Appulby’s brief introduction, like his closing statement, has no given title.↩back to note source
Chapter 4, Paragraph 1
lyvynge. Marginal note: Liber primo reuelationum beate Brigitte. capitulum x. A [The first book of the revelation of the blessed Bridget. Chapter 10. A]. The function of the letter here and in subsequent marginalia is not immediately clear. The letters do not correspond to recognizable subsections in BSR, or even consistently show Appulby moving between different passages within it. Since they work through the alphabet in sequential pairs, albeit with some unaccountable omissions, they are perhaps intended to help the reader piece together the quotations from Bridget into some form of ordered whole, but it remains difficult to discern any pattern or purpose. See Dowding, “For your ghostly conforte,” pp. 157–59.↩back to note source
joye and exultacyon. Marginal note: Liber x reuelatio beatem brigitte. capitulum x. D [Book 10 of the revelation of the blessed Bridget. Chapter 10. D]. The note is erroneous, since in its medieval form BSR only consisted of seven or eight books; it should refer to Book 1, but remains uncorrected in all editions.↩back to note source
And good lady. Marginal note: Liber x reuelatio capitulum x. D [Book 10 of the revelation, chapter 10. D]. The mistake has obviously been carried over from earlier in the chapter.↩back to note source
our lorde Jesu. 1514, 1517, 1531, 1532: our lorde. Although 1530 is alone here, it offers a tenable correction; across all five editions, the opening contentes of this boke includes Jesus’s forename as part of the chapter heading even when it does not appear in the actual chapter itself.↩back to note source
Chapter 7, Paragraph 1
that every thynge . . . unto the instytucyons. In 1514 the accompanying woodcut is oversized, and smudges the initial letters of that, submytte, and instytucyons, but the text is clear from context and from subsequent imprints.↩back to note source
for onely unto this lawe. Marginal note: Leuiti. x [Leviticus 10].↩back to note source
of profounde humylyté. Marginal note: Bernardus (i.e., St. Bernard of Clairvaux).↩back to note source
persecucyon of Jhesu. So 1517, 1531, 1532. 1530: persecucyon of our lorde Jesu. Perhaps a correction, although the modified phrasing does not appear on the contents page of any edition.↩back to note source
Chapter 8, Paragraph 1
two yere of aege. 1514, 1517, 1531, 1532: two yere aege. The 1530 emendation is required for sense.↩back to note source
to halowe therby our baptym. So 1517, 1531, 1532. 1530: to have therby our baptym. There is no obvious reason for the change, since the majority reading makes equally good sense.↩back to note source
fastynge of Jhesu. So 1517, 1531, 1532. 1530: fastynge of our lord Jesu, although the header remains unchanged on the contents page.↩back to note source
that our lorde made. 1514, 1532: our lorde made. 1517: of our lorde made. The contents pages of all five editions make clear that 1530 is correct. This is only one of two emendations 1530 shares with 1531; the second occurs in chapter 24, paragraph 1.↩back to note source
Chapter 15, Paragraph 2
worthy deth. While we might expect “of” or a similar preposition here, all copies contain the same formulation.↩back to note source
erubescensy of. Marginal note: Liber reuelatio capitulum x. E [Book of the revelation chapter 10. E]. The book number is missing in 1514; the omission is rectified in 1517 and 1532 (albeit to an erroneous x), although the numeral disappears again in 1530 and is overlooked by Redman in 1531.↩back to note source
fresshely in syght. So 1517, 1531, 1532. 1530: flesshely in syght. It is entirely possible that 1530 has corrected a misreading in the previous versions, but either variant is plausible.↩back to note source
beauteful skynne. Marginal note: Liber x. reuelatio beatem Brigitte capitulum x. E [Book 10 of the revelation of the blessed Bridget chapter 10. E], repeating the same dittographic error from chapter 4, paragraphs 4 and 5.↩back to note source
one moved in spyryte asked. 1514, 1517, 1531, 1532: one moved in spyryte. 1530 has obviously emended a recurring error caused by the page break; the alternate reading garbles the translation from Bridget. Marginal note: Ibidem.↩back to note source
Beholde man. It is tempting to assume that an article has been missed here, and that Pilate is meant to say “the man,” but all surviving copies contain the same formulation.↩back to note source
Chapter 19, Paragraph 1
thy sorowfull. Marginal note: Liber primo reuelatio capitulum x. E [The first book of the revelation chapter 10. E].↩back to note source
Chapter 19, Paragraph 3
may no more. Marginal note: Liber x reuelatio capitulum x. F [Book 10 of the revelation chapter 10. F], again reprising an error from chapter 4, paragraph 5.↩back to note source
mercy of Jhesu. So 1517, 1531, 1532. 1530: mercy of our lorde Jesu. Although the 1530 reading makes sense, it is unsupported by the contents pages.↩back to note source
other that loved. Marginal note: Liber primo reuelatio capitulum decimo. H [The first book of the revelation, the tenth chapter. H].↩back to note source
bytternesse and trybulacyons. So 1517, 1531, 1532. 1530: bytternesse of trybulacyons. The change seems to be a simple error rather than a revision; 1514 mirrors Bridget’s Latin more effectively [amaritudinem et tribulacionem].↩back to note source
And for as moche. Marginal note: Liber reuelatio capitulum x. H [The book of revelation chapter 10. H].↩back to note source
dolour and passion. So 1530, 1531, 1532. 1514, 1517: dolour a passion. The later editions are obviously correct; an ampersand has been confused with an article in the early imprints. Redman seems to have emended the text independently, since he usually follows 1514 or 1517 rather than 1530.↩back to note source
and for the bytter wepynges. The British Library copy of 1514 (shelfmark C.21.c.23) has an extra (and redundant) oratio in the margin which does not appear elsewhere; Dowding takes this as evidence that de Worde issued the book twice that year (“For your ghostly conforte,” pp. 23–24).↩back to note source
Chapter 26, Paragraph 1
Than the virgyn. Marginal note: Liber primo reuelatio beate Brigitte capitulum x. H [The first book of the revelation of blessed Bridget chapter 10. H].↩back to note source
in sondre. So 1517, 1530, 1531, 1532. 1514: in sondee. The first imprint is clearly in error; each subsequent edition has recognized and emended the slip.↩back to note source
all the holy soules. 1514, 1517, 1531, 1532: all holy soules. 1530 is probably emending an earlier slip here.↩back to note source
Chapter 26, Paragraph 4
wayled for thee. So 1517, 1531, 1532. 1530: wayle for thee, an obvious misprint.↩back to note source
ye heed. An alternative reading might be the heed, since y and thorn are indistinguishable in blackletter type. Although the same ambiguity is present across all five editions, Redman’s punctuation suggests that he read the first word as a pronoun rather than an article.↩back to note source