A Dutch Translation of The Life of Adam and Eve 1. THE LIFE OF ADAM AND EVE

Ons Geestelijk Erf 80(4), 313-373. doi: 10.2143/OGE.80.4.2047112© Ons Geestelijk Erf. All rights reserved.

1 Edition TROMP 2005 (superceding BERTRAND 1987), and see STONE 1992, DE JONGE & TROMP 1997, MERK & MEISER 1998, HAELEWYCK 1998 (article ‘Adam’ pp. 1-29), DENIS & HAELEWYCK 2000, ANDERSON, STONE, & TROMP, eds. 2000. ANDERSON & STONE 1999 is a synoptic printing of the Greek, Latin, Armenian, Georgian, and Slavonic texts in the original languages and in English translation. TROMP 2005 contains the latest research on the textual filiations of the differ-ent versions. J.-CL. HAELEWYCK, MARTINUS DE JONGE and JOHANNES TROMP are three of the four editors of the Brill series Studia in Veteris Testamenti Pseudepigrapha.2 English texts of both versions in a synoptic arrangement are presented by JOHNSON 1985.

BOB MILLER

A Dutch Translation of The Life of Adam and Eve

1. THE LIFE OF ADAM AND EVE

1st Introduction. The background of the text known as the Life of Adam and Eve is briefly introduced. The Dutch text of the Life published here is situated within the text classes of the Latin source text. It is argued that the source was also interpolated from another redaction which is extant only in Georgian, Armenian, and in two recently discovered Latin manuscripts. Some of the readings of the Dutch suggest that the Latin source used drew on a source of this text class superior to either of the extant Latin manuscripts. The text includes the motif of the Legend of the Wood of the Cross Before Christ in a version distinct from that found in other texts of the Life.

The Life of Adam and Eve, its history and versions

The document published here is a combination of a mediaeval treatise with one of the texts generally described as biblical pseudepigrapha and apocrypha, texts which were not accepted as scripture by Jews or Christians although written in a similar form to those which were so accepted. The Life of Adam and Eve is such a text, which is generally thought to have been written in the first or possibly the second Christian century. It is extant in Greek, Armenian, Georgian, Church Slavonic, and Latin forms, and there are some fragments of Coptic and Arabic versions. At the beginning of modern times Western schol-ars knew only two quite distinct versions, one in Greek and one in Latin, which obviously used the same framework but which contained quite distinct reports of events.2 It was initially conjectured that both of these texts were selections from an older, more inclusive Jewish book about Adam. In recent decades a work has been discovered which combines the material of both shorter versions. However, it has not been universally accepted that this longer text is more original that the shorter ones. Many scholars consider that the short Greek text, which is also extant in Armenian and Slavonic, was com-posed first, and that the longer version was later built up by the addition of

93154_OGE_4_02_Miller.indd 31393154_OGE_4_02_Miller.indd 313 14-04-2010 10:55:1414-04-2010 10:55:14

314 BOB MILLER

3 Advocating this approach, e.g. DE JONGE & TROMP 1997, DENIS & HAELEWYCK 2000, TROMP 2002, DE JONGE 2003 pp. 181-200; TROMP 2005 pp. 3-16, 96-103, against ELDRIDGE 2001 pp 233-264, KNITTEL 2002 pp. 53-68, PETTORELLI 2003, citing KAESTLI 2003 note 14. While TROMP (2005) has proven that the Long Life as we have it is based on the expansion of one particular late text class of the short version, PETTORELLI (2003) has shown that the short version in the oldest form contains remnants of motifs only found in extenso in the long version. Taken together this implies that the short version is a condensed version of a no-longer-extant long version, and that the surviving long version is the result of a later re-insertion of parts of the previously deleted material into the framework of the text as it had developed in liturgical use. PETTORELLI’s argu-ment is important for the dating of the Life, but does not prove that all of the episodes of the extant Long Life were present in the posited older long text (although he believes that the account of the Fall of Lucifer was part of the oldest text form). Conversely, the other authors mentioned do not dispute that the distinctive material of the Long Life may be as old and as important as that found in the short Greek Life. The argument of STONE (1992), that the presence of Jewish material cannot create a presumption of Jewish origin against Christian origin, unless this material “can only exist in Jewish writings” (p. 58) has been broadly accepted. However, ANDERSON (1992) presents material suggesting that the most basic layer of the Life proposes that males (only) can achieve divine forgiveness by acts of penitence and sacrifice, without a context of universal salvation, which after 100 AD could only be a polemical Jewish response to Christianity or Gnos-ticism or both (and after 300 AD would become impossible).4 See MOZLEY 1928, PETTORELLI 1998, 2000a, 2000b (text editions), MEYER 1878 (essay, edition now obsolete). On the vernacular versions see the new overview by MURDOCH (2009).5 GW 205-209, dated 1473-1493, see KATONA 1904 (text), THOMPSON 1933 (discussion on sources).6 Edited by PETTORELLI 1998 & 1999b, and see discussion PETTORELLI 2002b, TROMP 2002.7 Edited by MOZLEY 1928. Another indication was the existence of the Irish Saltair na Rann, a late-tenth-century work which draws on the Long Latin Life of Adam and Eve, see GREENE & KELLY (1976) pp. 7-8 and MURDOCH (1976) pp. 32-37.8 See OGILVY 1967, reviewed GNEUSS 1971, and GNEUSS 2001, 2003.

further episodes.3 It is agreed that this longer text was originally composed in Greek, probably in Egypt, although only Georgian, Armenian and Latin ver-sions survive complete.

In contrast with this unresolved situation, it is now accepted that the short Latin version is a secondary work edited out from the longer version. This is the text which is generally known as the Vita Adae et Evae.4 It is this shorter Latin work which was ubiquitous throughout the Latin Middle Ages from Caro-lingian times to the 15th century, when the text was printed as a chapbook by German printers working in Rome.5 However, it has recently been discovered that two manuscripts of the longer Latin version have survived,6 and there is evidence that there must have been more in existence in the Middle Ages. This is because a number of manuscripts of the shorter version have been corrected or supplemented from the longer version, but from better manuscripts than those yet discovered. It used to be thought that this process had taken place in England, because there is a cluster of insular Latin manuscripts which contain the greatest concentration of such additions.7 By contrast, continental manu-scripts containing lesser numbers of additions were once thought to be derived from manuscripts in which wandering English or Irish monks had copied excerpts of their own texts as marginal annotations, subsequently taken into the text. This assumption is inconsistent with the absence of attested knowledge of the Vita Adae et Evae in Anglo-Saxon England8, and is now rendered unneces-


THE LIFE OF ADAM AND EVE 315

9 They are all of the 13th-15th century, see PETTORELLI 1999a pp. 252-258.10 To be published in the Brepols series Corpus christianorum, Series apocryphorum. Pettorelli is an association of AELAC, the editorial organisation of this series.

sary by the discovery of continental Latin manuscripts of the longer version. While the additional matter in the insular manuscripts is indeed more copious, these manuscripts cannot be dated before the Norman Conquest, and may derive from a manuscript brought to England from a Norman library such as that of Le Bec, which was closely linked with Canterbury after the Conquest.9 The additional material in continental manuscripts may have no direct connec-tion with that found in insular ones, and may derive from exemplars in Carol-ingian libraries.

Common to all versions of the work are the expulsion of the protoplasts from paradise, their search for food, the birth of Cain and Abel, the murder of Abel, the plan of the protoplasts to earn foregiveness by a penitence, the final sickness of Adam, the journey of Eve and Seth to paradise to plead for Adam, and the death and burial of Adam. Peculiar to the short Latin Life are an extensive vision granted to Adam, and the story of the two tablets on which the Life itself is to be inscribed, one on stone and one on clay, in order to withstand destruction by either floood or fire. The long versions contain two other long episodes, one recounting the fall and the resulting curses in a version based on the motif that Lucifer had fallen on the first day of creation due to his overweening pride, leading to his temptation of Eve through the mouth of the serpent, the other a retrospective account of the fall of Lucifer explained by his refusal to worship the image of God in man in the form of Adam’s not-yet ensouled body, incorporated in a story of Lucifer’s sabotage of the penitence of Eve. The two accounts of the fall of Lucifer are inconsist-ent, but the longer text at one time enjoyed wide circulation and multiple translation despite this. Whether the short or the long Greek version is taken as primary, the shorter Latin form containing only the refusal motif is cer-tainly a secondary development. It is therefore significant that the Tilburg Dutch compilation, uniting the short Latin Life with a treatise containing a version of the fall using the pride motif, in effect reconstitutes the fuller content of the Long Life, although with a different sub-motif in the tempta-tion, the impersonation of the serpent replacing the version in which Lucifer enters into the serpent.

The Dutch text published here contains some passages which show that it was translated from a Latin text containing interpolations from the longer version which are superior to those found in the insular manuscripts and in both the extant Latin manuscripts of the longer version. It is therefore further evidence of the existence of better Carolingian Latin manuscripts than those now extant.

These manuscript discoveries have occurred during work on a critical edition of the text of the Vita Adae et Evae (henceforth VAE) by J.-P. PET-TORELLI.10 He has developed a new classification of the manuscripts of the


316 BOB MILLER

11 MEYER 1878, variant texts from other manuscripts by HORSTMANN 1887, MOZLEY 1928, EIS 1935, and from incunables by KATONA 1904. CARL HORSTMANN investigated the Latin sources of the Middle English legends which he edited such as the Vernon Manuscript and the South English Legendary. J.H. MOZLEY was a Latinist and mediaevalist who translated Ovid and Statius and the Oxford Book of Mediaeval Latin Verse.12 PETTORELLI 1999a pp. 245-247.

VAE which will replace that proposed by the Munich scholar and University Librarian WILHELM MEYER in 1878, and which has been used ever since with various ad hoc additions.11 The new system does not begin from a genetic analysis but is classed in order of the earliest dated manuscript of each text class:

PETTORELLI 1999a MEYER 1878 and later additions

1. South German Redactions (Austrian-Bavarian)G1, G2, G3 (edited PETTORELLI 1998)

Includes the stylistically rewritten homilies ‘Meyer I’ and ‘Eis’.

2. Rhenish Redactions (Carolingian)R1, R2, R3 (edited PETTORELLI 2001-2002a)

Includes most of ‘Meyer II’ and the unique classically rewritten text ‘Meyer IV’

3. Bohemian Redaction The readings of one MS of this class were included by MEYER in ‘Meyer II’

4. British Redaction ‘Mozley’, a text found in most insular man-uscripts, published by MOZLEY 1928, previ-ously regarded as a sub-class of ‘Meyer II’

Long Latin Life of Adam and Eve These two recently identified manuscripts are not of the Vita Adae et Evae at all, but of the older Long Life of Adam and Eve.

5. Two Late Redactions F1 and F2 (both probably disseminated from Bohemia). Both contain the ‘Legend of the Wood of the Cross’ in a version in which Seth receives a branch of the Tree of Know-ledge with leaves of three kinds.

‘Meyer III’. PETTORELLI does not use the incunable evidence but his group F1 includes the Huntingdon MS which belongs to the ‘incunable-source’ group ‘Thompson’, the text class used by early printers.

The Dutch translation of the Life of Adam and Eve (Vita Adae et Evae)

PETTORELLI lists nineteen characteristics which are unique to the ‘Bohemian’ redaction.12 Examination of the Tilburg text reveals that in six of these cases Tilburg agrees with the ‘Bohemian’ variant against all other redactions (§4, §6, §9, §23, §24, §28), and in one further there is a lack of a single word which is the variant in question, which does not make sense and is thus a more likely candidate for deletion than the non-‘Bohemian’ forms (§35). In one case the Tilburg text agrees with the ‘British’ class against all other



redactions (§8), and in four further cases it agrees with all other classes including ‘British’ against the ‘Bohemian’ (§11, §31, §47, §51a). In six cases the phrase concerned is lacking, or, where the variant is itself an omission, this is lost in a larger omission (§1, §18, §21, §29, §29d, §51d). In one other case the translation is too vague to assign to either redaction (§30). The Dutch text includes the sections 26.1-27.1, which are lacking in all witnesses of the ‘Bohemian’ redaction and also in those of its precursor redaction R2. The Tilburg manuscript thus appears to draw on a mixed or a transitional redac-tion between the ‘Rhenish’ and ‘Bohemian’, which shares the specific textual variants of the ‘Bohemian’ but which retains some of the text of the ‘Rhen-ish’ redaction which has been lost in most other witnesses. Cutting across this characterisation of the base text is the intrusion of interpolations from a source similar to that of the interpolations in the ‘British’ class, which how-ever must be ascribed the influence of a manuscript of the Long Life, superior to the Milan and Paris manuscripts. One important reading (see §8/9) agrees with the ‘British’ class, but with a variant which is not in the material pub-lished by MOZLEY.

The Latin parallel text offered below is therefore based on the only hitherto published form of the ‘Bohemian’ redaction, MS Q, Oxford Queen’s College 218, in the transcription of HORSTMANN 1887. Where it is necessary and appropriate text of the ‘Rhenish’ redaction is used to fill the gaps in Q. Where this is inadequate the variants of the ‘British’ class are given from MOZLEY 1928 together with relevant variants of the Milan, Paris, Armenian and Geor-gian texts.

Diagram of the Versions of the Life of Adam and Eve assuming that the shortGreek Life is primary


318 BOB MILLER

13 See MEYER 1882 and SUCHIER 1883. PPA was the major source of Dat Boec van den houte, and of Veldener’s Geschiedenis (1483, reproduced BERJEAU 1863). HERMODSSON 1959 pp. 18-29 showed that both works are based on a lost Dutch prose translation of a Latin source which already combined PPA with other versions of the legend. The extant Dutch prose text is a second-ary reworking of the verse work (edition TIDEMAN 1844 pp. 46-58). The PPA version of the legend is also briefly recounted in the Livre de Sydrac, question 18, for Dutch Sidrac versions see VAN TOL 1934. For overviews of the French and German versions of PPA see PRANGSMA-HAJENIUS 1995 and MILLER 2003.14 See CRAMER 1908a and 1908b and GANSER 1985 for the Dutch versions. This motif in the Travels is probably dependent on PPA, but unlike the Livre de Sidrac there is not enough context to prove this.

The Legend of the Wood of the Cross in the Tilburg Life

The text of the Vita Adae et Evae used here contains an interpolation from the Legend of the Wood of the Cross Before Christ. This interpolation is unique and distinct from that found in PETTORELLI’s text class Vita Adae et Evae F1 & F2 (MEYER’s text class Vita Adae et Evae III), in which Seth is given a branch with shoots bearing leaves of three different species which he should plant on his father’s grave. In the Dutch narrative of Seth’s journey to Paradise to request the Oil of Mercy for his father Adam, we find the phrase: Ende hi gaf hem drie greynen die hi leggen soude onder syns vaders tonge daer af soude (wassen) den boem des leuens (f. 332v). There are two versions of the Legend which contain the idea that the tree of the cross grows from three seeds which are placed directly in Adam’s mouth, that of the Latin legend Post Peccatum Adae (PPA)13 and that transmitted in the Travels of John Mandeville.14 Both of these were translated into Dutch, but the versions known to me do not make

Diagram of the Latin versions of the Life of Adam and Eve



explicit the identity of the cross with the Tree of Life made here. If found in isolation it would be reasonable to assume that the wording of this interpolation could have been drawn from memory, but it is significant that the treatise pre-ceding the Vita Adae et Evae also makes an unusual identification of the For-bidden Tree with the Tree of Life: Mer God gaf Adam ende Eua een cleyn ghebodt als sy niet en smaccten en solde noch eten vanden vrucht des leuens die in’t myddel des paradijs staet (f. 309v, see footnote).

It transpires that the three seeds are not placed in Adam’s mouth by Seth at the time of his burial, as supposed by both PPA and Mandeville, but are put into his mouth directly after his death by Eve: Eua was in grote rouwe ende weeneden jamerlic sy lach opter eerden ende had Adam handen op hoer hoeft ende haer kynderen weenden alte bitterlic om den heer haeren vader. Eua nam die drie greyne ende leede se Adam inden mont. (f. 333v). This has the advantage that neither Eve nor Seth intervene in the burial of Adam by the Archangels Michael and Gabriel, which is explicitly stated to be a demonstration to humankind of how they should bury their dead in future. It is therefore probably a rationalising correction to adapt the motif to the context of the Vita Adae et Evae.

1st Conclusion The Tilburg Dutch text is a translation of the Latin Vita Adae et Evae from a source intermediate between the Rhenish and Bohemian text classes. It also contains some cross-contamination from a source close to the longer Latin version of the Life of Adam and Eve, from a stage of the transmission superior to that evidenced by the extant Latin texts of this redaction, or the interpolations in the British class of Latin Vita manuscripts. This is evidence that manuscripts superior to those found up to now once circulated in the Carolingian heartlands. It also contains a version of the Legend of the Wood of the Cross Before Christ which is not that normally found in the Late Redactions F1 and F2, and which is derived from the legend known as Post pec-catum Adae either directly or through the Travels of John Mandeville.

