BOOK OF GENESIS: EXPLANATORY NOTES

ABBREVIATIONS: CA: Gower, Confessio Amantis; CM: Cursor mundi; CT: Chau­cer, Canterbury Tales; DBTEL: A Dic­tionary of Biblical Tradition in English Literature, ed. Jeffrey; HS: Peter Comes­tor, Historia Scholastica, cited by book and chapter, followed by Patrologia Latina column in paren­theses; K: Kalén-Ohlander edition; MED: Middle English Dictionary; NOAB: New Oxford Annotated Bible; OED: Oxford English Dictionary; OFP: Old French Paraphrase, British Library, MS Egerton 2710, cited by folio and column; Whiting: Whiting, Proverbs, Sentences, and Pro­verbial Phrases; York: York Plays, ed. Beadle. For other abbreviations, see Textual Notes.

41–48 God . . . with Hys Word hath wroght. . . . On the heght the Holi Gast / abown the waters movyd. Much depends on the editorial act of capitalization. What the poet means by hys word (line 42), for instance, is quite uncertain due to the lack of standardized capitalization practices within the vast majority of medieval manuscripts, including those associated with the Paraphrase. If uncapitalized, the poet’s phrase states only that God spoke Creation into existence — in accordance with the opening verses of Genesis 1. If capitalized, the poet’s phrase states that Christ (as Word) was the acting agent of Creation, a theological revision of Genesis through the lens of John 1:1–3: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him: and without him was made nothing that was made.” As editor I have opted for the latter, capitalized reading, influenced by the poet’s observation, in lines 47–48, that the Holy Spirit was likewise in presence: since the Council of Constantinople in 381, the co-eternal and consubstantial nature of the Trinity has been the mainstream doctrine of the Christian Church (see Bell, Cloud of Witnesses, pp. 65–74). It is thus both doctrinally sound and rhetorically expected to find both Word and Holi Gast in united substance and action with God from the very beginning of this mammoth biblical paraphrase.

49–56 Hell He mad . . . the lyghtnes to be Day. According to Genesis 1:1–2, Creation began with Heaven and earth, followed by light and darkness. The poet begins with a heaven, too, as well as an earth (lines 41–46); but the separ­ation of light and darkness is made to correspond to the creation of Hell (where utter darkness lies) and a more properly outfitted Heaven (where now light resides). The creation of Hell has no place in the Bible, and its place here is one we might associate with drama: the setting of the stage. When Lucifer falls, he must have a place to fall to, a Hell (or, as one often gets in the plays and in iconography, a hell-mouth). It stands to reason, then, that the construction of the lower, tertiary stage must occur before the creation of the angels. While its connection to the separation of light and darkness thereby seems a matter of logic, not theology, such a mythology makes Hell an absolute and necessary place — thus speaking to God’s omni­potence and fate.

53–54 The creation of the angels is in neither the Bible nor OFP, but it was well known from numerous sources during the Middle Ages. While ultimately derived from Augustine and Gregorius, the poet’s immediate source here is likely HS. Parallel retellings of the story can be found in CM and York.

110 dyverse fysches to flett with fyn. The first of those lines that clearly illustrate York’s usage of the Paraphrase; compare York 2.65: “And othir fysch to flet with fyne.”

115–16 ther lyfes to lede / and same won withoutyn fynd. This statement is, perhaps, a reference to the belief that most birds are monogamous. Chaucer’s turtledove, for example, is presented as a paragon of marital fidelity in Par­lia­ment of Fowls, lines 582–88 — though the mallard is quick to voice its opinion that promiscuity is fair enough. The opinion that turtle doves in particular are symbols of fidelity is supported by the Middle English Phys­iologus and its Latin tradition; indeed, it goes back at least as far as Aris­totle’s Historia animalium viii.600a 20. On avian love prac­tices, see Bar­tho­lomaeus Anglicus’ De proprietatibus. rerum 12.1: “Among alle bestis that ben in ordre of generacioun, briddes and foules [folwen] most hones­t[ee] of kynde. For by ordre of kynde males seche femalis with bisynesse and loueth hem whanne they beth ifounden . . . And briddes and foules gendrynge kepith covenable tyme” (trans. Trevisa 1.597–98).

124 and wormes on the wome to wende. Compare York 2.78: “And wormis vp-on þaire wombis sall wende.”

138 a crokyd rybe, os clerkes can rede. The idea that Eve was made from one of Adam’s ribs was taken so literally in the West that it was a popular belief that all men had one less rib than women. The first clear refutation of this belief came in 1543, when Andreas Vesalius wrote otherwise in De humani corporis fabrica libri septem 1.19; he was roundly condemned by the Church for taking such a position. That the rib from which Eve was formed was particularly “crooked” and that this thus remarks upon her character is a long tradition that seems to have Islamic origins (see, e.g., the Tafsir Ibn Kathir on Qur’an, Surah 4:1 [An-Nisa]), but one of its clearest forma­tions comes at the end of the Middle Ages in Kramer and Sprenger’s Mal­leus Maleficarum: “There was a defect in the formation of the first woman, since she was formed from a bent rib, that is, a rib of the breast, which is bent as it were in a contrary direction to a man. And since through this defect she is an imperfect animal, she always deceives” (p. 44). For a broad look at this tradition, see Utley’s Crooked Rib.

141 He gafe them power playn. The multiple possible meanings of playn in Middle English produce a range of theologically loaded readings of the line. The power given to Adam and Eve is at once unlimited (playn meaning “full”), finite (“simple”), and restricted (“honest”). How this semantically open loop will close itself off will depend, it turns out, on their own actions: “tyll thei breke Hys bydyng” (line 144).

157–60 In myddes of Paradyse yt stud . . . suld clerly knaw both gud and yll. There are two trees in the Garden according to Genesis 2:9: the Tree of Life and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. The former conveyed eternal life (see Genesis 3:2, Proverbs 3:18, and Apocalypse 22:2, 14, 19), while the lat­ter conveyed wisdom (2 Kings [2 Samuel] 14:17 and Isaias 7:15).

170 fallyn was not fer before. That Satan had fallen from Heaven with a host of rebellious angels is a tradition with roots in the post-exilic period of Jewish history, its primary sources being 1 and 2 Enoch, and the book of Jubilees. And while many medieval theologians endeavored to place Satan into the background — perhaps fearful that such a being might lead to Gnostic and Manichean heresies — the popularity of Satan as a figure of evil is clear enough in literature. In the fourteenth century, the devil plays a key role in Langland’s Piers Plowman (see, for instance, his attack on the Tree of Charity in C.16), in Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales (e.g., in the Monk’s and Friar’s Tales), and, especially, in the plays. York, N-Town, Towneley, and Chester all devote plays to his fall. For an overview of the English tradition, see “Devil,” DBTEL, pp. 199–202.

180 them both forto gyle. Note that both Adam and Eve are made subject to Satan’s temptations. While this is not a direct reading of the biblical text it is, strangely, in accordance with the Qur’an, Surah 2:36 (Al-Baqarah).

184 with woman face. On the iconography of a woman’s face on the serpent in the garden, see Flores, “‘Effigies amicitiae . . . veritas inimicitiae.’” The tradi­tion, which appears in HS and is prevalent in medieval art, might be trace­able to the notion that Eve and the serpent work together to bring about Adam’s fall. This is the case, for example, in CM, lines 723–30.

190 skyll. In his treachery, the Fiend thus turns God’s ordinance into a deceit — a stratagem or ruse — that God plays on fools. The Fiend’s reading is com­pelling since he, in earnest, mirrors such a skyll in himself. See MED skil n.6b.

224 wyn thou thy foyd with swynke and swett. Compare York 5.161: “In erthe þan shalle ye swete and swynke.”

227 manys kynd com this thyng. The poet has carefully conveyed a complex the­ological concept within this phrase. On the one hand, the thyng is the hard­ships of life, which have been placed upon “mankind.” In addition, how­ever, the story of the Fall is the story of another thyng, original sin, which has entered into “man’s kind” — i.e., human nature.

