Chapter L: LAUD 719, Bodleian Library, Oxford. Contains Vox Clamantis (14)

961 f. The construction of accusative with infinitive is here used after ‘Ecce,’ as if it were a verb, and ‘Calcas’ is evidently meant for an accusative case. It is probable that the names here given, Calchas, Antenor, Thersites, Diomede, Ulysses, as well as those which follow in ll. 985 ff., are meant to stand for general types, rather than for particular persons connected with the government. In any case we could hardly identify them.

997. _Vix Hecube thalami_, &c. This looks like an allusion to the princess of Wales, the king’s mother, whose apartments in the Tower were in fact invaded by the mob. Similarly in the lines that follow ‘Helenus’ stands for the archbishop of Canterbury.

1019 ff. The text of these five lines, as we find it in DTH₂, that is in its earlier form, was taken for the most part from the _Aurora_ of Petrus (de) Riga, (MS. Bodley 822) f. 88 v^o,

‘Non rannus pungens, set oliua uirens, set odora
Ficus, set blanda uitis abhorret eos.
Anticristus enim regit hos, nam spiritus almus,
Nam lex, nam Cristus, non dominatur eis.’

He is speaking of the parable of Jotham in the Book of Judges.

1046. _Fasti_, ii. 228.

1073. _medioque_: written apparently for ‘mediaque.’

1076. _posse caret_, ‘is without effect.’

1081. Cp. _Tristia_, iv. 2. 5 f.

1094. Cp. _Fasti_, i. 122.

1141. _Metam._ vi. 559.

1143. Cp. _Metam._ vii. 603.

1161. _Metam._ vii. 602. Considering that the line is borrowed from Ovid, we cannot attach much importance to it as indicating what was done with the body of the archbishop.

1173. _ostia iuris_: cp. Walsingham, i. 457, ‘locum qui vocatur “Temple Barre,” in quo apprenticii iuris morabantur nobiliores, diruerunt.’

1188. Cp. Ovid, _Her._ iii. 4.

1189. _Metam._ v. 41.

1193 f. Cp. _Ars Amat._ ii. 373 f., where, however, we have ‘cum rotat,’ not ‘conrotat.’

1206. _Quam periturus erat_, ‘rather than that he should perish,’ apparently.

1209. Cp. _Metam._ v. 40.

1211. _Metam._ xiv. 408.

1215 f. A reference probably to the massacre of the Flemings.

1219 f. _Fasti_, iii. 509 f.

1221 f. Ovid, _Amores_, iii. 9. 11 f.

1224. Cp. _Her._ v. 68.

1253. Cp. _Metam._ vii. 599, ‘Exiguo tinxit subiectos sanguine cultros.’

1271. Perhaps ‘cessit’ is right, as in l. 1265, but the reading of C is the result of a correction, and the corrections of this manuscript are usually sound.

1279 f. If there is any construction here, it must be ‘Erumpunt lacrimae luminibus, que lumina,’ &c. For this kind of ellipse cp. l. 1501.

1283. Cp. _Her._ viii. 77.

1289. _Metam._ ix. 775.

Cap. xvi. _Heading_, l. 1. _quasi in propria persona_: cf. _Conf. Amantis_, i. 60, _margin_, ‘Hic quasi in persona aliorum quos amor alligat, fingens se auctor esse Amantem,’ &c. The author takes care to guard his readers against a too personal application of his descriptions.

1359. Cp. Ovid, _Metam._ xiv. 198. In the lines that follow our author has rather ingeniously appropriated several other expressions from the same story of Ulysses and Polyphemus.

1363 f. _Ars Amat._ iii. 723 f.

1365. _Metam._ xiv. 206.

1369. _Metam._ xiv. 200.

1379 f. Cp. _Tristia_, v. 4. 33 f.

1385 f. _Her._ xx. 91 f.

1387. Cp. _Metam._ xiv. 120.

1395. Cp. _Metam._ iv. 723.

1397 f. Cp. _Tristia_, i. 3. 53 f.

1401 f. Cp. _Fasti_, v. 315 f.

1403. Cp. _Metam._ xv. 27.

1413 f. _Pont._ i. 3. 57 f.

1420. Cp. _Her._ iii. 24, used here with a change of meaning.

1424. Cp. _Ars Amat._ ii. 88, ‘Nox oculis pavido venit oborta metu.’

1425 f. _Pont._ i. 2. 45 f.

