There has been much dispute as to the language in which the AR was written. The older scholars, Dr. Thomas Smith (1696 A.D.), Wanley (1705), Planta (1802) had no doubt that it was Latin. Morton (1853) championed the English version, but some of his arguments were refuted, others shaken by Bramlette. Muhe, holding the priority of the Latin proved, was obliged to adopt an involved and improbable view of the relationship of MS. T to the other manuscripts. It should be observed that these scholars were unable to take into account the Corpus MS. and the French version. The first to pronounce from a knowledge of all the materials was G. C. Macaulay in the M. L. Review, xi. 61. He appears to have disposed effectually of the claim on behalf of the Latin version, but his arguments in favour of French as the original language are not convincing. It must suffice here to say that nothing he adduces appears to be so crucial as the passage at 58/79, or even 56/38, 56/54, 70/170. In a general comparison, the English has all the vigour and raciness of an original work, while the French gives the impression of being unidiomatic and wanting in spontaneity. In the foot-notes p. 60, l. 12, add C after chepilt: p. 61, l. 17, read chirche: p. 65, l. 62, add C after grettere: p. 67, l. 96, read wull{et} C for wulh C., also at p. 75, l. 191. A. THE SEVEN DEADLY SINS. The references throughout are to the Corpus MS., unless otherwise stated. 1. #wildernesse#: of the world; he has already said, ‘Iþisse wildernesse wende ure Louerdes folc, ase Exode telleð, touward tet eadie lond of Jerusalem . . . ⁊ ȝe, mine leoue sustren, wended bi þen ilke weie toward te heie Jerusalem,’ AR 196/28-30. Comp. ‘alse longe se we iðese westen of þesser woruld wandrið,’ OEH i. 243/3; ‘Claustrales in huius mundi deserto exulantes,’ Alanus de Insulis, 65. #þer . . . in#, in which; see 1/3: ‘ou vous aleȝ enȝ,’ F. 3. #beastes . . . wurmes#: The Lion of Pride, the Serpent of Envy, the Unicorn of Wrath, the Bear of Sloth, the Fox of Covetousness, the Swine of Greediness, the Scorpion of Lechery, each with its whelps. The conception comes from S. Jerome, ‘quasi inter scorpiones et colubros incedendum ut . . . iter per insidias saeculi huius et inter venena faciamus possimusque . . . terram repromissionis intrare,’ iv. 796. Comp. also, ‘Per superbiam enim quasi a leonibus lacerantur, per invidiam tanquam viperarum morsu percutiuntur,’ Cesarii Sermo lx, in S. August. v. App. 301 B. It is not in the manner of the Bestiaries, where the lion and the unicorn are types of Christ, though the influence of the Bestiaries is often shown in the AR.