236 cheke of an ase. Theories about the murder weapon abound in biblical com­mentaries, but it is only in the English tradition that it is said to be the jaw­bone of an ass, a detail that perhaps owes its origin to Judges 15:15–17, where Samson utilizes such a bone to kill one thousand men. Cain is pic­tured with a jawbone in the eleventh-century illustrations to Ælfric’s Anglo-Saxon Hexateuch in Cotton MS Claudius B.iv. Such is also made clear in Queen Mary’s Psalter (fol. 8r), the Holkham Manuscript (fol. 5v), and CM, line 1073, a version of which our poet could well have had at hand. Neither HS nor OFP contain the detail. In the plays, see Towneley 1.324 and N-Town 2.149. Unfortunately, York is defective in this portion. That the “jawbone of an ass” detail has remained in currency is probably the result of its ap­pearance, much later, in Hamlet 5.1.76.

239–40 Caymys went down to Hell / and to God gaf noe lyght. This is quite against Genesis 4:11–16, which depicts Cain as made to dwell “as a fugitive on the earth, at the east side of Eden” (4:16). The land in which he makes his dwel­ling place is Nod, meaning “Wandering.” CM, lines 1223–36, agrees with the Bible here, while adding the detail that Cain and his kin were killed in the Flood. I follow K in viewing noe lyght as a primary reference to the lack of light from Cain’s burnt offering (compare Genesis 4:4–5), a detail that fits well with the choking smoke of dramatic tradition (see, e.g., Towneley 2.277–92, where Cain’s offering refuses to burn and only coughs up thick smoke). Stern has suggested that the line be emended to read no delyght (Review A Middle English Metrical Paraphrase, p. 281), but it is not necessary to emend in order to achieve the mul­tiple levels of mean­ing in the term: Cain gives God no light, no figurative delight (see MED light n.8), and no spiritual enlightenment (n.9). The final meaning is particularly interesting, as Cain fails to gloss his relationship with God properly — in which case we might gloss the line as “demonstrated no spiritual under­standing.”

245–48 Bot aftur that full mony a yer . . . the story says sexty and moe. As Ohlander notes, OFP 3b follows the Bible in giving no exact number of children (“Old French Parallels,” p. 204). The source for this mention of Adam and Eve’s sixty-plus additional children, then, is probably HS Gen. 29 (1080): “Legitur Adam triginta habuisse filios, et totidem filias praeter Cain et Abel.” A parallel can again be found in CM, lines 1215–22.

250 lyfyd be law of kynd. That the initial generations of mankind were apparently incestuous is here acknowledged but also excused as necessary action in keeping with the first rule of nature: to reproduce. CM says simply that Seth, for example, married his sister Delbora because God told him to do so (lines 1449–50).

253–54 Of Caymys kynd come Tubulcan, / of metall mellyd he amang. That Tubal-cain was the first metalworker reflects a long-standing tradition, rooted in Gene­sis 4:22. See, e.g., CA 4.2425–26, where he “Fond ferst the forge and wroghte it wel”; or CM, line 1518, where he is “þe formast smyth.” See also the expla­natory note to lines 257–58, below.

257–58 Hys brothyr Juball he began / musyke, ose mynstralsy and sang. Jubal as the in­ven­tor of music and the harp (line 559) is a detail from Genesis 4:21 (see the par­al­lel in CA 4.2416–18). The listing of the occupations of Lamech’s sons is, as NOAB observes, evidence of hu­man­ity’s “[c]ultural advance” (p. 7). It is interesting, in this regard, to note the inversion of Tubal-cain and Jubal in the Paraphrase (Jabal, ancestor of shepherds, is not listed here). To medi­eval thinking, music is a far more advanced form of culture than black­smithing.

263–64 He wrott what dedes thei dyd / that last aftur the flode. Perhaps a reference to the tradition in which Seth returns to Eden and receives from the archangel Michael seeds from one of the holy trees that he places in Adam’s mouth after he died. In Midrash tradition there are two of these seeds, and wood from the two trees is used in building Noah’s ark and Solomon’s Temple. Christian exegetes added a third seed and thus a third tree (see, e.g., CM, lines 1363–1430), its wood being used to produce the Cross upon which Christ died. Still other Christian writers gave the number of seeds as four.
Or has the poet confused Seth with Enoch, the son of Jareth? According to Genesis 5:24, Enoch “walked with God, and was seen no more: because God took him,” a tantalizing detail that is greatly expanded in later tradi­tions. CM, lines 1467–80, for example, claims that Enoch was the first man to write, and that the first books are attributable to his hand. He then was taken into Eden, where he yet lives. He will supposedly come forth from Par­a­dise on Doomsday, when he will fight for the Christian cause only to be slain, alongside Elijah (the other Old Testament persona reportedly taken into God’s presence without dying), by the Antichrist — but not before they are able to act as the two witnesses referred to in Apocalypse 11:3. This join­ing of Enoch, Elijah, and Doomsday was immensely popular (see, for exam­ple, the Glossa Ordinaria Apoc. 11 [PL 114.730]), taking a prom­inent role in some of the medieval plays, like the Chester Antichrist (23.253–624), where Enoch and Elijah, having not tasted death, ask to be made flesh once more in order to die and thus participate fully in Christ’s gifts.

272 thre thowssand yere for neven by nere. Different versions of the Bible provide different timespans for the Antediluvian Age. A precise reading of the Hebrew (Masoretic) text of the chronogenealogy (I borrow the term from Hasel, “Genesis 5 and 11”) of Genesis 5:1–32, for example, indicates that 1,056 years passed between the creation of Adam and the birth of Noah. Since Noah was said to have been six hundred years old when the Deluge came (Genesis 7:6), the total time span should be something like sixteen hundred years. This is the accounting that we are given in the Vulgate. The Septuagint’s numbering, however, adds 586 years into the lives of the ten pre-Flood patriarchs, giving a Creation-to-Flood dating of roughly twenty-two hundred years. And some Christian commentators have chosen to dis­regard the numbers here in order to place the length of time as six thousand years; this allows a connection between this time span and the six days men­tioned in Mark 9:2, which are also read in terms of the six days of Creation. The Paraphrase’s three thousand years is perhaps indebted to CM, lines 2005–06, which appears to be following a tradition that goes back at least to Josephus who, in Jewish Antiquities 1.3.3–4, gives the time span between Adam and the Flood as 2,656 years, which was then rounded up to three thou­sand. Josephus claims a dating based on the authority of accurate “sac­red books,” and we cannot discount the possibility that he was privy to sour­ces that now elude us. It is also possible that his dating is indebted to both the Masoretic and Septuagint traditions. While the Septuagint adds one hun­dred years to the Masoretic accounting of six of the ten generations between Adam and Noah, Josephus has simply added a century to all ten.

273 No rayn on erth then fell. Compare CM, line 1991: “no reyn on erþe felle” (Trinity Manuscript). That no rain fell on earth prior to the Flood is a tradition that seems to arise from Genesis 9:12–14, in which God places a rainbow in the sky as a sign of his covenant with Noah. Since there had not been, up to this point in time, rainbows, some exegetes concluded that there could not have been rain. Support for this understanding was found in 2:5, where as pre­lude to the description of the creation of Eden it is said that there was not yet any plant life because “the Lord God had not rained upon the earth.”

275–76 faur fludes of a well / that went from Paradyce. See Genesis 2:10–14. The four waters of Paradise — Pishon, Gihon, Tigris, and Euphrates — were well known to medieval geographers and are given some amount of explication in HS Gen. 14 (1068); see, too, OFP 2c.

301 To make an erke. While many Christian exegetes interpret the ark as a figure of Christ (compare 1 Peter 3:20–21), no such opportunity is taken to do so here. As discussed in the introduction, the poet only rarely makes such Chris­tian interpretations.

