þenkeb on Ely and on hys sonys; When pou wylt nat betyme chastyse.1 In this connection it is especially interesting to note the use made of the Bible in the popular legends of the Middle English period. Oftentimes, as the nucleus of some legend, such as the poems on The Birth of Jesus, and The Childhood of Jesus, we find a Biblical story that appealed so strongly to the imaginations of men as to gather about itself a large accretion of purely fictitious material. The Cursor Mundi is filled with examples of this. One illustration, however, must suffice here. When the author wishes to tell about the building by Solomon of a temple to God, he begins by telling us of three wands carried by Moses into the land of Moab, the miraculous power of which became incalculable after his death. David took these wands to Jerusalem, and put them in a cistern, where they struck such deep root that no one could pull them out. So David built a wall and planted a garden about them, and they grew into a large and beautiful tree. Under this tree the king often sat, and here, one day, he purposed in his heart to build a temple to God in which all the sacred relics might be kept. But as David sat pondering these things in his heart, an angel was sent from God to tell him that he, a warrior, should not build the temple, but his son, a man of peace. These distinctly Scriptural allusions, embedded in so much legendary material, are fol 1 Handlyng Synne 5031-44. 21 Kings 8. 17; 5. 3-5: Cursor Mundi, 2. 8001-8313. lowed, after a little, by an account of the building of the temple by Solomon; and to tell this story was the central aim of the author in the long legend in which it finds place.1 We must turn now to some of the other ways in which Middle English writers may be said to have used the Bible, the few illustrations that can be given being regarded as typical, thoroughly representative of a large number that might be gathered from a great variety of works. One of the commonest things found is the addition of a clause to a direct quotation, but without the slightest indication that anything has been introduced which is not taken from the Bible. In the following translation of Psalms 60. 10, the last clause, though a natural inference, is not part of the verse of the Psalm, yet the whole is prefaced by the words, 'Forþi hlest no hwat Godd de ratt.' The quotation reads: 'Worldes eihte, gif hie is swide rixinde to deward, ne do du naht dine herte derto, ac do hes to me': 'If thy worldly possessions increase, set not thine heart on them, but set it on me."2 The words, but set it on me, do not occur in the Psalm. Another writer says that James forbade swearing except when necessary, 'ne zwerieð naght bote huanne hit is nyede.' But James says nothing about the fact that sometimes it may seem necessary to swear.* The habit of paraphrasing Scripture, so common in the Old and Middle English periods, led to the addition of a great deal of material not found in the Bible. These additions to the paraphrases are sometimes of a pictorial character, as in the Pearl group; 1 Cursor Mundi 8757-8866. 3 Ayenbite of Inwyt, p. 63. 2 Vices and Virtues, p. 75. James 5. 12. sometimes of legendary origin, as in the Cursor Mundi, and often of a didactic and hortatory nature, as in the Ayenbite of Inwyt. Some of them are decidedly naive, as when, in telling of the death of John the Baptist, the writer informs us that there is no need of mentioning the name of the girl who brought it about, for this is very well known in hell. This is certainly a clever way of getting out of naming a person who is not named in the Bible. Still another way of using the Bible was to combine two or more verses, taken either from the same book or chapter, or from entirely different books. Indeed, we must needs be often on our guard lest we be misled into supposing that certain things were said by some writer who never said them at all, but which are the utterance of another man. In the following words, two verses, one from Psalm 26. 5, and the other from Psalm 139. 21, are combined, but so naturally that we do not at first suspect it: 'Me is andsete pe samninge of þe hinderfulle, for ich wot þat þat hie ben lode God." An example of the introduction of a passage from a different book into the account that is being given according to one of the Gospels, for instance, may be found in the transaction of Luke 24. 49-53. After verse 51 has been quoted, there follows the story of Christ's ascension as found in Acts 1. 10-11, and then verses 52-53 of the chapter in Luke are translated.2 Sometimes, and frequently in the mystery plays, parallel passages from the Gospels are so skilfully combined that it is difficult to separate the quotations and assign each one to its proper place, one half of a line being taken from one Gospel, and the other 1 Homilies 2, p. 215. 2 Old English Miscellany, p. 55. half from another. Or, in the midst of a quotation from one of the Evangelists, a single line from another is given, and then the account continues according to the first. In the story of Christ's betrayal, as quoted from Matthew, verse 50 of chapter 26 is thus given: 'Freond, seyde Ihesu Crist, to hwan ertu ycume?' And then, as if part of the same verse, comes the line, taken from Luke 22. 48: 'Mid pine...cosse pu trayest monnes sune.' After this, the account follows Matthew again. In such cases as this there is usually no warning that any transition is made from one Biblical writer to another. In some thirty lines of one homily, for example, the various signs of the coming of Doomsday, as mentioned in the Bible, are collated, and we have a series of ten Biblical quotations, or allusions, representing at least seven different books, though without specific reference.2 Sometimes inaccuracies of allusion occur. Usually, perhaps, these are of minor importance, and perfectly natural mistakes, such as those with respect to numbers, where the memory was apparently trusted, and the result was a misstatement. In quoting from the Sermon on the Mount, for example, the writer says: 'Se de het þe to gonne mid him twa milen, ga mid him prie.' That the number of miles should be thus increased over that found in Matthew is more excusable in a Middle English writer without facilities for verifying references, than is Browning's confusion of the two stories of the loaves and fishes.* More serious blunders due to faulty memory occur, 1 Old English Miscellany, p. 42. 2 Homilies 1, p. 143. • Vices and Virtues, p. 127. The Ring and the Book 8. 1201-05. however. Richard Rolle tells us that Christ says in His Gospel: Wa till yhow bat says with will These words actually occur in Isaiah. Such mistakes as this are found so seldom in Middle English writings that we can but marvel at the accuracy displayed in an age when no concordances were accessible, and men so often relied on their memory for their Biblical allusions. In modern times, Browning, perhaps, more than any other poet, has alluded to the Bible from memory, and in such ways that we can not fail to be impressed with his knowledge of it, and his ability to use it familiarly for the enrichment of his poems. But it is not easy to pardon in him actual blunders due to reliance on memory, for he had no such excuse as his predecessors of the Middle English period. What can be said when he, too, puts into Christ's mouth words which come nearest to a saying of Isaiah's? As when Christ said,-when, where? 'All other wrongs done, patiently I take: Honorem trado is my quick retort.3 Perhaps the most trying kind of mistakes is that where certain ideas are ascribed to some Biblical writer, which it seems impossible to locate, even The Pricke of Conscience 1614-15. 2 5. 20. The Ring and the Book 10. 1982-87. cf. 8. 663-7. |