2. THE DUTCH COMPILATION IN ITS CONTEMPORARY CONTEXT

2nd Introduction Contemporary interest in these matters is evidenced from other traces of knowledge of the Life, although no other complete Dutch translation is known. The Life is transmitted in combination with a treatise on the fall of Lucifer and of Adam and Eve which contains different versions of the events. The treatise is analysed and is found to contain indications of Franciscan doctrines. The treatment of some similar topics by Jan Brugmann OP is reviewed, drawing on records of sermons thought to have been delivered to nuns such as may have produced and used the manuscript of the present work. It is suggested that the two texts may have been brought together as part of the meditation exercises of the Devotio moderna.

Echoes of the VAE in the Noordnederlandse Historiebijbel

The Tilburg text is the only complete extant version of the Vita Adae et Evae in Dutch. Evidence of other knowledge of the text in the mediaeval Netherlands


320 BOB MILLER

15 VAE 10, ‘Bohemian’: et caro eius virida erat quasi herba, per frigore, ‘Rhenish’: et caro eius erat sicut herba de frigore aquae, ‘British’: et caro eius uiridis erat de frigoribus aque. Milan MS: et erat caro eius sicut erba de frigore aque, Paris MS: et caro eius uiridis erat sicut herba a frig-ore aqua, Georgian: and her flesh was withered like rotten vegetables because of the coldness of the water, Armenian Penitence: her flesh was like withered grass, for her flesh had been changed

can be found in two passages of the Noordnederlandse Historiebijbel. The first of these passages appears to be a verbal reminiscence of material from the Vita Adae et Evae mixed with extraneous motifs (Cf. f. 335r-v).

Int Dal van Josaphat daer lach een cluut aerde. Daer blies God op ende seide “Adam, staet op”. Ende rechtevoert was hi een levende, volmaect mensche in die gedaent van 33 jaren. Doe nam hem God ende sette hem int aertsche parad-ijs. Dat had God vercyert mit wonderlice cyerheit van bomen ende van cruden. Doe sende God in hem een vake. Doe sliep Adam. Doe toech God sinen geest in den hemel. Daer sach hi in den spiegel der Drievoudicheit dingen die gesciet sijn, als van der dyluvyen ende ander wonderlicheit die gesciet sijn. Oec sach hi dingen die noch gescien sullen, als van Entekerst ende vanden Doemsdach. Ende dat bescreef Adam daerna al in tweerhande stenen. Omdat hi die vloeden der wateren voirsien hadde, so screef hi die wonderlicheit die hi ghescien hadde, in merberstenen: die en vergaen niet van den water. Ende omdat hi die brant des vuers gesien hadde, so screef hijt in backenstenen: die en vergaen niet van den vuer. (VAN DEN BERG 1998 p. 226, partially also DE BRUIN 1937 p. 72)

The source of this revelation passage is VAE section 29, a revelation to Adam, a passage which is absent from the Tilburg Dutch text and probably was lacking in its Latin exemplar. The two tablets made by Seth, one of clay and one of stone, to withstand either flood or fire, drawn from VAE 52, are here ascribed to Adam himself, a rationalising compression, since Seth uses the tablets to transmit what Adam revealed to him. The motif of the tablets is in the Tilburg text in a differ-ent version. The second passage is more substantial. It would appear to be evi-dence of a full Dutch translation of at least part of Vita Adae et Evae, (VAE 4-7, 9.-11) but it also shows signs that, prior to being included in the Noordneder-landse Historiebijbel, the material had been adapted for a sermon on the topic of the relationship of husband and wife, perhaps as an allegory of reason and passion as is found in the Dutch treatise edited here (Cf. f. 316r-v):

Doe Adam uten paradise verdreven was, doe hoepte hi op die ontfermherticheit Gods, want hi hadde gesien in den spiegel der Drievoudicheit, dat hem genade soude gescien. Doe seide hi tot Eva, “Laet ons penitencie doen ende bidden an God, opdat wi genade mogen vercrigen.” Doe settede Adam Eva op een steen in dat water ter knyen toe ende hi beval daer te bliven, ter tijt toe dat si ontfermher-ticheit vercreghe. Ende hi ghinc op een ander stede staen in penitencien ende bat om genade. Doe Adam ende Eva aldus geweest hadden in penitencien 40 dagen lanc ende doe dat die duvel sach, doe gruwelde hem, dat hem God genade soude ende ghinc tot Eva in een ghedaent van enen engel mit enen claren aensicht ende seide tot haer, dat God haer penitence angesien hadde ende dat God al haer sonden vergeven hadde. Eva geloefde den duvel ende ghinc uut den water daer si in geweest hadde so lange, dat haer lichaem al groen geworden was15 ende seide:



from the water. The simile itself is probably derived from ancient Greek, cf. Sappho 31 13-16, cited by WEST 1971 p. 527 as “her most famous fragment”: The sweat pours down me, a trembling / seizes my whole body, I am greener / than grass: I seem to myself little short of dead.

“waer sel ic nu vinden Adam, mine man?” Doe seide die duvel: “Coemt, ic sellen u wisen.” Ende he leedse tot Adam. Doe Adam Eva sach, daer hi in peni-tencien was, doe seide hi: “Och Eva, Eva, noch eens bedrogen van den duvel”. Die ghinc Adam tot haer ende bleef bi haer, want hi kende: sceide hi van haer, die duvel soudse mit allen bedriegen. Daerom sal een man bliven bi sinen wive ende dat wijf bi haren man, opdat die / man van geen ander wiven bedrogen en wort, noch dat wijf oec niet bedrogen en wort van anderen mannen. (VAN DEN BERG 1998 pp. 230-231)

There is other material in the Noordnederlandse Historiebijbel which is cog-nate to that used in the Tilburg treatise, not within the Vita Adae et Evae, but which perhaps indicates that the same circles were interested in the Vita Adae et Evae and the components used in the treatise. This is a passage concerning the Fall of Lucifer which uses the concept of the ‘mirror of the Trinity’ which is used in the Tilburg treatise (Cf. f. 305v-306r):

Doe God alle die engelen gescepen hadde, elc in sijn choer, doe sach Lucifer in den spiegel der Drievoudicheit, dat God verenigen soude mit sijn creatuer. Ende hem docht dat geen engel soe scoen en was als hi was. Doe meende hi dat hi diegene wesen soude daer God mede verenigen soude. Ende hi docht: hi woude sijn stoel setten int norden ende wesen gelijc den Oversten. Ende rechtevoert warp hem Got uten hemel mit dat tiendeel van alle den engelen die God gescapen hadde. Die somme vielen doer die aerde in die helle; die somme bleven opter aerden; die somme vielen in den water ende die somme bleven in der luchten, also als God dat ordineerde. Doe Lucyfer utem hemel geworpen was mit voel engelen, doe gruwelde hem dat God vereinigen soude mitten mens die Hi ges-cepen hadde ende dat die mens besitten soude die vroechde, daer hi uut gewor-pen was. (VAN DEN BERG 1998 p. 227)

This passage contains the full ‘tenth choir’ motif, the ‘pride’ motivation and the ‘instantaneous fall’, but also a highly unusual suggestion that Lucifer desired that God should become a God-angel rather than a God-man. Knowl-edge of the vision granted to Adam may have also played a role in inspiring the treatment of the similar visions granted to Lucifer in the Tilburg Dutch treatise. The ‘mirror of the trinity’ seems to be an intrusion of a motif from contemporary theological or mystical speculation into the material, drawn from a variety of sources, concerning both Adam and Lucifer.

The Tilburg treatise on the Creation and Fall of Lucifer and of Adam and

Eve

The text of Vita Adae et Evae is introduced as a ‘capittel’ of the foregoing work, but the final sentence of Vita Adae et Evae is not followed by any explicit


322 BOB MILLER

16 See footnotes to VAE 37 below.17 Among modern sources which analyse mediaeval ideas on the Creation and Fall of Lucifer, and of Adam and Eve are (1) BABILAS, Untersuchungen zu den Sermoni subalpini, (1968), a wide-ranging examination of the Patristic and mediaeval sources of a 12th-century set of sermons which contain many motifs from older layers of belief about these topics. (2) MURDOCH, The Fall of Man in the Middle High German Epic (1972), an examination of the Patristic background of the accounts of the Fall in early mediaeval poetry, which has been especially useful in bringing out the implica-tions of the contrasts between the Dutch version and the standard accounts. (3) ERFFA, Ikonologie der Genesis (1989), a catalogue raisonée of the textual sources of mediaeval iconography of Gen-esis 1-11. Of particular relevance are ‘Der Christlogos als Schöpfer’ pp. 45-47, ‘Erschaffung der Engel/ Engelchöre/Engelstürz’, pp. 61-70, ‘Erschaffung Adams’, pp. 76-87, ‘Bäume/Kreuzleg-ende’, pp. 105-128, ‘Zuführung/Hochzeit Adams und Evas’, pp. 158-160, ‘Der Fall des Menschen’, pp. 162-148, ‘Adambücher’, pp. 249-314. (4) the modern Franciscan-Scotist Summa of P. FRASSEN, the Scotus Academicus in six volumes (2nd ed. 1901). This work cites the classic proof texts on the questions of the creation of the angels and man and the nature of the Imago Dei, and does so from a position similar to that of the putative Franciscan author of the Tilburg treatise.

of the larger work, and ends with a simple Amen. The Vita Adae et Evae might appear to have been added at the end of an independent treatise. However, it does not seem that the two texts have been brought together merely because of a general similarity in topics, both concerning the nature of Lucifer, his Fall, the Creation of Adam and Eve, the Temptation, Fall and Expulsion. The treatise does cover this ground, but in comparison with most equivalent works, it is distinguished by a significant emphasis on material otherwise exclusive to the cycle of texts related to the Vita Adae et Evae: the penitence of the protoplasts, God’s desire to comfort them, and the explicit communication of a promise of eventual redemption. This material can be found to be integrated into a the-matic presentation of prominent and interrelated Franciscan theological topics, using such concepts as the Trinitarian structure of the human soul as the Imago Dei, the Four Daughters as aspects of the human and divine personality, the role of reason and the need for persistent turning away from good to sin before the fall, and the immaculate nature of Mary. Despite the use of the replenish-ment theory and the Man of Sorrows, it is also implied that God would have become incarnate even without the fall of Adam. There has also been some attempt to integrate the two texts, as chapter 37 of the Vita has been altered to harmonise with the account of the Fall found in the treatise.16

The unusual or contentious features of the treatise are:17

f. 305v The angels were created before all other creatures (Ambrose, Hex. I.5.19, cf. FRASSEN 1901 IV p. 17).f. 305v Lucifer is granted the ‘Beatific Vision’, in the form of a vision of Christ with the five wounds sitting at the right hand of God the Father, and of the Holy Spirit. A crucial word is lacking but it is suggested here that the vision is given in the divine mirror. In the Noordnederlandse Historiebijbel this vision is granted with no motivation and appears to cause Lucifer’s van-ity. Here it follows his becoming vain and appears to be intended as a rem-edy. This may reflect the Scotist view that sin is never instantaneous, but



must arise from a continued series of acts of will (cf. FRASSEN 1901 IV pp. 249-252).f. 305v-6r Lucifer is further given a vision of all the patriarchs and prophets, apostles, martyrs, confessors and virgins.f. 306v Lucifer is described as harbouring the desire to become equal to the Trinity rather than to Godfather alone as generally supposed (reinforcing the impression that the vision is given in the mirror of the Trinity).f. 306v There is a conflict between Lucifer and his angelic choir and Michael and the good angels, which Lucifer would have won if God had not inter-vened (it is not explained how) on Michael’s side. (Rev. 12.7-8 see next note).f. 307r The angels who fell with Lucifer were a third part of the stars, but are nowhere explicitly described as a tenth choir, nor are the conventional nine choirs ever mentioned. Since the choirs (‘choren’) of the evil angels are however mentioned, it seems presupposed that the evil angels occupied sev-eral choirs. (Rev. 12.9 see previous note)f. 307r The number of human souls in heaven will be numerically equal to that of the unfallen angels who remained after the fall of the evil angels. (Rev. 12)f. 307v When God made man in order to fill the empty choirs, he made him of mud and slime in order that he should not become arrogant.f. 308r The soul of man was composed of gifts from the different persons of the Triune Godhead, memory from the Father, reason and wisdom from the Son, and the will of an angel from the Holy Spirit. (Augustine, De Gen. ad litt. 16, De Trin. 10.12.18; Isidore, Etymologies 7.4.1)f. 309v Immediately after God has formed Eve from Adam’s rib, God him-self married Adam and Eve to each other. (Augustine, De civitate Dei 15.16-26)f. 310r The command which God gave to Adam and Eve was not to taste or eat from the Fruit of the Tree of Life which was in the middle of the garden. This command was intended to test their obedience. (Ambrose, De Paradiso Liber Unus 5.29, SCHENKEL 1896 p. 285 or PL 14 c.29)f. 310r Lucifer does not enter into the serpent but only takes on his appear-ance. Thus the ‘serpent’ cursed is actually Lucifer. This is necessary for the anti-type Eve/Mary to make sense: Mary, the second Eve, will crush the head of Lucifer, not of any biological snake. (Avitus II 118-125, Ambrose, De Paradiso 11-12,54-55, SCHENKEL 1896 pp. 311-313).f. 310r Eve knows that God’s command threatens death, but does not know what death is. She takes an apple (now named for the first time) from the tree but does not immediately eat it. As Eve is still considering whether to eat the apple, Adam arrives and Lucifer in the serpent’s form attempts to persuade him also to eat an apple.f. 310v Eve eats from her apple standing between Adam and Lucifer (the serpent): she does not persuade Adam to eat the apple, but he is convinced when he sees her bite into the apple and not die. This is a scene often depicted


324 BOB MILLER

18 These are: f. 305r, Isidore, Angels were created before other creatures (see footnote in text to f. 305r), f. 306v, Augustine, Fall of the angels, f. 306v, Isidore, Fall of the angels, f. 307r, Augustine, Fallen angels a third part of the stars, f. 307r, Augustine, As many human souls will enter heaven as angels remain there, f. 307r, Gregory, The same, f. 312r, Chrysostom, In Mattheum, God’s unwillingness to condemn (see footnote), f. 312r, Ambrose, Adam sinned in the early morning, f. 312r, Gregory, Adam sinned in the later morning, f. 312r, Augustine, When God must condemn Mercy appears and asks for respite, f. 315r, Ambrose, God gave Adam a blessing after the fall, f. 318v, Jerome, The mutual sympathy of the protoplasts lamenting on Calvary, f. 321r, Jerome, inden boeck des rechts, that no-one else has suffered as much remorse (see footnote below).

in art but with no basis in the biblical text. (cf. Adam’s reasoning in the Rijmbijbel and the Noordnederlandse Historiebijbel, based on Petrus Comes-tor, Historia scolastica PL198 c.1072D)f. 310v-311r Eve does not become aware of her sin until Adam bites into his apple: they simultaneously realise their error.f. 311r The ‘serpent’ abuses Adam and Eve and departs celebrating their fall.f. 311v Lucifer returns to tempt and attack the protoplasts in the serpent’s form, in the guise of comforting and strengthening them, as in Vita Adae et Evae in the Penitence scene. However, here this may be simply so that all three, Adam, Eve, and the serpent, are together again when God gives them their curses, thus f. 312v God came as the serpent was still ‘by’ Adam.f. 311v-312v God delays punishment of sin as long as possible to allow repentance.f. 313r-314r God’s curses on the ‘serpent’, Adam, and Eve, with the use of the typology of the first Eve and second Eve (Mary).f. 315r-315v Discussion of the four ‘virtues’ of Adam, in line with the alle-gory of the Four Daughters of God, establishing a parallel between man’s constitution and the mind of God equivalent to the previously used image of the Triune composition of the human soul.f. 317r God gives a detailed revelation of the suffering of Jesus Christ on the cross in atonement for the sins of Adam and Eve.f. 317r-321r May be a separate composition on the extreme remorse of the protoplasts.

By contrast, the explicit references to Patristic authors in the text of the Tilburg treatise, some of which may be apocryphal, generally concern only trivial com-monplaces.18 Augustine and Ambrose are the author’s primary sources for the events recounted, probably not used in the original but in later commentaries, and again either directly or indirectly the Historia scolastica of Petrus Comestor.

The Dutch Life and the Dutch treatise in the Tilburg MS

The treatise and the Life have been brought together and superficially made into a single unit for reading in a community. They are alike in stressing the aspect of penitence of the protoplasts and the corresponding promise of divine



19 see MEYER 1878, STONE 1992, MILLER 1998.20 See AERTS & KORTEKAAS 1998.21 Although PETTORELLI 1999 has not found any of the 106 extant Latin VAE manuscripts to have this ascription.

redemption. Because of this common emphasis on the Fall, penitence and redemp-tion it is an open question to what extent their readers may have been aware of a fundamental discrepancy between the anthropology of the two accounts. In the treatise, Lucifer falls first because of his desire to usurp the self-sufficiency of God, and human beings are created subsequently to replace the fallen angels in their choirs. Lucifer is shown the entire economy of salvation in the beatific vision, and the Dutch text allows, perhaps fortuitously, for the mathematical pos-sibility that humans would have joined the angelic choirs even if the angels had not fallen. In the Life by contrast the creation of man itself causes Lucifer’s Fall, and Lucifer falls because he refuses to worship the Image of God in man. He justifies this refusal by his priority in creation. The treatise explains that man is made with a body out of clay, rather than as a pure spirit, in order to preserve him from the same temptation to which Lucifer has already succumbed. Thus if the text is read as a whole there is circular and self-contradictory reasoning.

