^{page 831 note 1} As originally written the paper was read before the Modern Language Association at Philadelphia in 1900. Since that time some additions have been made and the whole has been revised. There has been, however, no essential modification of the principal results of the original study. Yet special mention should be made of a monograph by Dr. Louis Ginzberg, Die Haggada bei den Kirchenvätern und in der apochryphischen Litteratur, which has been of special assistance in connection with Hebrew tradition. Though printed in the same year as the reading of this paper I had not seen it when the paper was written. Dr. Ginzberg has also furnished me valuable information in one or two letters.

^{page 833 note 1} Holt's ed., ll. 14456 f.

^{page 833 note 2} Scot. Text Soc., ed. by Jas. Cranstoun, l. 97.

^{page 833 note 3} Early Eng. Text Soc. 7, ll. 393–4.

^{page 834 note 1} Early Eng. Text Soc., 28, 117. Upon this passage (EETS. 67, 225) Prof. Skeat quotes Wright's brief note regarding a popular legend of the Middle Ages on Cain's birth in the period of transgression, though without showing its connection with Hebrew tradition. He adds, “Petrus Comestor says: ‘Adam cognovit uxorem suam, sed non in paradiso et ejectus.’” The passage from the C Text of Piers Plowman will be found on p. 900 of this paper.

^{page 834 note 2} Horstmann, Sammlung altenglischer legenden; Trin. ms., p. 126, 1. 140 f.; Auch, ms., p. 141, l. 235 f.; Vern. ms., p. 223.

^{page 835 note 1} So referred in Jewish Encyclopædia, article Cain; Ginzberg, Die Haggada bei den Kirchenvätern und in der apochryphischen Litteratur, p. 59. See also Bayle, Dict. Hist., articles Eve, Cain.

^{page 835 note 2} Bibliotheca Magna Rabbinica, i, 290.

^{page 835 note 3} Based on Eisenmenger, Entdecktes Judenthum, ii, 8.

^{page 836 note 1} References from Ginzberg above.

^{page 836 note 2} Reference is by Ginzberg, Die Haggada, as above, p. 59.

^{page 836 note 3} Cf. also Bede, Exegetica in Epistolam Joannis (Migre, 93, 102); Martinus Legionensis, Expositio in Epistolam 1 B. Joannis (Migne, 209, 270).

^{page 837 note 1} Appendix to vol. iii of Augustine, Migne, 35, 2282.

^{page 837 note 2} Edited by Meyer, 1879.

^{page 838 note 1} The Chester Plays ed. by Diemling, EETS. (extra ser.), 62; The Creation, ll. 531 f. To this passage Ungemach, Die Quellen der fünf ersten Chester Plays, gives a parallel from the Old French Le Mintere du Viel Testement. The similarity is only general in the main and can be shown to be common to a large number of sources in other places. For our purpose the main point is that Cain offers “une gerbe meschante, Et une blee non valante,” Des Sacrifices Cayn et Abel, Société des Anciens Texts Français, p. 95.

^{page 839 note 1} The Towneley Plays, ed. by England, EETS. (ex. ser.), 71; The. Killing of Abel, ll. 122 f.

^{page 839 note 2} Ibid., ll. 200 f.

^{page 839 note 3} Ancient Cornish Drama, ed. by Norris, l. 473 of translation.

^{page 839 note 4} Edition of Diemer, p. 24.

^{page 840 note 1} Horstmann, Altenglische Legenden, p. 130, ll. 482 f; p. 224.

^{page 840 note 2} The Creation, ed. by Stokes. Transactions of the Philological Society (1864), iv, p. 87.

^{page 840 note 3} See also a note in Longfellow's edition, mentioning the Italian tradition of Cain though without accounting for it, and suggesting the relation of this passage to two in Shakespeare's Midsummer Night's Dream. The latter will be discussed later.

^{page 841 note 1} Compare with this the similar legend noted by Grimm in Deutsche Mythologie, chap. xxii (Mondsflecken), though there connected with that unfortunate trespasser of Numbers 15, 32–36, who was stoned for gathering sticks on the Sabbath. I have found nothing in English which directly connects the moon-man with the trespasser in Numbers or with the Sabbath.