1429 f. Cp. _Pont._ i. 2. 49 f.

1433. _Metam._ iii. 709.

1442. Cp. _Her._ v. 14, where we have ‘Mixtaque’ instead of ‘Copula.’

1445 ff. Cp. _Metam._ xiv. 214-216.

1453. Adapted from _Metam._ iv. 263, ‘Rore mero lacrimisque suis ieiunia pavit.’ The change of ‘mero’ to ‘meo’ involves a tasteless alteration of the sense, while the sound is preserved.

1459. Cp. _Rem. Amoris_, 581.

1465. _Metam._ ii. 656. Our author has borrowed the line without supplying an appropriate context, and the result is nonsense. Ovid has

‘Suspirat ab imis
Pectoribus, lacrimaeque genis labuntur obortae.’

1467 f. _Pont._ i. 2. 29 f.

1469. Cp. _Metam._ xiii. 539.

1473. Ovid, _Metam._ viii. 469.

1475. _Metam._ iv. 135, borrowed without much regard to the context.

1485. From Ovid, _Her._ xiv. 37, where however we have ‘calor,’ not ‘color,’ a material difference.

1496. _Her._ v. 46.

1497. The expression ‘verbis solabar amicis’ is from Ovid (_Fasti_, v. 237), but here ‘solabar’ seems to be made passive in sense.

1501 f. i.e. ‘cessat amor eius qui prius,’ &c., with a rather harsh ellipse of the antecedent. The couplet is a parody of Ovid, _Pont._ iv. 6. 23 f.,

‘Nam cum praestiteris verum mihi semper amorem,
Hic tamen adverso tempore crevit amor.’

1503 f. Cp. _Tristia_, iii. i. 65 f.,

‘Quaerebam fratres, exceptis scilicet illis,
Quos suus optaret non genuisse pater.’

1506. _Fasti_, i. 148, not very appropriate here.

1512. _Her._ xi. 82.

1514. Cp. _Her._ xiii. 86, ‘Substitit auspicii lingua timore mali.’

1517 f. Cp. _Her._ iii. 43 f.

1519. Cp. _Pont._ iii. 4. 75.

1521. Cp. _Tristia_, i. 11. 23.

1534. Cp. _Tristia_, v. 4. 4, ‘Heu quanto melior sors tua sorte mea est.’

1535 ff. Cp. _Tristia_, iii. 3. 39 ff.

1539 f. _Tristia_, iii. 3. 29 f.

1541. _scis quia_: ‘quia’ for ‘quod,’ cp. l. 1593; ‘puto quod,’ i. Prol. 15, &c.

1549. Cp. _Fasti_, i. 483.

1564. _Her._ xiv. 52.

1565 f. Cp. _Her._ x. 113 f. The lines are not very appropriate here.

1568. See note on l. 1420.

1569. Cp. _Metam._ iii. 396.

1571. Cp. _Metam._ xiv. 210.

1573. Cp. _Metam._ vii. 614.

1575. Cp. _Metam._ ix. 583.

1581. _Obice singultu_, that is, ‘Impediente singultu’: cp. _Cronica Tripertita_, ii. 3.

1585. _Metam._ xiv. 217.

1589. _Tristia_, i. 5. 45.

1593. _vidi quia_: cp. l. 1541.

1609. _quid agant alii_, ‘whatever others may do.’

1612. Cp. _Her._ xix. 52.

1615 f. It seems probable that this is a prayer to the Virgin Mary, whose name ‘Star of the Sea’ was used long before the fourteenth century, e.g.

‘Praevia stella maris de mundo redde procella
Tutos: succurre, praevia stella maris,’

in an address to the Virgin by Eberhard (date 1212) in Leyser, _Poet. Med. Aevi_, p. 834, and the name occurs also in Peter Damian’s hymns (xi. cent.). For Gower’s use of the expression cp. _Mirour de l’Omme_, 29925, ‘O de la mer estoille pure,’ and later in this book, l. 2033, ‘Stella, Maria, maris.’ Here, however, we might translate, ‘Be thou a star of the sea going before me,’ taking it as a prayer to Christ.

1623. _Metam._ i. 265.

1627. _Extra se positus_, ‘beside himself.’

1630. _Fasti_, iv. 386.

