but ‘ceratas’ for ‘agitatas’).

965 f. _Pont._ iii. 7. 25 f.

967 f. Cp. _Rem. Amoris_, 97 f.

969 f. Cp. _Rem. Amoris_, 101 f.

971 f. Cp. _Rem. Amoris_, 729 f., ‘Admonitus refricatur amor,’ &c.

973. Cp. _Rem. Amoris_, 623.

975 f. Cp. _Rem. Amoris_, 731 f., ‘Ut pene extinctum cinerem si sulfure tangas, Vivet,’ &c. The reading ‘sub’ must be a mistake on the part of our author for ‘si.’

979. Cp. _Ars Amat._ iii. 597.

981. _Ars Amat._ iii. 373.

983 f. _Ars Amat._ iii. 375 f., but Ovid has ‘iratos et sibi quisque deos.’

985 f. Cp. _Ars Amat._ iii. 501 f.

990. _Fasti_, iii. 380, absurdly introduced here.

991 f. Cp. _Conf. Amantis_, Latin Verses before Prol. 499.

1003 f. Cp. _Tristia_, ii. 141 f.

LIB. VI.

1-468. With this section of the work compare _Mirour_, 24181 ff.

11. Ps. xiv. 3.

89-94. From _Aurora_, (MS. Bodley 822) f. 66, where however the reading is ‘sapit’ in l. 94 (for ‘rapit’).

95-98. _Aurora_, f. 65, where we find ‘in nocte’ for ‘in noctem’ and ‘reprobi’ for ‘legis’ (l. 97).

101 f. Cp. _Aurora_, 64 f.,

‘Inprouisus adest cum pullos tollere miluus Esurit, in predam non sine fraude ruit.’

This is adapted by our author to his own purpose, but as his meaning is altogether different, some obscurity results, and he does not make it clear to us how the biter is bit.

113. _Metam._ v. 606.

115-118. Cp. _Metam._ vi. 527 ff.

133. In the Glasgow MS. ‘locuplex’ has been altered to the more familiar ‘locuples.’

141 f. Is. v. 8, ‘Vae qui coniungitis domum ad domum et agrum agro copulatis usque ad terminum loci: numquid habitabitis vos soli in medio terrae?’ The same text is quoted in the _Mirour_, 24541 ff.

144. By comparison with _Mirour_, 24580 ff. we may see that the dissipation of the property by the son is here alleged as a proof that it has been ill acquired:

‘Qu’ils font pourchas a la senestre Le fin demoustre la verrour.’

176. _forum_, i.e. the market price.

188. _que foret equa_, ‘(the balance) which should be fair’: so also ‘foret’ below, l. 190.

203. _Basiliscus_: cp. _Mirour_, 3748 ff.

209 f. Ovid, _Pont._ ii. 3. 39 f. (but ‘lasso’ for ‘lapso’).

217. _nam nemo dolose Mentis_, &c. ‘for no man of a crafty mind can have sure speech.’

225. _tenebrescunt_, ‘darken.’ So other inceptives are used transitively, e.g. ‘ditescere,’ ii. 607, _Cron. Trip._ iii. 119.

233 f. ‘And this _lex, legis_, from _ledo, ledis_, as _ius_ from _iurgo_, administers justice at this present time.’ It is meant that the administration of law, as we see it, suggests the above etymologies. The use of ‘isto’ for ‘hoc’ is quite regular.

241 ff. Cp. _Mirour_, 24253 ff.

249 ff. Cp. _Mirour_, 24349 ff., and see Pulling, _Order of the Coif_, ch. iv.

269. The reference is to Ecclus. xx. 31, ‘Xenia et dona excaecant oculos iudicum.’

274. ‘Fear puts to flight the discernment of justice.’

313-326. These fourteen lines are taken with some alterations (not much for the better) from Neckam, _De Vita Monachorum_, pp. 180 f.

327 f. Cp. _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 182,

‘Sic mihi, divitibus si quando defuit hostis; Hos terit et quassat saepe ruina gravis.’