There are medieval French, German and English versions of the Vita Adae et Evae in verse, and late medieval prose versions in these languages, and prose versions only in Italian, Czech, Croatian and Polish.19 While these other ver-nacular forms are generally transmitted either as independent works or as part of compilations or universal chronicles within which their role is purely narrative, the manuscript in which the Dutch version is preserved appears to be unique in placing the work within a context of devotional discussion of the central theme of the pseudepigraphon, the penitence of the protoplasts and the promise of eventual redemption made to them. In the present manuscript, the Vita Adae et Evae comprises approximately one half of a treatise of the creation of the proto-plasts. The text found here is complete as written by the scribe. It seems to begin in media res, either because it was copied from a defective exemplar or because a sub-heading was at some point mistakenly taken as the commencement of the text. It nevertheless probably preserves the greater part of the treatise. In passing it mentions a parallel with an episode in the Passion of Saint Lawrence. Both in its rhetorical cast and in the apparent presence of asides to an audience, the treatise presents the form of a monastic reading, although in the absence of any overall incipit or explicit this identification remains speculative.

The text of Vita Adae et Evae is introduced with the words Dit is vander penetencien Adam ende Eva, but it is ascribed to Saint Methodius of Patera. This ascription was possible because of a similarity between the opening passages of Vita Adae et Evae and of the Revelationes of pseudo-Methodius, which also begins in the immediate aftermath of the Expulsion.20 Indeed the present text is not merely ascribed to Saint Methodius, but is falsely described as this very Revelationes, a confusion which probably was taken over from the Latin source of the Dutch text.21 A possible motivation for this situation is that a text with the


326 BOB MILLER

22 On the Gelasian Decretals, see DOBSCHÜTZ 1912; for an edition of the Indices Librorum Pro-hibitorum from a version printed in 1554 which still contained the entry Liber qui appellatur De poenitentia Adae, apocrifus, see REUSCH 1886 p 174.23 The literature up to 1948 is listed by GROOTENS 1948 pp. IX-XI. At the same time as GROOTENS published the Ruusbroecgenootschap MS, VAN DIJK 1948 published a selection of published and unpublished sermons and excerpts using all 15 manuscripts then known. Mertens 2007 shows that many of the older ascriptions of sermons to Brugmann found in the manuscripts are false. See RUH 1999 pp. 212-218, chapter 54, ‘Jan Brugman’, and SHERWOOD-SMITH & STOOP 2003.24 Despite the superficial appearance of such a list in the treatment of the curses given by God to the serpent, the woman and the man, four, three and two respectively, which is given by the subject matter.25 See KOCK 1999 pp. 145-147.

title Penitence of Adam and Eve was condemned as apocryphal by the Gelasian Decretals. Although it cannot be proven, it is possible that the text intended was some version of the extant Vita Adae et Evae. The use of false titles and mislead-ing incipits may have been intended to protect scribes and users of the Vita Adae et Evae from the effects of this condemnation. Readers may appreciate the irony of a situation whereby one apocryphal text, the Vita Adae et Evae, was deliber-ately confounded with another apocryphal text, the Revelationes of (pseudo-)Methodius, in order to circumvent the condemnation of the former as apocryphal by a third apocryphal text, the (pseudo-)Gelasian Decretals.22 The confusion is confounded by the first sentence of the text, Adam ghinc spaden ende Eua ghinc spynnen, which is not part of either work and was very likely copied into the text from an illustrated manuscript in which it served as a caption.

Jan Brugman O.F.M., a preacher close to the Devotio moderna

Jan Brugman lived circa 1400-1473 and was a popular Franciscan preacher in sympathy with the Devotio moderna. A wide range of evidence of his sermons has been discovered and published.23 The most useful collection of material for comparison with the Tilburg MS. is that found in the Ruusbroecgenootschap MS. and published in 1948 by P. GROOTENS S.J.. This collection of 23 sermons or excerpts from sermons contains seven pieces which parallel elements of the Tilburg material, either in their subject matter or in their use of allegory. Over-all the impression given is that the authors of the Tilburg treatise (there may be two separate authors of the first and second parts of the treatise) were influ-enced by Brugman in their vocabulary and style, and took over some of his allegorical devices, but did not share all of his opinions on disputed questions and did not prefer his major stylistic tool of building up lists which he then explained systematically in numbered paragraphs.24 The Tilburg treatise by contrast develops a single simile at a time in great detail but without systematic structure, and is marked by a greater amount of citation of Patristic authors than the sermons of Brugman. Indeed it is possible that Brugman would have disap-proved of the great show of learning made by the Tilburg treatise, which he might have considered to detract from the devotional content.25



26 MERTENS 2007, see especially pp. 264-269.27 Brugman used some imagery derived from the additional ‘chapters’ concerning the creation of the ‘microcosmic’ Adam which are often transmitted together with the Vita Adae et Evae, but which were also widely known separately, e.g. Ende hi gaf hem doen enen naem te samen settende van vier letteren, ende hiet hem Adam, ende dese letteren haelden hi uut den vier hoeken der werelt, uutten oesten, uutten westen, uut den noorden, ende uut den suyden. (GROOTENS 1948 pp. 20-21).

The way in which such a text could nevertheless find its way into a manu-script of the lay adherents of the Devotio moderna is shown by a recently published programme for weekly meditation aimed at exactly this group. KOCK reports: “Gemeinsam mit dem Statutentext ist in dem Faszikel ein Meditation-sprogramm überliefert, das den Stoff für die einzelnen Wochentage aufbereitet: der Schöpfer und sein Werk, die Sünden, der Tod, das jüngste Gericht, die Strafen der Hölle, die Leiden des Herrn und die himmlischen Freuden.” (KOCK 2002 p. 21). The text of MS Vienna ÖNB Cod. Ser.n. 12860 consists of Der leeken ghewoenten in Eemsteyn (KOCK 2002 pp. 33-34), followed by Een cort oefeninghe voer den leken broederen, op dat si daghelix voer oghen nemen moghen, hoe si hem hebben sullen in horen ghedachten ende hoe si alle daghe wat sonderlinx hebben daer si hore ghedachten toe keren moghen … (f. 26v, KOCK 2002 p. 47), which contains the instruction (f. 28r): Des manendaghes saltu verbeelt siin mit dinen sonden ende dencken hoe seer die sonden gode mishaghen; hoe hi den hoverdighen Lucifer uten hemel werp; hoe hi den ong-hehorsamen Adam uten paradyse werp;… (KOCK 2002 p. 48). This explains the presence of material on this topic in both Brugman and the Tilburg text and suggests that meditation on such topics would have extended to weighing up the disparate versions transmitted and their theological implications.

MERTENS emphasises that even the increased number of sermons by Brug-mann identified during the 20th century does not truly reveal the nature of his more popular preaching, since these transcripts probably derive from sermons given to communities of nuns, and may not reflect the content of his more famous sermons given to the population at large in major churches or in the open air. Anecdotal evidence suggests that Brugmann used many rhetorical tricks and dramatic effects in his more popular sermons.26 In the present context this underlines the relevance of the topics and materials chosen by Brugmann as evidence of the variant forms and use of material cognate to that found in our treatise in sermons designed for an audience comparable to the readers of our manuscript. Most of the material cognate to that used by Brugmann is found on ff. 305-10, with an isolated instance, the legend of the four daughters of God, on ff. 316-17; the leaves 311-321 otherwise evidencing few parallels with Brugmann’s materials. This may be further evidence that the treatise is a composite work. The more important parallels are reproduced or reported in the footnotes to the edition of the Tilburg text below.27

2nd Conclusion There is other evidence of knowledge of the Life in Dutch, but this is found in passages which have been adapted for didactic purposes, no other literal trans-lation has yet been discovered. The treatise found combined with the Life contains a


328 BOB MILLER

28 BAARDA & HERMANS 1992, item 10, pp. 52-3, SPAAPEN 1961, see from p. 176, VAN DE VEN 1994, pp. 103-107, with illustration, note that “olim 646” is a misprint. I would like to thank Drs. Jaap Maessen, Librarian of the Brabant-Collection, for the supply of these materials and for the organisation of the photographs of the manuscript.29 VAN DE VEN 1994 p. 104.30 BARDA & HERMANS 1992 items 3, 8, and 10, pp. 40-41, 50, 52-53.31 VAN DE VEN 1994 p. 106; BARDA & HERMANS 1992 p. 53. From the tabular results of SCHELLE-KENS 1992 pp. 213-3 we can see that from the Fraterhuis only 9 Dutch manuscripts survive and from Bloemenkamp only 7; yet apart from the exceptional fate of the library of the Coudewater Brigittines these are the highest survival figures for Dutch or Latin manuscripts from any of the monastic institutions.

wide range of Patristic motifs which are selected or adapted from a Franciscan view-point. The treatise displays some commonality of subject matter with the sermons of Jan Brugmann, but the stylistic treatment of the material is different. The apparently strange juxtaposition of two texts on the Fall of the protoplasts may be explained by the meditational programs of the Devotio moderna.

3. THE MANUSCRIPT, THE SCRIBE AND THE SCRIBAL DIALECT

3rd Introduction It is suggested that a specific date found in the calendar part of the manuscript cannot be used to fix the date of the text as the two parts of the book may have been combined at any time. The present manuscript should be taken as one of a group of three which is agreed to have been bound by the same bindery. This places the book in use in a convent of Franciscan Tertiaries.

The text is preserved in the MS 16 of the University Library of Tilburg Uni-versity, olim ’s-Hertogenbosch, Provinciaal Genootschap, 644. I found this manuscript through the card index of Middle Dutch literature in the University Library in Leiden. When I wrote to the Library in Tilburg for photographs of the manuscript, I was also supplied with copies of the literature containing descriptions of the manuscript.28 None of these had identified the presence of the Vita Adae et Evae within the present text.

The manuscript begins with a calendar which has been localised as that of the diocese of Liège (Luik) by reason of the prominence given to the com-memoration of St Hubertus, the patron saint. However, VAN DE VEN suggests that the gatherings containing the calendar and associated computistic material, which are all in one hand, may be taken over from another manuscript.29 VAN DE VEN and BARDA & HERMANS, who were working on their publications simultaneously, agree in localising the book, or more precisely, a group of three books, MSS 9, 14, and 16 (olim KHS 637, 642 and 644), in Den Bosch,30 since the manufacture of the binding of all three can be assigned to the Augustinian Broeders van het Gemene Leven of the Fraterhuis St-Gregorius. However, only MSS 9 and 14 have been definitively assigned on artistic and ownership grounds to the Franciscan Tertiaries of St-Elisabeth-Bloemenkamp.31 Textual peculiarities in MS 9 also suggest that this book was designed to be read by Franciscan Tertiaries. MS 16, although thus at some time used in this house,



32 VAN DE VEN 1994 p. 106 and see p. 19.33 BARDA & HERMANS 1992 p. 53.34 VAN DE VEN 1994 pp. 102-105.

may have been written elsewhere. MS 16 displays a lower level of aesthetic intention and so may have been written in the same house but not by the skilled artist responsible for the two more highly decorated books. Apart from an inscription of the name ‘Lisken Heren’ in the calendar there is no textual evi-dence of the original provenance in MS 16 and VAN DE VEN states that the provenance is unknown, grouping it as one of three manuscripts certainly bound in Den Bosch but perhaps written elsewhere.32

If all three manuscripts were bound at roughly the same time, as seems indicated by the use of the same pattern of impressed decoration on the cov-ers, all of the contents must have existed by the time which can be assigned to the latest. While MSS 9 and 14 are assigned dates circa 1500, the dates 1516, 1521 and 1532 are mentioned in connection with MS 16 solely because of features of the calendrical material, which VAN DE VEN suggests may not originally belong with the textual part. The calendar contains the notation ‘Paesdach’ against the 23rd March, not as a later addition but as part of the original production, which could refer to any of the years 1499, 1510, 1521 or 1532 in which Easter fell on this date. However, the computational material contains two computus-circles for calculating the dates of Easter, and this diagram is itself dated 1516. Unless blindly copied from an older manuscript, this date would seem to provide a terminus ad quem for the binding and thus for the textual part. However, since the computus material has been found to be unworkable it does seem that the date may be an error. BARDA & HERMANS suggest that the scribe may have written xvi for xxi, making 1521 into 1516.33

We are therefore thrown back on the fact that the group of three manu-scripts were bound in the same workshop perhaps as a batch at one time. Since the other manuscripts are dated circa 1500 and we are not tied to the date 1516 as either accurate or relevant, the date of circa 1500-1525 may provisionally stand for the original production of the textual part of the third manuscript also.

The MS contains a calendar ff 6-17, a computus ff 18-21, then devotional material until f 304a, where the treatise begins: Dese engelen syn ghescappen Also ysdrius seit… The treatise continues until f. 321v, where the Dutch Vita Adae et Evae begins. It ends on f. 336, with a simple Amen. There are no fur-ther texts. VAN DE VEN reports that the largest continuous part of the book, ff. 22-120, consists of meditations on the soul and the spiritual life largely derived from Geert Grote, while the following collection of treatises derived from Augustine and Bernard (ff. 121-168) also contains another reference to Grote. There follow various meditations of the passion and wounds of Christ (ff. 168-240) culminating with Der Mynnender Sielen Boegaert (ff. 277-294).34 The connection with Geert Groote and the nature of the following texts combines


330 BOB MILLER

35 The following statement may be allowed to stand mutatis mutandis for the Francsican Tertiar-ies, particularly in a location such as Den Bosch: “Die Laienbrüder in der Devotio moderna waren keineswegs generell illiterat. Der Anteil der Brüder, die lateinisch oder volkssprachig lesen oder schreiben konnten, läßt sich nicht quantifizieren, auch sind erhebliche Unterschiede zwischen den einzelnen Gemeinschaften anzunehmen, aber es ist nicht zu übersehen, daß eine beträchtliche Anzahl von Laienbrüdern als Autoren, Schreiber und Leser von Texten auftraten.”, KOCK 2002 p. 19.36 VAN DE VEN 1994 p103 showing folio 22r.37 Using the index of LECHNER-SCHMIDT 1990.

with the probable place of use of the book to suggest a connection with the circles of the Devotio moderna.

In their discussions of the localisation of MS 16 none of the authors cited locate the manuscript outside of Brabant. Some of the scribal characteristics, such as the free interchange of vocalic w- and v-, and the appearance of many false plural forms, which might be indications of authorial dialect if com-bined with vocabulary features, are probably rather indications of the diffi-culty of processing what was perhaps a stenographic report of a verbal pres-entation. Certainly many of the more problematic features of the text disappear in the second part, the translation of the Vita Adae et Evae.

The scribe is not biblically educated, as shown by forms such as Clavarien for Calvary, Yerehel for Israhel, likewise the names of some of the Church Fathers are distorted. If the text was produced by dictation, both participants must be presumed to be equally unfamiliar with the material, while literate, perhaps recent entrants into religious life from a literate lay background.35 From f. 22, after the calendar and computus, the manuscript is all in one hand.

The opening page of the text (f. 305r) displays the same style and density of littera gothica hybrida as the sample illustrated by VAN DE VEN.36 This quality is maintained until f. 311v where there the script begins to become more spaced out and skeletal, and after f. 315 there begins an increasing dif-ferential in quality between the recto and verso of each leaf and in density between the top and bottom of each page, with crossings-out being found pricipally in the lower six lines, perhaps suggesting that the text was being copied rather than dictated. At f. 329v there is a marked improvement sug-gesting a break in the work session, with only the last few leaves showing renewed signs of fatigue or haste.

Analysis of the vocabulary used in the Tilburg text to refer to the chief of the fallen angels reveals that in addition to the distinction between the Vita Adae et Evae text and the preceding treatise, there is also a clear distinction between two parts of the treatise. This may be due to the use of two different Latin sources, or it could reveal that the two parts of the treatise were produced at different times and perhaps by different people. The use of Dutch terms in the Vita Adae et Evae shows that the translation was very exact.37



38 I would like to thank Werner J. Hofmann (UB Leipzig) and the editor and referees of Ons Geestelijk Erf for assistance in the edition of this text.

Treatise I

up to f. 307r

Treatise II

from f. 307v

Dutch VAE Latin VAE

————Luscefer (10)

—viant (11) (and maybe +1)viantscap (1)—Luscefer (2) at start

duuel (9)viant (1)viantscap (1)wedersake (2)Satenas (1)

diabolus (11)inimice (1)inimicitia (1)adversarius (2)Satanas (1)

While there may be some influence of the context, as to whether narrative, allegorical or moral themes are being discussed, on the evidence of the Ruus-broecgenootschap MS, Brugman seems to use Lucifer (Luscefer) in preference to all other terms, such as duvel, viant, wedersake and Satanas. He is found to use duvel and viant only when he is citing texts by other writers. This may suggest that the use of different terminology does reveal the combination of different sources.

3rd Conclusion The manuscript was produced between 1500 and 1525 as one of a batch of three which show evidence of being used in Den Bosch by Franciscan Ter-tiaries with an interest in the texts of the Devotio moderna. Spelling errors of common biblical names suggest that the scribe is not biblically educated. Distinctive vocabu-lary suggests that the first element of the text, the treatise, may derive from two distinct sources.

