^{Note 1 in page 25} ? 3189–3204. This and all subsequent quotations from Chaucer are from Robinson's edition; The Works of Geoffrey Chaucer, 2nd ed. (Boston, 1957).

^{Note 2 in page 25} Theodore Spencer's “Chaucer's Hell: A Study in Mediaeval Convention,” Speculum, II (1927), 177–200, answers this question in part but omits the aspect dealt with in this paper. The standard editions of Chaucer have no commentary on the reference to Adam in Hell, although the convention in which Chaucer is working has many complexities and much of it has been forgotten. R. K. Root, in Sources and Analogues of Chaucer's “Canterbury Tales,” ed. Bryan and Dempster (Chicago, 1941), p. 625, virtually dismisses the Lucifer and Adam without treatment. However, scribal alterations in the Monk's Tale MSS suggest that even some medieval readers were puzzled; e.g., helle altered to celle and delue; cf. Manly and Rickert, The Text of The Canterbury Tales (Chicago, 1940), vn, 475–476.

Two articles touch, negatively, on the subject of this paper. Pauline Aiken, “Vincent of Beauvais and Chaucer's Monk's Tale,” Speculum, xvn (1942), 56–57, investigates the possible influence of the Historiale on Chaucer's Adam stanza but presents nothing concerning Adam in Hell; Dudley R. Johnson, “The Biblical Characters of Chaucer's Monk,” PMLA, LXVI (1951), 828, examines the Bible Historiale of Guyart Desmoulins and the De Casibus of Boccaccio (commonly cited as Chaucer's principal source for the Adam), with, however, only the following relevant observation: “The last line of the stanza, ‘To labour and to helle, and to meschaunce,’ reflects in modified form Boccaccio's taut conclusion, ‘Servitus. Exilium. Labor’.” One may observe, however, that exilium cannot be equated with helle. Further, it is noteworthy that Boccaccio begins with Adam not Lucifer; the pairing is Chaucer's, although inevitably Lucifer and Adam appear together in other works (e.g., Gower, Confessio Amantis, vin, 1–70 contains accounts of Lucifer, Adam, and Eve—but with no reference to Adam in Hell).

^{Note 3 in page 26} E.g., Tatian (c. 160) and the Encratites (cf. Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, ed. F. L. Cross, London, 1957, p. 15). Eusebius of Alexandria (5th-6th cent.) refers to the Prophets as having been rescued but makes no mention of Adam (Migne, Palrologia Graeca, LXII, 721–722; LXXXVI, i, 509–510; cf. J. A. MacCulloch, The Harrowing of Hell: A Comparative Study of an Early Christian Doctrine, Edinburgh, 1930, pp. 176–184); Marcion (2nd cent.) sees them as having been left in Hades but is unclear as to Adam's fate (MacCulloch, ibid., pp. 86–87; see also p. 338). For a Jewish view that the soul of Adam was translated to the third Heaven “until the resurrection,” see Jewish Encyclopedia (New York, 1901), art. “Adam, Book of.” Loofs's article on the Descensus in Hastings' Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics (New York, 1924), IV, 654–663, is thorough, but from the point of view of this paper the most useful treatment is MacCulloch's The Harrowing of Hell, hereafter referred to as MacCulloch.

^{Note 4 in page 26} A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, ed. Philip Schaff (Grand Rapids, Mich., 1956), i, 516; the passage is from the Epistle to Evodius, trans. J. G. Cunningham (chap, iii., p. 6). I quote Cunningham's note: “We give the original of this important sentence: ‘De illo quidem primo homine patre generis humani, quod inde solverit Ecclesia fere tota consentit: quod earn non inaniter credidisse credendum est, undecumque hoc traditum sit, etiamsi canonicarum Scrip-turarum hinc expressa non proferatur auctoritas’ ” (loc. cit.). MacCulloch, p. 337, states that the following speak “expressly” of Adam's release: Tertullian, Hippolytus, Origen, Gregory, Thaumaturgus, Athanasius, Ambrose, Ephrem Syrus, and the Questions of Bartholomew.