Where, it would seem, we ought to read ‘Dic mihi.’

329 ff. _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 181. Most of the lines 329-348 are borrowed.

351. ‘Nonne’ for ‘Num,’ as often: cp. v. 731.

355 f. Cp. _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 182,

‘Iustitiae montes virtutumque ardua nullus Scandet, dum mundi rebus onustus erit.’

357. _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 190.

359-372. Most of these lines are borrowed with slight alterations from _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 191.

387 ff. Cp. _Mirour_, 24733 ff.

389. Cp. _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 192, ‘Cur ampla aedificas busto claudendus in arcto?’

397. _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 193,

‘Et cecidit Babylon, cecidit quoque maxima Troia Olim mundipotens, aspice, Roma iacet.’

419 ff. Cp. _Mirour_, 24817-25176.

421 f. For the idea contained in ‘vnccio’ and ‘vncta’ cp. iii. 1376.

433. ‘The word _comes_ receives its beginning not from _vice_ but from _vicium_.’ That is, apparently, the prefix which makes ‘comes’ into ‘vicecomes’ is to be derived from ‘vicium.’

439 f. Cp. _Mirour_, 25166 ff.

445 ff. With this compare the corresponding lines in the _Carmen super multiplici viciorum Pestilencia_, under the head of ‘Avarice’ (246 ff.),

‘Vendere iusticiam nichil est nisi vendere Cristum,’ &c.

463 f. Cp. _Mirour_, 24973 ff.

467 f. _Vt Crati bufo_, &c.: cp. _Mirour_, 24962 f.

498. Cp. _Mirour_, 22835 f.

522. The insertion which is found after this line in the Digby MS. (and in no other) consists of eight lines taken from the original text of the passage 545-580, which was rewritten by the author: see ll. 561*-566* and 579* f.

523 ff. ‘Can a house be built without timber? But of what use is timber to the builder if it be not hewn?’ ‘Nonne’ for ‘Num,’ as frequently: see note on v. 731. It seems that ‘sibi’ refers to the builder rather than to the house; in any case, it has no reflexive sense. Finally ‘ligna’ is here used as a singular feminine: all the MSS. have ‘foret’ in l. 524 and ‘valet’ in 525.

The idea of the passage seems to be that good laws are as the material, and the ruler as the builder of the house.

529 ff. Cp. _Conf. Amantis_, vii. 2695 ff.

545-580. It is certain that the passage preserved to us in the Dublin and Hatfield MSS. is that which was originally written in those books which now exhibit an erasure; for in several places words are legible underneath the present text of these latter MSS. For example in S ‘maior’ is visible as the last word of the original l. 547, and ‘locuta,’ ‘aula,’ similarly in ll. 549, 551. The chief difference introduced is in the direction of throwing more responsibility on the king, who however is still spoken of as a boy. Thus instead of ‘Stat puer immunis culpe,’ we have ‘Rex puer indoctus morales negligit actus’ (or more strongly still ‘respuit’).

The text of 545*-580* follows the Dublin MS. (T) with corrections from H₂. Neither text is very correct: both omit a word in l. 549*, which I supply by conjecture, and both read ‘omnes’ in l. 561*. There are some obvious errors in T, as ‘sinis’ for ‘sinit’ in l. 554*, ‘Tempe’ for ‘Tempora’ in l. 559*, which have been passed over without notice.

Cap. viii. _Heading_. The ensuing Epistle to the young king, which extends as far as l. 1200, assumes a more severely moral form owing to the alteration of the preceding passage, the exclusion of all compliment (‘regnaturo’ in this heading for ‘excellentissimo’) and the substitution of ‘doctrine causa’ for ‘in eius honore.’ (The readings ‘excellentissimo,’ ‘in eius honore’ no doubt are to be found in the Hatfield MS., but I have accidentally omitted to take note of them.)

629 f. Neckam, _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 185,

‘Quid tibi nobilitas et clarum nomen avorum, Si vitiis servus factus es ipse tuis?’