318 fyfty cubbeyttes. Genesis 7:20 has the water being fifteen cubits over the high­est mountains (so, too, HS and OFP 3c). Somewhere along the line a scribe has either misread (or misheard) his copy-text or has eyeskipped the “fyfty cubbeyttes” from line 304.

321 monethes yt encressyd. Genesis 7:24: “the waters prevailed upon the earth a hundred and fifty days.”

322–24 That Noah’s ark came to rest in Armenia (Armynie, line 322) is a detail repeated both in HS Gen. 34 (1085) and OFP 3c (Ohlander, “Old French Parallels,” p. 205). The same location is given in both CM, line 1869, and York 9.263–64; some translations of Genesis 8:4 give Armenia, while some locate the landing, more specifically, in the mountains of Ararat (which is a region of Armenia).

329 a dowfe he hath commawnd. In the biblical account (Genesis 8:8–12), the dove is actually sent forth twice: the first time it returns with nothing, but a week later it retrieves the olive branch.

342 broyght furth frutt. Though the phrase is referring to the positive results of their newly sown crops, it might also carry a dual reference to God’s com­mand to Noah and his sons upon their leaving the ark: “Increase and mul­tiply, and fill the earth” (Genesis 9:1, repeated at 9:7). They are thus doubly fruitful in producing both sustenance and children, the latter expli­citly noted in line 344: “thei multiplyd with mony an heyre.”

356 in god degree. Probably a reference to the detail in Genesis 9:23 that Shem and Japheth, in covering their father with a garment, walked backward and kept their faces turned away so that they would not see Noah’s nakedness, thus acting more properly.

358 he werryd hym forthi. This is the so-called Curse of Canaan, given in Genesis 9:25–27. Canaan was a son of Ham (see Genesis 9:22 and 10:6), and it was his people who settled the land that subsequently carried his name. The curse explicitly points out that Canaan would become slave to his brothers; Canaan is, indeed, subjugated by the Israelites during the conquest.
The cursing of Canaan for what appears in the Bible to be his father’s mis­deeds has often been a point of bewilderment for exegetes. It is ex­plained in Judaic lore with the story that it was Canaan who first saw his grandfather’s nakedness. He told his father, and the two of them made great mirth at Noah’s expense. Therefore Canaan (and not Ham’s other children) earned the curse. Another interpretation is that the text originally read “Ham,” but was later changed in order to excuse Israel’s treatment of the Canaanites. Yet another possibility is that Ham could not be cursed since he had already been blessed (Genesis 9:1), therefore the curse passed to his eldest son and his descendants. See Ross, “Curse of Canaan.”

372 Bablion. That is, Babel. The odd spelling here, as Ohlander has observed, is due to both HS Gen. 38 (1089), which reads “De turre Babylon,” and the need to meet rhyme. Comestor’s confusion is also picked up by OFP 4a, which reads “Babiloine” (“Old French Parallels,” p. 205). Though the spel­ling has changed, the etymology given here still follows Genesis 11:9 in relating the name to Heb. balal, meaning “to confuse,” though Babel ac­tually means “Gate of God.” For his part, the poet probably has in mind an ety­mological connection to babble, which, ironically, derives from Babel as a result of this famous story.

377–79 Yf we suld say hys suns all sere . . . Thatt lesson wer full long to leere. A con­venient way of excusing this abbreviated version of one of the more lengthy “begat” sequences in the Bible: Genesis 10 and 11:10–32.

384 to lere our law. As discussed in the introduction, one of the many intriguing aspects of this work is the way that it shuns anti-Semitism and accepts both Jews and Judaism as legitimate forerunners of faith. Phrases such as our law make clear a unity between the Jews and what is, presumably, the poet’s Chris­tian audience.

406 twa hunderth yer. Genesis 11:32 sets Terah’s age at 205 when he died, as does HS Gen. 41 (1091).

433–35 Sodome . . . / Gommer . . . / And next them was ther other thre. The so-called Pentapolis (Wisdom 10:6) was a region dominated by five cities: Sodom, Gomorrah, Segor (Zoar), Adama, and Seboim. These cities united to resist the invasion of Chodorlahomor, referred to in stanzas 37–39 (for the fuller account, see Genesis 14:1–16).

465–68 He wold not byd ne blyne . . . and broyght hym home agayn. The Paraphrase here greatly reduces the biblical account of Abram’s military prowess against the alliance of four eastern kings. Part of the reason for this might be the desire to portray Israel’s ancestors as a more peaceful people than the Bible reveals them to have been.

471–74 Melchesedeke . . . with bred and wyne. The mysterious Melchizedek, both king of Salem (Jerusalem) and a priest of the Canaanite religion, was later inter­preted to be a harbinger of the messiah. See, for instance, Vulgate Psalm 109:4 (NRSV 110:4), which says that the messiah will be a priest-king “ac­cor­ding to the order of Melchisedech.” See also Hebrews 7:1–17, where the writer “de­duces that the mysterious priest-king Melchizedek, was greater than either Abraham or his descendant, Levi” and thus greater than the levi­ti­cal priest­hood (NOAB, p. 322). The Paraphrase-poet takes no op­por­tunity to intrude these later messianic interpretations onto the text, even when Gen­esis 14:18 provides the detail that Melchizedek brought bread and wine to Abram.

499–500 A nearly identical blessing is given by God in York 10.15–16: “He saide my seede shulde multyplye / Lyke to þe gravell of þe see.”

505–16 K (1:clxxxix–cxc), imagining the priority of the plays to the Paraphrase, notes that this stanza is copied “nearly word by word” from York 10.3, though the reverse is surely the case.

511–12 Hyr servant prevely scho wan / tyl Abraham at hys wyll to weld. That Sarai worked secretly (prevely) to provide Abram with a child is a detail in no way found in the biblical account (Genesis 16:2), which relates the decision for Abram to have sex with her slavegirl as a mutual one between husband and wife. Al­though NOAB notes that, “[a]ccording to ancient custom, a wife could give her maid to her husband and claim the child as her own” (p. 19) — a custom that is also related in Genesis 30:3 and 30:9 — the poet is apparently an­xious about the perceived adultery on Abram’s part. Thus, Sarai is given full respon­sibility for precipitating the act, and Abram is kept in the dark, as it were.

514 beldyd. Here, as elsewhere, the poet appears to take a decided interest in clean­sing his narrative of some of the “naughty” parts. Hagar “comforts” Abram through the night, a neat euphemism for what no doubt led to Ish­mael’s conception. Abram’s marriage to Hagar (Genesis 16:3) is also glossed over.

515 Ysmaell. Meaning “God hears.”

522 ever scho wrogh os woman wyse. The fact that Sarai drives Hagar away, and that Hagar only returns after an angel orders her to do so, is omitted here (Genesis 16:6–14) and instead told at lines 649–60. See explanatory note to those lines.

530 C wynters. Genesis 17:1 gives Abram’s age as 99, as does HS Gen. 50 (1097).

531–35 K notes (1:cxc) the similarity of York 10.44–48.

534 Ysac. Meaning “He laughs.”

543–44 For Abraham it is sayd schortly / that Abraham then he suld be cald. Though the Middle English does not make the distinction quite clear, the Vulgate and Hebrew sources are specific in delineating Abraham’s two names. His given name was Abram, meaning “exalted ancestor,” while his post-Covenant name was Abraham, meaning “ancestor of a multitude” and referring to the peoples whose ancestry was traced to Abraham (notably the Israelites, Edo­mites, and Ishmaelites).

550 ose clerkes declare it can. It is unclear if the poet has in mind any specific authorities here or is simply thinking about the general knowledge that the Jewish faith — and thus, by extension, that of Christianity — began with the Abrahamic Covenant. See the note to lines 551–52, below, on how this notion is passed on to popular materials.

551–52 The trowth and the begynnyng / of our fayth ther begane. K notes (1:cxc–cxci) a similarity to York 10.51–53: “The grounde and þe begynnyng / Of trowthe þat tyme be-ganne.”

