Nam tales seruos Cristus habere cupit.’
1797. Cp. _Aurora_, f. 46 v^o,
‘Balteus ex bysso tunicam constringit honeste.’
1799 f. Cp. _Aurora_, f. 45 v^o.
1801 f.
‘In medio tunice capitale ligat sibi presul,
Vt capitis sensus non sinat ire uagos.’ _Aurora_, f. 46.
1807 f.
‘Aurum ueste gerit presul, cum splendet in illo
Pre cunctis rutilans clara sophia patris.’ _Aurora_, f. 45.
1809 ff.
‘Ne tunice leuiter possit ruptura minari,
Illius in gyro texilis ora micat:
A grege ne presul se disrumpat, set honestus
Ad finem mores pertrahat, ista notant.’ _Aurora_, f. 46.
1813 f. Cp. _Aurora_, f. 46 v^o.
1815-1818.
‘Aaron et natis uestes texuntur, ut horum
Quisque sacerdotis possit honore frui.
Nam modo presbiteri, seu summi siue minores,
Conficiunt Cristi corpus idemque sacrant.’ _Aurora_, f. 45.
1823 f. _Aurora_, f. 43 v^o.
1841-1848. These eight lines are taken with insignificant changes from
the _Aurora_, f. 63 v^o.
1853. The reference here given by Gower to the _Aurora_ of Petrus
(de) Riga has led to the tracing of a good many passages of the _Vox
Clamantis_, besides the present one, to that source.
1863-1884. These lines are almost entirely from _Aurora_, ff. 66 v^o,
67. The arrangement of the couplets is somewhat different, and there
are a few slight variations, which are noted below as they occur.
1866. _eius_: ‘illud,’ _Aurora_, f. 67.
1868. _tumet_: ‘timet,’ _Aurora_. (MS. Bodley 822), but Gower’s reading
is doubtless the more correct.
1871. _nimio_: ‘magno,’ _Aurora_.
1872. _ipse_: ‘esse,’ _Aurora_.
1876. _ligante_: ‘trahente,’ _Aurora_, f. 66 v^o.
1878. _tardat ad omne bonum_: ‘ad bona nulla ualet,’ _Aurora_.
1880. _Lumina nec_: ‘Nec faciem,’ _Aurora_, f. 67.
1881 f.
‘Per pinguem scabiem succensa libido notatur;
Feruet vel fetet corpus utroque malo.’ _Aurora_, f. 67.
1885 ff. Our author still borrows from the same source, though from a
different part of it. We find these lines nearly in the same form in
the _Aurora_, f. 103,
‘Oza manus tendens accessit ut erigat archam,
Set mox punita est arida facta manus.
Hinc ideo dicunt meruisse necem, quia nocte
Transacta cohitu coniugis usus erat.
Declaratur in hoc quod si pollutus ad aram
Accedas, mortis uulnere dignus eris.’
1891 f.
‘Namque superiectas sordes detergere pure
Nescit nostra manus, si tenet illa lutum.’ _Aurora_, f. 103.
1905-1908. These two couplets are from _Aurora_, f. 69 v^o, where
however they are separated by four lines not here given.
1911 ff. Cp. _Aurora_, f. 69 v^o,
‘Radices non extirpat rasura pilorum,
Set rasi crescunt fructificantque pyli.
Sic licet expellas omnes de pectore motus,
Non potes hinc penitus cuncta fugare tamen.
Hec de carne trahis, quia semper alit caro pugnans;
Intus habes cum quo prelia semper agas.’
Gower’s reading ‘pugnam’ in l. 1915 is probably right.
1937. Ovid, _Rem. Amoris_, 669.
1939. _Tristia_, iv. 6. 33 f.
1943 f. _Rem. Amoris_, 89 f.
1945 f. Cp. _Rem. Amoris_, 115 f.
1946. _Inueniet_: apparently meant for subjunctive; cp. l. 1114.
1947-1950. _Rem. Amoris_, 81-84.
1952. Cp. _Her._ xvii. 190.
1953. _Rem. Amoris_, 229.
1955 f. _Rem. Amoris_, 139 f.
1999 f.
‘Cum sale uas mittens in aquas Helyseus, easdem
Sanat, nec remanet gustus amarus aquis.’ _Aurora_, f. 140.
2001. _Aurora_, f. 60 v^o.
2017-2020. From _Aurora_, f. 8.
