New Site Announcement: Over the past several years, the METS team has been building a new website and new digital edition, in collaboration with Cast Iron Coding. This next phase of METS' editions includes improved functionality and accessibility, an increased focus on transparency, and conformity to best practices for open access and digital editions, including TEI markup. We are currently in a "soft launch" phase in which we will monitor the new site for bugs and errors. We encourage you to visit our new site at https://metseditions.org, and we welcome feedback here: https://tinyurl.com/bdmfv282

We will continue to publish all new editions in print and online, but our new online editions will include TEI/XML markup and other features. Over the next two years, we will be working on updating our legacy volumes to conform to our new standards.

Our current site will be available for use until mid-December 2024. After that point, users will be redirected to the new site. We encourage you to update bookmarks and syllabuses over the next few months. If you have questions or concerns, please don't hesitate to contact us at robbins@ur.rochester.edu.

Fourth Book Of Kings (2 Kings)

FOURTH BOOK OF KINGS (2 KINGS): 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.

11913–16 The poet is probably thinking of Romans 15:4, though similar statements by Paul can be found in 1 Corinthians 9:9 and 2 Timothy 3:16.

12001–02 Thore in that cyté wonned a man / that Moyses Law wold never lett. In 4 Kings (2 Kings) 1:13, the third individual sent to fetch Elijah is not, as here, a loyal Jew sent alone. Rather, he is another captain, leading a third company of fifty men. The poet’s source for this change is unknown.

12006 within his sell whore he was sett. The Bible specifically describes Elijah as sitting atop a hill (4 Kings [2 Kings] 1:9), a location followed by HS 4 Reg. 1 (1387). The poet’s alteration from hilltop to a cell — a small, secluded dwelling — brings Elijah into the hagiographic tradition of hermit saints living in solitude in the wilderness.

12053–55 Enoch and Elijah, both taken up by God without dying (for the account of the former, see Genesis 5:22–24), were the source of much postbiblical commentary, especially among Christian writers who could not rationalize admittance to Heaven without acceptance of Christ as God — an impossibility for two men who lived long before the birth of Jesus of Nazareth. These writers eventually came to agreement that the two men had been transported to the Earthly Paradise where they awaited Christ’s Second Coming. As early as the time of Justin Martyr in the second century, Enoch and Elijah were thus identified as the Two Witnesses of Apocalypse, two mysterious figures who will appear at the end-times to witness for Christ in the final battle against the Antichrist. This identification grew more secure in the Middle Ages; it is accepted essentially as dogma, for instance, in the twelfth-century Glossa Ordinaria. Building out of Apocalypse 11:3–13, it was said in these traditions that during the Apocalypse Enoch and Elijah would preach against the Antichrist and convert the Jews; the Antichrist would then kill the two witnesses, who would willingly offer up their lives so that they could participate fully in the love of Christ by being resurrected into their “purified” forms. It was thought that they would, indeed, be resurrected three and a half days later, and thereafter taken into Heaven just prior to the Second Coming. Though reference to this legend is not made in HS, the stories of Enoch and Elijah were very much a part of the Middle English literary landscape, appearing in works as widespread as CM and The Pricke of Conscience to performative works like the mystery plays (see especially Chester’s “Harrowing of Hell,” “Prophecies of Antichrist,” and “Antichrist” plays).

12072 two hunderth shepe be yere. 4 Kings (2 Kings) 3:4 and HS 4 Reg. 4 (1388) both number the tribute as 200,000 sheep in total. This much smaller (and, frankly, more realistic) number also appears in OFP 98a.

12129–32 Similar comments about the identical names but separate identities of the kings of Israel and Judah at this point in the narrative occur in HS 4 Reg. 1 (1387) and OFP 98d.

12134 Godolé. See note to line 11670.

12158 my husband . . . Obedias. The husband is not named in the Bible (4 Kings [2 Kings] 4), but compare 3 Kings (1 Kings) 18:3 and stanza 927. HS 4 Reg. 5 (1389), gives the name here: “uxor scilicet Abdiæ,” an identification also found in OFP 99a: “Femme ert Obedias et sa muiller.” These identifications appear to derive ultimately from Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 9.4.2.

12174–75 my sun that is full fayr and free, / Thei say thei sall have hym forfett. In 4 Kings (2 Kings) 4:1, the widow is threatened with the taking of two children into slavery, not one. So, too, HS 4 Reg. 5 (1389).

