The Folk-Lore Society
For Collecting and Printing
Relics of Popular Antiquities, &c.
Established in
The Year MDCCCLXXVIII.
Alter et Idem.
Publications
Of
The Folk-lore Society
LX.
[1907]
The Grateful Dead
The History of a Folk Story
By
Gordon Hall Gerould
B. Litt. (Oxon.)
Preceptor in English in Princeton University
Published for the Folk-Lore Society by
David Nutt, 57—59 Long Acre
London
1908
Glasgow: Printed at the University Press
By Robert Maclehose and Co. Ltd.
To
Professor A. S. Napier
Table of Contents
Introduction.
The combination of narrative themes is so frequent a phenomenon in folk and formal literature that one almost forgets to wonder at it. Yet in point of fact the reason for it and the means by which it is accomplished are mysteries past our present comprehension. If we could learn how and where popular tales unite, if we could formulate any general principle of union or severance, we should be well on the way to an understanding of the riddle which has hitherto baffled all students of narrative, namely, the diffusion of stories. We have theories enough; our immediate need is for more studies of individual themes, careful and, if it must be, elaborate discussions of many well-known cycles. Happily, these are accumulating and give promise of much useful knowledge at no distant day.
One principle has become clear. Since motives are so frequently found in combination, it is essential that the complex types be analyzed and arranged, with an eye kept single nevertheless to the master-theme under discussion. Collectors, both primary and subsidiary, have done such valiant service that the treasures at our command are amply sufficient for such studies, so extensive, indeed, that the task of going through them thoroughly has become too great for the unassisted student. It cannot be too strongly urged that a single theme in its various types and compounds must be made predominant in any useful comparative study. This is true when the sources and analogues of any literary work are treated; it is even truer when the bare motive is discussed.
The Grateful Dead furnishes an apt illustration of the necessity of such handling. It appears in a variety of different combinations, almost never alone. Indeed, it is so widespread a tale, and its combinations are so various, that there is the utmost difficulty in determining just what may properly be regarded the original kernel of it, the simple theme to which other motives were joined. Various opinions, as we shall see, have been held with reference to this matter, most of them justified perhaps by the materials in the hands of the scholars holding them, but none quite adequate in view of later evidence. The true way to solve the riddle appears to be this: we must ask the question,—what is the residuum when the tale is stripped of elements not common to a very great majority of the versions belonging to the cycle? What is left amounts to the following,—the story reduced to its lowest terms, I take it.
A man finds a corpse lying unburied, and out of pure philanthropy procures interment for it at great personal inconvenience. Later he is met by the ghost of the dead man, who in many cases promises him help on condition of receiving, in return, half of whatever he gets. The hero obtains a wife (or some other reward), and, when called upon, is ready to fulfil his bargain as to sharing his possessions.
Nowhere does a version appear in quite this form; but from what follows it will be seen that the simple story must have proceeded along some such lines. The compounds in which it occurs show much variety. It will be necessary to study these in detail, not merely one or two of them but as many as can be found. Despite the bewildering complexities that may arise, I hope that this method of approach may throw some new light on the wanderings of the tale.
Of my debt to various friends and to many books, though indicated in the body of the work, I wish to make general and grateful acknowledgment here. My thanks, furthermore, are due to the librarians of Harvard University for their courteous hospitality; to Professor G. L. Kittredge for his generous encouragement to proceed with this study, though he himself, as I found after most of my material was collected, had undertaken it several years before I began; and to Professor R. K. Root for his help in reading the proofs.
Chapter I.
A Review.
To Karl Simrock is due the honour of discovering the importance of The Grateful Dead for the student of literature and legend. In his little book, Der gute Gerhard und die dankbaren Todten,[1] he called attention to the theme as a theme, and treated it with a breadth of knowledge and a clearness of insight remarkable in an attempt to unravel for the first time the mixed strands of so wide-spread a tale. Using the Middle High German exemplary romance, Der gute Gerhard, as his point of departure, he examined seventeen other stories, all but two of which have the motive well preserved.[2] Unhappily, the versions which he found came from a limited section of Europe, most of them from Germanic sources. Thus he was led to an interpretation of the tale on the basis of Germanic mythology. This, though ingenious enough and very erudite, need not detain us. It was done according to a fashion of the time, which has long since been discarded. Simrock took the essential traits of the theme to be the burial of the dead and the ransom from captivity.[3] “Wo nur noch eine von beiden das Thema zu bilden scheint,” he said, “da hat die Ueberliefertung gelitten.” Here again he was misled by the narrow range of his material, as later studies have shown. Nearly all the versions he cited have the motive of a ransomed princess, though the majority of the stories now known to be members of the cycle do not contain it.
Three years after the publication of Simrock’s monograph Benfey treated some features of the theme in a note appended to his discussion of The Thankful Beasts in the monumental Pantschatantra.[4] Though he named but a few variants, he found an Armenian tale which he compared with the European versions, coming to the conclusion not only that the motive proceeded from the Orient but also that the Armenian version had the original form of it. That is, he took the ransom and burial of the dead, the parting of a woman possessed by a serpent, and the saving of the hero on the bridal night as the essential features. This was a step in advance.
George Stephens in his edition of Sir Amadas[5] held much the same view. He added several important versions, and scored Simrock for admitting Der gute Gerhard, saying that he could not see that it had “any direct connection” with The Grateful Dead.[6] He was at least partly in the right, even though his statement was misleading. According to his Opinion,[7] “the peculiar feature of the Princess (Maiden) being freed from demonic influence by celestial aid, is undoubtedly the original form of the tale.”
In a series of notes beginning in the year 1858 Köhler[8] supplied a large number of variants, which have been invaluable for succeeding study of the theme. Nowhere, however, did he give an ordered account of the versions at his command or discuss the relation of the elements—a regrettable omission. The contributions of Liebrecht,[9] though less extensive, were of the same sort. In his article published in 1868 he said that he thought The Grateful Dead to be of European origin,[10] but he added nothing to our knowledge of the essential form of the story. The following decade saw the publication by Sepp of a rather brief account of the motive,[11] which was chiefly remarkable for its summary of classical and pre-classical references concerning the duty of burial. Like Stephens he assumed that the release of a maiden from the possession of demons was an essential part of the tale. In 1886 Cosquin brought the discussion one step further by showing[12] that the theme is sometimes found in combination with The Golden Bird and The Water of Life. He did not, however, attempt to define the original form of the story nor to trace its development.
