Introduction, p. cxvi. The French romance here grotesquely represents
Nectanabus as making up a disguise for himself with a ram’s head and
a dragon’s tail, which he joins together with wax, ‘e puis dedens se
mist.’ The Latin _Hist. de Preliis_ says simply that he changed himself
into a dragon.
2074 ff. The French has,
‘Une pel de moton ouvec les cornes prist,
Une coroune d’or sur les cornes assist.’
The punctuation after ‘tok’ is that of F, but I suspect that ‘in signe
of his noblesse’ belongs really in sense to 2076 f., and refers rather
to the crown than to the horns, in which case we ought to set a full
stop after ‘bar.’
2113. _seth hire grone_, that is, in child-bed.
2128 ff. The French romance, following Valerius in the main, gives a
rather confused account of Philip’s dream. Gower has turned from it to
the _Historia de Preliis_.
2160. _Amphion._ The name apparently is got from ‘Antifon,’ which
occurs below in connexion with the incident of the pheasant’s egg.
2182. _rampende._ The French has ‘mult fierement rampant.’
2199 ff. The transformation into an eagle is found in Valerius and the
French romance, and not in the _Hist. de Preliis_. It may be noted,
however, that the picturesque description which we have here of the
eagle pruning himself and then shaking his feathers, so that the hall
was moved as by an earthquake, is Gower’s own.
2219 ff. The Latin accounts say that a bird, according to Valerius a
hen, came and laid an egg in Philip’s lap as he sat in his hall. The
_Rom. de toute Chevalerie_ makes the incident take place out in the
fields, and the bird, as here, is a pheasant. The expression used, ‘Un
oef laissat chaïr sur les curs Phelippun,’ seems to mean that the egg
was laid in Philip’s lap. There is nothing about the heat of the sun in
the Latin versions.
2250 ff. These lines refer to the precautions taken by Nectanabus to
secure that the child shall be born precisely at the right astrological
moment: cp. _Rom. de toute Chevalerie_, 401-425. Gower has chosen to
omit the details.
2274. _Calistre_, i. e. Callisthenes, who was reputed to be the author
of the history of Alexander which Valerius translated.
2299 ff. The question of Alexander and the answer of Nectanabus is
given as here in the _Hist. de Preliis_. In Valerius and the French
romance Alexander throws Nectanabus down merely in order to surprise
him, and the suggestion that Nectanabus knew that he should die by the
hands of his son is not made till afterwards.
2368. _Zorastes._ The statement here about the laughter of Zoroaster
at his birth is ultimately derived from Pliny, _Hist. Nat._ vii. 15.
It is repeated by Augustine, with the addition ‘nec ei boni aliquid
monstrosus risus ille portendit. Nam magicarum artium fuisse perhibetur
inventor; quae quidem illi nec ad praesentis vitae vanam felicitatem
contra suos inimicos prodesse potuerunt; a Nino quippe rege Assyriorum,
cum esset ipse Bactrianorum, bello superatus est’ (_De Civ. Dei_, xxi.
14).
2381. ‘Like wool which is ill spun’: cp. i. 10.
2387. _Phitonesse_, cp. iv. 1937.
2411. _betawht To Aristotle_, ‘delivered over to Aristotle’: ‘betawht’
is the past partic. of ‘beteche,’ which occurs afterwards, vii. 4234,
and in Chaucer, _Cant. Tales_, B 2114, ‘Now such a rym the devel I
beteche.’
2418. _Yit for a time_: to be taken as one phrase; cp. ‘for a while
yit,’ &c., ll. 311, 738, 893.
LIB. VII.
The account given in the earlier part of this book of the parts of
Philosophy, that is, of the objects of human knowledge, represents in
its essentials the Aristotelian system. The division into ‘Theorique,’
‘Rethorique,’ and ‘Practique’ is in effect the same as Aristotle’s
classification of knowledge as Theoretical, Poetical, and Practical,
and the further division of ‘Theorique’ into Theology, Physics, and
Mathematics, and of ‘Practique’ into Ethics, Economics, and Politics,
is that which is made by Aristotle. The statement of Pauli and others
that this part of Gower’s work is ‘very likely borrowed’ from the
_Secretum Secretorum_ is absolutely unfounded. This treatise is not
in any sense an exposition of the Aristotelian philosophy, indeed
it is largely made up of rules for diet and regimen with medical
prescriptions. Gower is indebted to it only in a slight degree, and
principally in two places, vii. 2014-2057, the discussion of Liberality
in a king, and 3207*-3360*, the tale of the Jew and the Pagan.