2035-2040. From _Aurora_, f. 15 v^o, but one couplet is omitted, and
so the sense is obscured. After ‘sunt sine felle boni’ (l. 2038), the
original has,
‘Cras canit hinc coruus, hodie canit inde columba;
Hec vox peruersis, congruit illa bonis.
Cras prauum cantant, dum se conuertere tardant,
Set tales tollit sepe suprema dies.’
The meaning is that the bad priests cry ‘Cras,’ like crows, and
encourage men to put off repentance, while the others sing ‘Hodie,’
like doves, the words ‘cras’ and ‘hodie’ being imitations of the notes
of the two birds. The expression ‘Cras primam cantant,’ in l. 2039,
is not intelligible, and probably Gower missed the full sense of the
passage.
2045. ‘sit’ has been altered in S from ‘fit.’
2049 ff. Cp. _Mirour de l’Omme_, 20785 ff.
2071. Cp. _Mirour_, 20798.
2078. _fugat_: cp. l. 1498.
2097 f. Cp. iv. 959 and note.
LIB. IV.
The matter of this book corresponds to that of the _Mirour de l’Omme_,
ll. 20833-21780.
19 f. Cp. Lib. iii. Prol. 11.
34. ‘dompnus’ or ‘domnus’ was the form of ‘dominus’ which was properly
applied as a title to ecclesiastical dignitaries, and it seems to have
been especially used in monasteries. Ducange quotes John of Genoa as
follows: ‘Domnus et Domna per syncopen proprie convenit claustralibus;
sed Dominus, Domina mundanis.’ Cp. l. 323 of this book and also 327 ff.
57. _humeris qui ferre solebat_, ‘who used to bear burdens,’ as a
labourer.
87. Cp. Godfrey of Viterbo, _Pantheon_, p. 74 (ed. 1584).
91. _Pantheon_, p. 74.
109 f. Cp. Ovid, _Fasti_, i. 205 f.
111. _Ars Amat._ ii. 475, but Ovid has ‘cubilia.’
112. Cp. _Fasti_, iv. 396, ‘Quas tellus nullo sollicitante dabat.’
Gower has not improved the line by his changes.
114. _Fasti_, iv. 400.
115. _Metam._ i. 104, but Ovid has of course ‘fraga.’
117. Cp. _Metam._ i. 106, ‘Et quae deciderant patula Iovis arbore
glandes’: ‘patule glandes’ is nonsense.
119. Cp. _Metam._ i. 103.
128. A play on the word ‘regula’: ‘re’ has been taken away and there
remains only ‘gula.’
145. Cp. _Metam._ viii. 830.
147. _Metam._ viii. 835.
151 ff. Cp. _Metam._ viii. 837 ff.
163. Cp. _Ars Amat._ iii. 647.
165 f. Cp. _Conf. Amantis_, Prol. 473 ff.
175. _Ars Amat._ iii. 503 f., but Ovid has ‘Gorgoneo saevius,’ for
‘commota lenius.’
177. Cp. _Metam._ viii. 465, ‘Saepe suum fervens oculis dabat ira
ruborem.’ The reading ‘oculis’ is necessary to the sense and appears in
one manuscript.
179. Cp. Ovid, _Ars Amat._ iii. 509.
215. ‘corrodium’ (or ‘corredium’) is the allowance made from the
funds of a religious house for the sustentation of a member of it or
of someone else outside the house: see Ducange under ‘conredium’ and
_New Engl. Dict._ ‘corrody.’ Gower himself perhaps had in his later
life a corrody in the Priory of Saint Mary Overey, of which he was a
benefactor.
302. The reference is to Ecclus. xix. 27, ‘Amictus corporis et risus
dentium et ingressus hominis enunciant de eo.’ Cp. _Confessio Amantis_,
i. 2705, margin.
305-310. _Aurora_, (MS. Bodley 822) f. 65,
‘Est nigra coruus auis et predo cadaueris, illum
Quem male denigrat ceca cupido notans.
. . . . . .
Sub uolucrum specie descripsit legifer illos,
Quos mundanus honos ad scelus omne trahit.
Hunc aliquem tangit qui religionis amictum
Se tegit, ut cicius possit honore frui.’
(MS. Univ. Coll. 143: ‘libido’ for ‘cupido,’ ‘amictu’ for ‘amictum,’
‘maius’ for ‘cicius’).