554 Abraham was tyllyd under a tre. Genesis 18:1 has Abraham in a tent near the trees (usually read as oaks) of Mamre, which NOAB notes to be “an ancient sacred place, slightly north of Hebron, with which Abraham was associated” (p. 17). Cleanness similarly omits the tent, as Abraham was “schunt to þe scha­dow vnder schyre leues” (line 605). There may also be some distant con­­nection here to the notion, common in folklore, that unusual events tend to happen when one sits beneath a tree (see, e.g., Sir Orfeo, Sir Degaré, and Sir Gowther).
The verb tyllyd is interesting here. MED cites this instance under tillen v.2a, meaning, as I have glossed it here, “to stretch out.” So Abraham is relaxing (see also line 55, “hym to play”). But there may be an underlying play on words here, too, as tyllyd could also derive from tillen v.1, with its var­ious agricultural meanings of plowing, production, and toil. Thus Abraham was toiling under a tree, preparing the land for a new crop. Little does he know that his seed has already been planted: his work, as the visitors will announce, has not been for nought.

557–61 Thre chylder . . . wer fayr to syght. One of the three visitors proclaims them all to be messengers of God (line 566), and that his two companions are sent by God to destroy the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. However, this third figure would seem, in accordance with the indications of Genesis 18:22 and 19:1, to be God; when the other two are gone, Abraham is no longer talking with the third visitor but with God (line 579). Then again, in lines 573–76 the poet associates the three visitors with the Trinity (Compare HS Gen. 51 [1098–99]), a claim that is difficult to interpret literally. On their physical appearances, see note to line 560, below.

560 all semand on eld to be. One might be tempted to gloss the line as all “seeming to be mature in age,” following MED elde, but this does not fit well with their youthful appearance reported in line 557. I have followed Oh­lander’s glos­sary (K 5.30) in glossing this line as all “seeming to be in flames” (see MED eld). This description would certainly fit with a deity accustomed to guiding and talking to man through burning bushes, pillars of fire, and tongues of flame, and it would also make some sense in light of Genesis 18:2, where, on seeing the visitors, Abraham “ran to meet them from the door of his tent, and adored down to the ground.” And while Abraham’s reaction here ap­pears to be muted from what we might expect of a man suddenly faced with three men on fire (he describes them next as only “fayr to syght” — line 561), his hailing of them (“helsyd them os hende” — line 562) carries many meanings of subservience and reverence (see MED halsen v.1).

581–82 God sayd ther was non gud therin / bot Loth and tho that with hym ware. This abbreviated version of the conversation between God and Abraham (com­pare Genesis 18:23–33) cuts to the chase. In the biblical account Abraham “talks down” the deity, from fifty good people as sufficient to keep God from destroying Sodom to ten good people within, to which God agrees. But ten such people are not found. The Paraphrase simply jumps to the conclusion: only Lot and his family are deemed salvageable, and not all of them even make it to safety.

592 bad furth tho chylder two. The Sodomites’ reasons for wanting the two men to come forth is not given here, but at Genesis 19:5 it is said that the towns­folk desire to “know” them. It is a long-standing tradition that this euphe­mism implies sex; and, more specifically, homosexual relations since the speakers are presumably male (thus “sodomy”). The destruction of Sodom is thereby taken to be God’s “hands-on” denouncement of homosexuality (as opposed to the mere statement of law in Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13). But the Para­phrase-poet makes no such claims, instead regarding the destruc­tion as sim­ply due to their “syns sere” (line 572).

597–600 God mad them blynd to be / so that thei toke no tent, / Tyll Loth with hys meneye / and tho chylder wer went. The poet makes a significant change to the biblical nar­rative, presumably to heighten the romance characteristics of his nar­rative. In the biblical account, the de­praved people of the town are struck blind so that they cannot find and open the door to the house. The angels urge Lot to leave, but he cannot manage to convince his family to do so. The night passes. The angels repeatedly request evacuation in the mor­ning, but they must eventually forcibly remove Lot and his family to the safety of the plain where, ap­parently, the mortals finally get the message. Here in the Para­phrase, how­ever, no repeated cajoling is necessary. Indeed, we get a sequence of uninterrupted action: the wicked are struck blind, buying Lot and his family enough time to slip past them and out of the city.

608 with sympyll chere. The poet seems to have a measure of pity on Lot’s wife that God does not; she looks back because of her sad realization that all of her friends have just been destroyed. Her pity is not unlike that of Uxor in the York Noah play: “wher are nowe all oure kynne / And companye we knwe before?” (9.269–70). In Genesis 19:26 no reason is given for her decision to look back.

611–12 Scho wurthyd to an ymag / of salt and sall be evere. Lot’s wife, in effect, is turned into an image of remorse, a monument to salt tears over a lost cause.

615 Sogor. Zoar (meaning “little”) was a small town on the southern end of the Dead Sea.

621–22 or ever the fyne / the werld to fulfyll. Once again, the poet seems to have a measure of pity on his characters (see note to line 608, above): Lot’s daugh­ters truly think that no one else remains in the world but the two of them and their father (an understandable conclusion after the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah). They take the drastic measure of sleeping with their father in order to propagate the species (an act that would be in accor­dance with God’s command to Noah in 9:1). First the eldest (“the werld to mayn­ten at hyr myght,” line 626) gets him drunk enough to have sex with her, then the youngest manages to “fob” him, too (line 630); neither action is ex­pli­citly condemned. Indeed, the child of the youngest (Ben-ammi, ancestor of the Ammonites) is pointedly given the descriptor “semly” (line 632), a detail not in the Bible.

634 in wastes that wer wyld. Like characters in a medieval romance, Lot and his fam­ily are cast out beyond the margins of civilization into the wilderness where they must learn to survive before being brought once more into society.

635–36 tell of Abraham and Sara and / of Ysaac that was hys chyld. Stanza 53, in a remar­kable transition from one brother to the other, juxtaposes the children of Lot, inseminated through the anxieties of his daughters to repopulate the earth, with Abraham and Sarah’s child, Isaac, who came about through God’s covenant with Abraham, which will populate the earth by the millions in times to come with God’s chosen people.

649–60 The poet conflates the two banishments of Hagar and Ishmael (Genesis 16:6–14 and 21:8–21) into a single account. While this helps Sarah to come off better (see explanatory note to line 522) and helps to smooth and sim­pli­fy the narrative, it does leave Hagar and Ishmael with Abraham and Sarah rather than in the wilderness of Paran, as the Bible would have it (Genesis 21:21). One additional interesting aspect of this change is that Ishmael is no longer free to become the ancestor of the Bedouin tribes of the south; it is from these “Ishmaelites” that Muslims trace their ancestry to Abraham and to the monotheistic God of Judaism. By leaving Ishmael with Abraham rather than in the southern wilderness, the poet has effectively undercut Islam’s claims of authority. If this is intended, it shows a remarkably acute knowledge of Islam on the poet’s part. Isaac is unequivocally God and Abra­ham’s chosen heir (line 360), as God’s subsequent tests will demonstrate.

664 sadnes. There is perhaps dual meaning in the term. First and foremost, God says that he will see (investigate) Abraham’s “steadfastness.” That is, He will test Abraham’s willingness to obey, even at terrible cost. The reader, how­ever, will no doubt sense a second meaning, “sadness,” given the pathos of the story.

673–708 Three straight stanzas are missing a long line. I have followed K in num­ber­ing these lines on the assumption that the original poem had 12-line stanzas throughout and to allow ease of cross-referencing with that earlier edition. It is tempting, however, to view these sequential omis­sions as in­ten­tionally short, helping to press speed into this exciting nar­rative.
673–80 Abraham unto hys son beheld . . . And chargeyd hym with wud and fyre. The poet omits the accompanying two men of the biblical account. Even more inter­esting, however, is the decision to heighten the emotional pull of the scene by allowing Abraham the chance to reflect on what should have been — a far more human reaction than his silent assent to God’s will in the biblical account. One is reminded of the sensibilities of the Brome Abraham and Isaac play.