12355 flesch. K suggests that in order to maintain the rhyme flesch should be pronounced “fless,” as if sch = s (1:cxxviii). The end-rhyme would thus be only orthographically broken, perhaps evidence that the text of this Yorkshire poem (where –sh appears as –s; see, e.g., Joas for Joash in line 13619) has passed through more southern scribal hands. Note, however, that the current text is consistent in its presentation of flesch(e) in all positions, even appearing to demand an –sh pronunciation for rhyme at lines 12046, 48 (flesch : fresch). Another explanation, therefore, might be that the palatization of s to sh is underway in the poet’s own dialect, in which case the present line may simply be an off-rhyme.

12479–80 Thus may men lyghtly lere / forto trow wemens tales. Naaman’s conclusion that his experience can serve as a pedagogical exercise for all men who might think to believe the words of women is neither biblical nor from Comestor (HS 4 Reg. 8 [1391]). It appears the Paraphrase-poet has instead added this embellishment to further underscore the positive actions of Naaman’s loyal Israelite serving-girl, whose central role in revealing God’s power to the Aramean otherwise goes largely unnoted.

12679–80 In 4 Kings (2 Kings) 6:6, the axhead is retrieved when Elisha throws a stick into the water, which miraculously causes the iron to float. So, too, HS 4 Reg. 9 (1392). Compare OFP 102a.

12761–64 Then forto loke he led his knave . . . for baners and for basnettes bryght. These lines are difficult to construe, even more difficult to get to match the biblical source. In 4 Kings (2 Kings) 6:16–17, the theme of vision in this story is underscored in the fact that the servant is pointedly unable to see Elisha’s army until the prophet prays that his eyes be opened. Only then is the army revealed: made up of horses and chariots of fire (an image hearkening back to the taking of Elijah into Heaven).

12802 thei wend all had bene feld. The appearance of feld here, echoing back to line 12734 and the plan to assassinate Elisha, serves as a further marker of divine justice: the Arameans have, both narratively and orthographically, had the tables turned on them.

12821 Sauns fayle. While it is true that this particular French expression, and a few others like it, had by the time of the composition of the Paraphrase become common in English, it is hard not to wonder if there might not be subtle political points being made in its usage. The only other appearance of the phrase in the poem is at line 8721, where it is spoken by Absolom.

12929–32 The prophett that wyll noyght for us pray . . . sall be done to dede this day / for all the tales that he has told. 4 Kings (2 Kings) 6:31 gives no explanation why the king’s wrath turns against Elisha, but Josephus comments that this is because Elisha failed to “pray to God to provide them some exit and way of escape out of the miseries with which they were surrounded” (Jewish Antiquities 9.4.3), a detail picked up by Comestor. The blameworthy tales Elisha has told (line 12932) would thus seem to be either his statements of being both in God’s favor and in favor of Israel, or, sarcastically, his lack of words before God.

13002 Arabys. The poet thus replaces the Hittites of 4 Kings (2 Kings) 7:6, who would be unfamiliar to his audience.

13035 spyre and spye. K (3:102) notes the same phrase in Gawain, line 2093.

13075 Evyn in the entryng was he slayn. Implied here, but specified in 4 Kings (2 Kings) 7:20 and HS 4 Reg. 11 (1394), is the detail that the unbeliever is trampled to death by the people as they seek out the food.

13085–86 For als He made both erth and ayre / and with His Word all wardly wyght. I have capitalized Word in accordance with the extended Christological readings of John 1:1, which would regard the “active” half of God’s speeches in Genesis as the second person of the Trinity. This would seem very much in keeping with the theological position of the Paraphrase-poet, who makes clear his own Trinitarian leanings.

13109–10 Of holy men then here wyll He / that for us profers ther prayer. While one could read this as referring to either the intercession of saints (to which we might compare the poet’s earlier praise of Mary and her “mediacy” in our salvation — lines 7–8) or the efficacy of confession (to which we might compare Samuel’s earlier comments on the necessity of maintaining a priesthood — lines 5513–14), the poet seems to intend both. In the following lines he deems it “gud wysdome” (line 13111) to send prayers to God via the saints, and that we should, here on earth, listen to those we know are wise (which has all the ring of a plug for the priesthood). These positions, it must be noted, would stand very much against those of Wycliffe and the Lollards.