By all odds the most adequate treatment that The Grateful Dead has yet received is found in Hippe’s monograph, Untersuchungen zu der mittelenglischen Romanze von Sir Amadas, which appeared in 1888.[13] Not only did he gather together practically all the variants mentioned previous to that time and add some few new ones, but he studied the theme with such interpretative insight that anyone going over the same field would be tempted to offer an apology for what may seem superfluous labour. Such a follower, and all followers, must gratefully acknowledge their indebtedness to his labours.
Yet one who follows imperfectly the counsels of perfection may discover certain defects in Hippe’s work. He neglects altogether Cosquin’s hint as to the combination of the theme with The Water of Life and allied tales, thus leaving out of account an important element, which is intimately connected with the chief motive in a large number of tales. Indeed, his effort to simplify, commendable and even necessary as it is, brings him to conclusions that in some respects, I believe, are not sound. Though he states the essential points of the primitive story in a form[14] which can hardly be bettered and which corresponds almost exactly to the one that I have been led to accept from independent consideration of the material,[15] he fails to see that he is dealing in almost every case, not with a simple theme with modified details but with compound themes. Thus he starts out with the “Sage vom dankbaren Toten und der Frau mit den Drachen im Leibe”[16] and explains all variations from this type either by the weakening of this feature and that or by the introduction of a single new motive, the story of The Ransomed Woman. He would thus make it appear[17] that we have a well-ordered progression from one combined type to various other combined and simplified types. Such a series is possible without doubt, but it can hardly be admitted till the interplay of all accessible themes, which have entered into combination with the chief theme, is investigated. Hippe passes these things over silently and so gives the subject a specious air of simplicity to which it has no right.
I should be the last to deny the necessity of treating narrative themes each for itself, and I have nothing but admiration for the general conduct of Hippe’s investigation; but I wish to show that his methods, and therefore his results, are at fault in so far as he does not recognize the nature of the combinations into which The Grateful Dead enters. Traces of other stories, unless their presence is obviously artificial, must be carefully considered, since in dealing with cycles of such fluid stuff as folk-tales it is certainly wise to give each element due consideration. Certain minor errors in Hippe’s article will be mentioned in due course, though my constant obligations to it must be emphasized here.
Since the appearance of Hippe’s study no one has treated The Grateful Dead with such scope as to modify his conclusions. Perhaps the most interesting work in the field has been that of Dr. Dutz[18] on the relation of George Peele’s Old Wives’ Tale to our theme. He follows Hippe’s scheme, but gives some interesting new variants. Of less importance, but useful within its limits, is the section devoted to the saga by Dr. Heinrich Wilhelmi in his Studien über die Chanson de Lion de Bourges.[19] Though he added no new versions, the author studied in detail the relationship of some of the mediaeval forms to one another, basing his results for the most part on careful textual comparison. His gravest fault was the thoroughly artificial way in which he mapped out the field as a whole, a method which could lead only to erroneous conclusions, since he classified according to a couple of superficial traits. An English study by Mr. F. H. Groome on Tobit and Jack the Giant-Killer[20] unhappily was written without regard to the previous literature of the subject, and simply rehearses a number of well-known variants.
In this brief review I have touched only on such studies of The Grateful Dead as have materially enlarged the knowledge of the subject or have attempted a discussion of the theme in a broad way. In the following chapter reference will be made to other works, in which particular versions have been printed or summarized.
[1] 1856.
[2] Guter Gerhard, as will be seen later, does not follow the theme at all.
[3] P. 114.
[4] 1859, i. 219–221.
[5] Ghost-Thanks or The Grateful Unburied, A Mythic Tale in its Oldest European Form, Sir Amadace, 1860.
[6] P. 9.
[7] P. 7.
[8] Germania, iii. 199–210, xii. 55 ff.; Or. u. Occ. ii. 322–329, iii. 93–103; Arch. f. slav. Phil. ii. 631–634, v. 40 ff.; Gonzenbach, Sicilianische Märchen, 1870, ii. 248–250.
[9] Heidelberger Jahrbücher der Lit. 1868, lxi. 449–452, 1872, lxv. 894 f.; Germania, xxiv. 132 f.
[10] P. 449.
[11] Altbayerischer Sagenschatz zur Bereicherung der indogermanischen Mythologie, 1876, pp. 678–689.
[12] Contes populaires de Lorraine, i. 214, 215.
[13] Archiv f. d. Stud. d. neueren Sprachen, lxxxi. 141–183.
[14] P. 167. “Ein Jüngling zeigt sich menschenfreundlich gegen die Leiche eines Unbekannten (indem er dieselbe vor Schimpf bewahrt, bestattet, etc.). Der Geist des Toten gesellt sich darauf zu ihm und erweist sich ihm dankbar, indem er ihm zu Reichtum und zum Besitze des von ihm zur Frau begehrten Mädchens verhilft, jedoch unter der Bedingung, dass er dereinst alles durch ihn Gewonnene mit ihm teile. Der Jüngling geht auf diesen Vertrag ein, und der Geist stellt sich nach einer gewissen Zeit wieder ein, um das Versprochene entgegenzunehmen, verlangt aber nicht die Hälfte des gewonnene Gutes, sondern die der Frau. (Schluss variabel.)”
[15] See p. x. above.
[16] P. 180.
[17] See his scheme on p. 181.
[18] Der Dank des Todten in der englischen Literatur, Jahresbericht der Staats-Oberrealschule in Troppau, 1894.
[19] Marburg diss. 1894, pp. 43–63.
[20] Folk-Lore, ix. 226–244 (1898).
Chapter II.
Bibliography.
The following list of variants of The Grateful Dead includes only such tales as have the fundamental traits, as sketched above, either expressed or clearly implied. Thus Der gute Gerhard, for example, is not mentioned because it has only the motive of The Ransomed Woman, while one of the folk-tales from Hungary is admitted because it follows in general outline one of the combined types to be discussed later, even though the burial of the dead is obscured. I cite by the short titles which will be used to indicate the stories in the subsequent discussion. The arrangement is roughly geographical.
Tobit.
In the apocryphal book of Tobit. According to Neubauer, The Book of Tobit, a Chaldee Text from a unique MS. in the Bodleian Library, 1878, p. xv, Tobit was originally written in Hebrew, although the Hebrew text preserved was taken from Chaldee. Neubauer (p. xvii) quotes Graetz, Geschichte der Juden, (2nd ed.) iv. 466, as saying that the book was written in the time of Hadrian, and he concludes that it cannot be earlier because it was unknown to Josephus. The correspondence with Sir Amadas, and thus with The Grateful Dead generally, seems to have been first noted by Simrock, p. 131 f., again by Köhler, Germania, iii. 203, by Stephens, p. 7, by Hippe, p. 142, etc.
Armenian.
