26. fatil (_fatal_), fatit (_fated_). 285. unarmyt (_unarmed_), enarmyt (_fully armed_). 682. can here, cam nere. 700. rendit (_rent_), vondit (_wounded_). 764. refuse (_refusal?_), reprefe (_defeat_). 861. felith (_feeleth_), ſetith (_setteth_). 1054. vyt, ry{ch}t. 1084. speiris, spuris. 1455. cumyng (_coming_), cunyng (_skill_). 1621. he war, be war (_beware_). 1641. promyß, punyß (_punish_). 2010. ane desyne, medysyne. 2092. born, lorn (_lost_). 2114. havin, harm. 2142. Hymene (!), hyme (_him_). 2219. such, furth (_forth_). 2245. al so y-vroght, al foly vroght. 2279. chichingis (!), thithingis (_tidings_). 2446. love, lore (_teaching_). Etc. Several omissions also occur, as, _e.g._, of the word “off” in l. 7, of the word “tressore” in l. 1715, and of four whole lines at a time in two instances; viz., lines 1191-4, and 2877-80. It will be found, in fact, that the former text can seldom be safely quoted for the purposes of philology; and I cannot but think Mr Stevenson’s claim of being accurate to be especially unfortunate; and the more so, because the genuine text is much simpler and more intelligible than the one which he has given. The original MS. is to be found in the Cambridge University Library, marked Kk. 1. 5. It formerly formed part of a thick volume, labelled “Tracts;” but these are now being separated, for greater convenience, into several volumes. The MS. of “Lancelot” has little to do with any of the rest as regards its subject, but several other pieces are in the same hand-writing; and, at the end of one of them, an abstract of Solomon’s proverbs, occur the words, “Expliciunt Dicta Salamonis, per manum V. de F.”[P2] This hand-writing, though close, is very regular, and my own impression certainly is that the scribe has almost always succeeded in preserving the sense of the poem, though there is much confusion in the dialectal forms, as will be shewn presently. [Footnote P2: See Mr Lumby’s editions of “Early Scottish Verse” and “Ratis Raving,” both edited for the E.E.T.S. from this MS. Only the latter of these is in the hand-writing of V. de F.] The present text is as close a fac-simile of the MS. as can be represented by printed letters, every peculiarity being preserved as far as practicable, even including the use of _y_ for _þ_ (or _th_); so that the reader must remember that _yow_ in l. 94 stands for _thow_, and _yis_ in l. 160 for _this_, and so on; but this ought not to cause much difficulty. The sole points of difference are the following: 1. In the MS. the headings “Prologue,” “Book I.” etc., do not occur. 2. The lines do not always begin (in the MS.) with a capital letter.