1631. Cp. _Metam._ i. 282.

1635. Cp. _Metam._ i. 269.

1637. Cp. _Metam._ i. 270.

1653 ff. From this point to the end of the chapter the description is mostly taken from Ovid, _Metam._ xi. 480-523, many hexameters being appropriated without material change, e.g. ll. 480, 482, 484, 486, 488, 491, 492, 495, 499, 501, 516, 517, 519 f.

1689. The line is taken away from its context, and consequently gives no sense. In Ovid it is,

‘Ipse pavet, nec se qui sit status ipse fatetur
Scire ratis rector.’--_Metam._ xi. 492.

1693. _Metam._ i. 292.

1695. From Peter Riga, _Aurora_, (MS. Bodley 822) f. 16 v^o.

1697-1700. Cp. _Aurora_, f. 15 v^o,

‘Fontes ingresso Noe corrumpuntur abyssi,
Et de uisceribus terra fluenta uomit.
Effundunt nubes pluuias, deciesque quaternis
Sustinet inmensas archa diebus aquas.’

1717 f. Cp. Ovid, _Metam._ iv. 689 f.

1719. Cp. _Metam._ iv. 706 f. Ovid has ‘praefixo,’ which is more satisfactory.

1721. Cp. _Metam._ iv. 690.

1727 f. _Tristia_, i. 11. 21 f.

1729. _Fasti_, iii. 593.

1735. _Metam._ xi. 539.

1739. Cp. _Metam._ xi. 515, ‘Rima patet, praebetque viam letalibus undis.’

1774. Cp. _Fasti_, ii. 98.

1775 f. Cp. _Amores_, ii. 11. 9 f.

1779 f. _Tristia_, v. 12. 5 f.

1781. _Metam._ xiv. 213.

1825. Cp. _Tristia_, ii. 179.

1832. _Tristia_, i. 5. 36.

1847 f. Cp. Ovid, _Pont._ iii. 7. 27 f. In the second line Ovid has ‘tumidis,’ for which there is no authority in Gower. Our author perhaps read ‘timidis’ in his copy of Ovid, or made the change himself, taking ‘timidis’ to mean ‘fearful.’

1879. ‘Perhaps that day would have been the last of confusion, even if,’ &c. This, by the context, would seem to be the meaning.

1898. Ovid, _Fasti_, iv. 542.

1899 f. Cp. _Pont._ i. 3. 9 f.

1907 f. From Godfrey of Viterbo, _Pantheon_, p. 82 (ed. 1584).

1909. ‘But he who walked upon the sea,’ &c., that is, Christ.

1913. Cp. _Metam._ i. 328, ‘Nubila disiecit, nimbisque Aquilone remotis.’

1917. _Metam._ i. 329.

1919. Cp. _Metam._ i. 345.

1921. Cp. _Metam._ v. 286, where we have ‘nubila,’ as the sense requires. Here the MSS. give ‘numina’ without variation.

1923. Cp. _Metam._ ix. 795.

1925. _Metam._ i. 344.

1935. _Metam._ xiii. 440.

1939. _Metam._ xiii. 419.

1944. _Quam prius_: for ‘prius quam,’ as often.

1963 f. This alludes to the supposed reply made to Brutus (son of Silvius), when he consulted the oracle of Diana in the island of Leogecia, ‘Brute, sub occasum solis,’ &c., as told by Geoffrey of Monmouth.

1979 f. Ovid, _Pont._ iii. 8. 15 f.

1991 ff. Cp. _Tristia_, i. 11. 25 ff.

1997 f. _Tristia_, iii. 2. 25 f.

2001 f. Cp. _Her._ xi. 27 f.

2003 f. _Her._ xiv. 39 f.

2029 f. Cp. _Rem. Amoris_, 119 f.

2031 f. Cp. _Rem. Amoris_, 531 f.

2033 f. Cp. _Her._ ii. 123 f.

2037 f. _Pont._ iv. 3. 49 f.

2043. Cp. _Pont._ i. 4. 21. In Ovid we read ‘animus quoque pascitur illis,’ and this probably was what Gower intended to write.

2071 f. Cp. _Pont._ ii. 7. 9 f.

2074. _Pont._ ii. 7. 8.

2091. Cp. _Hist. Apollonii Tyrii_, xli, ‘Sicut rosa in spinis nescit compungi mucrone.’

2139. Cp. _Pont._ i. 5. 47.

2150. Cp. _Rem. Amoris_, 484.

LIB. II. PROLOGUS.