^{page 841 note 2} Wright's edition in the Rolls Series, 34, p. 54.

^{page 841 note 3} ms. is.

^{page 842 note 1} ms. is.

^{page 842 note 2} Böddeker, reprinting this in his Altenglische Dichtungen, also refers for the explanation to the German legend given by Grimm, but adds no proof of any sort.

^{page 842 note 3} See Moon Lore, by Rev. Timothy Hurley (1885), p. 28. For this seal Hurley refers to an article by Hudson Taylor in the Archæologieal Journal, a reference which I have not followed out. Hurley also gives one or two references to this moon legend not found in other places.

^{page 842 note 4} Upon this Skeat notes the poem in Ritson above, the passage in Neckham, and those in Shakespeare.

^{page 842 note 5} Babington's edition, Rolls Series, p. 155.

^{page 843 note 1} Ll. 260–264, as given in the reprint of Thynne's Chaucer.

^{page 843 note 2} Grosart's Dekker, iii, 258. Other allusions to the man in the moon are to be found in Hudibras, ii, iii, 767 f., as noted by Hurley above, and in Wilkins's Discovery of a New World, 4th ed., 1684, pp. 77, 94. While Wilkins mentions various suggestions as to the moon's spots they do not bear directly upon our matter.

^{page 845 note 1} Just as I write this revision there comes to hand the London Athenæum of June 23, 1906, with a letter of Paget Toynbee on Cain as a Synonym of the Moon. He quotes certain lines from The Strange Fortune of Alerane, or My Ladies Toy (London, 1605), in which “Cain appears to be used as a synonym of the moon.” They read as follows:

These lines must be regarded, I think, as clinching the argument above in favor of a connection of the moon legend with that of Cain in Elizabethan literature. For completeness of bibliography on this point perhaps I may add reference to my own letter in the Athenæum of August 18. This brought no further discussion of the subject.

^{page 846 note 1} EETS. 57, ll. 1065–6.

^{page 846 note 2} Horstmann's Legenden, p. 130, ll. 480 f.

^{page 846 note 3} Ibid., ll. 487 f.

^{page 846 note 4} Ibid., p. 224.

^{page 847 note 1} The Killing of Abel, ll. 108–9. Cf. lines already quoted on p. 839.

^{page 847 note 2} Ibid., ll. 195 f.

^{page 848 note 1} Horstmann, Legenden, p. 224.

^{page 848 note 2} The Killing of Abel, ll. 275 f.

^{page 848 note 3} The Chester play of The Creation, l. 569.

^{page 848 note 4} Paradise Lost, xi, 441–2.

^{page 849 note 1} Die Haggada, p. 61 f.

^{page 849 note 2} Migne, 14, 355.

^{page 849 note 3} Migne, 100, 518.

^{page 849 note 4} Hist. Schol., Liber Genesis, cap. xxvi, Migne, 198, 1077.

^{page 850 note 1} Translation of Malin, Book i, ch. 77.

^{page 850 note 2} Ibid., Book i, ch. 78.

^{page 850 note 3} This Ginzberg mentions in Die Haggada, etc., p. 69, but I think without clear evidence in its favor.

^{page 851 note 1} See Malin, p. 98.

^{page 851 note 2} Migne, 100, 525. Cf. John a Lapide, Com. in Genesim, cap. iv.

^{page 852 note 1} Horstmann, Legenden, p. 130, ll. 469 f.

^{page 852 note 2} Ibid., p. 224.

^{page 852 note 3} Bibliothek der Angelsächsischen Prosa, Genesis, 4, 8.

^{page 852 note 4} Holt's ed., ll. 14466 f.

^{page 853 note 1} Horstmann, Legenden, p. 224.

^{page 853 note 2} See Matthew's Works of Wiclif Hitherto Unprinted, Early Eng. Text Soc., 74, p. 374.

^{page 853 note 3} The Killing of Abel, ll. 301 f.