640. ‘vix’ is sometimes used by our author (apparently) in the sense of ‘paene.’

696. Ovid, _Rem. Amoris_, 526.

710. _iudiciale_, ‘judgement,’ used as a substantive: cp. iii. 1692.

718. _culpe ... sue_, ‘for their fault,’ i.e. the fault of his ministers.

719-722. Cp. _Aurora_, (MS. Bodley 822) f. 65,

‘Euolat ancipiter ad prede lucra, suisque Deseruit dominis in rapiendo cybum. Sic multi dominis famulando suis, ad eorum Nutum pauperibus dampna ferendo nocent.’

725. _presul_, ‘the bishop.’

740. The expression ‘Cuius enim’ for ‘Eius enim’ occurs more than once, e.g. l. 1238: cp. vii. 372. It is found also in the _Confessio Amantis_, Latin Verses after vii. 1984, but was there corrected in the third recension.

765. _stabiles_: apparently used in a bad sense.

793 f. Cp. _Aurora_, f. 96 v^o,

‘Exiguus magnum vicit puer ille Golyam, Nam virtus humilis corda superba domat.’

816. Ovid, _Amores_, i. 8. 62, ‘Crede mihi, res est ingeniosa dare.’

839 f. Cp. _Aurora_, f. 95 v^o.

846. _Fasti_, ii. 226.

875-902. This passage of twenty-six lines is taken with few alterations from the _Aurora_, f. 76.

876. _bella_: in the original ‘corda’ (or ‘colla’ MS. Univ. Coll. 143).

883. _noctibus_: in the original ‘nutibus.’

884. _Spirant_: so in the original according to MS. Bodley 822, but ‘Spirent’ in MS. Univ. Coll. 143.

886. _acuum ferrum_: in the original ‘minitans ferrum.’ Apparently our author took ‘acus’ to mean a spear or javelin. The choice of the word in this passage is unfortunate.

887 ff. ‘vincit,’ ‘tenet’ (or ‘teret,’ MS. Univ. Coll. 143), ‘consurgit’ in the original.

891. In the original, ‘Rex hoc consilium grata bibit aure, puellas Preparat,’ &c.

892. ‘genis’ in the original.

894. ‘furit’ for ‘fugat’ is the reading of the original, and we find this in several MSS. of our text, but in the Glasgow MS. this has been corrected to ‘fugat,’ which is the reading of S.

898. In the original, ‘Vultus que geminus ridet in ore decor,’ (or ‘Vultus et geminus,’ &c., MS. Univ. Coll. 143).

907. _Aurora_, f. 100.

947-950. Taken from the description of Saul at the battle of Gilboa, _Aurora_, f. 100 v^o.

971 ff. Cp. _Praise of Peace_, 78 ff.

985-992. From _Aurora_, f. 64 v^o,

‘Alta petens aquila uolat alite celsius omni, Quisque potens, tumidus corde, notatur ea: Vt sacra testantur cythariste scripta prophete, In celum tales os posuere suum. Pennatum griphes animal, pedibusque quaternis Inuitos homines carpit, abhorret equos: Designatur in his facinus crudele potentum, Qui mortes hominum cum feritate bibunt.’

986. Our author no doubt read ‘mundus corde’ here in the _Aurora_.

987. _citharistea_: properly no doubt ‘cithariste,’ to be taken with ‘prophete,’ as in the _Aurora_.

990. ‘horret equos’ seems to represent the ‘equis vehementer infesti’ of Isidore, _Etym._ xii. 2.

1019-1024. From Neckam, _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 185, with slight variations.

1037. _esse_: as substantive, ‘existence.’

1041-1050. Taken with slight changes from _Aurora_, f. 108.

1066. _fugat_: used as subjunctive; so also iii. 1498, 2078.

1085 f. From _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 184.

1107-1112. _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 193.

1115 f. _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 183.