In the handling of quotations from foreign languages I shall generally follow Cunningham's practice above; that is, give translations in the text and, for especially important passages, the original in the notes.

^{Note 5 in page 26} But an English amplification which Chaucer might have known reads: “sethen his [Christ's] sowle wente to helle and tok owt be sowlys bat he ordeynyd to saue be-fore bis world was made” {Lay Folks Catechism, ed. Simmons and Nolloth, EETS, O.S., cxvm, 17). Amplifications also appeared in primers; see the French primer reproduced in facsimile in Plimpton, The Education of Chaucer (New York, 1935), pi. xiii, 5, which states that Christ delivered “les ames des sains patriarches et prophètes et de tous les autres.” The doctrine, minus the amplifications, appears in the Athanasian Creed as well as in the Apostles', but not in the Nicene Creed. The belief, however, is much older than these expressions of it; some of the Biblical passages on which it rests are I Peter iii.18-19, iv.6; Acts ii.31; Ephesians iv.9.

^{Note 6 in page 26} The Church Fathers were divided in their opinion as to the rescue of the Old Testament Saints : Tertullian denies that they were removed {De Anima, ce. 7, 55, 58; MacCulloch, p. 266) and also Marcion (see fn. 3 above); Augustine's ideas varied (MacCulloch, pp. 122, 255–256). Aquinas concludes that they were rescued {Summa, ni, Q. 52, Art. 5).

^{Note 7 in page 27} The apocryphal Gospel of Nicodemus {Evangclium Ni-codemi) is especially responsible for the popular view of those rescued; the influence of this work in England is well treated by VV. E. Hulme, The Middle English Harrowing of Hell and Gospel of Nicodemus, EETS, Ex. S., c (1907), xv-lxx, and in articles by Hulme, and more restrictedly by W. A. Craigie, “The Gospel of Nicodemus and the York Mystery Plays,” Furnivall Miscellany (Oxford, 1901), pp. 56–61. The influence of the drama on the popular imagination cannot be overemphasized, nor can another influence, which cannot be handled, except incidentally, in this paper; this is the iconography. Hulme's EETS volume is hereafter referred to as Hulme.

^{Note 8 in page 27} MacCulloch, p. 261; cf. also Aquinas, Summa, in (Suppl.), Q. 69, Art. 5.

^{Note 9 in page 27} Attwater, Catholic Dictionary, 2nd ed. (New York, 1954; Imprimatur), p. 292, for first quotation; Catholic Encyclopedia (New York, 1913; Imprimatur), art. “Limbo,” for second.

^{Note 10 in page 27} The “Summa Theologica” of St. Thomas Aquinas, trans. Fathers of the English Dominican Province (London, 1932), xx, 14 (Q. 69, Art. 5). The original of this important statement reads: “Si ergo consideretur limbus Patrum et infernus secundum locorum qualitatem praedictum, sic non est du-bium quod distinguuntur. Turn quia in inferno est poena sensibilis, quae non erat in limbo Patrum. Turn etiam quia in inferno est poena aeterna, sed in limbo Patrum detinebantur sancti temporaliter tantum. Sed si considerentur quantum ad situm loci, sic probabile est quod idem locus, vel quasi con-tinuus, sit infernus et limbus, ita tamen quod quaedam superior pars inferni limbus Patrum dicatur” {Summa Theologiae, Ottawa, 1941, inel Partis Supplementum, 301b).

^{Note 11 in page 27} Necrosima 29, in Ephrem, Opera (Rome, 1743), vi, 28; MacCulloch, p. 113.

^{Note 12 in page 27} Migne, Pat. Gr., XLni, 482; MacCulloch, p. 194.

