Prof. Skeat has based his text on Thynne, making such alterations of spelling as seemed to him suitable, and giving the variants of Wright’s edition as those of the Trentham MS. Misled by Wright, he has accepted in his text the readings ‘reserved’ in l. 278, and ‘cese’ in l. 382.
The text given by the Trentham MS. is apparently quite free from material error, except as regards the word erased in l. 71, and the points of spelling which require correction are very few in number. The orthography is not quite in accordance with the standard spelling of the Fairfax and Stafford MSS., and in some respects resembles that of the third hand of F, on which we have commented in the note on Confessio Amantis, viii. 2938. Here however there is only a slight tendency to use i for e in weak terminations. We have distourbid 153, vndefendid: amendid 223 f., handlid 321, soeffrin 222, folwiþ 23, goddis 32, 84, mannys 237, but elsewhere almost always the usual forms, as affermed, cared, gouerned, aken, ledeþ, londes, mannes. On the other hand the -ir termination is used almost regularly, as vndir, wondir, aftir, modir (but vnder 286), and there is a tendency also to substitute i for e in other places also, as first, chirche (also ferst, cherche), wirche, dide (348), proprite, but here for hire 108, 329, cp. 254. For I (pers. pronoun) we have regularly y; gh usually for h in such words as right, myghti, knyght, light, highe, stigh, but also riht, rihtwisnesse, knyht; vppon for vpon, schulde but also scholde. In addition to these points we may note the dropping of -e several times in euer, neuer, which hardly ever occurs in the Fairfax MS., and also in heuen 79, but we have also euere, neuere, heuene. The -e of the weak preterite form is dropped before a vowel in myht 39, behight 41, had 42, mad 103, 345: -e is inserted in some imperatives, as Leie 122, sette 124, Lete 129, putte 130, þenke 162, Beholde 276 (but let 158, Kep 367, 384, draugh 384). As regards the use of þ and ȝ the Trentham MS. agrees with F.
There is no title in the manuscript, and Prof. Skeat calls the poem ‘The Praise of Peace,’ a title suggested by Mr. E. W. B. Nicholson. I have adopted a modification of this, ‘To King Henry the Fourth in Praise of Peace,’ expressing also the substance of that given by Thynne.
8 ff. The threefold claim of Henry IV is given in this stanza, as in Chaucer’s well-known Envoy, but the ‘conquest’ is here represented as a divine sanction.
50. a place, ‘into place’: cp. Conf. Amantis, v. 735, ‘Hou suche goddes come aplace.’
53. in manere, ‘in due measure’: cp. Conf. Amantis, vii. 2132, 4344.
55. what aftirward betide, ‘whatever may happen afterwards.’
71. The first word of the line is erased in the manuscript, only the initial S being left, with a space for five or six letters after it. The word which is suggested in the text is perhaps as likely as any other: for the form of it cp. ‘Maintene,’ l. 385. Thynne’s reading, ‘To stere peace,’ looks like a lame attempt on the part of a copyist to fill the gap.
78 ff. Conf. Amantis, iii. 2265 ff.
89. I write regularly ‘evere’ ‘nevere’ in accordance with Gower’s practice: so 126, 127, 148, 241, 301, 350, 365.