709–20 That Abraham actually notifies Isaac of his intent, and that Isaac willingly agrees, is not a feature of the biblical account. It is, however, a scene from popular interpretations of the tale. See, e.g., the Brome Abraham and Isaac play, or the N-Town Cycle, where Isaac, bearing the wood on his back (as in line 700 here), accepts his Christological role in the sacrifice.

723 A wedder he saw hym besyd. Often figured as a representation of Christ as the sacrificial lamb that takes the place of man, the ram is treated as nothing more than an unfortunate wandering beast here. The location of the sac­rifice was afterward known as Jehovah Jireh (Heb. “the Lord will provide”).

733–34 Scho was woman wynsom to weld, / non heynder haldyn under Hevyn. Keturah is little more than a name in the Bible (Genesis 25:1), but she is here given high praise for her beauty and goodness in proper romantic fashion.

740–41 a gud wyfe to hym can he nevyn: / Rebecca, a damisell. Here, Abraham sends his servant with the specific task of finding Rebecca. This is quite different from Genesis 24:2–4, where he asks only that the servant look for a legiti­mate match for Isaac.

741–44 As K notes (1:cxci), these lines, a description of Rebecca, can be found in York 10.365–68.

745–56 The discovery of Rebecca at the well, a rather lengthy tale in the Bible (Gen­esis 24:10–61), is much abbreviated here. Likely the slow pacing of the story was not in keeping with the kind of romance narrative the poet chose to produce.

762 sexty. The poem ought to record seventy, in agreement with the Bible, where Abraham lives 175 years rather than 165 (Genesis 25:7).

777–80 God’s pronouncement to Rebecca (Genesis 25:23) is altered somewhat here. In the biblical account, the Lord says to her: “Two nations are in thy womb, and two peoples shall be divided out of thy womb, and one people shall overcome the other, and the elder shall serve the younger”; the point being that Rebecca will give birth to twins, who will in turn give rise to two nations, and that the nation of the elder child will serve the nation of the younger child. To this basic pronouncement, our poet has followed a long-standing tradition of understanding a difference in strength between the two chil­dren, in which the elder is also the stronger, so that the more in all thyng / sall serve unto the lesse (lines 779–80). As lines 785–86 show, this difference in strength was largely tied to the fact that Esau was the firstborn, the idea being that he literally fought his way out of her womb first (see the ex­planatory note to lines 781–84, below). Further evidence was seen in Esau’s hairiness — a sign of testosterone long before the chemistry of the matter was known — and in Esau’s reported success as a hunter, which stands in marked contrast to Jacob’s willingness to stay at home in the tents with his mother (see Genesis 25:27–28). The two nations that Rebecca’s twins will give rise to are those of the Edomites (from Esau, who was later called Edom — see note to lines 803–04, below) and the Israelites (from Jacob, who will later be given the name Israel — see note to lines 997–1008, below).

781–84 That Jacob and Esau fought in the womb is a long-told legend, though the poet’s source is surely HS Gen. 66 (1109). A close parallel can also be found in CM, lines 3481–82. As Ohlander notes, there is no parallel in OFP (“Old French Parallels,” p. 206).

787 Jacob. Genesis 25:26 relates that Jacob came out holding onto his brother Esau’s heel. The name Jacob can mean either “He takes by the heel” or, more metaphorically, “He supplants.” The latter meaning is clearly indi­ca­ted in lines 885–86, when Esau laments how Jacob is rightfully named since he has twice supplanted his older brother.

788 ther moyder was all marryd thore. That Rebecca suffered bodily injury as a result of giving birth to such fighting twins is a detail not found in the Bible. For more on the poet’s attempts to create a more “realistic” account of the Old Testament, see the introduction.

803–04 Though not related here, Genesis 25:29–30 explains that it is this moment that gives rise to Esau’s being called Edom, meaning “red”: “And Jacob boiled pottage: to whom Esau, coming faint out of the field, said: Give me of this red pottage, for I am exceeding faint. For which reason his name was called Edom.” Though the connection is here made to the red pottage (or perhaps to his being flushed from hunger), the attribution also connects back to Genesis 25:25, which relates that Esau came out of his mother’s womb all red.

813 The abrupt introduction of the story of Esau’s lost blessing is largely the result of the decision to excise Genesis 26 from the Paraphrase. In this chapter, Isaac goes to Gerara, at which time God twice renews with him the Covenant He made with Abraham, promising: “I will multiply thy seed like the stars of heaven: and I will give to thy prosperity all these countries: and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed” (Genesis 26:4). Other key events in this chapter: Isaac tries to trick the Palestines into thinking that Rebecca is his sister (fearing that they will kill him for her if they know she is his wife), digs a somewhat miraculous well at a place he names Shibah (from which the city of Bersabee — meaning “Well of the Oath” — gets its name), and ultimately makes a pact with King Abimelech of the Palestines. In addition, Esau (now forty years old) marries two Hittite wives, both of whom offend the minds of his parents.
A primary motivation for the exclusion of Genesis 26 — aside from the need to construct a more streamlined and exciting biblical account — might be that it places the story of Esau selling his birthright to Jacob and the story of Esau’s lost blessing by his father next to one another. The resulting jux­taposition presumably helps to alleviate the reader’s concern that Jacob is lying to his father, tricking him into giving him Esau’s blessing. That is, since Esau had just sold his birthright to his younger brother Jacob, the blessing rightfully belongs to him. Rebecca and Jacob, then, are at worst guilty of a venial sin in tricking Isaac; they are preventing what would have been the greater wrong (Esau acquiring what he had so flippantly sold). It is also useful to note here that Augustine (in Contra mendacium 10) began a tradition of reading this sequence as a prefiguring of the movement of God’s blessing from the Jews to the Gentiles (or, even more broadly, from the Jews to the Christians, though that might under­score the “familial” relationship between the two religions more than many Christians would like to admit).

821 veneson. That Isaac specifically requests venison is not related in the Bible, where he only asks for “some thing by hunting” (Genesis 27:3). The detail is picked up from Genesis 27:19, where Jacob asks his father to “arise, sit, and eat of my venison, that thy soul may bless me.”

885 well was he namyd. See note to line 787.

899–900 Thus all this werld was wroght, / evyn os God wold yt wer. That God would will the deceiving of Isaac and the taking of the birthright from Esau has long been troubling to readers of Scripture. Some exegetes answer both objec­tions by regarding Esau as a mere hunter, not one who could properly lead the people. His indifference toward this responsibility, according to this in­ter­pretation, is clearly shown in his willingness to sell the eternal for the temporal satisfaction of food. Their mother, recognizing this in a way that the literally and figuratively blinded father cannot, helps to rectify the situ­ation for the greater good of the people to come, aiding Jacob in ac­quiring his father’s blessing. While such an interpretation makes Jacob the more capable man for the job and perhaps gives a reason for the deception, it does not answer the question about whether the means to the end is morally right. On this point, however, one can point to Jacob’s experience in Haran, where he will have a similar deception foisted upon him (invol­ving a similar issue of older and younger siblings). In particular, note that in Genesis 29:25, when Jacob complains to Laban that he has been de­ceived, he uses the same Hebrew word that Isaac had used in 27:35. In other words, Jacob eventually gets what is coming to him and learns from it, making the ori­ginal deception, if not right, at least atoned for.

913 crown. That the ladder reaches up from the top of Jacob’s head is a detail not found in the biblical account (Genesis 28:10–22), and it may be obliquely con­nected to Bonaventure’s Itinerarium mentis in Deum, which relates the mind’s journey to God as an ascension of Jacob’s ladder. Thus the ladder, quite logically, should rise from Jacob’s head.

930 Goddes awn howse. It is from this pronouncement that the location of Jacob’s dream derives its name: Bethel, meaning “House of God.” The town was formerly called Luz.