^{Note 13 in page 27} At least by inference. Monnier {La Descente aux enfers: Elude de pensée religieuse d'art et de littérature, Paris, 1904) reproduces an llth-cent. miniature showing Christ drawing Adam out of a place of flames (p. 198, fig. 2) and a 14th-cent. fragment depicting Adam and Eve leaving a flaming Hell mouth (p. 204, fig. 6); plate xiv (13th Cent.) in L. J. Friedman, Text and Iconography for Joinville's Credo (Cambridge, Mass., 1958), portrays Adam and the Fathers departing from a Hell mouth amidst red flames (cf. p. 67); fig. 101, p. 115, in Male, L'Art religieux du XIIIme siècle en France (Paris, 1931), is similar; plate ixb (14th-15th cent.) in Grace Frank, “Popular Iconography of the Passion,” PMLA, XLVI (1931), 333–341, represents Adam and Eve making an almost comi cally relieved exit from a very hot Hell. See also fn. 26 below Such works inevitably suggest the possibility that some people saw Adam as in the Hell of the Damned (cf. G. McN. Rushforth, Medieval Christian Imagery, Oxford, 1936, p. 386), although this is not necessarily so, since the Hell mouth (contrary to Rushforth) can be the gateway to a Heli which includes both the Limbus Patrum and the Hell of the Damned. Yet the picture is not simple and the possibility remains. (Cf. the Greek Gospel of Nicodemus, where Adam says to Christ, “Thou hast brought me up out of the lowest hell”—The Apocryphal New Testament, trans. M. R. James, Oxford, 1924, p. 138).

^{Note 14 in page 28} C-text, XXI, 146–154 (ed. W. W. Skeat, Oxford, 1886, I, 529); “Ryghtwisnesse” advances the same argument in 11. 194–208.

^{Note 15 in page 28} So Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th and 14th eds., art. “Limbus.” Neither limbus nor limbo appears in Chaucer. This is not ground, however, for concluding that Chaucer was unacquainted with the concept. While the OED citations are not numerous, they are sufficient, supplemented by the references to be added in this paper, to suggest that the concept had become rather widely known at least by the 15th century. See also below, pp. 33–34.

^{Note 16 in page 28} The classification into mild and severe arises from the nature of the English writings and is not meant as a theological distinction. The validity of limbus and bonds as indices of the two traditions derives in part from semantic incompatibility (one cannot lie fettered in a place where there is no corporal punishment). Ultimately, however, it depends upon the distribution of the terms—which is clear-cut in all but one (apparent) instance: in the prologue-like first scene of the York Harrowing of Hell play (see fn. 20), Christ says He will be on His way to “vnbynde” those He has “bought” (11. 7–8), although in the play proper the abode of the Fathers is referred to as “lymbus.” That this is merely a surface inconsistency, not a contradiction of the limbus-bonds opposition, is shown by 11. 53 and 97, which state that no one is bound (see p. 29 below).

^{Note 17 in page 28} St. Erkenwald: A Middle English Poem, ed. H. L. Savage (New Haven, 1926), p. 16,11. 286–296). The italicizing here and in all later quotations is mine.

^{Note 18 in page 28} See below, p. 33, for a discussion of Chaucer's probable acquaintance with Dante's Limbo.

^{Note 19 in page 29} C-text, xix, 111–117.

^{Note 20 in page 29} York Plays, ed. L. T. Smith (Oxford, 1885), Play xxxvn, 11. 102 and 198. The reference in 1. 102 was omitted by the OED. Another occurrence of the term which may date from the 14th century is in the Thornton MS. Pritity of the Passion (by Rolle or by one of his followers; not in the OED): “As sune as he [Christ] was dede, he wente downe to hell to owre holy ffadyrs hat ware in lymbo to tyme of his resureccione. & Jiene were bey all in grete Ioye: for the syghte of gode es perfite Ioye. pere was also be thefe]?at oure lorde hangynge one he crosse said thus to, ‘this daye sail bou be with me in paradyse‘—for paradyse es cauld)>e syghte of gode; for as sune after be passione of oure lorde bothe J>e thefe & all be holy ffadirs J?at ware in lymbo saw ]>s Ioye of gode as he es” (Yorkshire Writers, ed. C. Horstman, London, 1895, I, 212). The passage continues in a similarly mild vein.