15. Cp. _Speculum Stultorum_, p. 11, l. 41 (Rolls Series, 59, vol. i.).

41. Deut. xxxii. 13, ‘ut sugeret mel de petra oleumque de saxo durissimo.’

49 f. Cp. _Fasti_, i. 73 f.

51. The supposed mischief-maker is compared to Sinon, who gave a signal by fire which led to the destruction of Troy: cp. _Conf. Amantis_, i. 1172. I cannot satisfactorily explain ‘Excetra.’

57 f. From Neckam, _De Vita Monachorum_, p. 175 (ed. Wright, Rolls Series, 59, vol. ii.).

61. _De modicis ... modicum_: cp. _Mirour de l’Omme_, 16532.

64. Cp. Ovid, _Ars Amat._ ii. 166.

LIB. II.

With the general drift of what follows cp. _Conf. Amantis_, Prol. 529 ff.

1. _Incausti specie_, cp. _Conf. Amantis_, viii. 2212.

18. _nos_: meaning the people of England, as compared with those of other countries.

31 f. Cp. Ovid, _Tristia_, v. 8. 19 f.

33. _Tristia_, v. 5. 47.

41. Job v. 6, ‘Nihil in terra sine causa fit’: cp. _Mirour de l’Omme_, 26857.

59. This is the usual opposition of rose and nettle, based perhaps originally on Ovid, _Rem. Amoris_, 46: cp. _Conf. Amantis_, ii. 401 ff.

67 f. Cp. Boethius, _Consol. Phil._ 2 Pr. 4, ‘in omni adversitate fortunae infelicissimum genus est infortunii fuisse felicem.’ So Dante, _Inf._ v. 121 ff.,

‘Nessun maggior dolore,
Che ricordarsi del tempo felice
Nella miseria.’

117 ff. Cp. Ovid, _Her._ v. 109 ff. In l. 117 ‘siccis’ is substituted, not very happily, for ‘suci.’

138. Cp. _Conf. Amantis_, Latin Verses after ii. 1878,

‘Quod patet esse fides in eo fraus est, que politi
Principium pacti finis habere negat.’

163 f. Cp. Ovid, _Tristia_, v. 8. 15 f.

167 ff. Cp. _Tristia_, i. 5. 27 ff.

199 f. There seems to be no grammatical construction here.

239 ff. With this passage cp. _Mirour de l’Omme_, 27013 ff., where nearly the same examples are given. The classification is according to the nature of the things affected, first the heavenly bodies, then the elements of air, water, fire and earth, and finally living creatures. This arrangement is more clearly brought out in the _Mirour_.

259. Cp. _Mirour_, 27031, and note.

261. ‘And from the hard rocks of the desert,’ the conjunction being out of its proper place, as in i. 407, 847, ii. 249, &c.

267 f. Cp. _Mirour_, 27049 ff.

281 ff. See _Mirour de l’Omme_, 27073 ff.

282. _Congelat_, ‘took form.’ Probably the author had in his mind the phrase ‘congelat aere tacto,’ Ovid, _Metam._ xv. 415.

306. ‘num’ is here for ‘nonne’; cp. l. 320.

316. _Cumque_, for ‘Cum’: cp. l. 545, iii. 958, &c.

353 f. Cp. Godfrey of Viterbo, _Pantheon_, p. 9 (ed. 1584).

‘Ante creaturam genitor deus et genitura,
Primaque natura, novit statuitque futura.’

357-359. These three lines are from the _Pantheon_, p. 9.

371-374. Taken with slight change from the _Pantheon_, p. 10.

377 f. From _Aurora_, (MS. Bodley 822) f. 7 v^o.

414. ‘That which the new star brings argues that he is God.’

423. That is, ‘Lux venit, vt obscurari possit tenebris,’ &c.

485. ‘Every one who thinks upon Jesus ought to resolve to lay aside,’ &c.

487. The MSS. give ‘benedicti,’ but it seems probable that ‘benedici’ was meant. The verb is commonly transitive in later Latin.

495 ff. Cp. Isaiah, xliv. 9-20.

531 f. Psalms, cxiii. 8.

619 ff. Cp. Ovid, _Metam._ i. 74 ff.

LIB. III. PROLOGUS.