A. von Haxthausen, Transkaukasia, 1856, i. 333 f. A modern folk-tale. Reprinted entire by Benfey, Pantschatantra, i. 219, note, and by Köhler, Germania, iii. 202 f. A somewhat inadequate summary is given by Hippe, p. 143; a better one is found in Arch. f. slav. Phil. v. 43, by Köhler, who mentioned the tale again in Or. und Occ. ii. 328, and iii. 96. Summarized also by Sepp, p. 681, Groome, Folk-Lore, ix. 228 f., and mentioned by Wilhelmi, p.45.
Jewish.
Reischer, Schaare Jeruschalajim, 1880, pp. 86–99. Summarized by Gaster, Germania, xxvi. 200–202, and from him by Hippe, pp. 143, 144. A modern folk-tale from Palestine.
Annamite.
Landes, Contes et légendes annamites, 1886, pp. 162, 163, “La reconnaissance de l’étudiant mort.” A modern folk-tale.
Siberian.
Radloff, Proben der Volkslitteratur der türkischen Stämme Süd-Siberiens, 1866, i. 329–331. See Köhler, Arch. f. slav. Phil. v. 43, note.
Simonides.
Cicero, De Divinatione, i. 27, referred to again in ii. 65 and 66. Retold by Valerius Maximus, Facta et Dicta, i. 7; after him by Robert Holkot, Super Libros Sapientiae, Lectio 103; and again by Chaucer in the Nun’s Priest’s Tale, Cant. Tales, B, 4257–4294. For the relationship of Chaucer’s anecdote to those in Latin see Skeat, note in his edition, Lounsbury, Studies in Chaucer, 1892, ii. 274, and Petersen, On the Sources of the Nonne Prestes Tale, 1898, pp. 106–117. Connected with The Grateful Dead by Freudenberg in a review of Simrock in Jahrbücher des Vereins von Alterthumsfreunden im Rheinlande, xxv. 172. See also Köhler, Germania iii. 209, Liebrecht in Heidelberger Jahrbücher der Lit. lxi. 449, 450, and Sepp. p. 680. Not treated by Hippe.
Gypsy.
A. G. Paspati, Études sur les Tchinghianés ou Bohémiens de l’Empire Ottoman, 1870, pp. 601–605, Translated from Paspati by F. H. Groome, Gypsy Folk-Tales, 1899, pp. 1–3. Summarized by Köhler, Arch. f. slav. Phil. v. 43 and carelessly by Hippe, p. 143. This tale was heard near Adrianople. Cited by Foerster, Richars li Biaus, p. xxviii, and by Wilhelmi, p. 45.
Greek.
J. G. von Hahn, Griechische und albanesische Märchen, 1864, no. 53, pp. 288–295, “Belohnte Treue.” Summarized in part by Hippe, p. 149. See also Liebrecht, Heid. Jahrbücher, lxi. 451, and by Groome, Folk-Lore, ix. 243. This tale was found in northern Euboea.
Maltese.
Hans Stumme, Maltesische Märchen, Gedichte und Rätsel, 1904, no. 12, pp. 39–45.
Russian I.
Afansjew, Russische Volksmärchen, Heft 6, p. 323 f. Analyzed by Schiefner, Or. und Occ. ii. 174, 175, and after him by Hippe, p. 144, with some omissions. See Köhler, Or. und Occ. iii. 93–103, and Sepp, p. 684.
Russian II.
Chudjakow, Grossrussische Märchen, Heft 3, pp. 165–168. Translation by Schiefner, Or. und Occ. iii. 93–96 in article by Köhler. In English by Groome, Folk-Lore, ix. 229 ff. Summarized by Köhler, Arch. f. slav. Phil. v. 43, and (with an important omission) by Hippe, pp. 144, 145. See Köhler’s notes in Gonzenbach, Sicilianische Märchen, ii. 250.
Russian III.
Reproduced from an illustrated folk-book in the Publications of the Society of Friends of Old Literature in St. Petersburg, 1880, no. 49. Summarized by V. Jagić, Arch. f. slav. Phil. v. 480, and by Hippe, p. 145. Jagić remarks that the tale must have been widely known in Russia in the eighteenth century, though clearly of foreign origin.
Russian IV.
Dietrich, Russische Volksmärchen in den Urschrift gesammelt, 1831, no. 16, pp. 199–207. English translation, Russian Popular Tales. Translated from the German Version of Anton Dietrich, 1857, pp. 179–186. “Sila Zarewitsch und Iwaschka mit dem weissen Hemde.” Like other tales in the collection this was taken from a popular print bought at Moscow. Mentioned by Benfey, Pantschatantra, i. 220, and by Köhler, Or. u. Occ. ii. 328.
Russian V.[1]
P. V. Šejn, Materialien zur Kenntniss der russischen Bevölkerung von Nordwest-Russland, 1893, ii. 66–68, no. 33. Cited by Polívka in Arch. f. slav. Phil. xix. 251.
Russian VI.
P. V. Šejn, work cited, ii. 401–407, no. 227. Cited by Polívka, Arch. f. slav. Phil. xix. 262.
Servian I.
Vuk Stefanović Karadžić, 2nd ed. of his Servian folk-tales, 1870. Translated by Madam Mijatovies (Mijatovich), Serbian Folk-Lore, 1874, p. 96. Summarized from Servian by Köhler, Arch. f. slav. Phil. ii. 631, 632, and from him by Hippe, p. 145.
Servian II.
Summarized from Gj. K. Stefanović’s collection, 1871, no. 15, by Jagić in Arch. f. slav. Phil. v. 40 f. with the title “Vlatko und der dankbare Todte.” Thence by Hippe, p. 145.
Servian III.
Jagić in Arch. f. slav. Phil. v. 41 f, from Stojanović’s collection, no. 31. Hippe’s summary, p. 146, is exceedingly brief and faulty.
Servian IV.
Jagić, Arch. f. slav. Phil. v. 42, from Matica, B. 105 (A.D. 1863, St. Novaković). Summary of this by Hippe, p. 146. Jagić calls the tale “Ein Goldfisch.”
Servian V.
Krauss, Sagen und Märchen der Südslaven, 1883, i. 385–388, “Der Vilaberg.” Summarized by Dutz, p. 11.
Servian VI.
Krauss, work cited, i. 114–119. “Fuhrmann Tueguts Himmelswagen.” From the manuscript collection of Valjavec. Summarized by Dutz, p. 18, note 2.
Bohemian.[2]
Waldau, Böhmisches Märchenbuch, 1860, pp. 213–241. Mentioned by Köhler, Or. und Occ. ii. 329, and by Hippe, p. 146. Summarized by the former, Or. und Occ. iii. 97 f.