1159* ff. That this was the text which stood originally in S is proved partly by the fact that the original heading of the chapter stands still as given here in the Table of Chapters, f. 5, and also by the traces of original coloured initials at ll. 1175 and 1199. A considerable part of the erased chapter reappears in the poem ‘Rex celi deus,’ &c., addressed to Henry IV: see p. 343.

1189 f. _Si tibi ... cupias conuertere ... Te._ These words appear in S as a correction of the rewritten text by a second erasure and in another hand.

Cap. xix. _Heading._ The original form, as given by DLTH₂, is still to be found in the Table of Chapters in S.

1201. Cp. Ovid, _Metam._ vii. 585 f.,

‘veluti cum putria motis Poma cadunt ramis agitataque ilice glandes.’

1204 ff. Note the repeated use of ‘modo’ in the sense of ‘now’: cp. 1210, 1218, 1222, 1232, 1235, 1243, 1263, 1280, &c. The usual word for ‘formerly’ is ‘nuper’; see 1241, 1245, 1279, &c.

1205. _Metam._ ii. 541.

1223. _Oza_, that is Uzzah (2 Sam. vi.), who is selected as a type of carnal lust, apparently on the strength of the quite gratuitous assumption adopted in Lib. III. 1885 ff. Apparently ‘luxus’ in the next line is genitive, in spite of the metre: cp. ‘excercitus,’ i. 609, ‘ducatus,’ _Cron. Trip._ iii. 117.

1236. _Giesi_, i.e. Gehazi.

1238. _Cuius enim_: cp. note on l. 740.

1243. _Liberius_: pope from 352-366 A. D. He is mentioned here as a type of unfaithfulness to his charge, because he was induced to condemn Athanasius.

1251. _defunctis_, ‘for the dead,’ that is, to bury them charitably, as Tobit did.

1261. Cp. John xii. 24.

1267. Perhaps an allusion to Wycliffe, who seems to be referred to as a new Jovinianus in a later poem, p. 347.

1268. _dant dubitare_, ‘cause men to doubt.’

1273. _Troianus_: i.e. Trajan, whose name is so spelt regularly by our author.

1277. _Valentinianus_: cp. _Conf. Amantis_, v. 6398 ff.

1284. _Leo_: cp. _Conf. Amantis_, Prol. 739.

1286. _Tiberii_: i.e. Tiberius Constantinus; cp. _Conf. Amantis_, ii. 587 ff.

1306. _quis_, for ‘quisquam’: so also ‘quem’ in l. 1308; cp. i. 184.

1321 f. Cp. _Conf. Amantis_, vii. 2217 ff.: ‘relinquendo’ is used for ‘relinquens,’ as i. 304, 516, &c.

1323. Cp. _Conf. Amantis_, v. 6372 ff., _Mirour_, 18301 ff.

1330. _Vix si_: cp. iv. 218, _Cron. Trip._ iii. 444.

1345. Cp. Ovid, _Amores_, i. 9. 1.

1357 f. ‘She is silent as a jackdaw, chaste as a pigeon, and gentle as a thorn.’

1361 f. Perhaps an allusion to the case of Edward III and Alice Perrers.

LIB. VII.

5. Cp. _Conf. Amantis_, Prol. 595 ff.

9. _modo_, ‘now’: cp. note on vi. 1204.

12. _nec ... vix._ For this combination of ‘vix’ with a negative cp. v. 104, 153.

42. _dicunt ... volunt_, ‘say that they wish’: cp. ii. 200 f.

47 f. Cp. _Conf. Amantis_, v. 49 ff.; so below, ll. 61 ff.

123. Rev. ii. 25, ‘id quod habetis tenete, donec veniam.’

125 f. Ovid, _Tristia_, i. 8. 41 f.,

‘Et tua sunt silicis circum praecordia venae, Et rigidum ferri semina pectus habet.’

159 f. It is difficult to construe this couplet satisfactorily, and the reading ‘Est’ seems quite as good as ‘Et.’ The Glasgow MS. has ‘Et status’ erased, as if for correction.

163 ff. Cp. _Mirour_, 8921 ff.