The most important authority, however, for the earlier part of the
seventh book has hitherto been overlooked. It is the _Trésor_ of
Brunetto Latini. This book is very largely based upon Aristotle, with
whose works Latini was exceptionally well acquainted, and it is from
this that Gower takes his classification of the sciences, though in
regard to the place of Rhetoric he does not quite agree with Latini,
who brings it in under the head of ‘Politique,’ making Logic the third
main branch of philosophy. Gower takes from the _Trésor_ also many
of his physical and geographical statements and his reference to the
debate on the conspiracy of Catiline. On the other hand his astronomy
is for the most part independent of the _Trésor_, and so also is his
method of dealing with the principles of Government, under the five
points of Policy. Brunetto Latini does not treat of politics generally
so much as of the practical rules to be observed by the Podestà of
an Italian republic. It may be observed that Gower has drawn on the
_Trésor_ also in the sketch of general history given in the Prologue
(ll. 727-820). I refer to pages of the edition of Chabaille, 1863.
26 ff. ‘As to which Aristotle ... declares the “intelligences” under
three heads especially.’ The meaning of ‘intelligences’ here and in l.
176, and of ‘intelligencias’ in the margin, l. 149, seems to be nearly
the same as ‘sciences,’ that is to say, divisions or provinces of
knowledge.
155. _Algorisme._ This stands properly for the decimal system of
numeration, but the use of the word in the plural, l. 158, shows that
Gower did not use it in this sense only. The association of the word
‘Algorismes’ below with the letters _a_, _b_, _c_ (‘Abece’) seems to
suggest some kind of algebraical expression, but this is perhaps due
to a misunderstanding by Gower of the word ‘abaque’ (or ‘abake’) in
the _Trésor_, p. 6: ‘Et de ce sont li enseignement de l’abaque et de
l’augorisme.’
183 ff. ‘Ce est la science par laquele li vii sage s’esforcierent par
soutillece de geometrie de trover la grandeur dou ciel et de la terre,
et la hautesce entre l’un et l’autre.’ _Trésor_, pp. 6, 7.
207 ff. Cp. _Trésor_, p. 15, ‘Cele matiere de quoi ces choses furent
formées les desvance de naissance, non mie de tens, autressi comme li
sons est devant le chant, ... et neporquant andui sont ensemble.’ Cp.
pp. 104, 105.
216. _Ylem_, this is ‘hyle’ (Gr. ὕλη), the Aristotelian term for
matter. For what follows cp. _Trésor_, p. 105.
245. This comparison of the movement of water within the earth to the
circulation of blood in the veins, is taken from the _Trésor_, p. 115:
‘autressi comme li sangs de l’ome qui s’espant par ses vaines, si que
il encherche tout le cors amont et aval.’
256 ff. Cp. _Trésor_, p. 117.
265 ff. This which follows about the Air seems to be partly independent
of the _Trésor_, and the word ‘periferie’ is not there used. Aristotle
divides the atmosphere into two regions only, that of ἀτμίς or moist
vapour, corresponding to the first and second periferies here, and
that of exhalation (ἀναθυμίασις) or fiery vapour, corresponding to the
third, _Meteor._ i. 3.
283 f. ‘According to the condition under which they take their form.’
I suppose the word ‘intersticion’ to be taken from ‘interstitium,’ as
used with a technical sense in astrology. Albumasar, for example, says,
‘Quicquid in hoc mundo nascitur et occidit ex quatuor elementis est
compositum, tribus interstitiis educatum, scilicet principio, medio et
fine, quae tria in illa quatuor ducta duodecim producunt.’ This is the
cause, he says, why there are twelve signs of the zodiac, ‘Praesunt
siquidem haec signa quatuor elementis eorumque tribus interstitiis.’
He then explains that the first ‘interstitium’ of each element is that
condition of it which is favourable to production, growth and vigour,
the second that which is stationary, and the third that which tends
to decay and corruption, so that the word is almost equivalent to
condition or quality. (Vincent of Beauvais, _Spec. Nat._ xv. 36.)
