581. Were ful, that might be full, that might chance to be full. Were is the subjunctive, and the relative is omitted.
588. now, &c.; lately, in the time of early morning.
589. This shews that the pilgrims had rested all night on the road; see note to l. 555 above.
597. oght, in any way, at all. Cf. Kn. Ta., A. 3045; and Prioresses Tale, B. 1792.
599. ye, yea. There is a difference between ye, yea, and yis, yes. The former merely assents, or answers a simple question in the affirmative. The latter is much more forcible, is used when the question involves a negative, and is often followed by an oath. See note to Specimens of Eng. 1394-1579, ed. Skeat, sect. xvii. (D), l. 22; and note to ȝis in the Glossary to my edition of William of Palerne. See an example of ȝus (yes) after a negative in Piers the Plowman, B. v. 125. Similarly, nay is the weaker, no the stronger form of negation.
602. A note in Bell's edition makes a difficulty of the scansion of this line. It is perfectly easy. The caesura (carefully marked in MS. E. as occurring after knewe) preserves the final e in knewe from elision.
And yé | him knéw | e, ás | wel ás | do I ||
Tyrwhitt reads also for the former as; which is legitimate, because as and also are merely different spellings of the same word.
It is true that the final e in wondre, and again that in werke, are both elided, under similar circumstances, in the two lines next following; but the cases are not quite identical. The e in knewe, representing not merely the plural, but also the subjunctive mood, is essential to the conditional form of the sentence, and is of much higher value than the others. If this argument be not allowed, Tyrwhitt's suggestion may be adopted. Or we may read knewen.
608. rit, contracted from rideth; see A. 974, 981. See also slit for slideth in l. 682 below.