TILBURG UNIVERSITY, UNIVERSITY LIBRARY MS 16 FF. 305-336.38

Scribal features: (a/ae) the forms waeren, waer om, waerheit predominate despite a few isolated patches of war- forms; (e) –e– predominates as schwa but there is variation in the vocalisation of MDutch niemant, yemant e.g. MS yemant, yement, yemont; (ei/ey) –ei– predominates massively with only 6 instances of –ey–; (e/i) the form mit predominates with five instances of met; (i/y) the normal forms are hi and ghi with only rare instances of hy and ghy; (ij) the scribe attempts to use –ij– consistently, but when fatigued the graphies –ij– and –y– converge; (u/w) the words u and uwer contrast with initial w- elsewhere e.g. wten. The scribe prefers initial sch-, except in the word scepper; while g- and gh- are almost evenly balanced (gebodt, ghe-bodt).

Superfluous letters and mechanical repetitions are enclosed in square brackets [ ], letters omitted are supplied in angled brackets ‹ ›, words appar-ently omitted, of which there are many, are supplied in the form ‹heer›. Equivalent indications are given when the English translation is clarified by additional words. The abbreviation mark for the syllable -er- is silently


332 BOB MILLER

resolved, this only occurs regularly in the word overmits and a few times in the prefix ver-. The abbreviation mark for -us is found only in Latinate per-sonal names.

The nasal mark is silently resolved except where it has been necessary to supply a lack ‹n› or where it is apparently superfluous [n]. The abbreviation mark is applied or omitted indiscriminately on the word en from ende and the enclitic negative particle en. This inconsequence suggests that both words were pronounced the same. The form ende is printed when en is so marked, unmarked en in both meanings is printed as such and mistaken markings of negative en as ende are ignored. A similar inconsequence is also found in two similar cases, the creation of false nominal plurals by the unnecessary application of the nasal mark, or sometimes of written-out –n, and the balancing lack of a final –n on many infinitive verbal forms. Only the pronoun form hem is used, always writ-ten out in full, while the form hen survives only as an enclitic element within composite words e.g. datten = dat het hen. The scribe’s alternation of initial consonantal v and w, e.g. scribal weel = MDutch veel, scribal vorden = MDutch worden has been preserved, any ambiguity is resolved by the facing text. In footnote reports of aberrant readings round brackets indicate abbreviations which would otherwise be silently resolved.

The characters God, Lucifer, Adam, Eve, Seth and Michael address each other in direct speech. The plural form ghi is used when the two protoplasts are addressed together. Otherwise the forms du, u, and ghi, and the corresponding verbal forms, alternate for no apparent reason, often within the same sentence, with du predominating. Despite mention of the subjection of Eve to Adam in the third curse of Genesis 3.16 in the Dutch treatise, this has no immediate effect on how she addresses Adam, she later uses heer towards Adam only where this is a direct translation of domine within the Latin Life of Adam and Eve.

The treatise is accompanied by an English translation. The text of the treatise is frequently fragmentary, with words or phrases omitted. The translation is therefore a test of the interpretation which has led to the reconstruction. The text of the Life of Adam and Eve is accompanied by a Latin parallel text of the ‘Bohemian’ redaction, which has been shown to be the primary source of the Dutch translation, taken from the manuscript Oxford, Queen’s College 213, published by HORSTMANN (1887), and given the sigle Q by MOZLEY. Within this Latin text words supplied in angled brackets ‹ › are the emendations of HORSTMANN. Large omissions in the ‘Bohemian’ redaction are supplied from the ‘Rhenish’ redaction, taken from PETTORELLI (2001-2). At some points where the Dutch text appears to follow the Long Life of Adam and Eve, parallels are given from the Georgian and Armenian versions (ANDERSON & STONE 1999), the Milan and Paris manuscripts of the Long Latin Life (PETTORELLI 1998 & 1999b), and the ‘British’ manuscripts of VAE (MOZLEY 1928). Discrepancies of the Dutch from the Latin source, mostly of a rationalising or emotive kind, have been highlighted.



These angels were created, according to Isidore, by God before all other creatures, and in their original state, as they were first created by God, they were able to commit sins by their own will, but now with the grace of God, since Lucifer’s fall, they have been so confirmed in eternal blessedness that they can never more commit sin. Which angels were and are eternal by their nature, honest in their thoughts, prescient of future events, and have their abode in the throne of heaven. Among these angels one, the fairest of all above all the other angels, whose name was Lucifer, became aware of the excellence and the nobility of his nature, and of the subtlety and depth of his understanding and wisdom, which God had given to him to a greater extent than to the other angels. Because of this he began to become proud and rebellious against God, wanting to be equal to God, on account of which God initiated him into secrets and mys-teries of hiswisdom which no-one previously had seen or known of. In order that he should better know

39 It is the presence of the relative phrase Dese engelen, at the commencement of the text, which, together with the abrupt manner in which the discussion proceeds, suggests that some material is lacking at the beginning. Cf. Ambrose, Exameron, I.5.19: The Angels, Dominations, and Powers, although they began to exist at some time, were already in existence when the world was created. (SAVAGE 1961 p. 18, cf. SCHENKEL 1896 p. 15).40 This concept is derived from Augustine, City of God, Book XI, Chapter 13, He who is Truth has promised in the Gospel that his faithful saints will be ‘equal to the angels of God’. They also have the promise that they will ‘go into the life eternal’. But, if we are assured that we will never fall from that immortal felicity, then we shall be in a better state than the angels, not merely equal to them, if the angels have not the same assurance. But the truth cannot possibly deceive, and therefore we shall be equal to the angels. It must then follow that the good angels are themselves assured of their eternal felicity. The other angels had not that assurance, since their bliss was destined to have an end, and there was no eternity of bliss for them to be assured of. It remains that either the angels were unequal, or, if they were equal, the good angels received the certainty of eternal felicity after the ruin of the others. (BETTENSON 1972 p. 445). Isidore’s Etymologies do contain a short report of this matter, VII 5.30: This is the hierarchy or the array of the angels who stood in their celestial vigor after the Fall of the bad angels, for after the apostate angels fell, these were made firm (solidati sunt) in the steadfastness of eternal blessing (BARNEY et al. 2006 pp. 161-2).41 MS onlijdelick; take as onlidelijc, ‘niet vatbaar voor lijden’ or, ‘onvergankelijk’ (see MH lidelijc 1 and 2). The latter, although rarer, is taken as being more fundamental, however, by the same logic, also possible is a misreading of MDutch onlijflijc, ‘incorporeal’ or ‘immaterial’.42 Babilas reviews mediaeval disputes, initiated by the interpretation of Ezechiel 28.12-19 (e.g. 15 Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou was created, till iniquity was found in thee) in Gregory’s Moralia 32, 23, 47, as to whether Lucifer enjoyed the gloria and the Beatific Vision before his fall (BABILAS 1968 pp. 60-65). However, this mediaeval debate as presented by BABILAS is solely concerned with whether Lucifer could ever have fallen after having possessed the gloria and the Beatific Vision. The present text may be interpreted as suggesting that in his heart of hearts Lucifer had already fallen when this vision was given to him. Thus a negative answer to this question is here not doubted, but is rather taken for granted.43 MS: voer.

[f. 305r] Dese engelen39 sijn ghescappen, also Ysdrius seit, van God voer allen creatueren, ende in hoeren beghinsel alsoe, doe si ierst van God ghescapen waren, dat sy mit hoere eyge‹n› wil sunden mochten doen, mer nu mitter gracie Gods, nae Luscefeer val, worde‹n› sy soe gheuesticht inder ewigher salicheit, dat si nummermeer sun-den doen en mochte‹n›.40 Welken engelen waren ende sijn onlijdelick41 nae hoeren natueren, met hoeren ghedachten redelic, voer syennich der toe-comenden dingen, woennechtich inden troen der hemelen. Onder welken engelen één, die alre schoenste was bouen allen die anderen engelen, gheheiten Luscefeer, mercte die hoecheit ende die edelheit sijnre natuere[n], ende suptijlheit ende dipheit sijnre verstantnisse ende wijsheit, die hem God ghegeuen had, bouen dander enge-len.42 Soe heeft hi hem verhoueerdicht ende ver-heuen teghen God, wijllende wesen ghelijc God, waer43 om God meer vertoerden in heymelicheit ende in verhoelentheit sijnren [f. 305v] wijsheit, die te voeren nye‹mant› gesien noch becant en had. Want om dat hi hem te badt


334 BOB MILLER

his place and abandon his wild ideas and incon-ceivable pride against God, God revealed to him, in the ‹mirror› of His divine being, into which he saw precisely how he would be cast out and cut off from God and from the blessed-ness of his divine contemplation and from the joys of heaven. Nevertheless he did not leave off from his pride, because previously he had seen in the heaven above him the glorious Holy Trinity as a divine undivided being, and further-more, he saw there a body pierced by five wounds above which a soul was sitting at the right hand of the Father, and another pure ‹body›, and beyond that another pure body, also with a soul, which was without comparison beautiful and shining and proceeded above him with inconceivable blessedness and honour. He saw further all the Patriarchs and Prophets, the Apostles, Martyrs,

Confessors, ‹and› Virgins with an inconceiva-ble and innumerable ‹throng› of the Holy, who would occupy the places and the choirs of his comrades with greater glory than he or his com-rades and ‹with› delight, because mankind will have just as much delight in their souls in heaven from the glorious appearance of God as the angels in their ‹souls have›, each according to their choir, by which is meant the angels. And as befits them, mankind, their glorified bodies being united with their souls, will have just as

44 MDutch houerdy (and its derivatives) will throughout be taken as Latin ‘superbia’ and trans-lated as ‘pride’. Pride, the inordinate love of one’s own excellence, is the cardinal sin. The car-dinal virtue in classical systems is temperance, but in the Latin Middle Ages humility, classified as a component of temperance, becomes the polar opposite of pride. Humility is the acceptance of divine order and of one’s own place in it, and in this understanding pride becomes a rebellion against the divinely ordained order.45 This appears to be a report of the ‘Mirror of the Trinity’ which appears in the Noordneder-landse Historiebijbel (VAN DEN BERG 1998 p. 227, see the essay above). All souls are mirrors, and the soul of God is the greatest mirror, and is the only mirror in which future events can be seen. Whereas Adam is later granted particular visions, Lucifer is granted a self-revelation of God’s nature and all the secrets of the future.46 MS: beschouwege.47 The vision given to Lucifer explicitly mentions the five wounds, a specification which may reveal a Franciscan bias. Otto von Passau states that Saint Francis will be counted among the Apostles because the five stigmata were given him by a Seraphin (GROOTENS 1948 p. xciii.).48 MS: schoeren.49 The reference to choirs occupied by the bad angels, and later refilled by human souls, combined with the later reference to the fallen angels as constituting a third part of the stars, seems to exclude the idea that the fallen angels were a tenth choir, as is often found in medieval texts, particularly in Germany, which idea is generally thought to be a development of a passage in Gregory (See SINGER 1898, DUSTOOR 1930 pp. 219-229, SALMON 1963 pp. 326-330, and, critical of previous research, BABILAS 1968 pp. 173-209). However, see note to f. 307r and the essay above.

bekenen soude ende op sijn ghedachten ende onb‹eg›rypeliken houerdien44 tegen God achter laten soude, want God openbaerden hem inden ‹spiegel› sijns godteliken wesens daer hi beschei-delicke in sach,45 hoe hi van God ende van die blijscap sijnre godteliker beschouwi‹n›ge46 ende vrouden der hemelen gheworpe‹n› ende ver-scheiden soude[n] weerde‹n›. Nochtan en liet hi sijn houerdy niet, want te voeren had hi inden hemel ghesien bouen hem die gloriose heilige drieuoldicheit in een godtelike onverschiden wesen. Mer doe sach hi een doer wont lichaem mit vijf wonden47 mit een[r]re siele bouen hem was sittende al aen die rechter hant des vaders, een ander suuer ‹lichaem› ende daer nae een ander suuer lichaem, oec mit eenre sielen, die sonder ghelijck schoenre48 ende claere ende mit onbegrypeliker blij‹s›cappe ende eren hem bouen ghinc. Voert sach hi alle patriarcken ende proffete‹n›, ende die apostelen, martelaren,[f. 306r] confosceren, mechden mit eenre onbegrij‹p›liker ende ont‹e›lliker ‹menichte› heiligen, die in sijnre geselle stede ende coren49 wesen souden mit meere glorie dan hi ende sijn mede ghesellen waren en blijscapen, ouermits dat die menschen alsoe weel blijscappen sullen hebben inder sielen in hemelrijc vanden gloriose aenschijnn Gods als die engelen in hoere‹n› veel elc nae hoeren coren daer die engelen in sijn te verstaen. Ende werden soe sullen menschen mit hoeren glorifijserde lichaem verenicht mit



much blessedness in this body as in the soul, because of the Passion and the pure glorious body of Jesus Christ. And when Lucifer saw all of this still he did not let up from his pride, wanting to be equal to the Holy Trinity, and there were many angels who agreed with him and encouraged him in his pride, and as he remained stubborn God became angry with him. And because the other angel, Saint Michael, took notice

of God’s will together with the other angels, he battled with his comrades against Lucifer. And Lucifer took his stand against Michael. God had created Lucifer so glorious and powerful above Michael and the other angels that Saint Michael would have been defeated by Lucifer if God not come to the aid of Saint Michael and the other good angels.

How God caused Lucifer to see all future

events

Up to here the fall of the angels has been described following Saint Augustine, but now we follow the description of Isidore: why Luci-fer with his comrades was robbed of all his purity and fell from the luminosity of the divine light into the darkness of the most utter tor-ments, into the pain of eternal unholiness, from the dearest love of God into hate and envy against God and his creatures, from heaven into hell, dragging with

50 MS: blijscoppen.51 MS: constent. MDutch consent and consenteren are attested in legal records of the second half of the 15th century, the form consenteringe being apparently first attested (several times) in the sermons of Jan Brugman, perhaps indicating a personal preference for the use of this term (MH-Supplement). Cf. Keulen, Stadtarchiv MS G.B. oct. 71, ff. 163r-177r, = pp. 118-140 in VAN DIJK 1948, p. 134: “doe die enghel Gabriel Marien die boetscap brochte, dat die Sone Godes van hoer gheboren soude werden, end sie consent gaf…”. The word constant or constent is not attested in MDutch, however the phrase found here suggests a misreading of consent gheuenden as *constent ghehenden. See also f. 307r, consent gauen, and f. 316v, consent daer toe gaue.52 This entire passage exemplifies the point later made in the treatise in regard to the protoplasts, that God is slow to anger and unwilling to condemn, wishing to allow the sinner time to repent. The events reported here contrast with the version of Ludolf’s Vita Jesu Christi, which commen-ces: Casus Luciferi et protoparentes. In principio, Lucifer creatus esset, erexit se contra Deum Creatorem suum, et in ictu oculi de excelso coelorum projectus est in infernum. (RIGOLLOT 1877 I p. 16) that is, In the beginning, when Lucifer was created, he rose up against God his Creator, and in the blink of an eye he was thrown from the heights of heaven into hell.53 MS: Engelen, anticipation error.54 Setten, II, refl., ‘Zich plaatsen of stellen; ook: tot tegenweer’ (MH p. 537).55 MS: this heading is not marked as such but is run in with the text.

hoere‹n› sielen, oec alsoe weel blijscappen50 hebben inden selue lichaem als sy inder sielen sulle‹n› hebben, ouermits der passien ende den suueren gloriose lichaem Jhesus Christus. Ende als Luscefeer dit sach soe en liet hi noch niet af sijn hoeuerdy, willende weese‹n› ghelijc der hei-liger drieuoldicheit, ende veel engelen mit hem consent51 gheuenden, ende stercten hem in sijnre houerdien, ende als hi verhart bleef soe waert God toernich op hem.52 Ende waer om die ander engel[en]53 Sunte Mychiel dat mercte mitten[f. 306v] anderen enghelen die wil Gods daer in soe wacht hi volcomelic mit sijnen geselen tegen Luscefeer. Ende Luscefer setten hem54 weder tegen Mychiel. Also claer en moeghende had God Luscefeer ghescapen bouen Mychiel ende ander engelen dattet Sunte Mychiel tegen Luscefeer verloren soude hebben, en had hem God niet te hulpen ghecomen Sante Mychiel ende den anderen goede engelen.

Hoe God Luscefer liet sien alle toecomenden

dingen55

Tot hier toe bescryft Sunte Augustijnus vanden val der engelen, mer datter nu volcht dat bescryft Ysyderus: waer om Luscefer mit sijnen ghesele‹n› beroeft waert alle sijnre puerheit ende is gheuallen van die claerheit des godtelic-ken lichts in die doncker der wtterste termenten, in die pijn der ewiger onsalicheit, wter liefster mijnnen Gods in hat ende in nyt tegen God ende sijnre creatueren, uut den hemel in die helle, treckende mit


336 BOB MILLER

him all the angels who had become complicit in his pride and evilness. And as Saint Augustine says, Lucifer fell into hell and dragged behind him into hell with his sins the third part of the stars, that is to say of the angels. Now you should know that the masters of subtle interpre-tation ‹say› in the other book that as ‹many› of mankind will enter heaven as there are angels remaining there and will reign with God. The same thing was said by Saint Augustine and Saint Gregory. When Lucifer fell from heaven with his comrades, just as much as they had pre-viously been higher than the choirs of the hier-archies, and more beautiful and wiser, so much did they fall deeper and become uglier, stub-born in their evil against God. And Saint Michael and the other good angels called out praise and honour and thanks to Our Dear Lord on account of the victory and were confirmed in the grace of God that they would never more commit sin or think of it.