935 tokynyng. The word serves a dual function here, especially when read against Genesis 28:22. First, Jacob raises up the stone as a marker of some kind. The Douay translation calls the raised stone a “title,” whereas the NRSV calls it a “pillar.” Second, the Bible records that Jacob promises at this moment that he will give a tithe, one tenth of his wealth, to God. The word tokynyng sub­sumes both meanings — a mark of remembrance and a vow to tithe — under a single term.

942 when Rachell suld have neghyd nere. After serving Laban for the agreed seven years in exchange for Rachel, Jacob asked for her. But Laban tricked Jacob by sending Rachel’s older sister Leah into the tent instead. Only in the mor­ning, after sleeping with her, does Jacob recognize the deceit. See Genesis 29:21–25.

957–72 Laban agrees to give Jacob any of his flocks that were odd colored; that is, those that were not a uniform white. Such colorations are the exception rather than the rule, so Laban would seem to have little to lose in the agree­ment. Jacob’s trickery to reverse this trend, as NOAB points out (p. 39), fits in well with ancient understandings about the origins of the colora­tions: “Ancient cattle-breeders believed that the female, at the time of conception, was influenced by visual impressions which affect the color of the offspring. Jacob produced striped animals by putting striped sticks be­fore the females’ eyes while they were breeding.”

985–96 Though nothing is told here of the rivalry for Jacob’s attention between the two sisters, Leah and Rebecca, that story is significant for explicating the rationale behind both the naming of the children and the fact that two of Jacob’s servants bear him children. First, Leah bears Reuben (1), meaning “look, a son,” and then Simeon (2), whose name refers to God having “heard” her pleas. Next, Leah bears a third son, named Levi (3), meaning “joined” and pointing out (to her sister, apparently) that Leah and Jacob were clearly sharing a special bond. The fourth child is Judah (4), whose name is one meaning “praise.” Rachel, still having been unable to bear Jacob any children, is put in the position of Sarah. And, like Sarah, she chooses to bear him children through the proxy of one of her maids. Thus, she gives Bilhah to Jacob, and this handmaid bears Jacob a son named Dan (5), meaning “He [God] judged,” indicating the change in God’s favor that she hoped she was witnessing. Bilhah then conceived a second time and gave birth to Naphtali (6), whose name refers to the “wrestling” between the two sisters. Not to be outdone, Leah then gives to Jacob her maid, Zil­pah, who gives birth to Gad (7), meaning “fortune,” and Asher (8), mean­ing “happy.” Leah herself then gives birth to Issachar (9), whose name “my hire” refers to an exchange by which Rachel bought some of Leah’s son Reuben’s man­drakes — thought to be an aphrodisiac and fertility drug — in exchange for Leah “hiring” her husband’s services for a night. Leah next gives birth to Zebulun (10), meaning “honor” and marking herself as honored in Jacob’s eyes for having born him six sons. She then gives birth to the first daughter in the family, Dinah (11). At last Rachel herself gives a child, perhaps through the use of Reuben’s mandrakes, though this point is not made explicit in the Bible. This first child she names Joseph (12), whose name means “He [God] adds.” Finally, Genesis 35:16–21 relates that Rachel dies giving birth to Jacob’s twelfth son (13), whose name she pro­nounces with her dying words: Ben-oni, meaning “son of my sorrow.” Jacob, how­ever, calls the child Benjamin, meaning “son of the right hand,” which was a symbol of power and of good fortune. An alternate meaning for Ben­jamin might be “son of the south,” which would refer to Israel’s posi­tion south of Ephraim.

997–1008 Jacob’s wrestling with the angel of God at a place he named Peniel (“the face of God”) is an apparently very ancient tradition, marked as it is with signs of particular antiquity, such as the angel needing to disappear before sunrise (Genesis 32:26) and a concern for the power of names (32:27, 29). But these details are omitted here, where concentration is instead placed upon the angel giving Jacob the new name Israel, meaning “he who strives with God.” This name, which then passed to his descendants as “children of Israel” (line 1007), is one that has particular meaning for Jews, who see in it a root of their human impulse to forever wrestle with the divine. A separate account of the renaming of Jacob is given at Genesis 35:9–15.

1012 on hym jones the genology. To remark that a genealogy hinges (jones) on Judah might have many interpretations. The poet is probably, first and foremost, referring to the genealogy of Jesus, who descends from Jacob through Judah and Tamar (see Matthew 1:1–3 and the explanatory note to lines 1169–74, below). Other meanings available here, however, are an etymology relating to the Jews and (far less likely) a reading of the story of Joseph that will fol­low. In the former case, the word “Jew” derives from “Judah.” It was ori­gin­ally a term applied to only those Israelites from that land, but, in the time of David, for example, Judah dominated the other tribes to such an extent that Jew came to be applied to all Israelites. This is especially true after Judah was the only independent Israelite kingdom remaining in the Holy Land. Judah was thus given, in the Scriptures, a preeminence among the tribes; see, for example, Jacob’s blessing to his sons, especially that given to Judah in Genesis 49:8–12. It is also possible that the poet is taking a par­ticular reading of the story of Joseph, in which it is Judah who persuades his brothers not to kill Joseph (37:26–27) and, later, gives the pleading speech that convinces Joseph to reveal himself to his brothers and thus restore the house of Jacob (44:14–34). There are even some scholars who consider “Reu­ben” in 37:21–22 to be a scribal error for Judah, making Judah alone the sole advocate for his brother Joseph (NOAB, p. 49). This is certainly not the case here, however, as the opposite change occurs: Judah’s role in help­ing to save Joseph is given over com­pletely to Reuben (lines 1221–24).

1037–38 For wekydly then wastyd hee / the sed that suld be multiplyd. In Genesis 38:9 the sin of refusing to inseminate a woman is attributed to the brother Onan and given as the reason for God killing him. The circumstances Er’s wicked­ness entailed are not given in the Bible, which only notes his being “wicked in the sight of the Lord” (Genesis 38:7; see note to line 1043).

1043 The Fend on the fyrst nyght. Genesis 38:7 is quite clear in attributing Er’s death to God: “And Her, the firstborn of Juda, was wicked in the sight of the Lord: and was slain by him.” The NRSV translates even more forcefully: “the Lord put him to death.” It was apparently difficult for the poet to accept the seem­ingly over-sudden and severe punishment of Er, however; here God’s hand has been replaced by the workings of Satan. Both this change of attri­bution and the added detail of the death occurring on the first night very likely have their origins in the independent story of the demon who kills the new hus­bands of the daughter of Raguel on their wed­ding night (Tobias 6:14–8:3).

1048 ose men then in this werld was wun. Compare Deuteronomy 25:5–10, which explains that if a man dies without a son, his brother, the widow’s brother-in-law, must marry her and “raise up seed for his brother,” thus per­pe­tu­ating the dead man’s name and inheritance.

1142 The suth sall non man spare. Proverbial. Not cited by Whiting or Tilley.

1151–52 By this werke now wott I well / that scho is wyser then I. Though adultery was punish­able by stoning (Deuteronomy 22:23–24) or burning (Leviticus 21:9), Tamar is excused because she did what she did to fulfill the more important levirate marriage requirements of continuing her husband’s line.

1159–73 Tamar’s twins are the ancestors to two rival clans of Judah: Perez and Zerah. The elder Perez, whose name means “a breach” (relating to the cir­cum­stan­ces of his birth) is noted in Ruth 4:18–22 and 1 Chronicles 2:4 as an an­ces­tor of David. She is also noted in Matthew 1:3 as being in the gene­alogy of Jesus (see explanatory note to lines 1169–74). The second son’s name means “brightness,” and he is said in Genesis 38:30 to have been born with a “scar­let thread” upon his hand. Here the thread is given a more realistic origin than one of birth: the midwife ties the thread to his hand to tell the bro­thers apart (lines 1161–64).