Polish.
K. W. Wójcicki, Klechdy, Starożytne podania i powieści ludowe, 2nd ed., Warsaw, 1851. Translated into German by F. H. Lewestam, Polnische Volkssagen und Märchen, 1839, pp. 130 ff; into English by A. H. Wratislaw, Sixty Folk-Tales from exclusively Slavonic Sources, 1889, pp. 121 ff.; and into French by Louis Leger, Recueil de contes populaires slaves, 1882, pp. 119 ff. Summarized by Köhler, Germania, iii. 200 f., and by Hippe, pp. 146 f. See also Sepp, p. 684, Dutz, p. 11, Groome, Gypsy Folk-Tales, p. 3, note, and Arivau, Folk-Lore de Proaza, 1886, p. 205.
Bulgarian.
Lydia Schischmánoff, Légendes religieuses bulgares, 1896, no. 77, pp. 202–209,[3] “Le berger, son fils, et l’archange.”
Lithuanian I.
L. Geitler, Litauische Studien, 1875, pp. 21–23. Analyzed by Köhler, Arch. f. slav. Phil. ii. 633, and after him briefly by Hippe,[4] p. 147, as his “Lithuanian II.”
Lithuanian II.
Köhler, Arch. f. slav. Phil. ii. 633 f. From Prussian Lithuania. Summarized by Hippe, p. 147, as his “Lithuanian III.”
Hungarian I.
G. Stier, Ungarische Sagen und Märchen, 1850, pp. 110–122. Mentioned by Köhler, Germania, iii. 202, and by Hippe, p. 147.
Hungarian II.
G. Stier, Ungarische Volksmärchen, 1857, pp. 153–167. Summarized by Köhler, Germania, iii. 199 f., and too briefly by Hippe, p. 148.
Rumanian I.
Arthur Schott, Neue walachische Märchen, in Hackländer and Hoefer’s Hausblätter, 1857, iv. 470–473. Mentioned by Stephens, p. 10, Hippe, p. 147, and Benfey, Pantschatantra, ii. 532.
Rumanian II.
F. Obert, Romänische Märchen und Sagen aus Siebenbürgen, in Das Ausland, 1858, p. 117. Mentioned by Köhler, Germania, iii. 202, and by Hippe, p. 147.
Transylvanian.
Haltrich, Deutsche Volksmärchen aus dem Sachsenlande in Siebenbürgen, 1856, pp. 42–45. Analyzed by Köhler, Or. und Occ. ii. 326, and incompletely by Hippe, p. 148. Mentioned by Stephens, p. 10, and Sepp, p. 684.
Esthonian I.
Schiefner, Or. und Occ. ii. 175 f., whence the analysis by Hippe, p. 148.
Esthonian II.
Reisen in mehrere russische Gouvernements in den Jahren 1801, 1807 und 1815, 1830, v. 186–192, from Ein Ausflug nach Esthland im Junius 1807. Reprinted by Kletke, Märchensaal, 1845, ii. 60–62. Summarized by Dutz, p. 18, note 3.
Finnish.
Liebrecht, Germania, xxiv. 131, 132. Communicated by Schiefner from Suomen, Kansan Satuja, Helsingfors, 1866. Summarized by Hippe, pp. 148 f.
Catalan.
F. Maspons y Labrós, Lo Rondollayre: Quentos populars catalans, Segona Série, 1872, no. 5, pp. 34–37. Analyzed by Liebrecht, Heid. Jahrbücher der Lit. lxv. 894 (1872), and after him by Hippe, p. 151. Mentioned by d’Ancona, Romania, iii. 192, and by Foerster, Richars li Biaus, p. xxviii.
Spanish.
Duran, Romancero general, 1849–51, ii. 299–302, nos. 1291, 1292. Summarized by Köhler, Or. und Occ. ii. 323 f. and after him by Cosquin, Contes populaires, i. 215, and by Hippe, p. 151.[5] Mentioned by Sepp, p. 686.
Lope de Vega.
Comedy in two parts, Don Juan de Castro. According to J. R. Chorley, Catálogo de comedias y autos de Frey Félix de Vega Carpio, p. 5, this play is to be found in Part xix. of the Comedias published in 1623 (later issues 1624, 1625, and 1627). A. Schaeffer, Geschichte des spanischen Nationaldramas, 1890, i. 141, says that the second part, called Las aventuras de don Juan de Alarcos, is in Part xxv. of Lope’s comedies. The entire play is edited by Hartzenbusch, Comedias Escogidas de Lope de Vega, iv. 373 ff. and 395 ff. in the Biblioteca de autores españoles, lii. Schaeffer, pp. 141, 142, gives a careful summary of the play, and Köhler, Or. und Occ. iii. 100 f., gives another. The latter is followed by Hippe, p. 151. Mentioned by Duran, Romancero general, ii. 299, by Sepp, p. 686, and by Wilhelmi, pp. 45 ff. and 60.
Calderon.
El Mejor Amigo el Muerto, by Luis de Belmonte, Francisco de Rojas, and Pedro Calderon de la Barca, in Biblioteca de autores españoles, xiv. 471–488, and in Comedias escogidas de los mejores ingenios de España, 1657, ix. 53–84. Analyzed by Köhler, Or. und Occ, iii. 100 f., and briefly after him by Hippe, p. 151. Mentioned by Sepp, p. 686, and by Wilhelmi, pp. 60 f. Schaeffer, work cited, ii. 283 f., says that a play of this name was written by Belmonte alone in 1610, which was revised about 1627 with the aid of Rojas and Calderon.
Trancoso.[6]
Contos e historias de proveito e exemplo, by Gonçalo Fernandez Trancoso, Parte 2, Cont ii., first published in 1575 and frequently re-issued during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. In the edition published at Lisbon in 1693, our tale is found on pp. 45r.–60r.; and in that published at the same place in 1710, on pp. 110–177. Menéndez y Pelayo, Orígenes de la Novela (Nueva Biblioteca de autores españoles vii.), 1907, ii. lxxxvii ff., gives a bibliography, the table of contents, and a description of the work on the basis of seventeenth century editions; on p. xcv. he connects the tale above-mentioned with The Grateful Dead. See T. Braga, Contos tradiconaes do povo portuguez, 1883, ii. 63–128, who prints nineteen of the tales in abbreviated form, but not ours.
Nicholas.
Johannes Junior (Gobius), Scala Celi, 1480, under Elemosina. Gobius was born in the south of France and lived about the middle of the fourteenth century.[7] Summary by Simrock, pp. 106–109. Mentioned by Hippe, p. 169.
Richars.