How God created Adam and Eve and how

they broke the Commandment

Thereafter, as Lucifer and his comrades had been cast out from the kingdom of heaven on account of their pride and the choirs were empty, so the Holy Trinity, Whose nature is goodness, Whose will is power, Whose work is mercy, did not want this state to continue, but created the human nature in order that the choirs of the angels should be filled again, and made the man from slime of the earth, that is from the most impure parts of the earth, so that men should always remember what they were made of, and should humble themselves, and should not become arrogant, so that through their humility they should come into possession of the glory and holiness and the places from

56 Despite the introduction, this seems to be a heading taken into the text, not a sentence.57 This phrase suggests some influence from the ten-choir theory, though not necessarily that it was understood or intended as such by the author of the Latin or Dutch treatise. Ps.-Dionysius grouped his nine choirs into three groups of three which he called ‘hierarchies’. It is therefore possible that the phrase ‘above all the hierarchies’ could be understood as excluding the fallen angels from the beginning from the nine standard choirs, although the word could later have been taken in a more general sense.58 MS: ghenest (clearly -n- not -u-). The scribe may have written ghenest believing it in context to be some form of genesen, here in the sense of ‘redden, behouden’ (MH p. 200), but the exem-plar probably contained some form of the word ghevesten, ‘vastmaken, vestigen’ (MH p. 217), here in the sense of Latin solidare (Isidore), or, perhaps on a line break, the form gheuesticht, as found above (f. 305r).59 MS: welle / ker nuetuer.60 MS: deijke with error points over the ij.

[f. 307r] hem alle[n] die engelen die welck con-sent gauen sijnre houerdien en quaetheit.56 Ende als Sunte Augustinus seit, Luscefer viel in die helle ende toch na hem inder helle mit sijnre sunden dat derde deel der sterre, dat waeren die engelen. Nu is te weten dat die meysters vanden suptijlen sijnne in dat ander boeck ‹seggen› datter alsoe ‹menich› menschen inden hemel comen als daer engelen staende bleuen ende mit God regnere‹n› sulle‹n›. Dat selue seit Sunte Augustijnus ende Sunte Gregorius. Als Lusce-fer viel wten hemel mit sijnen gesellen hoe dat si hogher waere‹n› van die coeren der ierachien,57 ende schoenre en wijser, hoe si die-per vielen ende leeliker vorden, verhaert teghen God in quetheit. Ende Sunte Mychiel en die ander goede engelen, die riepe‹n› lof ende eer ende danckte‹n› onse lieue heer van victorie ende vorden gheuest58 inder gracie Gods dat si nummermeer sunden doen en mochten of te dencken.

Hoe God Adam ende Eua schiep ende [f. 307v] hoe sy dat ghebodt bracken Capittel

Hyer na als Lusc‹e›fer ende sijn ghesellen wtten rijck der hemelen gheworpen waren ouer-mits houerdien en die coren ledich waren, soe en wolde die heilige drieuoldicheit, welker natuer59 goetheit is, welker wil mogentheit is, welker werck ontfermherticheit is, niet laten gheschien, mer sciep die menscheliken natuer op dat die coren der ‹engelen› veruult souden werden. Ende macten den mensche vanden sclym der eerden, als vanden onreynsten der eerden, op dat die mensche altijt souden dencke‹n›60 waer ‹af› hi ghemaect wort, ende hem veroetmoedige‹n› soude, ende niet verhoeuerdige‹n› en soude, op dat si doer hoer oetmoedicheit besitten soude‹n› die glorie ende



which the angels had been cast out and had fallen on account of their pride. Which man God created in His own form and appearance. From pure loveHe gave him a noble immortal being and into the body He poured a noble soul, to which soul the Father of the Godhead gave as a divine gift memory and recollection, the Son gave under-standing and wisdom, and the Holy Ghost the will of an angel. And God gave these gifts to the noble soul because He wanted to greatly adorn the soul as ‹He› wanted to abide in the soul with His grace just as He reposes in heaven with His glory. And in his body God adorned man with five outward senses, so that man should perceive with the five senses the beauty of the creatures and their outward form, so that he should constantly think how beautiful it is in heaven, shining exceedingly joyfully and beau-tiful in outward form, on account of which joys of man God the Almighty ‹has› created all the other creatures under the throne of the heavens, on the earth and in the water and in the air, that is animals, fish and birds, which creatures God brought

to Adam in Paradise so that he should give to each a name after their nature. And Adam gave each a name in the same fashion as all creatures are called to this day. Beyond all these gifts God adorned him still further so that he should be well provided in his innocence, setting him in the middle, which is the most beautiful place in Paradise, and adorning him in the body and in the soul with still four other virtues which should preserve him and teach him to joyfully accomplish his creator’s will, namely with mercy, truth, justice and peace, of which truth

61 MS: lieftte.62 Although clearly written as den engel wil, this phrase only makes sense as a composite, den engelwil, cf. MH-Supplement engelkerse (attested 1495), engellsteen (attested 1467). The gift of memoria, intelligentia, voluntas is first found in Augustine, De Genesi ad litteram (cited FRASSEN V p. 147): For man was not made to the image of the Father alone, or of the Son alone, or of the Holy Spirit alone, but to the image of the Trinity. This Trinity is a trinity in such a way that it is one God, and it is one God in such a way that it is a trinity. (from TESKE 1991 chap. 16 section 61, p. 187), and is also found, or rather implied as given, in Augustine, De Trinitate 10, 12, 18-19, PL 42, 984, and as a possible source here in Isidore, Etym. VII, 4, 1: The Trinity (Trinitas) is so named because, from a certain three (tres) is made one (unum), as it were a ‘Tri-unity’ (Triunitas) – just as memory, intelligence, and will, in which the mind has in itself a certain (quondam = ‘kind of’) image of the divine Trinity. (BARNEY et al. 2006 p. 159). BABILAS 1968 p. 323 note to XI 35-37 gives more references. The angel’s will is a free will and the implication is that Adam and Eve can choose between good and evil as Lucifer could.63 MS: Euen.

salicheit ende die stede daer die engelen wt ghe-worpen en gewallen om hoere houerdien wil. Welcke mensche God schiep van sijns selfs form ende ghedaente. Wt rechter lieffte61

[f. 308r] heeft hi hem ghegeuen een edel onste-ruelicke wesen en inden lichaem ghegoten een edel siel, welcke siel die vader inder godheit schen‹c›te tot eenre godteliker gauen die memory ende ghedenckenisse, die soen verstont en wijsheit, die heilige gheest den engel wil.62 Ende dat heeft God der edelre sielen gescenct, om dat hi se hoegelijcke woude vercieren, want ‹hi› inder zielen woennen woude mit sijnre gra-cie, als hi inden hemel rust mit sijnre glorie. Ende inden lichaem vercierde God den mensche mit vijf wtwendige sijnnen, op dat die mensche mitten vijf sijnne‹n› merken soude die schoen-heit der creatueren ende hoer forme van buyten, op dat hi altijt dencken mocht hoe schoen dattet inden hemel [waer] also claer ghenoechlike ende schoen van b‹u›yten is, om welke men-sche ghenochten God almechtich ghescapen ‹heeft?› [ende] alle ander creatueren onder des hemels troen, inder eerden en inden water ende inder locht, als beeste, wissche, ende voghelen, welck creatuere God bracht[f. 308v] tot Adam inden paradijs om dat hi ellick enen name geuen souden nae sijnre natueren. Ende Adam gaf elc enen naem ghelijcker wijs als allen creatueren noch heiten. Bouen alle dese gauen heeft God hem noch meerre verciert om dat hi wael bewaert soud sijn in sijnre onnosel-heit, settende hem int myddel als in dat alre schoenste vande‹n› paradijs, ende vercierden Adam63 inden lichaem ende inder zielen noch mit vier ander doechden die hem bewaren ende lere‹n› soude‹n› den wille sijns sceppers blijde-licke te volbrengen, als mit ontfermherticheit,


338 BOB MILLER

should instruct him to teach all rational things, and of which peace should give him sustenance. And when God had given the man, that is, Adam, all these gifts, He remained in his com-pany in great joy as one friend takes a walk with another. And after innumerable divine loving words and joys which they had together, God brought a

sleep upon Adam, during which God made Eve from the upper rib of Adam’s body, that which lies nearest to the heart, and filled the place with flesh, and the woman, that is Eve, was made by God to be Adam’s joy and solace. And when God had created Eve He adorned her with the same gifts with which He had adorned Adam. And because God was well satisfied with His work He went walking with Eve in Paradise in great joy while Adam lay asleep. But Eve had not yet seen Adam because God’s joy and glory were so great and overwhelming that she had not paid attention to any other thing about her besides God. And when Adam arose from his sleep God began to take his leave from Eve and led her back into the path along which she would encounter Adam, giving her some indi-cation by which she would know Adam. And when Eve came upon Adam and saw him, and Adam saw her and they both each other, they both fell to their knees immediately and with great humility laidtheir hands together, because each of them assumed that the other had been specially privi-leged by God, because of the luminosity which

64 Justice, Truth, Mercy and Peace are the four sisters who feature in the Dispute of the Four Daughters of God. Truth and Mercy are described in accordance with the version of Saint Ber-nard. Two virtues remain uninterpreted. Unless text is lacking, the author may have used a source with only two daughters as in the Rex et famulus version of the text. See TRAVER 1907 pp. 15-16, 41-48, TIMMERMANN, Verfasserlexikon article ‘Viertöchterstreit’, and MILLER 2003 pp. 325-326 on a Low German version of this allegory found in a manuscript Leben Jesu compilation of the Windesheimer Congregation of Frenswegen, dated 1473.65 MDutch scheppen has the primary meanings ‘maken, vormen’ (MH p. 518), but cf. f. 305r ghescappen used of the angels and f. 308r of Adam as a whole being in the Image of God, against f. 308r makten used of Adam’s clay body. Eve’s creation is thus aligned with the former examples rather than with the latter.66 Adam and Eve are separately given the same spiritual and intellectual gifts, and in each case this takes place after their material creation and their ensoulment. The presentation of the animals to Adam and their naming are omitted, assimilation of the Genesis 2 to the Genesis 1 account.67 mitter haest(e), haest can be m or f. (MH p. 234)68 Adam and Eve each (elc) for themself. The sense of this passage must be that each of the protoplasts took the other one to be God, simply because they were each unaware of the existence of any other person than God and themselves. Only this justifies their subsequent attempt to worship each other. Some explanatory phrase may be lacking, or this may be taken as obvious.69 MS by sonder. Take as bizonder.

waerheit, ende rechtuerdicheit, ende vrede,64 welcke waerheit hem soude leren aen alle redeli-ken dingen onder wijsen, welck vrede hem soude voeden. Mer als God dese mensche als Adam aldus begaeft had soe bleef ‹hi› mit groter blijs-cappen bij hem gaen als een vrient bijden anderen gaen spaeseren. Ende onder alte veel godteliker mynliker woerde ende blijscappen die sy tesamen haden, soe seynde God ten lesten eenen[f. 309r] sclaep in Adam, onder welleke God Eua sciep65 van die ouerste rib Adams lichaem, die alre naest sijnre herten stont, ende veruulde die stede mit vleys, ende dit wijf als Eua maecte God tot Adams genoet ende solaes. Ende als God Eua ghescappen had soe vercierdese God mit die selue gauen daer God Adam mede ver-ciert had.66 Ende want God sijn werck wael behaecde[n] soe ghinc hi mit Eua inden paradijs wanderen mit groter blijscappen ende die wijl dat Adam lach en sliep. Mer Eua en had Adam noch niet ghesien, want die blijscap ende glorie Gods was groet ende also crachtich dat si niet en achten op enych dingen dan op God die bi haer was. Ende als Adam ontspranc wtten slap soe scheyde God een wenych van Eua ende ley-dese weder inden wege daer sy by Adam comen soud met haer yet te kennen geuende van Adam. Ende als Eua by Adam quam ende hem sach, ende Adam haer weeder, ende elc melcanderen, soe vielen sy beyde mitter haest67 ende seer oet-moedelijc op haer knyen ende lechden[f. 309v] hande te samen. Want elc had gemeynt dat hi68 by sonder69 God geweest had, ouermits die claerheit ‹die› sy vander teghenwoerdicheit



they had each received in their faces in the pres-ence of God, in the same way as Moses had received great luminosity in his face, so that the children of Israel could not bear to look directly into his face. And as they both crouched kneel-ing face to face in this great innocence and humility towards each other, God returned to them both and ordered them both to stand up to approach one another. And then God Himself came to them and married them, Adam and Eve, in the holy sacrament of matrimony, and held with His angels great inconceivable celebra-tions and wedding feasts. And God made Adam lord of Paradise and king of all that had He had created under heaven. And after God had blessed them both, Adam and Eve, they humbly adored Him and thanked Him for His grace. But God gave Adam and Eve a small

commandment, that they should not taste or eat from the fruit of ‹the tree of› life which stood in the middle of Paradise. God gave this small

70 sic. Read Israhel. Compare the form Ysarahel found in a collation of Jan Brugman, MS Berlin germ. oct. 328, ff. 79r-87v, printed VAN DIJK 1948 pp. 150-156, see p. 153. Here, where the thematic connection Moses/Children of Israel is so clear we must question whether these biblical passages were known to the scribes.71 MS: on-onselheit, on a line break.72 MS: brulste, for brulfte, a form of bruloft, brulocht (MH p. 120). Possibly a misplacement of the stroke on the following –t– which should have passed through both letters, cf. the form heeft on f. 305r.73 MS: coııııııc.74 MS: smactten, an anticipation error.75 The forbidden tree is identified as the Tree of Life, not that of Knowledge. The book of Genesis is the source of this confusion and speculation, which flows from the passage Gen.2.9, And the Lord God brought forth of the ground all manner of trees, fair to behold, and pleasant also to eat of: the tree of life also in the midst of paradise, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil (lignum etiam vitae in medio paradisi, lignumque scientiae boni et mali). Interpretation of this passage was a common crux of patristic literature, Ambrose, an author cited in the Tilburg treatise, stated: We should be aware of the fact, therefore, that where God has planted a tree of life He has also planted a tree of the knowledge of good and evil, in the midst of Paradise. It is understood that he planted it en meso paradeisou, that is, in the middle of Paradise. … There-fore, in the middle of Paradise there was both a tree of life and a cause for death. (Ambrose, De Paradiso Liber Unus V.29, Savage 1961 p. 306, corrected, cf. SCHENKEL 1896 p. 285 or PL 14 c.29). The identity of the two trees was argued in the Epistle to Diognetus and many later writers (Epistle to Diognetus chapter 12, EHRMAN 2003 II pp 156-159, and see WESTERMANN 1994 ad loc. Genesis 2.9 with extensive literature.). In VAE.32 Adam explains: (God) gave us all the fruit-bearing trees to eat from, and told us that we should only abstain from eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil which is in the centre of paradise (de arbore sciencie boni et mali que est in medio paradisi), as translated here: soe gaf ons God van allen vruchten der bomen te eten ende hi verboedt ons vanden ‹bome› der kunste ende der weetenheit niet te eten, welc staet in’t myddel des paradijs,… (f. 330r/v). Jan Brugman held to the non-identity of the Tree of Life and the Tree of Knowledge, and made a personal statement of preference for the identity of the Tree of Knowledge as a fig tree rather than an apple tree: Den gaf hi (sc. God) hen drie geboden…. Dat ander gebot was, dat si souden eten vanden boem des levens, ende van

Gods ontfanghen hadden in sijn aenschijn, gelij-ckerwijs als oec Moeyses grote claerheit ontf-anghen hadde in sijn aenschyn, soe dat die kijn-der van Yerehel70 hem niet te recht in sijn aenschyn niet en mochten sien. Ende als si aldus teghen malcanderen in deser groter onnoselheit71 ende in oetmoedicheit lagen, soe quam God weder tot hem beyden ende beualse beyde op te staen ende by malkanderen te comen. Ende daer quam God ende troudese seluer Adam en Eua inden heiligen sacrament der echtenscap, ende heelt mit sijnen engelen hoge onbegrijpelike blijscap ende brulfte.72 [die God maecten] Ende God maecte Adam heer vanden paradijs en coninc73 van alle dat God onder den hemel gescapen had. Ende als God hem beyde als Adam ende Eua ghebenedijt had soe aenbededen sy oetmoedelick God, ende danckte hem van sijnre gracie. Mer God gaf Adam ende Eua een cleyn[f. 310r] ghebodt als sij niet en smacken74 en solde‹n› noch eten vander vrucht des leuens die int mijddel des paradijs staet.75 Dit cleyn gheboet