1169–74 The Holy Writ quoted is Matthew 1:3, part of the genealogy of Jesus: “And Judas begot Phares and Zara of Thamar. And Phares begot Esron.”

1178–80 hys moyder dede herd he tell. / Ysac, his fader, myght no see; / for febylnes son seke he fell. Both of these details — Rebecca’s death and Isaac’s ill health — are un­recorded in the Bible, though they are referred to tangentially: in Genesis 49:31 Jacob relates that Rebecca is buried alongside her husband, Leah, Abraham, and Sarah in a cave in the field at Machpelah (near Mamre in Ca­naan), and Isaac’s death is reported in Genesis 35:27–29. The omis­sion of Isaac’s death is apparently the root of some confusion on the part of a scribe somewhere in the Paraphrase tradition since S, line 1209, gives Isaac as the one who keeps Joseph’s dreams in his mind, though Genesis 37:11 clearly relates that it is Joseph’s father, Jacob, who does this (I have altered the text accordingly). As Ohlander observes, the additional material here may ori­ginate in HS Gen. 85 (1123), “Venit etiam ad Isaac patrem suum in civitate Hebron, et jam mortuam invenit matrem,” or something like OFP 7a: “Jacob trova Rebecca morte, sa mere; / Mes il trova Ysaac vif, sun pere” (“Old French Parallels,” p. 206).

1185–88 This reference to Jacob and his sons building an altar to God is either added material or simply out of place. It is possible that it comes from either Gen­esis 35:14–15, where Jacob sets up a pillar at Bethel, the place where God spoke to him and (in a separate account from the wrestling with the angel at Peniel) renamed him Israel, or 35:20, where Jacob sets up a pillar on Rachel’s grave on the way to Ephrath.

1211–12 And what so suld betyde, / he prayd God to wyrke His wyll. Genesis 37:11 says simply that Jacob kept “the thing with himself,” that is, “kept the matter [of the dream] in mind” (NRSV). Here, however, Jacob seems to give a pres­cient version of part of the Lord’s Prayer, from Matthew 6:9–13, partic­ularly 6:10b: “Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.”

1263 Hym toght. Dative of agency, where the oblique case serves as subject which is acted upon or participates in an action: i.e., “a dream came to him.”

1302 As K notes, this same line, a description of Joseph’s brothers, is found in CM, line 6715.

1364 he toght thei twa suld not twyn. In the Bible Joseph is given no rationale for his guile against Benjamin other than, perhaps, a need to continue his tes­ting of them. The poet, however, seems unwilling to leave such a (non)ex­pla­na­tion standing. Instead, he posits that Joseph simply could not bear to be par­ted from the brother with whom he shared full blood relations — Ben­jamin being the only other child born of Rachel.

1380 hyng hegh by the neke. That Benjamin will be executed is a bit of dramatic license on the part of the Paraphrase-poet. Genesis 44:17 says only that he will be made a slave.

1387–88 Lett hym go home, and dwell wyll we / in hold, wherso ye wyll us have. Judah’s offer of them all as ransom for the youngest is a subtle but significant change to Genesis 44:33, where he only offers up himself in a one-for-one exchange.

1409 yle that hyght Jessen. The term yle here means a region, especially one near the coast (MED ile n.2) rather than an island (ile n.1). Goshen is an area of land on the east side of the Nile delta, present–­­­­day Wadi Tumilat. This re­gion is good grazing land, thus ideal for the Israelite settlers. It is pre­sumed that because Joseph wanted to keep his family close to him, Pha­raoh’s cap­ital must have been located in the delta area, probably at Rameses, as it was during the Hyksos period (1720–1550 BCE). This period of Egyptian history is also known to have been somewhat pro-Semitic.

1427–28 Bott folke war full gud one / that com of ther kynred. Possibly a reference to Jacob’s blessing upon his sons (Genesis 49:2–28), a poem that relates the later character of the twelve tribes of Israel as blessings (and curses) upon their namesakes.

1433–34 Thei mad grett mornyng them amell, / for Joseph was so fer them fro. Probably a reference to Joseph’s returning to Egypt after helping to bury his father in Canaan.

1435–36 For afturwerd, os men may tell, / ther welth was turn to wer and wo. Presumably a reference to the slavery of the Israelites, freedom from which will be dra­matically presented in the book of Exodus.

BOOK OF GENESIS: TEXTUAL NOTES

ABBREVIATIONS: L: MS Longleat 257; H: Heuser edition (partial); K: Kalén-Ohlander edition; O: Ohlander’s corrigenda to K; P: Peck edition (partial); S: MS Selden Supra 52 (base text for this edition).

39 cald is. So H. S: cald. K:[is] cald.

40 see. S: second e inserted above the line.
unsoght. S, K: vnsogh.

42 wroght. S, K: wrogh.

49–52 Written as separate lines in S.

52 forever and. S: for. K: for [euer and].

57 Marginalia (top of fol. 2v): de casu lucifer. Genesis.
Of. So K. S: On.

62 sone can. So K. S omits.

67 to. So O. S, K omit.

70 kend. S: clerkes kendes. K’s emendation.

72 the. S: ther. K’s emendation.

74 were. Second e is inserted above the line.

95 forto. K omits.

98 to moyv. So K. S: the moyn.

99 and. K omits.

113 Marginalia in S (at top of fol. 3a): Genesis.

116 won. So K. S: wons.

118 no. K marks this as an emendation, though S is clear.

148 in. So K. S omits.

153 tresses. K emends to tress.

158 frut fayr. K emends to frut [so] fayr.

159–60 Written as separate lines in S.
159 fang. S: fand fang.

164 to. K emends to thou.

167 That. S: S That.
bad. S: inserted above the line.

169 Marginalia in S (at top of fol. 3v): Genesis.

177 yt. So S. K omits.

183 sen. So K. S: sent.

184 free. So K. S: clere.

187 wold. So K. S: wole.

200 kyne. So S. K: kynd.

214 forbeyd. S: forso forbeyd.

220 erth. S: inserted above the line.

229 Marginalia in S (at top of fol. 4r): Genesis.

240 lyght. So S, K. Stern (Review, p. 281) suggests delyght.

251 loke. S: k loke.

259 harpe. So K. S: happe.

264 last. So K. S: lastur.

266 Marginalia in S (at left of fol. 4r): four illegible words.
Marginalia in S (at right of fol. 4r): Mattussile lameth Noe.

272 yere. So K. S omits.
by. S: in by.

281 non aw. S: non na; aw inserted above the line.

284 be. So K. S omits.

290 hath. So S. K emends to have.

294 Marginalia in S (at top of fol. 4v): Noye.

298 Marginalia in S (at right of fol. 4v): Arca Noe.

303 Thre. So K. S: thro.

312 of ylka kynd a. So K. S: mony of ylka, with kynd a inserted above the line.

314 wyll. S: inserted above the line.

321 monethes. S: ne inserted above the line.

342 thei. S, K: the.

348 werld. So K. S: welrd.

350 wych. S, K: wyhc.

354 Cham. So O. S: k Caym, followed by K.

357 Marginalia in S (at top of fol. 5r): Genesis. Turris babilonis.

When. S: ff When.
370 foyn. S: foynd, with d canceled.

374 bod dy. S: inserted above the line.

379 Thatt. So K. S: latt.

396 worthay. S: worthy, with a inserted above the line.

398 In. S: I, with n inserted above the line.

410 fune. S: sure fune.

419 Marginalia in S (at top of fol. 5v): Genesis.

426 thei. S, K: the.

430 hym. S: inserted above the line.

434 nere. S: t nere.

452 full. S: fer full.

460 thei. So K. S: the.

464 of. So K. S omits.

465 wold. So K. S: wole.

470 pyn. S: corrected from payn.

478 lay. S: law lay.

481 Marginalia in S (at top of fol. 6r): Genesis. Abram.

489 emong. K calls this a later addition to S, though I can find no evidence of this being the case.