Richars li Biaus, ed. W. Foerster, 1874. A romance written in Picardy or eastwards in the thirteenth century (Foerster, p. xxi). Analyzed by Köhler, Revue critique, 1868, pp. 412 ff., and Hippe, p. 155. Compared in detail with Lion de Bourges by Wilhelmi, pp. 46 ff.
Lion de Bourges.
An Old French romance known to exist in two manuscripts, the earlier dating from the fourteenth century,[8] the later from about the end of the fifteenth.[9] It has never been edited, but the portion which concerns us was analyzed in detail by Wilhelmi, pp. 18–38. This summary I have made the basis of my discussion. The romance was mentioned by P. Paris, Foerster, and Suchier (as cited in note below), Gautier, Les épopées françaises, 1st ed. 1865, i. 471–473, Ebert, Jahrbuch f. rom. und engl. Lit. iv. 53, 54, and Benfey, Pantschatantra, i. 220. A prose translation into German is found in manuscripts of the fifteenth century, which does not differ materially from the original.[10] This was printed in 1514, and summarized by F. H. von der Hagen, Gesammtabenteuer, 1850, i. xcvii–xcix, Simrock, pp. 104–106, and Hippe, p. 154. See E. Müller, Überlieferung des Herpin von Burges, 1905, who analyzes the work and treats its relations to Lion.
Oliver.
Olivier de Castille et Artus d’Algarbe, a French prose romance composed before 1472, according to Foulché-Delbosc (Revue hispanique, ix. 592). The first and second editions were printed at Geneva, the first in 1482, the second before 1492.[11] There exist at least three manuscripts of the work from the fifteenth century: MS. Bibl. nat. fran. 12574 (which attributes the romance to a David Aubert, according to Gröber, Grundriss der rom. Phil. ii. 1, 1145); MS. Brussels 3861; and Univ. of Ghent, MS. 470. The designs of the last have been reproduced, together with a summary of the text, by Heins and Bergmans, Olivier de Castille, 1896. An English translation was printed by Wynkyn de Worde in 1518. A translation from the second French edition into Castilian was made by Philippe Camus, which was printed thirteen times between 1499 and 1845.[12] The edition of 1499 has lately been reproduced in facsimile by A. M. Huntington, La historia de los nobles caualleros Oliueros de castilla y artus dalgarbe, 1902. A German translation from the French was made by Wilhelm Ziely in 1521, and this was translated into English by Leighton and Barrett, The History of Oliver and Arthur, 1903. From the German prose Hans Sachs took the material for his comedy on the theme (publ. 1556). A summary of Ziely’s work is given by Frölicher, Thüring von Ringoltingen’s “Melusine,” Wilhelm Ziely’s “Olivier und Artus” und “Valentin und Orsus,” 1889, pp. 65 f., which is used by Wilhelmi, pp. 55, 56, in his comparison of the romance with Richars and Lion de Bourges. An Italian translation, presumably from the French, was printed three or four times from 1552 to 1622.[13] A summary of the story is given in Mélanges tirés d’une grande bibliothèque, by E. V. 1780, pp. 78 ff., with an incorrect note about the romance, reproduced by Hippe, pp. 155 f., with an analysis from the same source of the part of the tale belonging to our cycle. Robert Laneham in his list of ballads and romances, made in 1575, mentions Olyuer of the Castl. See Furnivall, Captain Cox, his Ballads and Books, Ballad Soc. 1871, vii. xxxvii and 30.
Jean de Calais.
I. Mme. Angélique de Gomez, Histoire de Jean de Calais, 1723. Sketched in the Bibliothèque universelle des romans, Dec. 1776, pp. 134 ff. Köhler, Germania, iii. 204 ff., gives a summary of the work, which Mme. de Gomez stated was “tiré d’un livre qui a pour titre: Histoire fabuleuse de la Maison des Rois de Portugal.” A later anonymous redaction of this Jean de Calais exists in prints of 1770, 1776, and 1787, and it continued to be issued in the nineteenth century. Summarized by Hippe, pp. 156 f., and by Sepp, pp. 685 f. Mentioned by Köhler in Gonzenbach, Sicil. Märchen, ii. 250.
II. Bladé, Contes populaires de la Gascogne, 1886, ii. 67–90. This and the following folk-versions of Jean deserve careful consideration because of the interesting character of their variations.
III. J. B. Andrews, Folk-Lore Record, iii. 48 ff., from Mentone. See Liebrecht, Engl. Stud. v. 158, and Hippe, p. 157.
IV. and V. J. B. Andrews, Contes ligures, traditions de la Rivière, 1892, pp. 111–116, no. 26, and pp. 187–192, no. 41. These two versions differ slightly from one another, but more from the preceding.
VI. P. Sébillot, Contes populaires de la Haute-Bretagne, 3me. série, 1882, pp. 164–171.
VII. Wentworth Webster, Basque Legends, 1877, pp. 151–154. See Luzel, Légendes chrétiennes, p. 90, note.
VIII. A. Le Braz, La légende de la mort chez les Bretons armoricains, nouv. éd., 1902, ii. 211–231.
IX. L. Giner Arivau, Folk-Lore de Proaza (Asturia), in Biblioteca de las tradiciones populares españolas, viii. 194–201 (1886).
X. Gittée and Lemoine, Contes populaires du pays Wallon, 1891, pp. 57–61.
Walewein.
Roman van Walewein, ed. Jonckbloet, 1846. Analyzed by G. Paris, Hist. litt. de la France, xxx. 82–84, and by W. P. Ker, The Roman van Walewein (Gawain) in Folk-Lore, v. 121–127 (1894). My analysis is a combination made from these two summaries.
Lotharingian.
Cosquin, Contes populaires de Lorraine, 1886, i. 208–212 (no. xix). Noted by Hippe, p. 157.
Gasconian.
Cénac Moncaut, Contes populaires de la Gascogne, 1861, pp. 5–14, “Rira bien qui rira le dernier.” Summarized by Köhler, Or. und Occ. ii. 329. Mentioned by Hippe, p. 157, and by Groome, Folk-Lore, ix. 239.
Dianese.
Novella di Messer Dianese e di Messer Gigliotto, ed. d’Ancona and Sforza, 1868. Analyzed by Liebrecht, Heid. Jahrbücher der Lit. lxi. 450 (1868), by d’Ancona, Romania, iii. 191, (reprinted in his Studj di critica e storia, 1880, p. 353), and by Hippe, p. 152. D’Ancona’s summary is from Papanti, nov. xxi. The variant is of the fourteenth century, according to the writer of the introduction of the edition of 1868, p. 5. See also Foerster, Richars li Biaus, p. xxiv, and Wilhelmi, pp. 44 and 57.