11 ff. The author characteristically takes care to point out that in his criticism of the Church he is expressing not his own private opinion, but the ‘commune dictum,’ the report which went abroad among the people, and the ‘vox populi’ has for him always a high authority. Cp. _Mirour de l’Omme_, 18445 ff., 19057 ff., and see below, l. 1267 ff, iv. 19 f., 709 f.

With what is said in this Book of the condition of the Church and the clergy we may compare the author’s _Mirour de l’Omme_, 18421-20832.

25 f. Compare with this the author’s note on _Mirour de l’Omme_, 21266-78.

61. Cp. Ovid, _Pont._ iv. 14. 41.

64. Cp. _Pont._ iv. 9. 10.

67 f. Cp. _Tristia_, ii. 301 f.

82. Cp. _Pont._ ii. 2. 128.

LIB. III.

1-28. The form of these lines which stood originally in S is given by the Trinity College, Dublin, and the Hatfield MSS. The passage has been rewritten over erasure in CHG, and it must be left doubtful what text they had originally. From the fact that the erasure in G begins with the second line, it may seem more probable that the original text of this manuscript agreed with that which we have now in S, rather than with TH₂: for in the latter case there would have been no need to begin the erasure before l. 4. In CH the whole passage has been recopied (the same hand appearing here in the two MSS.) so that we can draw no conclusion about the point where divergence actually began. EDL have the same text by first hand. It will be noted that the lines as given by TH₂ make no mention of the schism of the Papacy.

11 ff. With this we may compare _Mirour de l’Omme_, 18769 ff.

22. _nisi_, for ‘nil nisi’: cp. l. 32.

41. Cp. Ovid, _Amores_, iii. 8. 55.

63. _Fasti_, i. 225.

65 f. Cp. _Fasti_, i. 249 f.

85-90. Chiefly from the _Aurora_ of Petrus (de) Riga, (MS. Bodley 822) f. 71,

‘Ollarum carnes, peponum fercula, porros,
Cepas pro manna turba gulosa petit.
Quosdam consimiles sinus ecclesie modo nutrit,
Qui pro diuinis terrea uana petunt.
. . . . . .
Carnes ollarum carnalia facta figurant
Que uelut in nostra carne libido coquit.’

It would seem that Gower read ‘Gebas’ (which has no meaning) for ‘Cepas’ and ‘preponunt,’ as in MS. Univ. Coll. 143, for ‘peponum,’ which is the true reading, meaning ‘melons’ or ‘pumpkins.’

115. Cp. _Metam._ xv. 173.

Cap. iii. _Heading_. Cp. _Conf. Amantis_, Prol. 288 (margin), where this is given as a quotation from Gregory.

141 f. Cp. _Mirour de l’Omme_, 18553.

167 f. From _Aurora_, f. 37.

175. _gregis ex pietate mouetur_, ‘is moved by pity for his flock.’

193 ff. With this passage compare _Conf. Amantis_, Prol. 407-413, and _Mirour de l’Omme_, 20161 ff. In all these places a distinct charge is brought against the clergy, to the effect that they encourage vice, in order to profit by it themselves in money and in influence: ‘the prostitute is more profitable to them than the nun,’ as our author significantly says in the _Mirour_ (20149).

209 ff. Cp. _Mirour de l’Omme_, 20113 ff.

227 ff. For this attack on the ‘positive law’ of the Church cp. _Conf. Amantis_, Prol. 247, _Mirour_, 18469 ff. The ‘lex positiva’ is that which is enjoined not as of inherent moral obligation, but as imposed by Church discipline.

249 f. Cp. _Mirour_, 18997 ff. Apparently ‘nouo’ is an adverb, meaning ‘anew,’ ‘again’: cp. 284, 376.

265 ff. Cp. _Mirour_, 18505 ff.

283 ff. Cp. _Mirour_, 18637, _Conf. Amantis_, ii. 3486.

329 ff. With this chapter compare _Mirour_, 18649-18732.

375. The note which we find here in the margin of SCHGD refers to the crusade of the bishop of Norwich in Flanders in the year 1383, which probably took place soon after the completion of our author’s book. It is added in SCHG in what appears to be one and the same hand, possibly that of the author himself. If we may judge by the manner in which the campaign in question is referred to by contemporary chroniclers, it seems to have been considered a public scandal by many others besides Gower.

419. Gower uses ‘sublimo’ as an ablat. sing, in l. 701; therefore ‘sublimis’ may here be an ablative plural agreeing with ‘meritis.’