490 I have. K inverts to have I in order to indicate an interrogative statement.

499 gravell. S: ra inserted above the line.

502 hevyn. So K. S: heuenyn.

514 beldyd. So K. S: beldyld.

539 circumscisyd. So S. K: circumcisyd.

543 it. S: inserted above canceled yrtt.

544 he. S: inserted above the line.

545 Marginalia in S (at top of fol. 6v): Genesis.

548 circumsysed. S: inserted above canceled cursyd.

555 hy. So K. S: hym.

559 And. So K. S: In.

565 Marginalia in S (at right of fol. 6v): signum trinnitatis.

567 unto. So K. S: forto.

572 down. S: n inserted above the line.

576 one. S: b one.

580 fro. So O. S, K: for.

596 byttur. S: inserted above canceled bett.

603 Marginalia in S (at top of fol. 7r): Genesis.

607 wyf. S: inserted above the line.

612 be. S: inserted above the line.

621 fyne. So O. S: syne, followed by K.

633 Marginalia in S (at right of fol. 7r): Abraham Sara Ysac.
wonnand. So S. K omits.

635 and Sara. So S. K omits.

638 thei. S: the, followed by K.

lend. S: inserted above the line.

642 myrth. S: corrected from my3th. Both meanings would, in fact, work. Sara has shown strength in her dealings but also her being comforted in line 640 would give ample cause for her happiness.

654 suld. S: inserted above the line.

656 acord. S: a inserted above the line.

661 Marginalia in S (at top of fol. 7v): Genesis.

662 yf. S: he yf.

668 Marginalia in S (at right of fol. 7v): imolacio de Ysac.

669 theron. S: or þer.

670 Me. S: tyll me.

681–82 Incomplete stanza indicates that perhaps lines are missing here. Though I am reluctant to do so, I have opted to number these missing lines in order to maintain number count with the existing edition of K.

692 for to Hys. So K. S: fforto do hys.

694–95 Missing lines. See textual note to lines 681–82, above.

702–03 Missing lines. See textual note to lines 681–82, above.

719 God. S: h God.

721 have. So K. S: hath.

722 noght. So S. K: not.

723 Marginalia in S (at top of fol. 8r): Genesis.

725 tyd. S: inserted above the line.

730 Marginalia in S (at right of fol. 8r): de secunda uxore Abree.

740 gud. So K. S: guf.

741 Marginalia in S (at right of fol. 8r): de uxore Ysac.

742 fayrer. So K. S: fader.

763 Then. S: W Þen.

768 be. So K. S omits.

780 the. So K. S omits.

784 Marginalia in S (at top of fol. 8v): no heading.

801 hir. S: inserted above canceled hys.

817 He. So K. S: The.

819 wun. So K. S: wunt.

833 feld. So K. S: fold.
fon. So K. S: fynd.

841 Marginalia in S (at top of fol. 9r): Genesis. Jacob et Rebecca.

845 hym. S: inserted above the line.

858 be felyn. So S, K. O suggests not be felyn, assuming felyn to mean “feeling.” If the term is parallel with our modern “felon,” however, no emendation is necessary.

872 Then. So K. S: the.

877 then. S: inserted above the line.

882 myn. S: n inserted above the line.

889 yow now. So S. K inverts.

894 howshald. So K. S: howshad.

904 Marginalia in S (at top of fol. 9v): Genesis. de dormicione iacob et scala domini.
and grett. So K. S: and with grett.

910 sclepand. So S. K: slepand.

912 hyght. S: inserted above canceled ryght.

915 angels. S: al angels.

927 in. S: inserted above the line.

944 schawyd no chere. So K. S: schawnyd chere.

949 elder. S: ell elder.

955 hym. S: y hym.

959 mad Jacob mony. So K. S: mad full soyn Iacob þerof mony.

961 Marginalia in S (at top of fol. 10r): Genesis.

966 or. So O. S, K: of.

979 Jacob. S: Go Jacob.
fro. So O. S, K: for.

980 made. So K. S omits.

985 Lya. So K. S: Lyi.

987 tha. So K. S: thei.

988 war. So S. K inserts trewly before.

994 scho. So S. K omits.
that. S: inserted above the line.

999 bryght. S, K: brygh.

1000 schent. S: inserted above the line.

1003 Israell. So K. S: Iraell.

1010 the. So K. S: ther.

1011 brothyr. So K. S: broythyr.

1013 has. So K. S omits.

1014 Chanaan. So S. K emends to Chanany.

1015 in. So K. S omits.

1021 Marginalia in S (at top of fol. 10v): Genesis.

1026 afore. So S. K emends to a fother.

1031 Marginalia in S (at left of fol. 10v): Judas.

1032 name. So K. S: naman.

1035 Marginalia in S (at left of fol. 10v): Thamar.

1059 yt is. So K. S: is yt.

1064 then. So K. S: the.

1071 lever. S: r inserted above the line.

1082 hir. S: his. K emends to gart hir.

1083 And cled. So K. S: bottom corner of the page is missing.

1084 jape. So S. K: rape.

1085 Marginalia in S (at top of fol. 11r): no heading.

1093 hyr. S: inserted above the line.

1104 hir. So K. S: his.

1106 scho. S: inserted above canceled k.

1112 and. So S. K omits.
prevely. S: pro prevely.

1119–20 Missing lines. See textual note to lines 681–82, above.

1121 monethyse. So K. S: mothneyse.

1128 hange. S: e inserted above the line. K: hang.

1133–34 Missing lines. See textual note to lines 681–82, above.

1137 was. S: r was.

1139 wroght. S, K: wrogh.

1145 gold. S: god gold.

1146 ther. S: inserted above the line.

1147–48 Missing lines. See textual note to lines 681–82, above.

1151 Marginalia in S (at top of fol. 11v): no heading.
By. So K. S: Now by inserted above the line, but now is repetitive within the line.

I well. S: inserted above the line.

1152 that. S: and that.

1174 Marginalia in S (at right of fol. 11v): Reversus est Jacob.

1188 Marginalia in S (at top of fol. 11v): de sompnio josephi.

1189 dremyd with. So K. S: dremyd then with, but the second then is unnecessary.

1193 schefe. S: f schefe.

1194 can. S: inserted above the line.

1200 me. So K. S omits.

1203 deme. So O. S, K: dreme.

1205 sall. S: altered from fall.

1209 Jacob. So O. S, K: Isac. The error is certainly scribal, as Isaac is dead; Joseph’s father is Jacob. Compare Genesis 37:11.

1213 Marginalia in S (at top of fol. 12r): Genesis.

1214 more. S: inserted above the line.

1228 wyld. So K. S: wyldes.

1230 thei. S: inserted above the line.

1236 Egype. S: inserted above canceled ferr.

1250 namys call. S: mamys call, corrected to namys call. K emends to namys thei call.

1253 And. S: d inserted above the line.

1255 all scathe. So K. S omits.

1264 com fatt. So S. K emends to fatt com.
folde. So S. K emends to flode.

1268 stud. S: inserted above the line.

1269 the clerkes. So K. S omits.

1273 Marginalia in S (at top of fol. 12v): Genesis.

1274 bend. So K. S: lend.

1284 hungur. So K. S: hugur.

1290 gret. So S. K: grett.

1297 ther then. So K. S omits ther.

1298 corn yf. So K. S: corn þer þen yf.

1302 ware. So S. K omits.

1310 down. So O. S, K: drownd.

1333 Marginalia in S (at top of fol. 13r): Genesis.

1338 have. S: inserted below the line.

1345 thei. S: he þei.

1368 Benjamyn. S: i inserted above the line.

1393 Marginalia in S (at top of fol. 13v): no heading.

1399 sayd. So K. S: say.

1414 sevyn. So K. S: xiiii.

1417 weld. So K. S: werld.

1421 when. So K. S: whe.

1422 ten and. So S. K emends to and X.

1430 multyplyd. So S, O. K: myltyplyd.

1432 schonged. So K. S: schonegd.