Stellante Costantina.
D’Ancona, Romania, iii. 192, mentions the popular poem Istoria bellissima di Stellante Costantina figliuola del gran turco, la quale fu rubata da certi cristiani che teneva in corte suo padre e fu venduta a un mercante di Vicenza presso Salerno, con molti intervalli e successi, composta da Giovanni Orazio Brunetto. I have not been able to find this poem and do not know how closely it accords with Dianese.
Straparola I.
Notti piacevoli, notte xi, favola 2. Analyzed by Grimm, Kinder- und Hausmärchen, 1856, iii, 289; and rather too briefly by Simrock, pp. 98–100, and Hippe, p. 153. See Benfey, Pant. i. 221, Köhler in Gonzenbach, Sicil. Märchen, ii. 249, and Groome, Tobit and Jack, Folk-Lore, ix. 226 f., and Gypsy Folk-Tales, p. 3, note.
Straparola II.
Notti piacevoli, notte v, favola 1. See Benfey, Pant. ii. 532.
Tuscan.
G. Nerucci, Sessanta novelle popolari, 1880, pp. 430–437, no. lii. A folk-tale from the neighbourhood of Pistoia. See Webster, Basque Legends, pp. 182–187, Crane, Italian Popular Tales, p. 350, and Cosquin, Contes populaires, i. 215.
Istrian.
Ive, Novelline popolari rovignesi, 1877, p. 19. See d’Ancona, Studj di critica, 1880, p. 354, and the summary by Crane, Italian Popular Tales, 1885, no. xxxv. pp. 131–136, from whom, as Ive’s collection has been inaccessible to me, I derive my knowledge of the story. Crane gives the title of Ive as Fiabe, etc., d’Ancona as above.
Venetian.
G. Bernoni, Tradizioni populari veneziane, 1875, pp. 89–96. Referred to by Crane, Italian Popular Tales, p. 350.
Sicilian.
Laura Gonzenbach, Sicilianische Märchen, 1870, ii. 96–103. Summarized briefly by Hippe, pp. 153 f., and by Groome, Folk-Lore, ix. 239 f.
Brazilian.
Roméro and Braga, Contos populares do Brazil, 1885, no. x. pp. 215. See Cosquin, Contes populaires, i. 215.
Basque I.
Wentworth Webster, Basque Legends, 1877, pp. 182–187. See Cosquin, Contes populaires, i. 215, and Luzel, Légendes chrétiennes, p. 90, note.
Basque II.
Webster, work cited, pp. 146–150. See Crane, Italian Popular Tales, p. 351.
Gaelic.
Campbell, Popular Tales of the West Highlands, new ed. 1890, ii. 121–140, no. 32, “The Barra Widow’s Son.” Summarized by Köhler, Or. und Occ. ii. 322 f., by Sepp, p. 685, by Hippe, p. 150, and by Groome, Folk-Lore, ix. 235. See Köhler in Gonzenbach, Sicil. Märchen, ii. 249, and Groome, Gypsy Folk-Tales, p. 3, note.
Irish I.
W. Larminie, West Irish Folk-Tales and Romances, 1893, pp. 155–167, “Beauty of the World.” Mentioned by Kittredge, Harvard Notes and Studies, viii. 250, note.
Irish II.
Douglas Hyde, Beside the Fire. A Collection of Irish Gaelic Folk-Stories, 1890, pp. 18–47, “The King of Ireland’s Son.”[14] Mentioned by Kittredge, place cited.
Irish III.
P. Kennedy, Legendary Fictions of the Irish Celts, 1866, pp. 32–38, “Jack the Master and Jack the Servant.”
Breton I.
Souvestre, Le foyer breton, contes et récits populaires, nouv. éd. 1874, ii. 1–21. Analyzed by Simrock, pp. 94–98, by Sepp, p. 685, and in part by Hippe, p. 149. See Luzel, Légendes chrétiennes, i. 90, note.
Breton II.
F. M. Luzel, Légendes chrétiennes de la Basse-Bretagne, 1881, i. 68–90, “Le fils de Saint Pierre.” Cited by von Weilen, Zts. f. vergl. Litteraturgeschichte, N.F. i. 105. Analyzed in part by Hippe, pp. 149 f.
Breton III.
Luzel, work cited, ii. 40–58. Mentioned by von Weilen, place cited, and analyzed by Hippe, p. 150. The title, slightly misquoted by Hippe, is “Cantique spirituel sur la charité que montra Saint-Corentin envers un jeune homme qui fut chassé de chez son père et sa mère, sans motif ni raison.”
Breton IV.
P. Sébillot, Contes populaires de la Haute-Bretagne, 1880, pp. 1–8. Noted by Luzel, work cited, p. 90, note, and by Cosquin, Contes populaires, i. 215.
Breton V.
F. M. Luzel, Contes populaires de Basse-Bretagne, 1887, ii. 176–194, “La princesse Marcassa.”
Breton VI.
F. M. Luzel, work cited, ii. 209–230, “La princesse de Hongrie.”
Breton VII.
F. M. Luzel, work cited, i. 403–424, “Iouenn Kerménou, l’homme de parole.”
Old Swedish.
Stephens, pp. 73 f., reprinted with translation from his Ett Forn-Svenskt Legendarium, 1858, ii. 731 f. This variant from 1265–1270 is analyzed by Hippe, pp. 158 f.
Swedish.
P. O. Bäckström, Svenska Folkböcker, 1845–48, ii. 144–156, from H—d (Hammarsköld) and I—s (Imnelius), Svenska Folksagor, 1819, i. 157–189. Bäckström also cites several editions of the folk-book, which he says is of native origin. Mentioned by Stephens, p. 8. Summarized by Liebrecht, Germania, xxiv. 130 f., and by Hippe, p. 158.
Danish I.
S. Grundtvig, Gamle Danske Minder i Folkemunde, 1854, pp. 77–80, “Det fattige Lig.” Mentioned by Stephens, p. 8, by Hippe, p. 160, and by Wilhelmi, p. 45. Summarized by Köhler, Or. und Occ. iii. 99.
Danish II.
Grundtvig, work cited, pp. 105–108, “De tre Mark.” Summarized by Köhler, Or. und Occ. iii. 100. Cited by Hippe, p. 160, and Wilhelmi, p. 45.
Danish III.
Andersen, “Reisekammeraten,” in Samlede Skrifter, xx. 54 ff. (1855). Found in most English editions of Andersen’s tales as “The Travelling Companion.” Based on Norwegian II. Analyzed by Sepp, p. 678. Cited by Köhler, Or. und Occ. ii. 327, by Hippe, p. 159, and by Groome, Gypsy Folk-Tales, p. 3, note.