340 BOB MILLER

commandment not because it would be any dim-inution of His divinity (sc. if Adam should eat of it), but because God wished to test whether Adam would be obedient and would be and remain in subjection to His commandments. And when God had taken his leave of Adam and Eve and had come with His angels into heaven, and Adam had left Eve for a short time in Paradise, then Lucifer, the one worst and cleverest fiend from hell, transformed himself into the appearance of a serpent, and he went to Eve admonishing and advising that she should by all means taste and eat of the fruit. And when Eve answered that she did not dare do so because God had forbidden it to her, because she would die from doing so, but – alas – Eve did not know what death was, and as the fierce fiend heard her say this, he said to her: “You should not on any account believe that, Eve, that you would die from it. But God your creator knows well that at themoment you taste this fruit you will become equal to God, knowing good and evil as he does, and that is why he has forbidden it”. And because the fruit was so becoming and beautiful and pleasing to the eye, Eve took an apple from the tree. The false fiend was still there by her,

allen vruchten des paradijs. Dat derde gebot was, dat si niet en souden eten vanden boem der weteneheit des goets ende des quaets. Sommighe segghen, dattet enen appel-boem was, ende die sommighe segghen, dattet een vighe-boem was. Mer ic hout daer-voer dattet een vighe-boem was. (GROOTENS 1948 pp. 23-24).76 This would appear to negate the reality of the curse on the serpent. The normal explanation of this curse is that the serpent allowed Lucifer to enter into his body and to speak from his mouth (as in the Noordnederlandse Historiebijbel, VAN DEN BERG 1998 p. 228, Doe ghinc Sathanas in dat serpent om den mensche te bedriegen…, Doe seide Sathanas doir dat serpent tot den wive… derived from the Historia scholastica PL198 c.1072B, although between these sentences there is a possible intrusion of the impersonation concept, Doe ghinc Satanas in die gedaente van dat serpent tot dat wijf…). If Lucifer merely disguised himself as the serpent the cursing of the serpent would be unjust. This is resolved later when it is explained that the figure cursed by God is not the real serpent but the same Lucifer in the same serpent disguise. This is necessary in order to rationalise the anti-type of the first Eve who is seduced by Luci-fer and the second Eve, Mary, who will crush his head. The topos is used by Ambrose (De Paradiso, SCHENKEL 1896 p. 331), the way in which Lucifer ‘re-made’ (versciep) himself is graphically described by Avitus, The Fall of Man, II 118-125 (NODES 1985 p. 35 & note); see MURDOCH 1972 pp. 17-19 & notes 7 & 17 for more references. If the early dating of the Life of Adam and Eve is accepted, the Greek version of this text may be the earliest surviving evidence of the motif of Lucifer entering into the body of the serpent as his ‘vessel’ or ‘lyre’. This motif is no longer present in the Latin VAE as it appears to be specific to the ‘pride’ account of the fall of Lucifer which has been abandoned in the VAE. See the text of VAE 19-20 below.77 ommer = ‘emmer, steeds, immers’, but here probably: ‘tot elken prijs’ (MH p. 163).78 This consequence has not previously been stated within this text.79 narrators’ interjection, probably a form of lace, see MW vol. 4 L-N, column 5 LACE, variants lacen, lacy, ‘Verkort uut ay lacen’, ‹OFr aylas cf. ModFr hélas, ModEng alas, comparable attested forms are Ay lacen (Beatrijs en Carel ende Elegast), ach lasen (Bloemlezing).

beual God niet dattet sijnre godheit hynderlic was, mer dat Adam God besuecken woude of hi hem ghehoersam ende onderdanich soud sijn en blijuen in sijn gheboden. Ende als God ‹van› Adam en van Eua was ende mit sijnen engelen inden hemel was gecomen, en Adam een wenych tijts was gegaen van Eua inden para-dijs, soe [sciep] versciep hem Lucefeer, als een die alre weertste cloecste viant van der helle, in een serpent ghelijc,76 ende hi quam tot Eua vermaen‹en›de ende radende dat si ommer77 vander vruchten ende eten ende smaken soude. Ende doe Eua den serpent antwoerden dat sijt niet en dorst doen ouermits dattet God haer ver-boeden had, want si daer om steruen soude,78 mer – achlacye79 – Eua en wist niet vat steruen was, en als die sterken scalke viant dat hoerden, soe seide hi tot Eua: “In gheenrewijs en gheloeft dat niet Eua, dat ghi daer om steruen soudt. Mer God dijn scepper weet wael tot wat[f. 310v] tijden dattu smaecste ende eet van deser vruchten dattu meede wesen soudste als God, weettende goet ende quet ghelijcker wijs als hi, daer om heeft hy dy verboden”. Ende want die vrucht soe seer bequaem is ende schoen ende behagelic den gesicht, soe nam Eua enen



with Eve holding the apple in her hand, and she greatly desired to eat it, when Adam appeared, and the fiend in the serpent’s form advised Adam also to eat from the fruit as he had done with Eve. And in the meantime Eve bit into the apple to eat from it. And when Adam saw that Eve ate from the apple and did not straightaway drop down dead, he also bit into the apple and broke God’s commandment, on account of which their eyes were opened and God caused their understanding to quicken and then they began to be ashamed, a feeling they had never experienced before, and as soon as the fiend had accomplished his evil deed and Adam had bro-ken the commandment he departed from Adam with gross insults, rejoicing

in his great wickedness which he had commit-ted against God with false lying words which he had spoken to Adam and Eve. You should know that although Eve bit the apple first, her understanding was not quickened by God because she had not broken the commandment, but that when her husband Adam bit into the apple desirously, that was when God’s com-mandment was broken. On account of which as soon as the fiend had left they looked at each other dejectedly, recognising in themselves that they had done evil and that they had been deceived by the serpent, on account of which they wept piteously together and left the spot where they had broken God’s commandment and went to the part of paradise where the trees

80 The ‘fruit’ is now apparently specified as an ‘apple’, but this may be a modern misunderstan-ding, as the Bibel of 1518 seems to use ‘appel’ as a generic word for fruit (f. IIr ad loc. Genesis 1.11): ende hi (sc.God) sprac Der aerden groeyen groeyende cruyten dat zaet maect. Ende hout dat appel draget dat vrucht maket elck na sijnre manieren wiens zaet si in hem selven boven der aerden. Ende het gesciet also. On the Bibel see DE BRUIN 1937 p. 83.81 A form of MDutch vloges, ModDutch vlug (MH p. 722). e.g. Noordnederlandse Historiebijbel (VAN DEN BERG 1998 p. 228): Ende Adam nam die vrucht ende at daer mede of, omdat hi sach dat Eva vlus niet en sterf., cf. Rijmbijbel (GYSSELING 1983 p. 17): 639 Ende boet adame haren man / die messchien merken beghan / dat soe te ant niet ne bleef doet…, both drawing on Petrus Comes-tor, Hist. scol., PL 198 c.1072D, ‘vidisset non fuisse mortam… et comedit’. In the Rijmbijbel and the Noordnederlandse Historiebijbel this motif is inserted into the standard Genesis account.82 MS: verbijden, on the bottom line, read as MDutch verbliden, refl., ‘Zich verblijden, zoowel over een bep. feit als van eene gemoedstemming, vroolijk sijn, juichen’ (MH p. 651)83 MS: loegenecheit, an anticipation error.84 MS: stat steden.85 The word gebodt is often preceded by genitives such as een, mijn, Gods, etc., where it is not so qualified it is in the majority of cases preceded by dat, but with such a large number of excep-tions, all in connection with the verb brecken, that it could appear that for this scribe ‘gebodt brecken’ was a self-sufficient concept. The origin of this phrase may be revealed by usage such as: (Bibel 1518, f. iiir, heading ad Genesis 3) Hoe Adam ende Eva tgebodt gods braken door ingheven des serpens. Thus a suppressed ‘t may be assumed in these cases.

appel80 van daer. Die valsche viant noch by was, ende als Eua den appel in haer hant had ende haer seer verlangde daer af te eten, soe quam Adam aenden aenganc, ende die viant in des serpens gelijc riet Adam oec mede vanden appel te eten als hi Eua gheda‹e›n had. Ende tussen beyden soe beet Eua inden appel daer af te eten. Ende als Adam sach dat Eua vanden appel aet ende niet vloes81 doot en bleef noch ter stont en sterf, soe beet hi oec inden appel ende brack dat gebodt Gods, waer om vorden hoer ogen op gedaen ende hoer verstandenisse dede God op ende doen qua-men si tot scheemte, die sy te voeren niet en haden, ende soe geringe als die viant sijn quaet wercke vol brach‹t› had ende Adam dat ghebodt had gebrocken, so scheiden [hi van] hi van Adam mit grote spot, verblijden‹de›82 hem in[f. 311r] sijnre quaetheit die hi tegen God gedaen had mit valsche bedriegelike loegenechtige83 woerden, die hi Adam ende Eua toe geseit had. Des is te weten hoe wael dat Eua inden appel beet, ende hoer der verstandenis niet op en worde gedaen, dattet gheboot by haer niet ghebrocken en was, mer doe Adam haer man mit begeerlij-cheit [inden appel beet] inden appel beet dat doe dat ghebodt Gods gebrocken was. Waer ‹om?› sij [malcanderen] ter stont als die viant van daer was bedruckelijc malcanderen aen sagen ‹ende› bekende in hem seluen dat si quaet ghedaen had-den ende dat si vanden serpent waeren bedrogen, waer om sy weennede‹n› clacelike tegen mal-canderen ende ghingen van dier steden84 als van daer sy ‹t›ghebodt85 Gods ghebroken hadden,


342 BOB MILLER

were thickest, because they were both naked, and they began to feel ashamed in front of each other. They picked and wove leaves from a fig-tree and made themselves a covering as best they could.

How Adam and Eve were driven from Para-

dise. How God takes no pleasure in punishing

mankind, and how Adam and Eve were driven

out of Paradise, and their malediction.

And as they both sadly wept and were patheti-cally sighing about how they had been so griev-ously misled and had made God angry by break-ing his commandment and being disobedient and as they were thus deeply remorseful, the serpent came to them again cheerfully being actually the fiend in the guise of the serpent wanted to com-fort and strengthen them. On account of which God, well knowing that Adam had broken the commandment on account of the deceptions of the enemy, did not come immediately to give Adam his punishment. Because His true nature is goodness and mercy and unwillingness to pun-ish anyone, and to condemn anyone is contrary to His nature, and just as any creature does not gladly do what is against his nature, yet when he (sc. the creature)must do such a thing he does it sadly. As Chrys-ostomus says concerning the Gospel of Saint Matthew: God, being good above all virtue and goodness, and who only punishes anyone against His will, when He is forced to condemn someone on account of their sins, does so in great sadness. But because He would very much like that those beings which He had created should be saved, ‹and this› is also His first and utmost wish, so ‹He› condemns someone only under strong compulsion. And you can see this because He slowly ‹condemns› someone, ‹as here› in the ‹case of› Adam’s sins/sinning. As Saint Ambrose says, I think, Adam broke God’s commandment early on at the very beginning of the day. But Saint Gregory says that Adam broke the com-mandment at the Sext hour before the None just as (sc. Jesus died at this time) on Good Friday,

86 MS: wijge / n bonen, on line break. The MDutch word vigebomen, ‘van een vijgenboom’ (MH p. 713) relieves the author of any need to specify if one or more fig trees are concerned.87 MS doettet = doet hi het.88 John Chrysostom does discuss the topic of condemnation at many points in the Homilies on Matthew, which were widely known in Latin in the middle ages, but much of the text found here does not closely follow these homilies but seems rather to be derived from Chrysostom’s Homilies on Genesis, namely Homily 17.2, 5, 8, and 13-14 (HILL 1986 pp. 222-229).89 MDutch vonnisse = oordeel (MH p. 732 vonnisse/vonnissen).

ende ghingen int paradijs daert alre dictste was van bomen, [ende] want sy beyde nacht waren, ende begonde‹n› onderlijnge te scamen die een tegen den ander. Sy cnopen ende vlochten blade-ren van [bomen] wijgebomen86 ende maecten hem seluen een om cleett als sij best mochten.

Hoe Adam ende Eua wt Parides geiacht. [f. 311v] Hoe God den mensche niet geernen en

pijnnicht en hoe Adam en Eua wten paradijs

veryecht worden ende hoeren maladixce.

Ende als beyde seer bedroeftdel‹i›ken weenden ende swaclic suchten om dat sy jamerlijc bedro-gen waren ende God vertoernt haden ende sijn gebodt gebrocken ende ongehoersam gewest hadde‹n› ende als sy aldus grote rouwe hadde‹n›, soe quam weder dat serpent blijdelijc als die viant in die serpent gelijc woudese troes-ten ende sterken. Waer om God wael weeten‹de› als hoe Adam dat gebodt ghebrocken had, bi bedriegenise des viantes, en quam metter stont om Adam te pynnige‹n›. Want sijn rechte natuer is goetheit ende ontfermherticheit ende nyemont te pynige‹n› of te verdoemen is hem contrarye ende tegen sijn natuer, ende soe wat enych creatuer doet dat dat tegen sijn natuer is, dat en doet hi niet gheern, mer want hijt doen

[f. 312r] moet soe doettet87 droefelijc. Als Crisostus seit op Sunte Mathues ewangile:88 God die boue‹n› alle doechde ende goetheit goet is ende tege‹n› sijne wil yement pijnicht, die wordt mit groter droefheit vanden sunden gheduongen yement te verdoemen. Mer want hi die gheen geern salich had welken hi ghescapen heeft, ‹ende dit› oec sijn yerste ende wterste wil is, soe, vordt ‹hi› crachteliken ghedwongen yemont te verdoemen. Ende dat machmen mercken dat hi traechlike yemont ‹verdoemt?, alse?› hier in Adaem sunden. Want als Sunte Ambrosius seit soe vermoede ic dat Adam vroech int beghijnsel vande‹n› dage dat ghe-bodt Gods brack. Mer Sunte Gregorius seit dat Adam dat gebodt brack ter sester uere voer der noenen als opten goeden vridach ende nochtant en quam God niet des voer noens om Adam te



and nevertheless, God did not come to him to punish Adam during the morning, but He waited until the afternoon and withheld so long His jus-tice, watching over him ‹in the meantime› in his mercy. As Saint Augustine says, wheneverGod must condemn someone in accordance with justice, however great a sinner that man is, immediately Mercy comes to him and contra-dicts the doom and condemnation of that person and suspends the execution of that punishment in the hope that they may better themselves. And we do well to note that here in the case of Adam’s punishment, for God approached Adam in a somewhat slow and sad manner. But He comes running in a very hasty and joyful man-ner when any people who have sinned desire mercy from Him and want to better themselves. Which sinful man He is able to comfort in pro-portion to the magnitude of their remorse, grant-ing him more grace than he ever had before, in order that they should better guard themselves against sin, and in the same way as we find is written about the prodigal son. And when Adam had broken the commandment and was very sad about that, and the serpent was close by him, then God came after the middle of the day at ‹the hour of› None, taking His circuit of para-dise slowly against the wind. And when Adam and Eve heard and recognised the voice of God they both hid themselves from God like oneswho were ashamed of themselves because they had broken God’s commandment and aroused God’s anger. And when God was with them, He cried out specifically to Adam, saying: “Adam, where are you?”. Straight away Adam and Eve, trembling and weeping bitterly, fell on their knees and beat their heads on the ground and Adam answered very sweetly: “Here I am dear Lord! I heard Your voice in paradise and I was very terrified and afraid because I was naked and so I covered myself up”. To this our dear Lord answered him: “Adam, Adam, who could have made you know and understand that you were naked, unless it was because you ate from the fruit which you had been forbidden to eat!”. Adam

90 MS: v(er)hant.91 MS: watz.92 MS: alster, perhaps an indication of verbal performance of the text, ‘als ‘t hier gescreven staet’.93 MS: ghesceruen.94 MS wan(n)e dar95 MDutch schoelen = schuilen.96 MDutch vervaren, ‘vrees anjagen, verschrikken, beangstigen of unrustig maken’ (MH p. 701).

pynige‹n› mer hi wachte totte achter noen ende verhelt soe lange sijn rechtuerdich‹ei›t, ver-wachtende hem tot sijnre bermherticheit. Als Sunte August‹ijnus› seit wanneer

[f. 312v] God yement verdoemen moet nader rechtuerdicheit, oec hoe sundich dat die men-sche is, terstont soe comet ontfermherticheit hem tegen ende weederseit dat vonnys89 ende doerdel des mensche ende verhan‹c›t90 dat von-nys der verdoemenisse op hoep dat [die?] hi hem beteren sal. Ende dat mach men mercke‹n› hier in Adams pijn, want [quam] God quam Adam tege‹n› wat91 lan‹c›sam ende tra‹e›chlike gaen tot Adam. Mer seer haestelic ende blijde-lijc comt hi lopen eynige mensch die in sunden hebben geweest ende genade van hem begeren ende hem beteren wille. Welck sundigen men-sche hi selue nae groetheit hoers berouue troeste‹n› moet, gheuende hem mer gracie dan hi te voeren ye gehad op dat si hem te badt wachte voer sunden ende ghelijckerwijs alster92 ghescreuen93 staet vanden verloren soen. Ende als Adam ‹t›gebodt gebrocken had ende seer droeuych daer om was, ende dat serpent by hem was, soe quam God naden mytdach ouer noen wanderen94 inde‹n› paradijs traechgelic tegen den wijnt. Ende doe Adam ende Eua die stem Gods hoerde ende vernamen soe schoelen95 sy beyde ‹hem?› voer God als die gheen[f. 313r] die hem scaemde dat si ‹t›gebodt Gods ghebrocken hadde‹n› en God vertoernt. Ende als God by hem was, soe riep hi uut sunderlinge Adam segge‹n›de: “Adam, waer bistu?” Ter-stont seer beuende ende seer weene‹n›de bit-terlicke viel Adam ende Eua op haer knyen ende sloegen haer hoefden ter eerden ende Adam antwoerde seer sueten: “Hier ben ic lieue heer! Ic hoerden dijn stem inden paradijs ende was seer bewreest ende verueert96 ouermits dat ic nacht was ende heb my daer om bedect”. Des antwoerde onse lieue heer hem: “Adam, Adam, wie gaf dy te kenne‹n› ende te verstaen dattu nacht w[o]aerste, om dattu ghegeten had vander vruchten die di verboeden was te eten!” Des ontschul‹dy›gede Adam hem seggende: “Lieue