302. Cp. _Trésor_, p. 119, ‘mais li fors deboutemenz dou vent la
destraint et chace si roidement que ele fent et passe les nues et fait
toner et espartir.’
307 ff. Cp. _Trésor_, p. 120.
323 ff. _Trésor_, p. 120, ‘dont aucunes gens cuident que ce soit li
dragons ou que ce soit une estele qui chiet.’ What follows about
‘exhalations’ is not from the _Trésor_.
334. _Assub._ This word is used in Latin translations of Aristotle as
an equivalent of ‘stella cadens.’
339. _exalacion._ This stands for fiery vapour only, originally a
translation of Aristotle’s ἀναθυμίασις.
351 ff. The names ‘Eges’ and ‘Daaly’ (l. 361), must be taken originally
from Aristotle’s expression δαλοὶ καὶ αἶγες, which he says are names
given by some people to various forms of fire in the sky, _Meteor._
i. 4. Our author simply repeated the terms after his authorities and
without understanding them. In fact, ‘Eges’ stands for the same as the
‘Capra saliens’ of the preceding lines.
389. The idea of the four complexions of man, corresponding to the
four elements, is not due to Aristotle, but we find it in the _Trésor_.
The application to matters of love in ll. 393-440 is presumably Gower’s
own.
405 f. Aristotle says on the contrary, οἱ μελαγχολικοὶ οἱ πλεῖστοι
λάγνοι εἰσίν, _Probl._ 30.
437. _To thenke._ For this use of ‘may’ with the gerund cp. ii. 510, ‘I
myhte noght To soffre.’
510. ‘While the flesh has power to act,’ that is during the life of the
body.
521 ff. For the geography which follows cp. _Trésor_, pp. 151-153.
534. _the hevene cope_: cp. l. 1579, ‘under the coupe of hevene,’ where
the spelling suggests the Latin ‘cupa,’ rather than ‘capa,’ as the
origin of the word in this common phrase. The quality of the ‘o’ in
Europe is perhaps doubtful.
536. _Begripeth_: used here as plural, cp. l. 1107: ‘calleth’ in l. 561
with ‘men’ (indef.) as the subject is not a case of the same kind.
545. _who that rede_: subj., cp. Prol. 460.
559. That is, presumably, double as much as either of the other two:
cp. _Trésor_, p. 152, ‘car Asie tient bien l’une moitié de toute la
terre.’
566. _Canahim_: a mistake for ‘Tanaim’ (or ‘Tanain’), see _Trésor_,
p. 152, where the extent of Asia is said to be from the mouths of the
Nile and the ‘Tanain’ (i. e. the Don) as far as the Ocean and the
terrestrial Paradise.
593 ff. Cp. _Trésor_, p. 115.
597. Latini says that this is the explanation given by some people of
the tides, but he adds that the astronomers do not agree with them
(_Trésor_, p. 172).
611. Aristotle does in fact make of αἰθήρ a fifth element, of which the
heaven and the heavenly bodies consist, but Gower takes this account of
it and the name Orbis from the _Trésor_, p. 110, where also we find the
comparison to the shell of an egg.
652 ff. ‘Sapiens dominabitur astris,’ an opinion which is developed in
the _Vox Clamantis_, ii. 217 ff.
694. _Bot thorizonte_, ‘beyond the horizon’: so perhaps in the first
text of v. 3306, ‘But of his lond’ stood for ‘Out of his lond.’
However, this use of ‘but’ is not clearly established in Southern ME.
and perhaps the reading of the second recension, ‘Be thorizonte,’ may
be right. As regards sense, one is much the same as the other: neither
is very intelligible, unless ‘thorizonte’ means the ecliptic.
699. _thei_, that is the planets, not the signs.
725 ff. Cp. _Trésor_, p. 141.
831. _is that on_, i. e. ‘is one,’ or ‘is the first.’
853. The sun’s horses are named by Fulgentius, _Mythol._ ii, in the
same order as we have here, ‘Erythreus, Actæon, Lampos, Philogeus.’
They are said there to represent four divisions of the day, Erythreus,
for example, having his name from the red light of morning, and
Philogeus from the inclination of the sun towards the earth at evening.
Ovid gives a different set of names.
944. ‘In whatever degree he shall exercise his powers.’
978. _as it appendeth_, ‘as it is fitting,’ lit. ‘as it belongs’: cp.
‘appent,’ _Mir._ 1535.