^{Note 21 in page 29} C-text, xxi, 1.369.

^{Note 22 in page 29} Play xxv, 11.96, 213 (G. England and A. W. Pollard, eds., The Towneley Plays, EETS, Ex. S., LXXI, 1897). Although chronology is not an important aspect of this paper, I have given dates of probable composition for a number of the less familiar works (following the dating in Hans Kurath and Sherman M. Kuhn, eds., Middle English Dictionary, i, Ann Arbor, 1954, “Plan and Bibliography”—hereafter referred to as MED). The dating of the plays, however, is under dispute: OED dates York c. 1440, Towneley c. 1460; MED dates York MS. ante 1450, Towneley ante 1500 (with 1460 as conjectured date of composition); Sisam, however, in his scrupulously edited Fourteenth Century Verse and Prose (Oxford, 1937), includes a play from both the York and the Towneley cycles. That Chaucer saw mystery plays is likely. One of the earliest English references to them is by him (Canterbury Tales, A 3384).

^{Note 23 in page 29} “The Seven Words from the Cross,” in Carleton Brown, Religious Lyrics of the XVth Century (Oxford, 1939), p. 142, 11.49-52.

^{Note 24 in page 29} K. S. Block, ed., Ludus Coventriae or the Plaie called Corpus Christi, EETS, Ex. S., cxx (1922), 307, 11. 1016–17. The use of terms is unprecise (cf. 11. 974 and 1404), the picture not very clear. The Chester Harrowing is even less explicit, although overall effect, as well as absence of a reference to bonds, places both plays in the mild tradition.

^{Note 25 in page 29} “The Middle English [La Estorie del] Evangelie,” ed. Gertrude H. Campbell, PMLA, xxx (1915), 556–557 (Dul-wich Coll. MS. XXII, 11. 195–202). Relating these lines to the mild tradition is not, however, an inference. The Dulwich MS. has the following marginal gloss: “boni in lumbum. mali in infernum. lucas. xvi. lazarus in sinum abrahe. diues in infirnum …” (ibid.). If the dating of the MS. is correct (“about 1300”; ibid., p. 530; also MED), this reference to the Limbus Patrum antedates the first citation in the OED by over fifty years. Limbo also occurs in another MS. of the Evangelie (Bodl. Add. C. 38; Campbell's article, p. 557); this is not in the OED but the date is much later (early 15th cent.).

One final instance of limbus (early 15th cent.; not in OED) deserves quoting because of its clarity: “For fro the tyme of the preuaricacion of Adam vnto the aduent of his and oure saueoure aile man-kynd was i-lost, and all that dyed des-cendid vnto helle, were they good, were they euel. Neuerthe-les the goode men yede to the ouer place of helle i-clepyd Limbus and the euel vnto depenes” (Speculum Sacerdotale, ed. E. H. Weatherly, EETS, O. S., cc, 1936, 4; I am indebted to Sherman M. Kuhn of the Middle English Dictionary for this reference, and also for the last reference in fn. 20).

^{Note 26 in page 30} But G. McN. Rushforth (Medieval Christian Imagery, p. 298) asserts that “the patriarchs emerging from the jaws of Hell or Hell's mouth, a design which occurs as early as Queen Mary's Psalter,” is “a popular and rather late interpretation.” If this statement is even generally true, it is striking that English literature reverses the situation. (It is worth noting that the design described by Rushforth appears earlier than Queen Mary's Psalter [14th cent.]—in ?. M. Cotton MS. Tib. C. VI, mid-llth cent.; in the St. Albans Psalter, before A.D. 1123; and in MS. 4509 of Joinville's Credo, usually dated 1287. For the first two references see Otto Pâcht, C. R. Dodwell, and Francis Wormald, The St. Albans Psalter, London, Warburg Institute, 1960, pis. 31b, 106a-b, and pp. 3, 51, 93; for the last, C. J. Friedman, Text and Iconography of Joinville's Credo, Cambridge, Mass., 1958, p. 38.)