13131–40 In both the Bible and HS, the story of the siege of Samaria is followed by the story of the Shunammite woman whose lands are restored to her by Elisha’s actions (which is a continuation of 4 Kings [2 Kings] 4:8–37). This story includes Gehazi and ignores his curse of leprosy (and his implied exile), which earlier occur in 5:27. It may be the case, then, that the Paraphrase-poet recognized the story as potentially out of chronology and omitted it. For certain, his omission of the story allows him to dwell on the aftermath of the siege by tying Ben-hadad’s illness to his defeat, a connection not made in the Bible but appearing in Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 9.4.6, whence it appears in HS 4 Reg. 12 (1394).

13163–64 Els may thou mater gyf / to do hym more dysese. This original line is a clever one: on the surface it reads simple enough, stating that to tell the king the truth — that he will soon die — would cause him more discomfort than a lie. In light of Hazael’s subsequent regicidal actions, however, it also carries the weight of foreshadowing on the part of the prophet: to do other than talking to the king would be causing him more discomfort. See explanatory note to lines 13193–94.

13193–94 yll lechyng for hym he layd / so that his lyf last not lang. Ill-doctoring, indeed: 4 Kings (2 Kings) 8:15 tells how Hazael, having relieved the king’s anxieties by assuring him of a full recovery, spread a wet cloth over the king’s face and smothered him. Thus, as reported in line 13202, Hazael makes himself king of Syria.

13209 Godolé. See note to line 11670.

13227–29 Sant Elysew . . . Ely. Both the Bible (2 Chronicles 21:12) and Josephus (Jewish Antiquities 9.5.2) agree in identifying the prophet-writer of the rebuke as Elijah, and are silent regarding Elisha’s possible involvement. This would be difficult to correlate with biblical timelines, which record Elijah’s ascension as occurring about four years earlier. Comestor, apparently aware of this chronological issue, alters his text to term Elisha the writer and is silent about Elijah’s possible involvement (HS 4 Reg. 13 [1395]). The Paraphrase takes an intriguing middle ground that remains true to the Bible while maintaining the chronology: the letter is a prophecy of Elijah, written before his ascension and delivered, years later, by Elisha (see OFP 105c).

13263 With Ethyopes and Arabyse. HS 4 Reg. 13 (1395) says nothing of Ethiopians, while 2 Chronicles 21:16 identifies the advancing Arabs as being those who live near the Ethiopians. The Paraphrase-poet follows OFP 105c, however, in identifying them equally as attackers.

13266 the eldest, Occozias. 2 Chronicles 21:17 and 22:1 call Ahaziah his youngest son. HS 4 Reg. 13 (1395) and OFP 105d do not mention his age. The poet, it seems, has let an expectation of primogeniture dictate his reading of the text.

13278 Kyng Benedab. Both copies of the Paraphrase (and its other editors) agree on the reading here, which follows OFP 105d in identifying the besieged king as Ben-hadad. This is surely a mistake, however. The poet told the story of Ben-hadad’s death less than a hundred lines earlier, along with the information that Hazael succeeded him (lines 13129–13200). Likewise, the primary authoritative sources (see, e.g., 4 Kings [2 Kings] 9:14 and 2 Chronicles 22:5), identify the besieged king as Hazael.

13380 Godolé. See note to line 11670.

13427 Sant Elysew. Both copies of the Paraphrase (and its other editors) read thus, which appears to be a mistake original to the poet. The prophecy was made by Elijah, as rightly referenced in 4 Kings (2 Kings) 9:36 and in both HS 4 Reg. 14 (1396) and OFP 106c.

13442 sexty chylder. 4 Kings (2 Kings) 10:1 gives the number of sons as seventy, as does HS 4 Reg. 15 (1396). The Paraphrase-poet here follows something like OFP 107a.

13532 Byschop Joiada. Jehoiada cannot, of course, be a bishop (a Christian title) in the context of his Jewish milieu. The decision to term him thus, rather than the more historical “priest,” is a means for the poet to help his readers relate to the Old Testament.

13533 his wyf. That the woman who helps Jehoiada to hide the child is the priest’s wife is a detail not from 4 Kings (2 Kings) but from 2 Chronicles 22:11, where she is also named Jehoshabeath.

13677–78 yeres aght and fawrty / regned he. According to 2 Chronicles 24:1, Joash reigned for forty years, coming to the throne at age seven (so, too, Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 9.8.4, and HS 4 Reg. 16 [1398]).

