Page:The Library, volume 5, series 3.djvu/331

MIRACLE CYCLES. 317 We may, therefore, finish our story of the versions by adding that F served as a source for *, that K was largely rewritten and worked over, possibly more than once, till it reached the state known to us as C ; lastly, that K was also used as the basis for, or rather supplied certain matter to, X- The author of x worked in an eclectic way, taking what he required and rearranging matter according to his liking, without however altering very greatly the language of what he borrowed. The text F I imagine to have been obtained expressly for use at Wakefield, and to have served immediately for the compilation of W. That K originated at, or was made for the use of, Coventry seems to me very doubtful ; at any rate, it appears unnecessary to suppose so. It might not be un- reasonable to suggest that AC may have been the Beverley play. Indeed, it seems not unlikely that the manuscript reached Chester first and was passed on to Coventry after it had served the purpose of the Chester playwright. That a writer at that combined their characteristics. Now there is evidence that K: was parallel to 1. 86 of Y (W's ' sawes ' is clearly corrupt), for in the non-parallel lines that C introduces at this point the word <reysun' occurs and <rawe* (in a different sense) is actually a rime-word (C 895, 897). Moreover, we have already seen reason to believe that the compiler of K had some acquaintance orally with scene 2 of Y. We may then conjecture that a reminiscence of 1. 50 led him to alter 1. 86 : To here oure reasouns redde by rawes . . . into: To here our reasouns right on rawes . . . and thus supply the compiler of x with the material for the line as it there appears. I