In this synopsis certain points are to be noted. First, Adam and Eve participate in the treatment whereas they do not in the York and Towneley versions. Only in the Ludus Coventria does even Adam appear and that is in a brief passage at the beginning of the play. Secondly the features italicized in the above epitome are not based upon anything in the Bible text.1 Such are (1) Cain's statement that he has abundant grain; (2) that it would be a pity to burn good corn; (3) the hope he expresses for worldly benefit from his tithe; (4) the visible sign that the offering of Abel is accepted; (5) Cain's expression of shame and envy; (6) his diatribe against Abel stressing in each case three points: Abel has surpassed him in renown; he shall pay; he shall die; and finally (7) the lamentation of Adam and Eve, including Eve's blaming it all on her original transgression. In the features enumerated stress is to be laid not on chance verbal resemblances in the text but on the ideas and motives involved. In occasional passages the Viel Testament is even closer to the Chester plays than Greban,2 but such additional resemblances only serve to further illustrate the French tradition. It is difficult to escape the feeling that in the general management of certain scenes and episodes, the structure of individual plays, lies the strongest reason, however strong that may be, for assuming the presence of French influence in the Chester cycle. In the present discussion an effort has been made to examine the evidence impartially and to avoid starting with a conviction and trying to establish it. Even now I should be the last to assume that the question had been settled by this examination. I do not think French On the theme in general, see Emerson, O. F., "Legends of Cain, Especially in Old and Middle English," PMLA, XXI (1906), 831-929. 2 An illustration is Cain's invitation to Abel to accompany him to the fields. The form which this takes in the Chester play is closely paralleled by the same speech in the Viel Testament, which corresponds more closely to the English version than Greban does and much more so than any of the other English cycles. York is defective at this point (two leaves of the MS. are missing). Towneley and the Ludus Coventria have no such speech; Cain slays Abel on the spot. So, too, does he in the narrative version in the Cursor Mundi. The Viel Testament agrees with the Chester passage in the reason given for going, in the tone of the request, and even verbally: come forth. brother, with me thou muste goe* into the feild a lyttle here froe, I haue an Arend to saye. Il fault aller Ung peu aux champs et entre nous De noz necessitez parler. (*thou muste goe is the reading of three MSS.) |