Norwegian I.
Asbjörnsen, Iuletraeet, 1866, no. 8, and Norske Folke-Eventyr, 1871, no. 99, pp. 198–201. Summarized by Liebrecht, Heid. Jahrbücher der Lit. lxi. 451 (1868), and by Hippe, p. 159. See Liebrecht, Germania, xxiv. 131.
Norwegian II.
Asbjörnsen, Illustreret Kalender, 1855, pp. 32–39, Iuletraeet, no. 9, and Norske Folke-Eventyr, no. 100, pp. 201–214. Translated by Dasent, Tales from the Fjeld, 1874, pp. 71–88. Cited by Stephens, p. 8, Liebrecht, Germania, xxiv. 131, and Groome, Gypsy Folk-Tales, p. 3, note. Somewhat inadequate summaries by Liebrecht, Heid. Jahrbücher der Lit. lxi. 452, Hippe, p. 159, and Groome, Folk-Lore, ix. 230.
Icelandic I.
Árnason, Íslenzkar þjósögur og æfintýri, 1864, ii. 473–479. English translation in Powell and Magnússon, Legends Collected by Jón. Arnason, 1866, pp. 527–540. German translation in Poestion, Isländische Märchen, 1884, p. 274. Cited by Liebrecht, Heid. Jahrbücher, lxi. 451, and Germania, xxiv. 131, and by Wilhelmi, p. 45. Summary by Köhler, Or. und Occ. iii. 101 f., and by Hippe, p. 159.
Icelandic II.
A. Ritterhaus, Die neuisländischen Volksmärchen, 1902, no. 57, pp. 232–235. From MS. 537, Landesbibliothek, Reykjavík.
Rittertriuwe.
F. H. von der Hagen, Gesammtabenteuer, 1850, i. 105–128, no. 6. A poem of 866 lines from the fourteenth century. Summaries in Benfey, Pant. i. 221, in Simrock, pp. 100–103, and, with a rather bad error, in Hippe, p. 164. See Foerster, Richars li Biaus, p. xxiv. Compared with Richars, Oliver, and Lion de Bourges by Wilhelmi, pp. 56 f.
Treu Heinrich.
Der Junker und der treue Heinrich, ed. K. Kinzel, 1880. Previously edited and analyzed by von der Hagen, Gesammtabenteuer, iii. 197–255, no. 64. Summary by Simrock, pp. 103 f. Cited by Hippe, p. 165.
Simrock I.
J. W. Wolf, Deutsche Hausmärchen, 1858, pp. 243–250, contributed by W. von Plönnies. Summary by Simrock, pp. 46–51, by Köhler, Or. und Occ. iii. 98, and by Sepp, p. 683. Cited by Hippe, p. 165.
Simrock II.
W. von Plönnies in Zts. f. deutsche Myth. ii. 373–377. From the Odenwald. Summary by Simrock, pp. 51–54. See Hippe, p. 165. This is the story analyzed by Sepp, p. 688 f., though he also refers to Wolf’s and Zingerle’s tales.
Simrock III.
E. Meier, Deutsche Volksmärchen aus Schwaben, 1852, no. 42. pp. 143–153. Summarized by Simrock, pp. 54–58, Köhler, Or. und Occ. iii. 99, and Sepp, pp. 686 f. See Hippe, p. 165.
Simrock IV.
H. Pröhle, Kinder- und Volksmärchen, 1853, pp. 239–246. Summary by Simrock, pp. 58–62. See Hippe, p. 165.
Simrock V.
Simrock, pp. 62–65, contributed by Zingerle, who afterwards printed it in the Zts. f. deutsche Myth. ii. 367 ff., in Sagen, Märchen und Gebräuche aus Tirol, 1859, pp. 444 f., and in Kinder- und Hausmärchen aus Tirol, 2nd ed., 1870, pp. 261–267. Analyzed without mention of source by Sepp, pp. 687 f. See Hippe, p. 165.
Simrock VI.
Simrock, pp. 65–68, from Xanten. See Hippe, p. 165.
Simrock VII.
Simrock, pp. 68–75, from Xanten. See Hippe, p. 165.
Simrock VIII.
F. Woeste, Zts. f. deutsche Myth. iii. 46–50, from Grafschaft Mark. Given by Simrock, pp. 75–80. Analyzed by Sepp, p. 685, who inadvertently speaks of it as “nach irischer Sage.” See Hippe, p. 165.
Simrock IX.
Simrock, pp. 80–89, contributed by Zingerle, who afterwards printed it in Sagen, Märchen und Gebräuche aus Tirol, 1859, pp. 446–450, and in Kinder- und Hausmärchen aus Tirol, 2nd ed., 1870, pp. 254–260. See Stephens, p. 9, Hippe, pp. 165 f., and Wilhelmi, p. 45.
Simrock X.
Simrock, pp. 89–94, from the foot of the Tomberg. Summarized by Köhler, Or. und Occ. ii. 326. See Hippe, p. 166, and Wilhelmi, p. 45.
Oldenburgian.
L. Strackerjan, Aberglaube und Sagen aus dem Herzogtum Oldenburg, 1867, ii. 308 ff. Cited by Hippe, p. 166, and by Foerster, Richars li Biaus, p. xxviii.
Harz I.
A. Ey, Harzmärchenbuch, 1862, pp. 64–74. Summary by Köhler, Or. und Occ. iii. 96. Cited by Hippe, p. 166.
Harz II.
A. Ey, work cited, pp. 113–118. Summary by Köhler, Or. und Occ. iii. 97. Cited by Hippe, p. 166.
Sir Amadas.
Ed. Weber, Metrical Romances, 1810, iii. 241–275, Robson, Three Early English Metrical Romances, 1842, pp. 27–56, Stephens, Ghost-Thanks, 1860. Stephens seems to have been the first to note the connection of Sir Amadas with The Grateful Dead. The romance, as it is preserved in two manuscripts of the fifteenth century, must accordingly have been composed as early as the second half of the preceding century. It contains 778 verses in the tail-rhyme stanza. Summarized by Köhler, Or. und Occ. ii. 325, by Foerster, Richars li Biaus, pp. xxiv–xxvi, by Groome, Folk-Lore, ix. 236, and by Hippe (with great care), pp. 160–164. Compared with Oliver by Wilhelmi, pp. 58 f.
Jack the Giant Killer.