344 BOB MILLER

excused himself saying, “Dear Lord, the woman that you gave to me as a housewife and companion, she gave me the fruit and I ate it”. God asked again of Eve why she had done this, and Eve excused herself: “God,the serpent misled me and advised me to eat it”. And since the serpent was unable to give any excuse, God gave the serpent four curses, the woman three, ‹and› the man two. Then he said to the serpent, because the Fiend had come to the two in the likeness of the serpent: “Serpent, because you have done this, of all of the creatures and beasts of the earth: {1} From now on you will creep on your breast for ever, because this diso-bedience has come out of your breast and your heart. {2} And from now on you shall not eat fruit any more because you have counselled to the eat-ing of that fruit the eating of which I forbade, rather you shall forever eat earth and the slime of the earth. {3} From now on I shall set an enmity between you and the woman, which shall endure eternally, and also ‹between her seed and yours›. {4} Also in addition because along with this woman you have brought all human kind into

97 This is correct vis-a-vis Genesis but is not the account given earlier in the treatise. God also curses the serpent in apparent ignorance of his true identity as established earlier in this text.98 The numbering of the curses is not in the manuscript and has been introduced as an aid to interpretation of the fragmented text.99 Cf. Bibel 1518, f. iiiv, Genesis ad 3.14-15: Om dattu dit gedaen hebste soe sultu vermaledijt sijn onder alle dye dieren ende beesten der aerde. Du sulste gaen over dijn borst ende du sulste aerde eeten alle die daghen dijns levens. Die viantscap sal ic setten tusschen di ende t’wijf, ende tusschen dijn saet ende haer saet. Si sal dijn hoeft vertreden. ende du selste spien na haren ver-senen. Bibel 1523 ibidem: Want ghi dit ghedaen hebt suldi sijn veruioest voor alle vee / ende alle dieren opten velde / ghi sult op uwen buyck gaen / ende stof eten al u leven lanc. Ende ick sal viantscap setten tusschen u ende den wive / ende tusschen uwen sade / ende haren sade. Dit selve sal u dat hoof vertreden / ende ghi sult hem in die versenen biten.100 The implication that the serpent had previously eaten fruit is derived from a reading of Gene-sis 1.29-30 which omits the final phrase found in the Hebrew text, Greek Septuagint, and modern texts, and which therefore must necessarily run verses 29 and 30 together, e.g. Bibel 1518 f. iiv, ad Gen. 1.29: Ende god seyde Siet ick hebbe u ghegheuen alle groeyende cruyt dat zaet brenct der aerden. ende alrehande houte dat in hem seluen heeft zaet nae sijnre manieren. dat si sullen wesen een spijs u (30) ende allen den dieren vander aerden ende elcken voeghel des hemels. ende allen die veruert worden inder aerden ende daer levende ziele in is dat si t’eten sullen hebben. Cf. the Catholic English-language Douay Version which maintains the mediaeval reading of the Vulgate Gen.1.30: And to all the beasts of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to all that move upon the earth, and wherein there is life, that they may have to feed upon. And it was so done., as against the Vatican’s corrected Nova Vulgata, which ends this passage...et in quibus est anima vivens, omnem herbam virentem ad vescendum, equivalent to the King James text: and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat; and the (Erasmus-based?) Bibel 1523, ende alle ghewormte dat dat leuen heeft datsi alder-ley groen cruyt eten…. This omission is not a mediaeval corruption, but is found in the oldest Vulgata manuscripts (cf. WEBER-GRYSON 1994 p. 5). The fuller texts are able to separate verses 29 and 30 so as to apply verse 29 only to humans, reserving the fruit and grain to the humans and lumping the beasts, birds and creeping things together as eating grass.

heer, dat wijf dattu my [die du my] ghegeuen hebt tot eenre hu[i]ijs vrouwe ende ghesellinne, die gaf my vander vrucht ende ic at daer af”.97 Weder vragende God Eua waer om sy dat had gedaen, des ontsculde Eua: “God,[f. 313v] dat serpeint heeft my bedrogen ende geraden te eten”. Ende want ‹t›serpent gheen onschout gheuen en mocht soe gaf ‹God› den serpent vier maladixcije, dat wijf drie, den ‹man› twee. ‹Doe?› seyde hi totten serpent ouermits dat die viant inden serpent gelijc tot hem beyden quam: “Wanstu serpent dit gedaen hebste onder alle diere ende beeste der eerden98 [Ende] {1} wo‹e›rt salstu ouer dijn borst cruy-pen ewylic, want wt dijnren borst ende herten dese ong‹e›hoersamheit is gecomen.99 {2} Ende voert meer en salste vrucht eten100 ouermits dattu hebste geraden te eten dese vrucht die ic verboden had te eten, mer du salste ewilic eerde eten ende slym der eerden. {3} Woert meer sal ic viantscap setten tussen dy ende den wijf die ewilic dueren sal ende ‹tussen hoer saet ende› dijn. {4} Oec mede wanttu mit dese wijf alle menschen ghebrocht ‹hebt› in groter eleynde



great misery and suffering, so shall another woman break all of your power and split your head in twain. And indeed hearthat you will have reason to ‹fear› her footsteps ‹as much as› to envy her humble obedience and virtue”. Which woman has been revealed as the glorious Virgin Mary and Mother of God, blessed eternally, who also subsequently won more grace with her obedience than Eve had ever lost with her disobedience. Furthermore, God said to Eve: {1} “May your pitiful suffer-ings be multiplied and also those of the children that you shall bear. {2} Eternally you shall bear your children in pain and in sorrow. {3} And you shall be under the power of your husband and he shall be your master”. Furthermore, God said to Adam, who was bitterly crying and awaiting his sentence in great fear and forebod-ing: “Adam, because you have listened to the voice of your wife rather than to my voice and because you have eaten the fruit which I for-bade you to eat, {1} the earth will be cursed in your working it, because thorns and thistles and weeds will be what it will bring forth for you. {2} From now on, further, in the sweat of your brow you shall

eat your bread until the time at which you shall return to the earth from which you have come”. On account of this Adam gave his wife her sec-ond name in the presence of God, and named

101 MS: biengen.102 Phrase omitted due to proximity of two occurences of als; vresen a conjecture.103 MS: salstu, a repetition error as this word is dependent on the preceding dattu.104 MS den, take as MDutch denne, variant form of danne.105 Bibel 1518, f.iii(v), Genesis 3.16.: Ic sal menichfoudighen dijn cativicheden ende dijne drach-ten, Jn pine sulstu dine kinderen baren, ende du selste wesen onder des mans macht ende hi sal heerscapie boven di hebben. Bibel 1523, ibidem: Ick sal u vele cativicheden toe senden als ghi groot sult gaen / ghi sult uwe kinderen in pine baren. Ende ghi sult wesen onder des mans macht ende hi sal u heer sijn.106 MS: dy.107 Bibel 1518, f.iii(v), Genesis ad 3.17-19: Om dattu hoerste dijns wij‹f›s stemme ende dattu aetste van den houte dat ic di of beval dattu niet eeten en soudes. Soe sal die aerde vermaledijt zijn in dijnen werc. In pinen sulstu eeten van haer alle die dagen dijns leuens. Die aerde sal di groeyen dornen ende distel, ende du sulste eten dat cruyt der aerden, in zweete dijns aensichtes soe sulstu eeten dijn broot. tot dattu selste wederkeeren inder aerden daer du of ghenomen biste. Want du biste gemul. ende du sulste wederkeren in ghemul. The Vulgate’s et comedes herbam terrae, has become eten dat cruyt der aerden in the Bibel and oncruyt in the Tilburg text. Bibel 1523, ibidem: Om dat ghi verhoort hebt uwes wijfs stemme / ende hebt ghe‹ge›ten van den boom / daer ick u af gheboot ende seyde / ghi en sult daer nz (=nit) af eten / vervloect si den acker om dinen wille / met pinen suldi u daer af gheneren / alle u leven lanck / doornen ende distelen sal hi u draghen / ende ghi sult dat cruyt des veldes eten. In swete uwes aensichts suldi u broot eten / tot dat ghi weder aerde wordt / daer ghi af ghenomen sijt / want ghi sijt stof ende sult weder keeren ende stof worden.

ende druck, soe sal noch een allen dijn macht bugen101 ende dijn hoeft ontwee vryuen. Hoe wael hoer[f. 314r] dattu nochtans haer voet stappen ‹alse veel vresen›102 als hoer oetmoedige ghehor-sam[ge]heit en doechd benijden salste”.103 Wel-ken die gloriose maecht Maria ende moder Gods ewilic gebenedijt heeft geweest die oec veel ‹meer› gracie den104 verworuen heeft mit ghe-hoersamheit dan Eua ye verlore‹n› had mit hoere ongehoersamheit. Woert meer seide hi tot Eua:105 {1?} “Dijn armelike verdriet vermennyuoldige ‹ik› [Ende voert in dijnre] ende voert in dijnre vruchten die du106 voert salst[e] ‹brengen›, {2} eweclick salste baren dijn kijnder in pijne ende in droefenysse! {3} Ock sulste wesen onder [ende] ‹die› mo[ge]genheit dijns mans ende hi sal dijn heer wesen”. Woert seide God tot Adam, die bitterlijck seer weende, verwachtende mit grote anxt ende verbeyden sijn sentij‹n›cien: “Adam, wanttu meer ghehoert hebt die stem dijns wijfs dan mijn stem ende hebt ghegeten vander vruchten die ic verboden had te eten,107 {1} soe sal die eerde vermaledijt wese‹n› in dij-nen ‹werc›, want dijstel ende doerne ende oncruyt die sul dy voert brengen. {2} Woert meer in sweet dijns aensicht sulstu[f. 314v] dijn broet eten totter tijt toe dattu weder coemste totter eerden daer du af gheco-men bist. Want as bistu ende salstu weder toe comen”. Des gaf [God] Adam inder tegenwoer-


346 BOB MILLER

her Eve which means as much as to say Mother of Unholiness, for before her name had been Virgo. And because Adam showed such great remorse and lay on his knees day and night on the earth before God with Eve his wife weeping unspeakably much, God took pity on Adam and Eve and made both of them a garment from the pelt and fur and skin of beasts and put them onto them himself, saying “Because you have been disobedient to me, so that you will not any more reach out your hands for the fruit of life and eat of it and live forever, you must remain outside of Paradise in the earth”. Upon this God went with them both to the outermost gate, all too deeply saddened because He was downcast by Adam’s distress, because He loved them (sc. Adam and Eve) very deeply.And as Saint Ambrose says, God gave him His blessing nonetheless, when He had to part from him. But Adam could not look God in the face because of his great shame and pain that he felt because he had made God so angry. You should know that Adam, as soon as he broke God’s commandment and sinned, lost the four virtues which should have preserved him, and he was stripped of them, namely his Innocence, and his Mercy, Truth and Peace, because the Mercy which should have preserved him, he lost quite rightly because he did not spare either himself, or his children which were yet to be born, but made them all subject to the sentence of death. He also lost his Justice in that he believed and trusted the voice of the serpent and of his wife more than the voice of God. And he lost the Truth which neither of them trusted to

believe in, namely that they would die as God had said to them in the beginning, but trusted the fiend who said that they would nowise die, but should be like God. They also lost their Peace, for there is no peace and cannot be in the midst of sins, no matter how well our desires for worldly goods may be satisfied. For the sin-ner is constantly fearing his conscience, which is a great pain to the heart and to the senses. Which wretched man, thus totally robbed,

108 MS: toetscen, = toetse hen.109 MS datten, read as dat het hen.110 God here means the Son, the Word, not Godfather, see note to f.318r.111 In this version of the list of four virtues rechtueerdicheit, as included in the previous version of the list on f.308v and discussed in the following interpretation, is replaced by onnoselheit.112 MS: goede.

dicheit Gods sijnen wijf hoere ander naem ende noemdese Eua welc alsoe weel beduyt als moe-der der onsalicheit, want te voeren hietse Virgo. Ende want Adam also groten rouwe had en op sijn knyen nacht ende dach lach op die eerde voer God mit Eua sijnen wijf onwtsprekelick seer screyende, soe ontfermde God Adam ende Eua ende macten selue hem beyden enen pels van vellen ende huyde van besten ende doetse-hen108 hem seluen aen seggende: “Want ghi my onghehoersam heebt geweest, op dat ghi u hande niet meer en stect totter vruchten des leu-ens ende daer af eet ende leuen moet ewelic, soe suldi wten paradijs inder eerden sijn”. Des ghinc God mit hem beyden totter wtterste poer-ten, toe seer bedroeft ouermits datten109 leet was van Adam armoede, want hijse seer lief had.[f. 315r] Ende als hi nochtant Sunte Ambruys ‹seit›, gaf God hem sijn benedixcy, doe hi van hem scheyde‹n› soude. Mer Adam en dorst God niet aensien in sijn aenschyn110 van groter scemte ende druck die hi had om dat hi God soe seer vertoer‹n›t had. Dit is te weten dat Adam alsoe gheringe als hy Gods geboet ‹gebroken?› had, ‹ende› sunde gedaen had, soe verloes Adam mit allen recht die vierde doechden die hem bewaren soude ende waert daer af beroeft, als van sijnre onnoselheit111 ende ontfermherti‹c›heit, waerheit ende vreede, want die ontfermherticheit die soude hem hebben bewaert, die verloes hi mit allen recht in dien dat hi hem selue niet en spaerde, noch sijn kijnder die noch geboerde‹n› soude‹n› weerden, mer der ewiger sente‹n›cie des doots hem schul-dich makende. Ock verloes hi die rechtueerdicheit in dien dat hi [Eua] meer gheloeftde ende betroude die stem des ‹serpents/viants› en sijns wijfs meer dan die stem Gods. Oec verloes hi die waerheit die sy beyde niet te ‹betrouen›[f. 315v] geloue‹n› dat si sterue‹n› soude‹n› als God hem ierst had geseit, mer betroude‹n› den viant die seide[n] dat si in genre wijs niet steruen en souden, mer soude‹n› wesen ghelijc als Gode,112 oec verloere‹n› sy die vrede, want genen vreden en is noch en mach wese‹n› mitten sunde-ren. Oec hoe wael sy alle hoer begeerten hebben van eertschen goede. Want altijt vroecht die sun-der hoer con‹scien›cien welcke alte grote pijn is der herten ende der sijnne‹n›. Welck eleyndi[cheit]



stripped of his four virtues, which should have preserved him in his innocence, cannot once again be completely clothed until at the right time when God, Creator of everything created, united with human nature, allowed Himself to be stripped of his clothes under the gallows of the cross, with great agony, nor was he (sc. suf-fering man) able to become alive again in his soul, other than when the Creator of everything created,Jesus Christ True God and man, having died on the cross was pierced by a spear stuck into his blessed heart, from which ran water and blood, from which all sacraments of the Holy Church derive all their force and power, which make alive once more the humans dead in their sins, and cleanse them of their sin. You should know that many speak foolishly of Adam and judge him because he broke God’s commandment, and yet they themselves rush to follow in his footsteps after him and sin more than he ever sinned, and they despise Adam outrageously because he was subject to and listened to the voice of his wife and not the voice of God, they who themselves continuously every day listen more to the voice of their own wife Eve and are obedient to it, namely their own will and lustful nature, rather than to God.120 Dear friends, don’t you think that if you all together saw Adam right here in front of you, and Eve, who broke the commandment, and she offered Adam the appleso that he would also break God’s command-ment, and you saw that Adam was also going to agree to do this, depending on whether he would be more obedient to God or to his wife, would