^{Note 27 in page 30} The Junius Manuscript, ed. G. P. Krapp (New York, 1931; The Anglo-Saxon Poetic Records, i), p. 149,11. 416–419. Charles W. Kennedy's translation reproduces the spirit: “Bitter the price we paid, v/hen we must needs sink downward to this flaming pit, and there abide for many thousand winters, dreadfully burning” (The Caedmon Poems Translated into English Prose, London, 1916, p. 162).

^{Note 28 in page 30} The Exeter Book, ed. G. P. Krapp and ?. V. K. Dobbie (New York, 1936; The Anglo-Saxon Poetic Records, in), p. 220,11.61,65.

^{Note 29 in page 30} Bright's Anglo-Saxon Reader, rev. by J. R. Hulbert (New York, 1951), p. 137,11. 18–19.

^{Note 30 in page 30} My free translation; the original reads “Tunc veniet diabolus et très vel quatuor diaboli cum eo, déférentes in manibus catenas et vinctos ferreos, quos ponent in colla Ade et Eve. Et quidam eos inpellent, alii eos trahent ad infernum; alii vero diaboli erunt iuxta infernum obviam venientibus et magnum tripudium inter se facient de eorum perdicione; et singuli alii diaboli illos venientes monstrabunt, et eos sus-cipient et in infernum mittent; et in eo facient fumum magnum exsurgere” (Das Adamsspiel, ed. Karl Grass, Halle, 1891, p. 33). The treatment is meant to be comic; but such cruel comedy would be impossible in the mild tradition.

^{Note 31 in page 30} Hulme, p. 112 (Galba version quoted, 11.1417-18).

^{Note 32 in page 30} The Apocryphal New Testament (Oxford, 1924), pp. 132, 134; hereafter referred to as James. James is translating the eclectic text of Tischendorff, which is the original of the English translations only in a general sense.

References to bonds or chains in theological writings are fairly numerous; see quotations on the following pages in MacCulloch: 79 (St. Athanasius), 129 (Venantius Fortu-natus), 130 (Acts of Callistratus), 138 (Caesarius of Aries), and fns. 11–12 above.

^{Note 33 in page 31} MS. Cotton Caligula A ii, in C. Horstmann, ed., Alteng-lische Legenden, Neue Folge (Heilbronn, 1881), p. 519, 11. 330–336.

^{Note 34 in page 31} Chaucer, of course, translated his A ? C from this work (written in 1330 or 1331); the quotation is from Lydgate's translation of the whole (ante 1430), in F. J. Furnivall, ed., The Pilgrimage of the Life of Man, EETS, Ex. S., LXXVII (1899), 125,11. 4748–49.

^{Note 35 in page 31} F. A. Foster, ed., EETS, O. S., CXLV (1913); Cambridge Dd. 1. 1., 11. 1817–22, quoted. The Northern Passion survives in a number of MSS, some of which, interestingly, omit the reference to Adam's having been bound, presumably under the influence of the mild tradition (e.g., Harley 4196 renders 1. 1821: “With him he toke adam and eue”; ibid., 213).

^{Note 36 in page 31} Legends of the Holy Rood, ed. Morris, EETS, O. S., XLVI (1871), 205.

^{Note 37 in page 31} Brown, Religious Lyrics of the XVth Century, p. 120 (No. 83,11.1-2).

^{Note 38 in page 31} Prose Life of Adam and Eve (ante 1325), Vernon MS., in C. Horstmann, ed., Sammlung Altenglischer Legenden (Heilbronn, 1878), p. 226. The Wheatley MS. Adam and Eve (ed. Mabel Day, EETS, O. S., CLV, 1921) does not speak of bonds but certainly reflects the severe tradition when God tells Michael to keep Adam's soul “yn turmentis” until “I de-lyuere hym” (p. 96).