167. The original reading seems to have been ‘grassantur,’ for which S gives ‘grossantur’ (‘o’ written over erasure), and CG ‘crassantur,’ also by correction.

182 ff. I have no record of the readings of H₂ in this passage, but I have no doubt that it agrees with EHT.

184. No record of the reading of T.

186. _abhorret_: apparently subjunctive; so we have ‘adhero’ for ‘adhereo,’ l. 1296.

192. _habere modum_: a first-hand correction in S, whereas the others in ll. 182-192 are in a different hand.

194. _caput ancille_: an allusion to the form in which Satan is supposed to have appeared in the garden of Eden.

243. _specialis_, subst., ‘a friend.’

255 f. Cp. Ovid, _Ars Amat._ ii. 201 f.,

‘Riserit, adride; si flebit, flere memento: Imponat leges vultibus illa tuis.’

In adapting the couplet to his purpose our author has contrived to make it unintelligible.

265. _Fuluus ... talus_: referring to the gilded spur of knighthood; gold is ‘metallum fuluum.’

273 f. Cp. _Tristia_, v. 13. 27 f.

315 f. Cp. _Metam._ i. 144 f.

323 f. Cp. _Ars Amat._ i. 761 f.

327 f. _Fasti_, iv. 717 f. The application belongs to our author.

331 f. Cp. Ovid, _Tristia_, i. 9. 5 f.

334. _Ars Amat._ iii. 436.

340. Cp. _Tristia_, i. 8. 8.

347. Cp. _Metam._ i. 141.

349. _cumque_, for ‘cum’: cp. ii. 302, &c., and l. 872, below.

361 ff. Cp. _Mirour_, 26590 ff.

372. _Talis enim_, ‘such, indeed,’: for this use of ‘enim’ cp. vi. 740.

375 f. From Neckam, _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 177.

379-383. Taken with slight change from _De Vita Monachorum_, pp. 183 f.

387. _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 195.

389-392. Taken with slight change from _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 197, and so also 395 f.

417-420. _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 196.

437 f. _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 196.

440. _ne sit_, for ‘ne non sit.’

441 f. _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 189.

459 f. Cp. Ovid, _Ars Amat._ iii. 65 f.

463 f. Cp. _Tristia_, v. 10. 5 f., ‘Stare putes, adeo procedunt tempora tarde,’ &c. The couplet has neither sense nor appropriateness as given here.

465 f. _Pont._ ii. 2. 37 f.

484. _Numquid_, for ‘Nonne’: cp. l. 892 and note on v. 280.

485 f. _Ars Amat._ iii. 119 f.,

‘Quae nunc sub Phoebo ducibusque Palatia fulgent, Quid nisi araturis pascua bubus erant?’

‘Qui’ is evidently a mistake for ‘Que.’

489 f. _Fasti_, i. 203 f.

499-504. From _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 181.

509 f. Cp. _Mirour_, 26605 ff. and _Conf. Amantis_, Prol. 910 ff.

519. This seems to be dependent on ‘noscat’ in the line above. The indicative in dependent question is quite usual, though not invariably found: cp. l. 516, where subjunctive and indicative are combined.

574. _consequeretur eum_, ‘should follow him,’ i.e. should be subject to man.

599. _Arboribusque sitis._ There must be something wrong here, but the variant given by D does not help us.

619. _Nonne_, used for ‘Num’: cp. v. 731.

639 ff. This quotation from Gregory appears also in the _Mirour de l’Omme_, 26869 ff., and the _Confessio Amantis_, Prol. 945 ff.

645. _minor est mundus homo_, ‘man is a microcosm’: cp. _Mirour_, 26929 ff.

647 ff. _Mirour_, 26953 ff.

684. The Glasgow MS. has ‘queris’ written over an erasure.

685-694. From Neckam, _De Vita Monachorum_, pp. 197 f.

699-708. With slight changes from _De Vita Monachorum_, pp. 193 f.

793. _nuper_ to be taken with ‘auaricia,’ ‘the avarice of former times’; ‘modo’ with ‘prestat.’