^{page 853 note 4} The Creation, ll. 593 f.

^{page 853 note 5} Salomon and Saturn, Ælfric Society, p. 186. This was quoted by Professor Skeat in Notes and Queries, 6th ser., ii, 143 (1880), later reprinted in A Student's Pastime, p. 137, to explain ‘Cain's jaw-bone’ in Hamlet, v, i, 85. He also notes the lines from Cursor Mundi, quoted below, but mentions no further allusions in English and does not explain the origin of the tradition.

^{page 854 note 1} ms. has.

^{page 854 note 2} Horstmann, Legenden, p. 224.

^{page 854 note 3} Phil. Soc. Trans., ll. 1112 f.

^{page 855 note 1} Salomon and Saturn, Ælfric Society, p. 219.

^{page 855 note 2} Paradise Lost, xi, 444–6.

^{page 855 note 3} Cain, A Mystery, Act III.

^{page 856 note 1} ms. broier.

^{page 856 note 2} ms. nourquar.

^{page 856 note 3} Higden's Polychronicon, i, xv. Rolls Ser. 41, 103.

^{page 856 note 4} This legend rests upon that which represented Adam as created outside of Eden in the region of the later Damascus, and afterward placed in the garden. Some references are given in Mätzner's Altenglische Sprachproben, (Prosa), 184, as Skeat noted in the article referred to above. That from the Middle English Genesis and Exodus (l. 207) is as explicit as any:

^{page 857 note 1} Meyer, p. 44. Cf. also the Revelation of Moses, Ante-Nicene Fathers, viii, 565.

^{page 858 note 1} Book i, ch. 78, Malin, p. 99.

^{page 858 note 2} Migne, 91, 70.

^{page 858 note 3} Die Haggada, etc., p. 64.

^{page 859 note 1} Book of Adam, i, 79.

^{page 859 note 2} When reading part of this paper before the Philological Club of Western Reserve University, Prof. Borgerhoff informed me that, as a boy, he was taught this legend in a Belgian Sunday School.

^{page 859 note 3} This use of one passage of Scripture to explain another, even though not really connected, is characteristic of early commentaries. Thus the “thorns and thistles” of Cain's sacrifice are probably connected with the curse of the ground in the case of Adam; see p. 849. The flame from heaven upon Abel's altar is like that which came upon Elijah's. The ass's jawbone is an interpretation from the story of Samson. Finally the interpretation of the curse of the ground in Cain's case is based on that in the condemnation of Adam; see pp. 864, 871.

^{page 860 note 1} Migne, 25, 315–16.

^{page 861 note 1} L. 1015.

^{page 861 note 2} Ll. 1143 f.

^{page 861 note 3} The Killing of Abel, l. 462 f.

^{page 861 note 4} The Creation, ll. 625–6, 663–4.

^{page 862 note 1} Ibid., ll. 641–4.

^{page 862 note 2} Ibid., ll. 665–6, 699–700.

^{page 862 note 3} Canterbury Tales, I, 1013 (Skeat ed.).

^{page 863 note 1} Altsächsische Bibeldichtung, ed. by Zangemeister and Braune, p. 45.

^{page 863 note 2} English Works Hitherto Unprinted, pp. 129, 211, 420.

^{page 864 note 1} Genesis, ll. 1015 f.

^{page 864 note 2} Cursor Mudin, ll. 1133 f.

^{page 865 note 1} Genesis, ll. 1013 f., 1018 f., 1049 f.

^{page 866 note 1} Paul and Braune's Beiträge, ix, 135.

^{page 867 note 1} The Creation, l. 635 f.

^{page 867 note 2} The Creation, ed. by Whiteley Stokes, l. 1670.

^{page 867 note 3} Ibid., l. 1480.

^{page 868 note 1} It is perhaps worth noting that in the Cornish play already referred to Lamech's servant says of Cain,

^{page 869 note 1} Reference has been made to one Rabbinical tradition, that Cain was given a dog to lead him (see p. 844). According to other Jewish sources the sign was a pair of horns'. This does not seem to occur in English, but reference is made to it in the Cornish play of The Creation. There Lamech's boy thinks he sees a ‘large bullock’ (l. 1546), and Cain says,

^{page 869 note 2} Horstmann, Legenden, p. 224.