311. Cp. Ovid, _Ars Amat._ iii. 249, ‘Turpe pecus mutilum,’ &c. The
word ‘monstrum’ in Gower came probably from a corruption in his copy of
Ovid.
327 ff. With this chapter compare _Mirour de l’Omme_, 21133 ff. The
capital letters of ‘Paciens,’ ‘Castus,’ ‘Luxus,’ &c. are supplied by
the editor, being clearly required by the sense.
354. _Apocapata_, ‘cut short’: cp. ‘per apocapen,’ v. 820.
363 f. The habit described is that of the Canons of the order of St.
Augustine.
395. Cp. Neckam, _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 175 (Rolls Series, 59, vol.
ii),
‘Vovistis, fratres, vovistis; vestra, rogamus,
Vivite solliciti reddere vota deo.
397. _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 176.
401. _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 178.
403 f. _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 177.
405-430. Most of this is taken from Neckam, _De Vita Monachorum_, p.
176.
425. Ovid, _Ars Amat._ ii. 465.
427. _foret_, ‘should be,’ i.e. ‘ought to be.’
431-446. Taken with slight alterations from _De Vita Monachorum_, pp.
187, 188.
442 f. _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 188.
449 Cp. Ovid, _Fasti_, ii. 85,
‘Saepe sequens agnam lupus est a voce retentus.’
Our author has interchanged the sexes for the purpose of his argument,
the man being represented as a helpless victim.
450. The subject to be supplied must be ‘agnus.’
451. Cp. _Ars Amat._ iii. 419.
453 f. _Tristia_, i. 6. 9 f.
461-466. _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 188.
469-490. Nearly the whole of this is taken from Neckam, p. 178.
537 f. Cp. Ovid, _Rem. Amoris_, 235 f.,
‘Adspicis ut prensos urant iuga prima iuvencos,
Et nova velocem cingula laedat equum?’
575. Cp. _Amores_, iii. 4. 17.
587. ‘Genius’ is here introduced as the priest of Venus and in l.
597 in the character of a confessor, as afterwards in the _Confessio
Amantis_. The reference to the ‘poets’ in the marginal note can hardly
be merely to the _Roman de la Rose_, where Genius is the priest and
confessor of Nature, but the variation ‘secundum Ouidium’ of the
Glasgow MS. does not seem to be justified by any passage of Ovid. The
connexion with Venus obviously has to do with the classical idea of
Genius as a god who presides over the begetting of children: cp. Isid.
_Etym._ viii. 88. The marginal note in S is written in a hand probably
different from that of the text, but contemporary.
617 f. Cp. _Ars Amat._ ii. 649 f.,
‘Dum novus in viridi coalescit cortice ramus,
Concutiat tenerum quaelibet aura, cadet.’
623. _Spiritus est promptus_, &c. Gower apparently took this text to
mean, ‘the spirit is ready to do evil, _and_ the flesh is weak’: cp.
_Mirour_, 14165.
624. Cp. _Mirour_, 16768.
637. For this use of ‘quid’ cp. that of ‘numquid,’ ii. Prol. 59, and v.
279.
648. Rev. xiv. 4, ‘Hi sequuntur agnum ... quocunque ierit.’
657 f. Apparently referring to Rev. xii. 14.
659. Cp. the Latin Verses after _Confessio Amantis_, v. 6358.
681 f. Cp. Ovid, _Pont._ iv. 4. 3 f.
689 ff. Cp. _Mirour de l’Omme_, 21266, margin.
699. _fore_: used here and elsewhere by our author for ‘esse’; see
below, l. 717, and v. 763.
715. _Acephalum._ This name was applied in early times to ecclesiastics
who were exempt from the authority of the bishop: see Ducange. The word
is differently used in iii. 956, and by comparison with that passage
we might be led to suppose that there was some reference here to the
‘inopes’ and ‘opem’ of the next line.
723 ff. Compare with this the contemporary accounts of the controversy
between FitzRalph, archbishop of Armagh, and the Mendicant Friars,
who are said to have bribed the Pope to confirm their privileges
(Walsingham, i. 285), and the somewhat prejudiced account of their
faults in Walsingham, ii. 13. The influence of the Dominican Rushook,
as the king’s confessor was the subject of much jealousy in the reign
of Richard II.
735 ff. Cp. _Mirour de l’Omme_, 21469 ff.
736. _sepulta_: used elsewhere by Gower for ‘funeral rites,’ e.g. i.