^{Note 39 in page 31} A Sawley Monk's Version of Grosleste's Castle of Love, in C. Horstmann, ed., The Minor Poems of the Vernon MS., EETS, O. S., xcvm (1892), 410,11. 67–68; Meditations on the Supper of Our Lord, ed. J. M. Cowper, EETS, O. S. LX (1875) 35, 11. 1121–23 (The medutacyun how cryst ede to helle; the textual variant, p. 53, “ffadirs bonde” shows bonde interpreted to mean “prison”); Fall and Passion, in Die Kildare Gedichte, ed. W. Heuser, Bonner Beitrage zur Anglislik, xiv (Bonn, 1904), 108, II. 189–191 (cf. also II. 77–83—before the Descensus the Devil brought all to Hell “and euer hem traiid bro3 is lore”). The above works are all from the 14th century except for the first (c. 1425—M ED).

^{Note 40 in page 31} Hulme, pp. 15,19; cf. also p. 3,11.9-12 et passim. Digby, the earliest MS (MED dates, with a question mark, ante 1300), actually has the line, “sebben bou boundest him [Adam] wib min' (Hulme, p. 10,1. 87); Christ is speaking to Satan, but the context requires bouyest, as in Auchinleck.

^{Note 41 in page 31} Carleton Brown, Religious Lyrics of the XIVth Century, 2nd ed. rev. by G. V. Smithers (Oxford, 1957), p. 53 (No. 37).

^{Note 42 in page 31} Canticum de Creatione, earlier version, 11. 17–26, in Emerson, A Middle English Reader (London, 1915), p. 67; later Canticum, ed. Horstmann, Anglia, ? (1878), 287–331,11. 884–888 (God says of Adam, “kep bis soule ri3t / In peynes”); Castle of Love, ed. Horstmann, EETS, O. S., xcvm (1892), 361,11. 241–242 (“Now is Adam wib wo I-nome, / Sunnes [the Devil's] bral he is bi-come”); A Song on the Passion, ed. Morris, EETS, O. S., xux, 199,11. 66–70; and others.

^{Note 43 in page 32} Théodore Spencer, in Speculum, ii (1927), 187–188, interprets ? 634–635 as referring to the original chaining of the fallen angels on their arrival in Hell, but Chaucer's “he that starf for our redempcioun” excludes this interpretation and thus also the parallels cited by Spencer.

^{Note 44 in page 32} James, pp. 135–138; the problem of the double binding is solved by depicting Satan as already bound but only with “a fetter about his feet” (ibid., p. 135). The Digby Harrowing of Hell (Hulme, p. 12,11. 121–126) gives the following reason for Christ's binding of Satan: “If bou were hounbounden among men, / Almest woldest bou bireuen me [Christ] hem; / pe smale deuelen bat beb hounstronge [un-strong, weak], / Hoe sulen among moncun 3onge / For to hauen allé hem / pat hem ne willeb stonden a3ein.”

^{Note 45 in page 32} Hulme, p. 12,11.137-142 (Digby version). The binding at the Descensus appears also in the following English writings : Old English Gospel of Nicodemus (Bright-Hulbert, p. 136, 11. 14–15); Christ and Satan (ed. Krapp, pp. 149–150, 11. 442450); Middle English Gospel of Nicodemus (Hulme, p. 112, 11. 1441–44); the Ludus Coventriae Harrowing (ed. Block, p. 319,1. 1396); the York Harrowing (ed. L. T. Smith, p. 392,11. 340–341). This list is merely selective.

^{Note 46 in page 33} James, p. 137.

^{Note 47 in page 33} Richard Morris, ed., EETS, O. S., LXII (1876), p. 1048, 11. 18283–87 (Cotton MS. quoted); 11. 17863–18512 retell the Gospel of Nicodemus.

^{Note 48 in page 33} Hulme, pp. 112–114 (Galba quoted; Harley and Sion agree but Add. omits the second binding). The exchange is implicit in the Latin A and Greek Gospel of Nicodemus but absent in the Old English translation and, of course, in all works of the mild tradition.

