Vmbethynke the wele of this partie.
Cyrces was a qwene, whos reaume was opon the see of Ytaile, and she was a grete enchaunteresse and knew meche of sorcery and wichcraft. And whan Vlixes, the which wente to the se after the destruccion off Troye, as he went to a returnyd[[579]] into his cuntre, throwe many grete and perlyous tormentes that he hadde he aryved at a hauen of the same lande. He sent to the qwene by his knyghtes to wete wheythir he myght swrely taken hauen in her lond or noon. Circes reseyuyd his knyghtes full gentely and of curtesei made ordeyne for theyme a potage full delicious to drynke, but the potage hade sich a strengh that sodenly the knyghttes were chaunged into swyne. Circes may be vnderstond in many maners. It ma[y] be vndirstonde be a lande or a cuntre where that knyghtes were putte in fowle and veleyns preson; and allso she may be lekened to a lady full of wantonnesse and ydilnes, that by hire many errant knyghtes, that is to sey, sewyng armes, þe which anamly were of Vlixes pepill, that is to vndirstonde, malicious and noyens, were kepte to soiorne as swyne. And therefor it is seide to þe good knyght that he shulde not reste in sich a soioryng. For Arystotill |f. 74.| seith, “He that is holy[[580]] in fornicacion may not be aloved[[581]] in the ende.”
Cyrceses swyne may we take for ypocrysy, the which the goode sperite shulde eschewe off all thynges. Ayens ypocrytes Seynt Gregory seith in his Moralles,[[582]] that the lyfe of ypocrytes is but a frawdelous vysyon and as a fantasye ymagenid, the which shewith owtewarde lykenes of an ymage, the which is not in very dede inwarde. To this purpose owre Lorde seith in the Gospell, [“Væ vobis, hypocritæ, quia similes estis sepulchris dealbatis,” etc.].[[583]]
XCIX.
Thou shulde no grete reson shewe to þe man
The which as that tyme vndirstond ne can.
Yno, the which the soddyn corne dide sowe,
Noteth it to the well inowgh, I trowe.
Yno was a qwene, the which made sothyn[[584]] corne to be sowen, the which comme not vppe. And therfor it is seide to the goode knyght þat gode resons and weele sette and wyse autorites shulde not be tolde to the pepill of rude vndirstondyng and that cannot vndirstond them, ffor they be lost. And therfor Aristotile seith, “As reyne avaylith notte to corne that is sowen on a stone, no more availleth argumentes to an onwyse man.”
That faire and wise wordis shuld not be tolde to rude and ignorant pepill, the which cannot vnderstond theyme, it is to sey that it is as a thyng loste, and than ignorance is to blame. Seynt Bernard seith in a book of xv. Degrees of Mekenes that fore noght tho ascuse theyme of fragilite or off ignorance,[[585]] standyng that siche as syne most frely be gladly ffreel and ignorant, and many thynges the which shuld be knowen be some tyme vnknowen, outhir be necligence to kune it....[[586]] All sich ignorances hath non excusacion. Therefore the postil Seynt Povle seyth, [“Si quis ignorat, ignorabitur”].[[587]]