1170. The meaning is that the friar claims to perform the funeral
services for the dead bodies of those whose confessor he has been
before death. Perhaps however we should take ‘sepulta’ here as
equivalent to ‘sepelienda.’
769. Hos. iv. 8: cp. _Mirour_, 21397, where the saying is attributed to
Zephaniah.
777 f. Cp. Ovid, _Tristia_, i. 9. 7 f.
781. _Tristia_, i. 9. 9.
784. Cp. _Fasti_, v. 354.
788. See _Mirour_, 21625 ff. and note.
795. ‘Prioris’ in S, but it is evidently an adjective here.
813 ff. Cp. _Mirour_, 21499 ff.
847. The wording is suggested by 1 Cor. ix. 24, ‘ii qui in stadio
currunt, omnes quidem currunt, sed unus accipit bravium.’
864. _Titiuillus_: see note in Dyce’s edition of Skelton, vol. ii. pp.
284 f.
869. Cp. Job ii. 4, ‘Pellem pro pelle, et cuncta quae habet homo, dabit
pro anima sua.’
872. _vltima verba ligant._ As in a bargain the last words are those
that are binding, so here the last word mentioned, namely ‘demon,’ is
the true answer to the question.
874. ‘Men sein, Old Senne newe schame,’ _Conf. Amantis_, iii. 2033.
903. Cp. Ovid, _Metam._ ii. 632, ‘Inter aves albas vetuit consistere
corvum.’ Gower’s line seems to have neither accidence nor syntax.
953 f. _Fasti_, ii. 219 f.
959. A reference to Ps. lxxii. 5, ‘In labore hominum non sunt, et
cum hominibus non flagellabuntur.’ The same passage is alluded to in
Walsingham’s chronicle (i. 324), where reference is made to the fact
that the friars were exempted from the poll-tax. The first half of
this psalm seems to have been accepted in some quarters as a prophetic
description of the Mendicants.
963. There is no variation of reading here in the MSS., but the metre
cannot be regarded as satisfactory. A fifteenth (or sixteenth) century
reader has raised a slight protest against it in the margin of S, ‘at
metrum quomodo fiet.’
969. Cp. Ps. lxxii. 7, ‘Prodiit quasi ex adipe iniquitas eorum:
transierunt in affectum cordis.’
971 ff. Cp. _Mirour_, 21517 ff.,
‘Mal fils ne tret son pris avant,
Par ce qant il fait son avant
Q’il ad bon piere,’ &c.
981 ff. Cp. _Mirour_, 21553 ff.
1059-1064. These six lines are taken without change from _Aurora_, (MS.
Bodley 822) f. 65.
1072. ‘lingua’ was here the original reading, but was altered to
‘verba’ in most of the copies. H and G have ‘verba’ over an erasure.
1081. In G we have ‘adepcio’ by correction from ‘adopcio.’
1090. _adheret_: meant apparently for pres. subj. as if from a verb
‘adherare.’
1099 f. Cp. _Aurora_, f. 19 v^o,
‘Sarra parit, discedit Agar; pariente fideles
Ecclesia populos, dat synagoga locum.’
1103. _Odium_: written thus with a capital letter in H, but not in the
other MSS.
1143 ff. Cp. _Mirour de l’Omme_, 21403 ff. and note.
1145 ff. These lines are partly from Neckam’s _Vita Monachorum_, p. 192:
‘Porticibus vallas operosis atria, quales
Quotque putas thalamos haec labyrinthus habet.
. . . . . .
Ostia multa quidem, variae sunt mille fenestrae,
Mille columnarum est marmore fulta domus.’
Gower alters the first sentence by substituting ‘valuas’ for the verb
‘vallas.’ ‘It has folding-doors, halls, and bed-chambers as various and
as many as the labyrinth.’
1161. ‘historia parisiensis’ in the MSS. I cannot supply a reference.
1175 f. From _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 193.
1189 ff. The reference is to the _Speculum Stultorum_, where Burnel the
Ass, after examining the rules of all the existing orders and finding
them in various ways unsatisfactory to him, comes to the conclusion
that he must found an order of his own, the rules of which shall
combine the advantages of all the other orders. Members of it shall
be allowed to ride easily like the Templars, to tell lies like the
Hospitallers, to eat meat on Saturday like the Benedictines of Cluny,
to talk freely like the brothers of Grandmont, to go to one mass a
month, or at most two, like the Carthusians, to dress comfortably like
the Praemonstratensians, and so on. What is said here by our author
expresses the spirit of these rules rather than the letter.