Found without essential difference in several chapbooks, the earliest owned by the British Museum being entitled: The Second Part of | Jack and the Giants. | Giving a full Account of his victorious Conquests over | the North Country Giants; destroying the inchanted | Castle kept by Galligantus; dispersed the fiery Grif- | fins; put the Conjuror to Flight; and released not | only many Knights and Ladies, but likewise a Duke’s | Daughter, to whom he was honourably married. Newcastle-on-Tyne, 1711.[15] Other editions with the story are: The History of Jack and the Giants, Aldermary Churchyard, London; same title, Bow Church Yard, London; same title, Cowgate, Edinburgh; The Pleasant and delightful History of Jack and the Giants, Nottingham, Printed for the Running Stationers, and The Wonderful History of Jack the Giant-Killer, Manchester, Printed by A. Swindells; all without date. The Newcastle edition was reprinted by Halliwell-Phillipps in Popular Rhymes and Nursery Tales, 1849, in which our tale appears at pp. 67–77. Apparently the British Museum copy dated 1711 is that owned by Halliwell-Phillipps. From his edition it has been reprinted by Groome, Folk-Lore, ix. 237 f., and summarized by Köhler, Or. und Occ. ii. 327 f., and Sepp, p. 685. See also Stephens, p. 8, Hippe, p. 164, and Wilhelmi, p. 45.
Factor’s Garland.[16]
The Factor’s Garland or The Turkey Factor, a tale in English verse, which may be regarded as a popular ballad, though by no means as a primitive one. It has often been reprinted as a chapbook or broadside. The library of Harvard University possesses copies of no less than eight different editions (see W. C. Lane, Catalogue of English and American Chap-Books and Broadside Ballads in Harvard College Library, 1905, nos. 809–815, 2420). An examination of these shows that they differ from each other in no essential point, though they vary considerably in statements of time. The British Museum Catalogue of Printed Books lists seven editions, all different from those at Harvard, with one possible exception. The popularity of the story, at one time at least, is thus strikingly illustrated. Another variant, reported from oral tradition, has been found in North Carolina. See the paper read by J. B. Henneman before the Modern Language Association of America on Dec 29, 1906.
Old Wives’ Tale.
George Peele, The Old Wives’ Tale (1590), published in 1595, Ed. by Dyce, 1828 and 1861, by Bullen, 1888, and by Gummere in Gayley’s Representative English Comedies, 1903, pp. 349–382. See H. Dutz for an elaborate discussion of the connection of the play with our theme.
Fatal Dowry.
Philip Massinger (and Nathaniel Field), The Fatal Dowry. First printed in 1632. Ed. A. Symons, Mermaid Series, 1889, ii. 87–182.
Fair Penitent.
Nicholas Rowe, The Fair Penitent, The Dramatick Works of Nicholas Rowe Esq., 1720, vol. i.
[1] I have to thank the kindness of Professor Leo Wiener for my knowledge of the content of Russian V. and VI., which he was good enough to translate for me from the dialect of White Russia.
[2] What the two Bohemian variants contain, which are mentioned by Benfey, Pantschatantra, i. 221, note, by Stephens, p. 10, by Köhler, Germania, iii. 199–209, and Or. und Occ. ii. 328, note, and by Hippe, p. 146, I have been unable to ascertain.
[3] On pp. 194–201 is found a curious “Écho de l’histoire de Tobie.”
[4] Hippe’s first Lithuanian tale is a variant of The Water of Life and will be treated in another connection.
[5] Hippe speaks of “zwei spanische Romanzen.” Had he consulted the Spanish text or read Köhler’s note more attentively, he would have seen that a single story runs through nos. 1291 and 1292 of the Romancero.
[6] My attention was called to this variant by the kindness of Professor F. De Haan, and I was supplied with a first summary from the 1693 edition by the friendly aid of Professor G. T. Northup.
[7] See Crane, Exempla of Jacques de Vitry, 1890, p. lxxxvi.
[8] P. Paris, Manuscrits françois, 1840, iii. 1, and Foerster, Richars li Biaus, 1874, p. xxvii, date it from the fifteenth century; Suchier, Oeuvres poétiques de Philippe de Beaumanoir, 1884, p. lxxxiv, and Wilhelmi, p. 15, from the fourteenth century.
[9] P. Paris, place cited, and Foerster, place cited, say the sixteenth century, but Wilhelmi, place cited, the fifteenth.
[10] See Wilhelmi, p. 43.
[11] Foulché-Delbosc, pp. 589, 590.
[12] Work cited, pp. 587, 588.
[13] Place cited.
[14] My attention was first called to this story by the kindness of Professor A. C. L. Brown.
[15] An edition with an almost identical title “Printed and sold by Larkin How, in Petticoat Lane,” of which a copy is in the Harvard College library, does not contain our story.
[16] My attention was called to this variant by the kindness of Professor Kittredge.
Chapter III.
Tales with the Simple Theme and Miscellaneous Combinations.
Of the tales enumerated in the previous chapter, over one hundred in number, all but seventeen fall into well-defined categories as having The Grateful Dead combined with one or more of three given themes: The Possessed Woman, The Ransomed Woman, and The Water of Life. Of these seventeen variants, moreover, only four can be regarded as having the simple motive of The Grateful Dead; and they are in part doubtful members of the family.
The first of them is Simonides, thus related by Cicero: “Unum de Simonide: qui cum ignotum quendam proiectum mortuum vidisisset eumque humavisset haberetque in animo navem conscendere, moneri visus est ne id faceret ab eo, quem sepultura adfecerat; si navigavisset, eum naufragio esse periturum; itaque Simonidem redisse, perisse ceteros, qui tum navigavissent.” The source of Cicero’s story we do not know, but in all probability it was Greek. Whether it really belongs to our cycle, being so simple in form and nearly two centuries earlier in date than any other version yet unearthed, is a matter for very great doubt. It may have arisen quite independently of other similar tales in various parts of the world, and have no essential connection with our tale; but it deserves special consideration, not only from its antiquity, but also from its subsequent history in lineal descent through Valerius Maximus, and possibly Robert Holkot[1] to Chaucer. We are at least justified in looking for some influence of so well-known an anecdote upon better-authenticated members of the cycle.
The three other variants with the simple theme are all folk-tales of recent gathering. The first of them is Jewish,[2] which runs as follows: The son of a rich merchant of Jerusalem sets off after his father’s death to see the world. At Stamboul he finds hanging in chains the body of a Jew, which the Sultan has commanded to be left there until his co-religionists shall have repaid the sum that the man is suspected of having stolen from his royal master. The hero pays this sum, and has the corpse buried. Later during a storm at sea he is saved by a stone on which he is brought to land, whence he is carried by an eagle back to Jerusalem. There a white-clad man appears to him, explaining that he is the ghost of the dead, and that he has already appeared as stone and eagle. The spirit further promises the hero a reward for his good deed in the present and in the future life.