Comment by thaumasiotes

> Also, you say spelling but e.g. "speken" feels more a grammatical than orthographic difference.

Doesn't make a difference if you're reading it.¹ If you were trying to produce correct Middle English, you're correct that this would cause difficulties.

(And to me it looks like it has caused difficulties for the author. The passage has several verbs introduced by auxiliary modals. Check out the list:

1. Here ſchaltou dyen Here shalt thou die

2. non ſchal knowen þi name none shall know thy name

3. non schal þe biwepe none shall thee beweep

4. wiþ what boldenesse I miȝte gaderen with what boldness I might gather

5. more þan I miȝte beren more than I might bear

6. I ne miȝte namore stonden ne spoken I [] might no more stand nor speak

Three examples use shall and three examples use might. Five of them have an -n suffix (must be infinitive or subjunctive; not to be confused with the 3rd person plural -n suffix that we also see) on the verb, but that suffix is missing from non schal þe biwepe, which is otherwise an exact grammatical match to non ſchal knowen þi name)

¹ The reason it doesn't make a difference is that the sentence structure is still that of modern English and there's only one permissible form of the verb in the modernized sentence. So it's sufficient to know (a) what verb is being used; plus (b) what the sentence it's being used in is.