979. _natheles._ This word is frequently used by Gower with no sense of
opposition, meaning ‘moreover’ or something similar: cp. i. 21, vii.
3877, &c.
983. It may be observed that (in spite of this reference and that in l.
1043) our author’s statements about the number and arrangement of stars
in the constellations of the zodiac do not at all correspond with those
in the Almagest.
983 (margin). _produxit ad esse_, ‘brought forth into existence’: the
infinitive is often used as a substantive in Gower’s Latin: e. g. Prol.
_Lat. Verses_, iv. 4, v. 6.
989. _hot and drye._ According to the astrologers, Aries, Leo, and
Sagittarius preside over the element of fire, and are hot and dry by
nature; Taurus, Virgo, Capricornus over that of earth, being dry and
cold; Gemini, Libra, Aquarius preside over air, and are hot and moist;
while Cancer, Scorpio, and Pisces are moist and cold, having dominion
over water (Albumasar, cited by Vincent of Beauvais, _Spec. Nat._ xv.
36).
991 f. Aries and Scorpio are the ‘houses’ or ‘mansions’ of Mars, Taurus
and Libra of Venus, Gemini and Virgo of Mercury, Cancer of the Moon,
Leo of the Sun, Sagittarius and Pisces of Jupiter, Capricornus and
Aquarius of Saturn.
1021. _somdiel descordant_: the hot and moist Libra is more in
accordance with her nature: see 1111 ff.
1036 f. This statement and the others like it below, 1073, 1089, 1127,
1147, 1198, 1222, may be taken to indicate that the division of the
signs was very uncertain in our author’s mind. It may be observed that
the usual representation of Taurus in star-maps is with his head, not
his tail, towards Gemini.
1085. _the risinge_: that is to say, Virgo is the ‘exaltation’ of
Mercury, as well as one of his houses.
1100. For the sense of ‘applied’ cp. v. 913.
1115 f. Libra is the exaltation of Saturn.
1135. That is to say, Scorpio is the ‘fall’ of Venus, being the sign
opposite to one of her houses, namely Taurus.
1155 f. Sagittarius is a house of Jupiter, and it is opposite to
Gemini, which is one of the houses of Mercury.
1162. _The Plowed Oxe_, i. e. the ox that has ploughed the land.
1166. Then the swine are killed and the larder, or bacon-tub, comes
into use.
1175. Capricorn is the ‘fall’ of the Moon, being opposite to her house,
Cancer, as the next sign Aquarius is that of the Sun, see l. 1190.
1216. ‘Piscis’ is the reading of the MSS. here in text and margin, but
‘Pisces’ in l. 1253.
1229 ff. That is, Pisces is a house of Jupiter and the exaltation of
Venus.
1239 ff. The reference is apparently to the _Introductorium_ of
Albumasar, but the printed editions of this give an abbreviated text
which does not help us here. A fuller translation of the original may
be found in manuscript, e. g. MS. Digby 194, where something more or
less corresponding to this may be found on f. 55, but the Arabic names
of places make it difficult to follow.
1281 ff. This account of the fifteen stars with their herbs and stones
is taken by Gower from a treatise called ‘Liber Hermetis de xv stellis
et de xv lapidibus et de xv herbis, xv figuris,’ &c., which may be
found in several manuscripts, e. g. MSS. Ashmole 341 (f. 123) and 1471
(f. 120 v^o): cp. l. 1437, where Hermes is mentioned as the authority.
Some information as to the names of the stars here mentioned may be
found in Ideler’s _Untersuchungen über den Ursprung und die Bedeutung
der Sternnamen_, 1809.
1292 ff. ‘Et scias quod stelle fixe habent fortunia et infortunia
quemadmodum et planete’ (_Lib. Herm._).
1317. ‘anabulla seu titimallum.’
1329. _Algol_, or Caput Algol, the Arabic ‘Ras el-ghûl’ (devil’s head),
in Perseus.
1338. _Alhaiot_, probably for ‘Alhaioc,’ that is Capella, from the
Arabic ‘El-‛aijûk.’
1343. ‘prassium seu marrubium.’
1345. _Canis maior_, ‘Alhabor,’ i. e. Sirius.
1356. _Canis minor_, ‘Algomeiza,’ i. e. Procyon.