^{page 870 note 1} Migne, 91, 71.

^{page 870 note 2} Expositio in Genesim, Migne, 164, 173.

^{page 870 note 3} The special application of these passages to Beowulf, 168–9, seems to me to be conclusive. Cf. p. 863.

^{page 871 note 1} Dr. Ginzberg has again supplied me with these references, in answer to a question.

^{page 871 note 2} The Talmud: Selections, trans. by H. Polano, p. 15.

^{page 871 note 3} Targums on the Pentateuch, ed. by Etheridge, p. 43.

^{page 872 note 1} Dr. Ginzberg is again my authority, and he also refers to the following tradition above.

^{page 872 note 2} Commentaria Sacrae Scripturae, on Genesis 4, 15.

^{page 872 note 3} Malin's trans., p. 103.

^{page 873 note 1} Migne, 16, 919.

^{page 873 note 2} This reference Dr. Ginzberg furnishes me in a private letter.

^{page 873 note 3} Commentarium in Genesim. Bayle, Dict. Histor., article Cain, quotes Saldinum Ot. Theol., p. 345, to the effect that “the dog which guarded the flock of Abel was given to Cain for a constant companion in his wandering.”

^{page 875 note 1} Genesis and Exodus, EETS., 7, p. 14.

^{page 875 note 2} ms. lameth both times.

^{page 875 note 3} Version of the Cotton ms.; chaunce of the second line is chaunge in the ms.

^{page 875 note 4} Another reading is loyterd.

^{page 875 note 5} Rolls Series, Higden, ii, 229.

^{page 876 note 1} Original Chronicle, i, 191.

^{page 876 note 2} Cf. Ginzberg, Die Haggada, etc., p. 65.

^{page 877 note 1} Malin, ii, ch. xiii.

^{page 877 note 2} Migne, 35, 2221.

^{page 877 note 3} Commentaria in Genesim, ii, i (Migne, 107, 506).

^{page 877 note 4} De Universo Libri Viginti Duo, ii, 1 (Migne, 111, 33).

^{page 878 note 1} Full credit must here be given to those who have already commented on this Beowulf passage. Grimm, in his Deutsche Mythologie (1835, third ed. 1854), first called attention to the Hebrew legend of Cain and his posterity, as explaining Grendel's descent from Cain in Beowulf. Bouterwek, also, in CæEDMON's des Angelsachsen biblische Dichtungen (1854) associated the passages connected with the Cain legend and the allusions in Beowulf, making some suggestions which will be considered later. Again, in his article Das Beowulfslied, Germania, i, 385 f. (1856), he refers to the Book of Enoch and rabbinical lore as explaining Grendel's relationship to Cain. He mentions particularly the tradition that Cain was the son, not of Adam, but of Samael, the chief of the devils, and that after Cain's death two evil spirits were born from his spirit, and from them all evil spirits. Bouterwek also regarded the man-devouring element in the Grendel story as Hebrew folklore, saying “Menschenfressende Kiesen kennt das germanische Heidenthum nicht.” He emphasized the devil relationship by noting the expressions used for Grendel, but did not do full justice to these, or make any full examination of the origin of the legend. Bugge mentions the Grendel-Cain relationship in Studien über der Entstehung der nordischen Götter- und Heldensagen, and in an article in Paul und Braune's Beiträge, xii, 81, referring to Bouterwek above. English editors of Beowulf have added nothing to the subject. Thorpe barely mentions the Grendel-Cain relationship as “no doubt of Rabbinical origin,” a note which may easily have come from Bouterwek. Earle, whose annotations are the most copious that have appeared, passes over it entirely.

^{page 879 note 1} I can not refrain from retaining this convenient word, which remained in English to modern times, as in Beaumont and Fletcher's Knight of the Burning Pestle, i, ii.