425 ff. Cp. _Aurora_, (MS. Bodley 822) f. 103,

‘Cogitat inde domum domino fundare, sed audit
A domino, “Templi non fabricator eris.
Es uir sanguineus, ideo templum mihi dignum
Non fabricare potes, filius immo tuus.”
Sanguineus uir signat eum qui, crimina carnis
Amplectens, templum non ualet esse dei.
Ecclesie sancte talis non erigit edem,
Nec sacre fidei collocat ille domum.’

508. ‘And whosoever may sound trumpets, we ought to be silent’; cp. i. 1609.

531 f. _Aurora_, f. 75 v^o.

619 f. Ovid, _Pont._ ii. 5. 61 f.

623 f. _Pont._ ii. 6. 21 f.

641. See _Ars Amat._ ii. 417, where we find ‘semine,’ a reading which is required by the sense, but not given in the Gower MSS.

651. ‘The line of descent by right of his mother proclaims Christ to be heir of that land in which he was born.’ The author argues for crusades to recover the Holy Land, if there must be wars, instead of wars against fellow Christians, waged by one pope against the other under the name of crusades: cp. below, 945 ff.

676. _quo foret ipse vigil_, ‘where it ought to be watchful,’ a common use of the imperfect subjunctive in our author’s Latin: cp. ‘gestaret,’ 695, ‘lederet,’ 922, ‘medicaret,’ 1052.

815. What follows is spoken as in the person of the supreme pontiff: cp. _Mirour_, 18505-18792, where somewhat similar avowals are put into the mouth of a member of the Roman Court.

819 f. Cp. _Conf. Amantis_, Prol. 261,

‘The hevene is ferr, the world is nyh.’

835. Ovid, _Fasti_, v. 209.

955 f. I take this concluding couplet as a remark made by the author on the sentiments which he has just heard expressed by the representative of the Pope. It practically means that ‘Clemens’ is not a proper name for the Pope: it is in fact a ‘headless name’ and should rather be ‘Inclemens.’ Compare the address to Innocent III at the beginning of Geoffrey de Vinsauf’s _Poetria Nova_:

‘Papa, stupor mundi, si dixero Papa _nocenti_,
Acephalum nomen tribuam tibi: si caput addam,
Hostis erit metri,’ &c.

957 ff. It seems best to take what follows as, in part at least, a dialogue between the author and the representative of the pope, who has just spoken. Soon however the speech passes again entirely to the author. The Biblical reference here is to Revelation, xxii. 8 f. The same use is made of it in the _Mirour_, 18736 ff.

1077-1080. These four lines are from the _Aurora_, f. 44 v^o.

1113 f. Ovid, _Ars Amat._ iii. 595 f. (where we have ‘sequatur’). The original application is to the effects of rivalry in stimulating the passion of lovers. For the use of ‘sequetur’ here, apparently as a subjunctive, compare l. 1946, ‘Inueniet tardam ne sibi lentus opem.’

1118-1124. These lines are almost entirely borrowed from the _Aurora_, (MS. Bodley 822) f. 21 v^o.

1124. In the Glasgow MS. ‘Est’ has been here altered to ‘Et.’

1145-1150. Almost verbatim from _Aurora_, f. 93 v^o.

1169. S has here in the margin in a somewhat later hand than that of the text, ‘No_ta_ h_ic_ _quattu_or n_e_cc_essar_ia ep_iscop_o.’

1171 f. Cp. _Aurora_, f. 44 v^o,

‘Est olei natura triplex, lucet, cybat, unguit;
Hec tria mitratum debet habere capud.’

1183 f. Cp. _Aurora_, f. 44 v^o,

‘Lux est exemplo, cibus est dum pascit egenos,
Vnctio dum populis dulcia uerba ferit.’

Gower is right in reading ‘serit,’ which is given in MS. Univ. Coll. 143, f. 13.

1206. Cp. l. 1376.

1213. Cp. Ovid, _Ars Amat._ iii. 655.

1215 f. Cp. _Ars Amat._ iii. 653 f.

1233. Cp. _Ars Amat._ ii. 279.

1247 ff. Cp. _Mirour_, 18793 ff.

1267. _Vox populi_, &c.: cp. _Speculum Stultorum_, p. 100, l. 4, and see also the note on iii. Prol. 11.