1362. _Primerole_: in the _Liber Hermetis_ we have here ‘solsecium,
quam elitropiam vocant.’
1364. _Arial_, apparently ‘Cor Leonis,’ i. e. Regulus.
1367. _Gorgonza_: ‘gregonza’ in MS. Ash. 341.
1375. ‘lappacium maius.’
1378. _gret riote_: ‘color huius niger est, faciens hominem iratum,
animosum et audacem et mala cogitantem et maledicentem ... et faciens
fugere demones et congregare.’
1379 ff. ‘Nona stella dicitur Atimet Alaazel, ... et est ex natura
Veneris et Mercurii, et dicitur stella pulchritudinis et racionis,’ &c.
The name ‘Atimet Alaazel’ is from the Arabic ‘El-simâk el-a‛zal,’ that
is the star which we call Spica.
1385. _Salge_, Lat. ‘saluia.’
1387. ‘Decima vero stella Atimet Alrameth, et dicitur saltator, et est
ex natura Martis et Iouis.’ This is the Arabic ‘El-simâk el-râmih,’
which we call Arcturus.
1393. _Venenas_: ‘Vndecima stella dicitur Benenais et est postrema de
ii stellis que sunt in cauda urse maioris.’ In Arabic ‘Banat Na‛sh.’
1401. _Alpheta_, ‘Elfetah,’ from the Arabic ‘El-fak‛ah’ (the beggar’s
dish), meaning the constellation which we call the Northern Crown. Here
the name stands for the principal star of that constellation, Gemma.
1419. _Botercadent._ The Latin says ‘Vultur cadens,’ that is perhaps
Vega; but ‘Botercadent’ would probably be a different star, namely that
called in Arabic ‘Batn-Kaitos’ or Whale’s belly.
1426. _Tail of Scorpio_: in the Latin ‘Cauda Capricorni.’
1449 ff. These names of the chief authors of the science of astronomy
seem to be partly taken from the treatise called _Speculum Astronomiae_
or _De libris licitis et illicitis_, cap. ii. (_Alberti Magni Opera_,
v. 657): cp. note on vi. 1311 ff. The passage is as follows, under
the heading ‘De libris astronomicis antiquorum’: ‘Ex libris ergo qui
post libros geometricos et arithmeticos inueniuntur apud nos scripti
super his, primus tempore compositionis est liber quem edidit Nembroth
gigas ad Iohathonem discipulum suum, qui sic incipit: _Sphaera caeli_
&c., in quo est parum proficui et falsitates nonnullae, sed nihil
est ibi contra fidem quod sciam. Sed quod de hac scientia vtilius
inuenitur, est liber Ptolemaei Pheludensis, qui dicitur Graece Megasti,
Arabice Almagesti, ... quod tamen in eo diligentiae causa dictum est
prolixe, commode restringitur ab Azarchele Hispano, qui dictus est
Albategni in libro suo.... Voluitque Alpetragius corrigere principia et
suppositiones Ptolemaei,’ &c.
It would seem that, either owing to corruption of his text or to
misunderstanding, our author separated the name ‘Megasti’ from its
connexion with Ptolemy and the Almagest, and made of it a book called
‘Megaster,’ which he attributes to Nembrot.
1461. Alfraganus was author of a book called in Latin _Rudimenta
Astronomica_.
1576 f. _out of herre ... entriketh_, that is, ‘involves (this world)
in perplexity, so that it is disordered.’
1579. _coupe of hevene_, see note on l. 534.
1595 ff. The discussion in the Roman Senate on the fate of the
accomplices of Catiline is here taken as a model of rhetorical
treatment. The idea is a happy one, but it is borrowed from the
_Trésor_, where Latini, after laying down the rules of rhetoric,
illustrates them (pp. 505-517) by a report and analysis of the speeches
in this debate, as they are given by Sallust. The ‘Cillenus’ mentioned
below is D. Junius Silanus, who as consul-designate gave his opinion
first. It is tolerably evident in this passage, as it is obvious in
iv. 2647 ff., that Gower did not identify Tullius with Cicero, though
Latini actually says, ‘Marcus Tullius Cicero, cils meismes qui enseigne
l’art de rectorique, estoit adonques consule de Rome.’
1615 ff. Cp. _Trésor_, p. 509, ‘mais Jules Cesar, qui autre chose
pensoit, se torna as covertures et as moz dorez, porce que sa matiere
estoit contraire,’ &c.