1197 f. The text here gives the original reading, found in TH₂ and
remaining unaltered in S. CHG have ‘et si’ written over an erasure,
and in the next line ‘Mechari cupias’ is written over erasure in G,
‘Mechari cupias ordine’ in C, and ‘ordine’ alone in H. The other MSS.
have no erasures.
1212. CHG have this line written over an erasure.
1214. Written over erasure in CHG, the word ‘magis’ being still
visible in G as the last word of the line in the earlier text. The
expression ‘Linquo coax ranis’ is said to have been used by Serlo on
his renunciation of the schools: see Leyser, _Hist. Poet._ p. 443.
1215. The word ‘mundi’ is over erasure in CHG.
1221*-1232*. These lines are written over erasure in CHG.
1225. _A planta capiti_, ‘from foot to head’: more correctly, v. 116,
‘Ad caput a planta.’
LIB. V.
45. _Architesis._ It must be assumed that this word means ‘discord,’
the passage being a series of oppositions.
53. _Est amor egra salus_, &c. Compare the lines which follow our
author’s _Traitié_, ‘Est amor in glosa pax bellica, lis pietosa,’ &c.,
and Alanus de Insulis, _De Planctu Naturae_, p. 472 (Rolls Series, 59,
vol ii).
79 ff. There is not much construction here; but we must suppose that
after this loose and rambling description the general sense is resumed
at l. 129.
98. _Nec patet os in eis_: cp. Chaucer, _Book of the Duchess_, 942.
104. _Nec ... vix_: cp. l. 153 and vii. 12.
121 f. Cp. Ovid, _Her._ iv. 71 f.
123 f. Cp. _Fasti_, ii. 763.
165. From _Metam._ vii. 826, but quoted without much regard to the
sense. In the original there is a stop after ‘est,’ and ‘subito
collapsa dolore’ is the beginning of a new sentence of the narrative.
169 f. Cp. _Rem. Amoris_, 691 f.
171. Cp. _Her._ iv. 161.
193. Cp. _Her._ v. 149. For ‘O, quia’ cp. i. 59.
209. Cp. _Metam._ x. 189.
213. Cp. _Her._ vii. 179. We have here a curious example of the manner
in which our author adapts lines to his use without regard to the
original sense.
221. Cp. _Her._ ii. 63.
257 ff. Cp. _Mirour de l’Omme_, 23920, _Conf. Amantis_, iv. 1634.
280. _Numquid._ This seems to be used here and in some other passages
to introduce a statement: cp. ii. Prol. 59, iv. 637. Rather perhaps it
should be regarded as equivalent to ‘Nonne’ and the clause printed as a
question: so vii. 484, 892, &c. For ‘num’ used instead of ‘nonne’ cp.
ii. 306.
299. S has in the margin in a later hand, ‘Nota de muliere bona.’ The
description is taken of course from Prov. xxxi.
333. In the margin of S, as before, ‘Nota de muliere mala et eius
condicionibus.’
341 ff. Cp. Neckam, _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 186.
359 f. Cp. Ovid, _Ars Amat._ iii. 289, 294. Presumably ‘bleso’ in l.
360 is a mistake for ‘iusso.’
361. Cp. _Ars Amat._ iii. 291.
367 f. _Ars Amat._ iii. 311 f.
376. Cp. _Ars Amat._ i. 598.
383 f. This reference to Ovid seems to be with regard to what follows
about the art of preserving and improving beauty. Some of it is from
the _Ars Amatoria_, and some from Neckam, _De Vita Monachorum_. For
‘tenent,’ meaning ‘belong,’ cp. iii. 584.
399-402. Taken with slight changes from _Ars Amat._ iii. 163-166.
403. Cp. _Metam._ ii. 635.
405. Cp. _Ars Amat._ iii. 179.
407. Cp. _Ars Amat._ iii. 185.
413-416. _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 186.
421-428. _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 189.
450. The line (in the form ‘Illa quidem fatuos,’ &c.) is written over
an erasure in the Glasgow MS.
454. ‘interius’ is written over an erasure in HG.
461. _Vt quid_, ‘Why.’
501. The reading ‘nos,’ which is evidently right, appears in CG as a
correction of ‘non.’
510. ‘While one that is stained with its own filth flies from the
field.’
520. Cp. _Mirour de l’Omme_, 23701 ff.
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,