^{Note 49 in page 34} The Divine Comedy of Dante Alighieri, trans. Jefferson Butler Fletcher (New York, 1951), pp. 17–18; the original reads: “Gran duol mi prese al cor quando lo intesi, / Perocchè gente di molto valore / Conobbi che in quel limbo eran sospesi. / ‘Dimmi, Maestro mio, dimmi, Signore … Uscicci mai alcuno, ? per suo merto / ? per altrui, che poi fosse beato?’ / ? quei, che intese il moi parlar coperto, / Rispose: ?? era nuovo in questo stato, / Quando ci vidi venire un possente / D'Abel suo figlio, e quella di Noè, / Di Moïse legista e ubbidiente; / Abraam patriarca, e David re, / Israel con lo padre e co’ suoi nati / ? con Rachele, per cui tante fe', / Ed altri molti … ' ” (La Divina Commedia, ed. C. H. Grandgent, Boston, 1909, p. 36, 11. 43–61). Tatlock, MLN, xxix (1914), 97, and Spencer, op. cit., pp. 182, 200, both speculate that Dante's Limbo underlies a passage in Chaucer's Troilus.

^{Note 50 in page 34} Fletcher's translation (loc. cit.). Even milder must this Limbo have been for Adam, since he possessed hope of deliverance (this is made clear in works of both traditions; cf. the Middle English Gospel of Nicodemus, stanzas 105–107).

^{Note 51 in page 34} Limbus in Middle English does not seem to have been investigated before this study; therefore, I have attempted to make my treatment as complete as possible, employing both the OED and the slips of the Middle English Dictionary (through the courtesy of Professor Kuhn) and supplementing these with an extensive search of my own.

^{Note 52 in page 34} Chaucer's interest in theology is attested to not only by The Parson's Tale and other surviving writings but also by the lost translations mentioned in the Prologue to The Legend of Good Women (“Orygenes upon the Maudeleyne” and the “Wreched Engendrynge of Mankynde”). The original of the second of these was Innocent Ill's De contemptu Mundi Sive De Miseria Conditionis Humanae; I find nothing concerning Adam in Hell in this work. The original of the first, the spurious Omelia Origmis super Maria stabat, is unavailable to me. However, these treatises hardly represent the extent of Chaucer's theological reading. Of writings which Chaucer is thought to have read or consulted—cf. T. R. Lounsbury, Studies in Chaucer (New York, 1892), n, ch. v, and ?. P. Hammond, Chaucer: A Bibliographical Manual (New York, 1908), pp. 73–105—at least two, in addition to Dante, involve the limbus concept: Jacobus de Voragine's Legenda Aurea (p. 242 in the edition of Th. Graesse; 3rd ed., Berlin, 1890) and Peter Comestor's Eistoria Scholastica (Migne, P. L., CXCVIII, 1126; the term used by Peter Comestor is sinus Abrahae but the concept is the same: cf. Du Cange, Glossarium Mediae et Infimae Lalinilatis, Graz, Austria, 1954, s. v. Limbus, where Comestor is cited).

^{Note 53 in page 35} For example, nothing has been said of the identicality often seen in their sin (Pride) nor of the connection sometimes drawn between Adam and Christ, the Adam noms. On Pride as the primary sin of both Lucifer and Adam, see Gower's Confessio Amantis, 11.3294-3303 (The Complete Works of John Gower, ed. Macaulay, n, Oxford, 1901, 125)—“Lucifer … bar Pride vnth him into helle”; “Adam for Pride loste his pris.” On Christ as the Adam novus see Gower's Mirour de VOmme, 11. 28869–96 (ibid., I, Oxford, 1899, 321) and Jerome, Against Joviniamts, trans. W. H. Fremantle et al., in Schaff and Wace, A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 2nd ser., vi (Grand Rapids, Mich., 1954), 375, 411,