1271. Cp. _Conf. Amantis_, Prol. 304 ff. and _Mirour_, 18805.

1313. With the remainder of this Book, treating of the secular clergy, we may compare _Mirour de l’Omme_, 20209-20832.

1341. Cp. _Mirour_, 18889 ff.

1342. _participaret_, ‘he ought to share’: see note on l. 676.

1359 f. Cp. _Conf. Amantis_, i. 1258 ff.

1375 ff. Cp. _Mirour_, 20287 ff.

1376. The reading ‘vngat vt’ is given by the Digby MS. and seems almost necessary: cp. l. 1206.

1405. _prece ruffi ... et albi_, ‘by reason of the petition of the red and the white,’ that is, presumably, by the influence of gold and silver, ‘dominis’ in the next line being in a loose kind of apposition to a dative case suggested by ‘Annuit.’

1407. S has here in the margin, in a rather later hand, ‘contra rectores Oxon.’

1417. Eccles. iv. 10, ‘Vae soli, quia cum ceciderit, non habet sublevantem se.’

1432. The margin of S has here, in the same hand as at 1407, ‘Nota rectores et studentes Oxon.’

1443. _formalis_, that is, ‘eminent,’ from ‘forma’ meaning ‘rank’ or ‘dignity,’ but here also opposed to ‘materialis.’

1454. Originally the line was ‘Dum legit, inde magis fit sibi sensus hebes,’ but this was altered to ‘plus sibi sensus hebes est,’ with the idea apparently of taking ‘magis’ with ‘legit.’ This involves an awkward metrical licence, ‘hebes est’ equivalent to ‘hebest,’ and the original text stands in CEH as well as in TH₂. The expedient of the Roxburghe editor is quite inexcusable.

1493 ff. Cp. _Mirour_, 20314. The sporting parson was quite a recognized figure in the fourteenth century. Readers of Froissart will remember how when the capture of Terry in Albigeois was effected by stratagem, the blowing of the horn to summon the company in ambush was attributed by those at the gate to a priest going out into the fields, ‘Ah that is true, it was sir Francis our priest; gladly he goeth a mornings to seek for an hare.’

1498. _fugat_: used apparently as subjunctive also in l. 2078, but it is possible that ‘Nec fugat’ may be the true reading here.

1509 ff. Cp. _Mirour de l’Omme_, 20313 ff.

1527. _Est sibi missa_, ‘his mass is over.’

1546. Apparently a proverbial expression used of wasting valuable things.

1549. If benefices went from father to son, little or nothing would be gained by those who go to Rome to seek preferment, for an heir would seldom fail.

1555 ff. Cp. _Mirour de l’Omme_, 20497 ff. The priests here spoken of are the ‘annuelers,’ who get their living by singing masses for the dead, the ‘Annua seruicia’ spoken of below:

‘Et si n’ont autre benefice,
Chantont par auns et par quartiers
Pour la gent mort.’ _Mirour_, 20499.

1559. In the _Mirour_,

‘Plus que ne firont quatre ainçois’ (20527).

1587-1590. Taken with slight change from _Aurora_, (MS. Bodley 822) f. 65 v^o.

1591. ‘With the ancients it is possible to say “hic et hec sacerdos,”’ that is, ‘sacerdos’ is both masculine and feminine.

1693-1700. Adapted from _Aurora_, f. 65,

‘Omen in urbe malum bubo solis iubar odit,
Escam uestigat nocte, ueretur aues:
In quem forte gregis auium si lumina figant,
Et clamando uolant et laniando secant.
Incestus notat iste reos, qui corpore fedi
Contra nature iura latenter agunt:
Hos iusti quasi lucis aues discerpere querunt,
Zelo succensi uerba seuera serunt.’

(‘Conclamando’ for ‘Et clamando’ in MS. Univ. Coll. 143.)

1727 ff. Cp. _Mirour_, 20713 ff.

1759 ff. Cp. _Mirour_, 20725 ff.,

‘Ne sont pas un, je suis certeins,
Ly berchiers et ly chapelleins,
Ne leur pecché n’est pas egal,
L’un poise plus et l’autre meinz,’ &c.

1775. _fierent_, ‘ought to become’: cp. l. 1789.

1791-1794 are from _Aurora_, f. 93 v^o, and the succeeding couplet is adapted from the same source, where we have,

‘De lino que fit per ephot caro munda notatur,
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,

‘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’).