872. _Cumque_, for ‘Cum’: cp. l. 349.

892. _Numquid_, for ‘Nonne’: cp. l. 484, and see note on v. 280. For the idea cp. _Mirour_, 1784 ff. It is originally from Augustine.

909 f. From _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 178.

911-918. From _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 179, with slight variations.

919-924. _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 180.

921. The reading ‘nostre,’ though it has small authority, is necessary to the sense and is given in the original passage.

929-932. _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 180.

955 f. Cp. _Mirour_, 11404 ff., where the often-quoted lines of Helinand’s _Vers de Mort_ are given.

990. _habet ... habitare_, used perhaps for the future, ‘will inhabit’: so ‘habet torquere,’ l. 1047. On the other hand in l. 1148 ‘habent regi’ means ‘must be guided,’ and the same meaning of ‘must’ or ‘ought’ may be applied to all the passages.

1067. _Thetis_, used for ‘water’ or ‘sea’: cp. v. 812. All the copies here give ‘thetis’ (or ‘Thetis’) except D, which cannot be depended on to reproduce the original form in a case like this. On the other hand in the _Cronica Tripertita_, i. 80, S and H have ‘tetis.’

1079. _furor breuis, ira set_: the words are suggested by the common expression ‘ira furor breuis,’ but the sense is different. This is frequently the case with our author’s borrowings, e.g. v. 213, vi. 101.

1095. _vix si_: cp. vi. 1330; but perhaps ‘vix sit’ is the true reading here.

1106. _Quam prius_, as usual, for ‘prius quam’: cp. i. 1944.

1148. _habent_: see note on l. 990.

1185. _Que_: the antecedent must be ‘virtuti,’ in the next line: ‘solet’ is of course for ‘solebat’; see note on i. 492.

1215. _tueri_: apparently passive.

1240. _deficit vnde sciam_, ‘I do not know.’

1305 f. ‘Because justice has departed, therefore peace, who is joined with her, is also gone.’ The reference here and in the next lines is to the Psalms, lxxxiv. 11.

1342. An allusion apparently to the debasement of the coinage. The reading ‘suum’ in G is over an erasure.

1344. _Nobile que genuit_, ‘she who produced the noble,’ i.e. the gold coin of that name, called so originally because of its purity.

1356. _sine lege fera_: for this kind of play upon words cp. iv. 128, 215, 243, 509, &c.

1409 ff. It may be noted that the Harleian MS. is defective for ll. 1399-1466. Its readings here would probably agree with those of EDL, &c. SCG have the text written over erasure.

1436. _Exiguo ... tempore_: for the ablative cp. i. 1568.

1455 f. It is the galled horse that winces at the load; that which is sound feels no hurt. Thus, if the reader is not guilty of the faults spoken of, he will pass untouched by the reproof.

1470. ‘Vox populi, vox dei’: a sentiment repeated by our author in various forms; cp. note on iii. Prol. 11.

1479 ff. These last three lines are over erasure in SCHG. They seem to have been substituted for the original couplet in order to point more clearly the moral of the _Cronica Tripertita_, which is intended for a practical illustration of the divine punishment of sin.

Explicit, &c. It will be seen that in these later years Gower has almost brought himself to believe that the events of the earlier part of the reign were intended for a special warning to the youthful king, whom he conceives as having then already begun a course of tyrannical government. At the time, however, our author acquitted him of all responsibility, on account of his youth.

11 ff. The swan was used as a badge by the duke of Gloucester and also (perhaps not till after his death) by Henry of Lancaster. For the horse and the bear as cognizances of Arundel and Warwick see _Annales Ricardi II_ (Rolls Series, 28. 3), p. 206.

CRONICA TRIPERTITA

1. _Ista tripertita_, &c. These seven lines must be regarded as a metrical preface to the Chronicle which follows. In the Hatton MS. these lines with their marginal note are placed before the prose of the preceding page (which is given in a somewhat different form) and entitled ‘Prologus.’

PRIMA PARS