13681 Long aftur this so yt befell. The poet skips the reign of Jehoahaz of Israel, son of Jehu, to go to his son named, Joash.

13758 thryty thowssand. 4 Kings (2 Kings) gives no number to the size of Amaziah’s army, while 2 Chronicles 25:5 gives the count as 300,000 (so, too, Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 9.9.1). The number here appears to come from OFP 109d.

13767 A thowsand men. Judah’s hiring of a mercenary army from Israel is noted in 2 Chronicles 25:26, where the number of men given is 100,000, which is followed by HS 4 Reg. 19 (1399) and Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 9.9.1. The source for the Paraphrase-poet’s number is not known.

13782 Moabyse. 4 Kings (2 Kings) 14:7 and 2 Chronicles 25:14 refer to his target as Edom and the Edomites. So, too, HS 4 Reg. 19 (1400) and OFP 109d. The poet’s source is unknown.

13824 Ozi. 4 Kings (2 Kings) 15 names him Azarias, but 2 Chronicles 26 calls him Ozias (Uzziah). I have followed the latter not only for its closeness to the Middle English, but also for its clearer differentiation from other characters of the same name.

13825–14004 This digression into the story of Jonas (based on the book of Jonas) is interpolated into the account at 4 Kings (2 Kings) 14:25. Comestor did not include Jonas in HS, so the poet is perhaps following something like OFP (see Bonnard, Les Traductions de la Bible, p. 102, and Baker, Die versifizierte Übersetzung, p. 38) as both a source of the story and its interpolation here. Jonas’ story is also famously told in Middle English in the poem Patience.

13862 Cecile. Jonas 1:3 gives their destination as Tarshish. The Paraphrase-poet has apparently copied over the error from OFP 110c, which reads “cesile.” K (3:125) explains the discrepancy: “Tarshish, traditionally located in Spain, here probably identified with Tarsus, Lat. T(h)arsus or T(h)arsi, capital of Cilicia. This name was easily confused with Sicily.” Compare, too, Baker, Die versifizierte Übersetzung, p. 38.

13921 Your Savyour thus has me send. This slip into a Trinitarian reading of God is, as far as I can tell, original to the Paraphrase. It is striking not only for the paucity of Christ references in the poem but also for the clever way it sets up the parallel between Jonas’ experience and Christ’s (see note to lines 13965–68).

13927–28 To Hell your cyté sall dyscend, / als other fyfe hath done before. The parallel being made, apparently original to the poet, is to the destruction by God of Sodom and Gomorrah and the other cities of the Pentapolis (see note to lines 433– 35, above).

13965–68 As the prophet Jonas / was thre days in the se, / So Cryst in erthe here was / bered be days thre. This parallel between Jonas’ three days in the whale and Christ’s three-day burial has its basis in Matthew 12:40 and does not appear in OFP. It does, however, have a long tradition in exegesis; see, for example, its appearance in the Biblia Pauperum (plate .g.). Interestingly, L does not include the parallel, reading instead: “Thus this prophet Ionas / was come vnto Ninive. / And thurgh it gun he pas / prechand be days thre.”

14012 Ozi. See note to line 13824.

14077–88 The Paraphrase-poet completes the books of Kings with a stanza informing his audience that Uzziah’s pride and punishment ought to be a warning against those who would question the Church and try to take on those tasks meant for its ordained churchmen. One would be hard-pressed not to see in this a rebuke of reformative movements like those associated with Lollardy.

14088b EXPLICIT LIBRI REGUM. Not hardly. The poet has paraphrased up to 4 Kings (2 Kings) 15:7, leaving him some ten chapters shy of completing the fourth and final book. Surprisingly, there is no indication that this material, which includes such important and fascinating stories as the Assyrian conquest of Israel, the story of Sennacherib and Hezekiah, the reformations of Josiah, and the conquest of Judah by the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar, is missing. The majority of this material is found in HS, so one wonders at its absence here. Of perhaps no coincidence, OFP similarly breaks off from its own narrative near to this point, ending incomplete (in midcouplet) in the midst of the story of Ahaz, king of Judah (4 Kings 16). It may be that the Paraphrase-poet, knowing that OFP was soon to end and seeing nothing of concern in the few French lines remaining (which summarily relate a sequence of inconsequential kings in Israel and Judah), decided to wrap up his own narrative in a seemingly more “complete” fashion by turning to a final exemplum.