1623. _after the lawe._ It may be observed as a matter of fact that the
law was on the side of Caesar, and that this was his chief argument
against the death penalty.
1706. _Fyf pointz._ The _Secretum Secretorum_ recommends to rulers the
virtues of Liberality, Wisdom, Chastity, Mercy, Truth, and afterwards
of Justice, but there is no very systematic arrangement there, nor in
general does the treatment of the subject, except partly as regards
Liberality, resemble Gower’s. It has been already observed that the
treatment of Politics in the _Trésor_ is altogether different from that
which we have here.
1783 ff. This story comes originally from 3 Esdras, ch. iii, iv. The
names, however, of Arpaghes and Manachaz are not found in the text of
that book, and the story of Alcestis, which Zorobabel tells, is of
course a later addition, made no doubt by our author.
1809. ‘Having his mind so disposed.’
1856. _behelde_, an archaic form, used here for the rhyme.
1884 ff. 3 Esdr. iv. 29, ‘Videbam tamen Apemen filiam Bezacis, mirifici
concubinam regis, sedentem iuxta regem ad dexteram,’ &c.
1961 f. ‘He that is true shall never rue,’ or some such jingle. Cp.
Shaksp. _K. John_, v. 7,
‘Nought shall make us rue,
If England to herself do rest but true.’
2000. _laste_, pret. ‘lasted’: cp. Prol. 672, iv. 2315.
2017 ff. This seems to be suggested by a passage in the _Secretum
Secretorum_. ‘Reges sunt quattuor. Rex largus subditis et largus sibi,
Rex auarus subditis et auarus sibi, Rex auarus sibi et largus subditis,
Rex largus sibi et auarus subditis.’ This last is pronounced to be the
worst, as the first is the best.
2031 ff. This refers to a passage in the _Secretum Secretorum_ (ed.
1520, f. 8), which runs thus in the printed edition: ‘Que fuit causa
destructionis regni calculorum: vnde quia superfluitas expensarum
superat redditus ciuitatum, et sic deficientibus redditibus et expensis
reges extenderunt manus suas ad res et redditus aliorum. Subditi ergo
propter iniuriam clamauerunt ad deum excelsum gloriosum, qui immittens
ventum calidum afflixit eos vehementer, et insurrexit populus contra
eos et nomina eorum penitus de terra deleuerunt.’
This is obviously corrupt, and it is evident that ‘calculorum’ stands
for a proper name, which Gower read ‘Caldeorum,’ as it is in MS. Laud
708. Other Bodleian MSS. to which I have referred give ‘Saldeorum’
(Bodley 181), ‘cangulorum’ (Add. C. 12), ‘singulorum ’ (Laud 645),
‘Anglorum’ (Digby 170). ‘Nonne’ is the reading of the MSS. for ‘vnde,’
and it seems that ‘Que fuit’ &c. is also a question.
2039. So in the _Secretum Secretorum_ (shortly before the passage
quoted above), ‘Debes igitur dona dare iuxta posse tuum cum mensura,
hominibus indigentibus atque dignis.’
2050. _of ken_, here apparently ‘of quality.’
2061 ff. The basis of this story is to be found in Seneca, _De
Beneficiis_, v. 24, ‘Causam dicebat apud divum Iulium ex veteranis
quidam,’ &c., but there is no question there of an advocate; the
veteran simply gains his case by recalling his personal services.
The story appears in a form more like that of Gower in the _Gesta
Romanorum_, 87 (ed. Oesterley), but the name Julius is not there
mentioned, only ‘Quidam imperator.’ It may be observed also in general,
that though many stories are common to the _Gesta Romanorum_ and
the _Confessio Amantis_, there is no instance in which Gower can be
proved to have used the _Gesta Romanorum_ as his authority. Indeed the
tales are there so meagrely and badly told for the most part, that
there would be little temptation to turn to it if any other book were
available.
Such references as ‘dicitur in gestis Romanorum’ are not to this book
but to Roman History.
Hoccleve tells this story much as we have it here, in his _Regement of
Princes_, 3270 ff., e. g.
‘Han ye forgote how scharp it with yow ferde,
Whan ye were in the werres of Asie?
Maffeith, your lif stood there in jupartie;
And advocat ne sente I non to yow,
But myself put in prees and for yow faght,’ &c.