^{page 880 note 1} For the force of this devil name compare Crist, 257, and the note in Cook's Christ.

^{page 880 note 2} ms. healènes, but I have no hesitation in accepting Ettmüller's conjecture helènes.

^{page 880 note 3} In view of this frequent use of gast (gæst) for Grendel I question whether we should not read gæst ‘spirit, demon’ for gæst ‘guest, enemy’ in lines 102, 1331, 1995, 2073. Possibly also it might be regarded as the correct reading for gist in line 141. In such case it would be explained as late West Saxon for Anglian gest (i. e. gēst, gst, WS. gst), which was misunderstood by the scribe. The Toller-Bosworth dictionary suggests that gæst means ‘spirit’ in wælgæst of 1331, and also in 1995.

^{page 883 note 1} See p. 863.

^{page 883 note 2} Some have even tried to take from the passage any Christian significance whatever. See, for example, Pogatscher's emendation formetode instead of for Metode, Paul and Braune's Beiträge, xix, 544.

^{page 883 note 3} Genesis und Exodus, von Joseph Diemer, I, pp. 26–27.

^{page 884 note 1} Cf. p. 895–6. Note also Eschenbach's Parzival (ed. of Lachmann), p. 247, a reference given me by Prof. Walz, of Harvard.

^{page 885 note 1} For some of these references I am indebted to notes by Professor Skeat in his edition of Piers Plowman, EETS., 67, 225 (1885), and by Professor Kittredge, PBB., 13, 210 (1887).

^{page 885 note 2} Ritson, Ancient English Metrical Romances, revised by Goldsmid, i, 133.

^{page 885 note 3} This is the ordinary form of the name in Middle English. It is evidently based on Low Latin or Old French Cai(y)m, and has possibly been confused with Cham (Ham).

^{page 886 note 1} Weber, Metrical Romances, i, 83. Compare also p. 833.

^{page 886 note 2} Edition of Skeat, EETS., 4, p. 57.

^{page 887 note 1} Reliques of Ancient English Poetry, Second Series, Book ii, iii.

^{page 887 note 2} Compare p. 863.

^{page 891 note 1} Bruchstücke des altsächsischen Bibeldichtung, p. 47.

^{page 893 note 1} Sievers's reading (PBB., 9, 140), for frecne geferdon of the ms. Yet it must be said that, except for its abruptness in construction, the textual reading is eminently appropriate to the giants of Genesis.

^{page 893 note 2} Publications of Mod. Lang. Association, 12, 218.

^{page 894 note 1} I have left this passage as it was in the paper read before the Modern Language Association in 1900. My paper was sent to Professor Bright in 1904 for the use of one of his students, and Dr. James E. Routh, in his dissertation, Two Studies on the Ballad Theory of the Beowulf, accepts the above interpretation, as well as some other of my conclusions. See especially p. 28 f. More recently Professor Klaeber has suggested the same interpretation in Textual Interpretation of Beowulf (Mod. Phil., iii, p. 459).

^{page 894 note 2} ms. hunkinde.

^{page 894 note 3} hunwreste.

^{page 895 note 1} hunframe.

^{page 895 note 2} widhin.

^{page 899 note 1} Ed. of Furnivall, Rolls Series, ll. 201–206.

^{page 899 note 2} Text A, x, 135 f.; EETS., 28, 117. Text C, xi, 212 f.; EETS., 54, 190.

^{page 902 note 1} ms. one.

^{page 902 note 2} Scottish Text Society's ed., Book i, l. 297 f.

^{page 903 note 1} Horstmann, Sammlung altenglischer Legenden (1878), p. 225.

^{page 903 note 2} Rolls Series, Book ii, ch. v.

^{page 904 note 1} There are two other passages in which Milton refers to the giants of Genesis 6. In the first (P. L. iii, 463 f.) he places them in Limbo. In the second (P. L. iv, l. 447 f.) he seems to have in mind the other interpretation, by which the “sons of God” were angels.

