FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30  
31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   >>  
the same mistake. [Footnote 1: Bright, _Anglo-Saxon Reader_, pp. 113-128.] [Footnote 2: _Zeitschrift fuer Deutsches Altertum_, XXX. 175.] The homily could not have been drawn from the poem, nor the poem from the homily, for in each we find facts and phrases of the Greek not contained in the other. For example, both in the Greek and in the homily, the flood which sweeps away the Mermedonians proceeds from the mouth of an alabaster image standing upon a pillar, while in the poem it springs forth from the base of the pillar itself. On the other hand, most of the dialogue between Andrew and the Lord on shipboard, as well as other important incidents, are wanting in the homily. Summing up, then, we have the homily and the poem agreeing in some important points in which both differ from the Greek, but so dissimilar in other points that neither could have been the source of the other. In the light of these similarities and variations, and of others which space prevents me from mentioning, we must suppose the homily to have been taken from an abridgment of the Latin version, of which the poet saw a somewhat corrupt copy. It is also not improbable that this Latin version may have been made from a Greek manuscript varying in some details from the legend as it appears in Tischendorf's edition. This view is sustained by a Syrian translation, which in some respects agrees with our hypothetical Latin version. But this Latin version has never been discovered, though some fragments of the legend are found in the Latin of Pseudo-Abdias and the _Legenda Aurea_,[1] which curiously enough supply several of the facts missing in the Greek, namely, that Andrew was teaching in Achaia, and that the land of the Anthropophagi was called Mermedonia. [Footnote 1: Grimm, _Andreas und Elene_, XIII-XVI.] So much for the sources of the poem as a whole. The poet is also deeply indebted to the _Beowulf_ and to the poems of Cynewulf (unless he be Cynewulf himself) for lines and phrases throughout his work. One example of this borrowing will suffice. In line 999, when Andrew reaches the prison, we read (translating literally): "The door quickly opened at the touch of the holy saint's hand." In the Greek: "And he made the sign of the cross upon the door, and it opened of its own accord." Why has the poet omitted the sign of the cross? We are unable to answer until we read in the _Beowulf_ (721) that at the coming of the monster Grendel to Heorot
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30  
31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   >>  



Top keywords:

homily

 

version

 
Andrew
 

Footnote

 

pillar

 

Beowulf

 

legend

 
important
 

Cynewulf

 

points


opened

 

phrases

 

omitted

 
curiously
 
unable
 

supply

 

Achaia

 
Anthropophagi
 

called

 

teaching


accord
 

missing

 
Abdias
 

Heorot

 

Grendel

 

discovered

 

hypothetical

 

agrees

 

monster

 
Mermedonia

answer

 

Pseudo

 

fragments

 
coming
 

Legenda

 
respects
 
borrowing
 

quickly

 

prison

 
translating

reaches

 
suffice
 
literally
 

Andreas

 

sources

 

indebted

 

deeply

 
alabaster
 
standing
 

proceeds