As regards the manner in which the text of the MS. has been reproduced in this edition, I have followed on the whole the system used in the publications of the ‘Société des Anciens Textes Français.’ Thus _u_ and _v_, _i_ and _j_, have been dealt with in accordance with modern practice, whereas in the MS. (as usual in French and English books of the time) _v_ is regularly written as the initial letter of a word for either _u_ or _v_, and _u_ in other positions (except sometimes in the case of compounds like _avient_, _avoegler_, _envers_, _envie_, &c.), while, as regards _i_ and _j_, we have for initials either _i_ or _I_ (_J_), and in other positions _i_. Thus the MS. has _vn_, _auoir_, while the text gives for the reader’s convenience _un_, _avoir_; the MS. has _ie_ or _Ie_, _iour_ or _Iour_, while the text gives _je_, _jour_. Again, where an elision is expressed, the MS. of course combines the two elements into one word, giving _lamour_, _quil_, _qestoit_, while the text separates them by the apostrophe, _l’amour_, _qu’il_, _q’estoit_. Some other separations have also been made. Thus the MS. often, but by no means always, combines _plus_ with the adjective or adverb to which it belongs: _plusbass_, _plusauant_; and often also the word _en_ is combined with a succeeding verb, as _enmangeast_, _enserroit_: in these instances the separation is made in the text, but the MS. reading is recorded. In other cases, as with the combinations _sique_, _sicomme_, _nounpas_, _envoie_, &c., the usage of the MS. has been followed, though it is not quite uniform. The final _-é_ (_-és_) and _-ée_ (_-ées_) of nouns and participles have been marked with the accent for the reader’s convenience, but in all other cases accents are dispensed with. They are not therefore used in the terminations _-ez_, _-eez_, even when standing for _-és_, _-ées_, as in _festoiez_, _neez_, nor in _asses_, _sachies_, &c., standing for _assez_, _sachiez_ (except l. 28712), nor is the grave accent placed upon the open _e_ of _apres_, _jammes_, &c. Occasionally the diaeresis is used to separate vowels; and the cedilla is inserted, as in modern French, to indicate the soft sound of _c_ where this seems certain, but there are some possibly doubtful cases, as _sufficance_, _naiscance_, in which it is not written. With regard to the use of capital letters, some attempt has been made to qualify the inconsistency of the MS. In general it may be said that where capitals are introduced, it has been chiefly in order to indicate more clearly the cases where qualities or things are personified. It has not been thought necessary to indicate particularly all these variations. The punctuation is the work of the editor throughout; that of the MS., where it exists, is of a very uncertain character.