^{page 907 note 1} Sedgefield's Boethius, p. 99. The Latin reads, “Accepisti, inquit, in fabulis lacessentes caelum gigantes; sed illos quoque, uti condignum fuit, benigna fortitudo deposuit.”

^{page 907 note 2} Boethius, iv., Metre 3. Sedgefield, p. 115.

^{page 908 note 1} Wülker's Grein, iii, ii, 46.

^{page 909 note 1} Kemble's Salomon and Saturn, Ælfric Society, p. 164.

^{page 910 note 1} Wülker's Grein, iii, ii, 16.

^{page 910 note 2} The mistake of the translator has of course been pointed out, but without explanation of the underlying conception.

^{page 911 note 1} See also Augustine, City of God, Book xv, chap. x.

^{page 911 note 2} The Homilies of Ælfric, ed. by Thorpe, i, 318.

^{page 911 note 3} Ibid., i, 366.

^{page 912 note 1} Ælfric's Lives of the Saints, EETS. 76, 82, 94, 114.

^{page 912 note 2} Napier's Wulfstan, p. 104 f. The reference to Nimrod reads:

Ac syan æt gewear æt Nembrod and a entas worhton ŏe wundorlican stypel æfter Noes flode, and him a swa fela gereorda gelamp, æs e bec secga, swa æra wyrhtena wæs. pa syan toferdon hy wide landes and mancyn a sona swye weox, and a set nyhstan wurdon hi bepæhte, urh ŏe ealdan deofol e Adam ju ær beswac, swa æt hi worhton wolice and gedwollice him hæene godas and ŏe soan God and heora agenna scyppend forsawan, e hy to mannum gescop and geworhte.

^{page 913 note 1} In the first, the words are Mercurius se gigand, in the second Mercurius se gigant; Kemble, Salomon and Saturn, pp. 192, 200.

^{page 914 note 1} Babington's ed., Rolls Series, Book ii, ch. ix.

^{page 915 note 1} If syan of l. 1689 means ‘after’ instead of ‘when,’ the passage would doubtless refer to the Nimrod story. Yet the meaning ‘when’ seems far more likely, owing to the close connection of the ‘struggle’ with the flood.

^{page 915 note 2} This same sword is spoken of in l. 1663 as eald sweord eacen, and presumably the same in l. 2140 as having eacnum ecgum. In both these places it has been conjectured by Bugge (Zeitschrift f. d. Philologie, IV, 206), that the correct reading is eotenisc and eotenum, though too much must not be made of such a conjecture.

^{page 916 note 1} This is not the usual view, I know, but I have became more and more inclined toward it. See also Klaeber, Zum Beowulf, Anglia xxviii, especially 441 f. If no one forestalls me I hope to take up the matter somewhat fully in a subsequent paper.

^{page 917 note 1} Bibliotheca Rabbinica, i, 290.

^{page 917 note 2} Entdecktes Judenthum (ed. of 1893), 589.

^{page 918 note 1} Migne, Patr. Graec. 6, 451.

^{page 918 note 2} Clementine Homilies, 8, ch. 14–18; Ante-Nicene Fathers, 17, 142 f.

^{page 919 note 1} Schodde's Book of Enoch, sec. iii, ch. 15.

^{page 919 note 2} Plea for the Christians, ch. 24–25.

^{page 920 note 1} Joannis Wieri Opera Omnia (1660), p. 659. I am indebted for this reference to John Small's note on Dunbar's Flytiny, l. 513, Scottish Text Society, 21. Small gives a free paraphrase of the Latin which I quote.

^{page 922 note 1} Edition of 1893, p. 47. Cf. also Ginzberg, Die Haggada, etc., p. 75.

^{page 924 note 1} The Book of Enoch, ed. by Schodde, p. 66–7.

^{page 924 note 2} Ibid., p. 82.

^{page 926 note 1} Migne, 198, 1081. On sic ordinat Methodius Petrus adds the note: Hanc opinionem alibi damnat Augustinus.

^{page 927 note 1} See p. 918 for another use of part of this quotation.

^{page 929 note 1} Translation of Schodde, ch. 8.