113 MS: werder influenced by preceding weder.114 MS dat god scheppen alle creatuer, misunderstood as a verbal phrase.115 MS: scpeer, iteration from schepper on preceding page.116 MS: gebenededy, cf. forms gebenediden, gebenedien, see GEBENEDIËN, MW 2 column 959.117 MS: sunert.118 Adan is a common variant of Adam in Western mediaeval manuscripts.119 vermoedy from MDutch vermoeden, vermoed-ghi, here: en vermoed-ghi, don’t you think that…120 In Sermon XXI of the Ruusbroecgenootschap MS. Brugman uses the simile of the wife as ‘sinlicheit’ and the husband as ‘redelicheit’: Ende die leerres setten een gelikenisse ende seggen: “het is met ons als inden paradijs was…. (the Fall is recounted)… Aldus ist oec met den men-schen: als hem die duvel die sunde voer-hout, soe ontfanget die sinlicheit, die bi den wive beteek-ent is, eerst die genuechte der gedachten der sunden ende daer-nae behagen. Mer daer-mede en is die sunde noch niet volbracht. Want die redelicheit en weet daer noch niet af, die bi den man beteekent is. Mer als die sinlicheit der reden die genuechte offert, ende die / reden die genuechte ontfanget ende die sunde merct, soe is si sculdich dat der sinlicheit uut te slaen. Want is dat si oec hoer genuechten daer-van nee‹m›t, ende consent daer-toe gheeft, soe is die sunde volbracht. (GROOTENS 1948 pp 251-252)

ge mensche, aldus alte mael beroeft ontcleedt van sijne‹n› vier dochden die [hem te] hem te bewaere‹n› haden in sijnre onnoselheit ende en mocht niet meer weder ghecleedt werden113 vol-comelic, ende te recht tijt toe dat God scheppe‹r› alle‹r› creatuer114 verenycht mitter menscheliker natueren sijn clederen onder die galge des cruce lyet wt treck met groter pijnen, noch en mocht niet weder leuendich werden, inder sielen, dan doe die scepper alle‹r› creatueren[f. 316r] Jhesus Christus gewaer God ende men-sche aenden cruce gestoruen mit enen speer115 in sin gebenedyden116 hart ghesteken waert, daer wt lopende water en bloet, van welke alle sacrame‹n›te der heiliger kerke cracht ende macht af ontfangen, die die mensche doet in sunden weder leuendich mact ende suuert117 van sunden. Des is hi te weeten datter veel dwaesselic spreken ende Adan118 veroerdelen om dat hi Gods gebodt gebrocken had, ende nochtant soe volge‹n› sy hem nae als meer te sundege‹n› dan hi ye ghesundiget heeft ende veronweerdege‹n› hem wonderlicke tege‹n› Adam dat hi die stem sijns wijfs meer onderda-nich heeft gewest ende gehoert dan die stem Gods die die nochtants alle daghe hoere‹n› wijf Eua als hoeren eygen wil ende begeerlijcker natueren meer hoeren ende onderdanych ‹sijn?› dan God. Lieue vrienden en vermoedy119 of ghi alte samen Adam tegenwoerdich saecht ende ghi oec Eua, die dat ghebodt gebrocken had, ende sy Adam den appel voert boedt[f. 316v] om oec Gods ghebodt te brecken, ende mercten dat Adam sijn consent daer toe gaue, of hi meer God onderdanych woude sijn of sijn wijf ende en soude‹n› niet te samen roepen mit


348 BOB MILLER

you not all together cry out to him saying, “O Adam, Adam, watch out for your wife, she has been fooled by the serpent. Take care and do not believe her!”? And how many times do the ser-pents still come to us to advise us to break God’s commandments and still we cannot give ourselves the correct advice. However well we know beforehand the deception of the hellish serpent, we trust and believe the serpent more than God and break God’s commandments straight away many times over, because the fiend first seduces and wins over our wife Eve, that is to say our sensuality and our natural inclinations, and our sensuality suggests to us that we should listen to our poor ‹nature?› rather than God.

On Eve’s Remorse and Adam’s Penitence

You must know that when Adam and Eve had broken the Commandment and had left Para-dise, they remained staying as close as possi-ble to Paradise, weeping greatly and sighing with great remorse, and they remained together there in sadness sighing until God Himself came to them and comforted them lovingly telling them that He Himself would become a man and that ‹He would come› in order to redeem them and their children. And He fore-told them of His Passion and of all the pain which He would ‹suffer› at the hands of the Jews and once again rise up to heaven and how He would send down the Holy Ghost to reside in the hearts of His loved ones. And He fore-told them the time of His Coming and the place

121 MS: heer.122 MS: en comen.123 MS omission: natuer seems the only possible choice since sinnen clashes with the foregoing synnlicheit.124 MILLER 2003 prints a Middle Low German legend of the wood of the cross before Christ, ‘Do god Adam hadde geschapen’, a prose version of the Latin legend Post peccatum Adae, from the MS Cuick, Kreuzherrenkloster St. Agatha, olim Frenswegen, Augustiner-Chorherren, a product of the Devotio moderna of the Windesheimer Congregation, in which the allegorical equation of Adam and Eve with reason and passion is used (see p. 327), derived ultimately from Philo, De Opificio mundi, LIX, and Legum allegoriae III, chapter LXXXIX. See the use of this motif in a sermon by Jan Brugman cited above. An adjacent leaf of this manuscript contains the Dispute of the Four Daughters of God in the ‘Rex et famulus’ version used by Brugman. MILLER suggests that the Low German work is an imitation, made without access to sources, of the pseudo-Bona-ventura Life of Jesus, which also contains an adaptation of the Four Daughters theme (STALLINGS-TANEY 1997 pp. 12-14, DE BRUIN 1980 pp. 17-19, this text now attributed to Johannes de Caulibus, see MILLER 2003 pp. 325-326)125 A fixed phrase, cf. f. 314v God decrees: soe suldi wten paradijs inder eerden sijn.126 On this and following progressive forms a nasal mark has been placed out of place by cor-rection.

macht tegen hem seggende: “O Adam, Adam, hoedt di voer dijn wijf, si is bedrogen vanden serpent. Daer wacht dy ende geloeft haer121 niet!”? Och hoe ende menychwerf comt noch die serpenten tot ons om te raden dat gebodt Gods te brecken ende nochtans en connen122 wi ons selue niet gerade‹n›. Hoe wael wy nochtans die bedriegenisse der helscher serpenten te woe-ren wael weten ende kennen, wy ‹betrouwen› ende gheloue‹n› die serpenten meer dan God en brecken dat ghebodt Gods met eens meer dick en menychwerf, want die viant verwijnt ierst ons wijf Eua, dat is onse sijnlicheit ende toeney-genheit der natueren, ende die synn[c]licheit brenct ons voer dat wi ons crancke ‹natuer?›123 meer hoeren dan God.124

Van Eua rouwe ende Adam penitencie.

Hier is te weeten doen Adam ende Eua dat [f. 317r] gebodt gebrocken hadden ende wten para-dijs waren,125 soe bleuen sy biden paradijs woenne‹n›de126 als sy alre naest mochten, seer scryende ende mit suchten ende mit swaeren rouwe, ende suchten droeue‹n›de by melcande-ren woenne‹n›de alsoe lange tent God selue by hem quam ende troestese mijnliken gheue‹n›de hem te kennen dat hi selue noch mensche weer-den soud ende dat ‹hi comen soude› hem ende sijn kijnder te verloessen. Ende voer seyde hem sijn passcy ende alle sijn pijn die hi van den Joden soude naemaels ‹liden› ende weder ver-rijsen [ende] opwaert te hemel, ende hoe hi den heiligen geest sijnen vrienden in hoere herten seynde‹n› sal. En voerseiden hem [hoe] die tijt



where He would suffer and be crucified and many other future things which no other prophet after them was ever told by God. And when Adam and Eve had fully heard and understood this, Adam and his wife Eve fell to their knees before God in the most humble way possible and wept

before God on account of their sins in such a way that no other creature after them would ever weep. Although one does read in the Pas-sion of Saint Laurence that when he was in prison he restored the sight of a pagan man who had wept so sorely over the memory of his sins that he had become blind. But Saint Augustine in his commentary on Genesis said in regard to the penitence of Adam that none of those at the foot of the Cross on which Christ died was as saddened and downcast as Adam and Eve had been on account of the so very bitter death which God would suffer on account of their sins, not even Mary the Mother of God even though her heart was pierced by the sword of anguish. On this account God lovingly com-forted them and lovingly heard their penitence and gave them both his divine blessings and promised them both that He would always remain by them with his grace. But however much our beloved Lord comforted them in order to set their minds at peace, since they had such great remorse, and they did not want to remain long on earth, and they could not become tranquil, because of the fact that God, whom they had made wrathful, should suffer such great pain and should die such a bitter death. And as Adam and Eve lay before God on the earth overflowing with unspeakable weeping,

127 MS: seide.128 e.g. the Legenda aurea of Jacobus a Voragine: (Lawrence was) in a gaol with many other persons, among whom was a certain pagan named Lucillus, who had lost the sight of his eyes with his weeping. Lawrence then promised to restore his sight if he would believe in Christ and receive baptism, and he instantly asked to be baptised. Taking some water, Lawrence said to him: ‘All things are washed away in confession’. RYAN & RIPPENBERGER 1941 pp. 439-40; cf. GRAESSE 1890 pp. 490-491.129 This mention of a reference to a penitence of Adam to be found in one of Augustine’s com-mentaries of Genesis may have played a role in the bringing together of the two texts found here.130 Rouwe, feminine or masculine noun.131 The Lord who created Adam and Eve was the Word, the Son; the pain and death which he suffers are not applied to God the Father, although in the following sentence the Holy Spirit and the Trinity do share in the sympathy which the Lord (Son) feels for the protoplasts. cf. the Evan-gelium Nicodemi, Latin B 25, where Eve, speaking to Christ, says: I see the hands that made me. See ERFFA 1989 pp. 45-47, citing John 1.3, Colossians 1.15-16, I Corinthians 8.6, Hebrews 1.2 and the Nicene Creed.

sijnre toe coemst ende die stede daer hi lijde‹n› ende gecrust soude weerden ende veel meer toe-comende dingen den enych ander prophet nae hem ye van God vernam. Ende als Adam ende Eua dit volcomelicke hadde‹n› ghehoert ende verstaen, soe viel Adam mit synen wijf Eua, als hy alre oetmoedelicste moch[s]te voer God op sijn knyeen ende screyden[f. 317v] voer God om sijn‹re› sunden dat nye creatuer nae hem ye soe en weende om sij‹n› sunden. Hoe wael dat men leest dat Sunte Lau-wenerens passcie dat hi inder kerker enen hey-dense mensche siende127 maect die om sijn‹re› gedenckenisse alsoe seer screyden dat hi blijnnt was worden.128 Want Sunte Augestijnus seit op dat ierste boeck der bibelen vander penenten-cien Adam129 daer hi seit dat nyemont inden doot Christus onder den cruce alsoe bedruct ende droewich en was, noch die moeder Gods Maria hoe wael dat dat sweert des rouwe130 haer hert doer sneet, als Adam ende Eua hadt om dat God also sueren bittere doot lijden soude‹n?› om hoer sunden wil. Waer om datse God mijn-lijke troesten ende ontfynck mynliken hoere beyden penetencie ende gaf hem beyde sijn godtelike benedicxe ende loeuende hem beyden dat hi altoes by hem wesen soude mit sijnre gra-cie [en] blijuen. Mer hoe onse lieue heer hem beyden meer troeste om te vreden te setten doe sy al-[f. 318r] -soe grote rouwe hadden ende hem lange inder eerden soe en woude ende mochte hem niet te vreden setten om dat God die si ver-toernt hadden alsoe grote pijn soud lijden ende soe bitteren doot soud steruen.131 Ende als Adam ende Eua ouervloeyt mit onwtsprekelike tranen inder eerden voer God lage‹n›, soe waert God


350 BOB MILLER

so God was moved and touched by their unspeakable remorse, ‹and› the Holy Trinity and all the choirs of angels ‹also›. And as our beloved Lord left them He appeared to be some-what sad after the manner of humans, howso-ever that no inward sadness can intrude into the Godhead, but in the same way as one of a pair of friends knows what pain and suffering the other is going through, and in the same way God appeared sad, because He has complete precognition of all things, because Adam would suffer great privation and pain in his body and unspeakableremorse in his heart because he had broken God’s commandment with Eve. And as our Lord ‹left, Adam went› with Eve out of the East away from Paradise, sighing and constantly weeping until he came to the Promised Land, which was the land in which He would in later times be born, wander, live, preach and die. As Saint Jerome said: So long were they both con-tinuously and repeatedly weeping on the hill of Calvary night and day without respite, because when Eve looked over at Adam and pulled her-self up a little, and remembered that she had vainly betrayed Adam and plunged him into misfortune, and saw how he had been continu-ously wringing his hands and casting his eyes heavenward, shamefully and humbly desiring forgiveness from Our Dear Lord, when Eve saw

Adam in this way, she fell down again on the earth with great commotion of the sadness of her heart, weeping unspeakably much, accusing herself of bringing Adam to this situation and that it was her fault. And in turn as Adam heard and saw the great sadness of Eve, so Adam became even more exceedingly sad and all his pain and suffering were increased because he acknowledged that he was the true cause through which Eve and he had come to this pass and had fallen, because God had given the com-

132 MS: Hoe woel, although wole is a variant of wel, the scribe’s form is wael, so this is probably influenced by the preceding Hoe.133 MS scheen is taken as a form of schijnen and om as iteration, but an alternative interpretation could read ommeschinen or ommeschemen, = ommeschaduwen, requiring reading droewich as droevicheit.134 MS: volconelicke.135 the continuation of this word overleaf omitted.136 sic, should be: Caluarien, but this graphy appears again f. 319r.137 A variant form of MDutch nacht (MH p. 373). See ff. 308r/310v alternation of brach/bracht, also perhaps aversion to nacht as this has previously occurred several times as ‘naked’.138 MS dat = dat het: at VAE 20.1 the scribe writes out: dattet.

bewege‹n› ende beruert mit hoere‹n› onwtspre-kelike rouwe ‹ende?› die heilige drieuoldicheit ende alle coren der engelen. Ende als onsen lieue heer van hem beyde scheide soe scheen hi droe-wich te wesen na manyeren der mensche licht, hoe wael132 dat geen inwendige droefheit in die godheit comen en mach, mer gelijckerwijs als die een vrient wael weet dat die ander in groter noet ende droefheit comen sal ende daer om [om] scheen God oec droewich,133 want hi alle dinck volcomelicke134 te voeren wist, hoe dat Adam grote armoede en lijden hebben soude inden lichaem ende onwtsprecke-‹like›135

[f. 318v] rouwe inder herten om dat hi Gods gebodt mit Eua gebrocken had. Ende als onse lieue heer van Adam ‹scheide, is Adam gegaen?› mit Eua wt Orienten vanden paradijs suchtende ende altijt screyende tot dat hi quam totten lande der beloeften als inden landen daer hi naemaels geboeren soude weerden, wannede-ren, woennen, preedicken ende steruen. Als Sunte Jheronimus seit: soe lange ‹liggen› si beyde dick ende menych werf opten berch van Clauarien136 nach137 ende dach sonder aflaten van screyen want als Eua Adam aensach ende hoer een wenych op richte ende ouerdacht dat si Adam onnosellicke bedrogen had ende hem in die eleynde ghebrach had en sach dat hi dick ghewrongen had sijn hande ende alsoe sceme-lijcke ende oetmoedelick sijn ogen ten hemel sloech, begeer‹en›de ghenaede van onse lieuen heer, als Eua dat[f. 319r] sach van Adam, soe viel si neder opter eerden mit grote gherucht van weemoedicheit haers herten screyende onsprekelic seer, becla-gende in hoer seluen dat sy Adam daer toe gebracht had ende dat 138 hoer schout was. Wee-der om als Adam hoerde en sach die groten rouwe van Eua, soe beweemoedichde hem veel meer Adam dan ‹hi› mocht ende vernyden hem alle pijn ende druck ouermits dat hi kennde dat hi die rechte sake was daer Eua ende hi in grote druck gecomen ende gheuallen waren



mandment in the first place to him and Adam humbly blamed himself. In this way they both remained lying there crying so much that they could not speak to each other. And as they thus in great penitence and remorse lay on the hill of Calvary, God Himself came to the both of them with a great throng of angels

and comforted them in a very friendly manner and called them to Him and He walked between the two of them and showed them friendly favours without end, took them by the hand and comforted them with His presence and remained there a long time sitting, because His Divine Mercy could not any longer suffer the great pain and suffering, and they cried so bit-terly that God Himself wiped away the tears from their eyes, for in the same way as a mother who has a sick child who is special to her and that she loves and which is in great pain and is crying and is sick has sympathy and dearly wants to comfort the child, with frequent kisses and speaking with pleasant words and pressing the child to her heart with many signs of love because she wants to settle her child and end its crying, just so behaved Our Dear Lord, the gracious and merciful God, towards Adam and Eve, ‹because› He loved them and cared for them incomparably more than ever any mother could love her own only child. But Adam did not dare lift his eyes out of shame and so he kept his head downcast on the ground. And however much God comforted them both, they both wept even more and could not be comforted and could not find any solace. In the same way as Saint Peter the Holy Apostle, after he had thrice denied God out of fear and dread and because of that bitterly wept, because he regretted it. And

God forgave him everything and comforted him in his distress, nevertheless he could not be sat-isfied and he could not and would not be com-forted in any way on account of his sins, so that as long as he lived whenever he heard the cock crow he cried out bitterly because he remem-bered his abhorrent sin namely that he had failed God so completely and he wept so much that the flesh of his cheeks was drenched with hot tears for so long that they became sodden and furrowed, and his holy face and cheeks became pitted. And in this same way also the holy Adam had such great remorse ‹that he›

139 MS: ontfermherticheit.

want hem God prynsepalic ‹t›ghebodt geuen had ende Adam hem seluen oetmoedelicke beschuldege‹de›. Soe bleuen si liggen screy-ende also seer dat die een den andere niet toe en conde spreken. Ende als si aldus in groter pen-etencien ende rouwe lagen opten berch van Clauarien, soe quam God selue tot hem beyden mit een groter schae‹r› der engelen[f. 319v] ende vertroestse seer vriendelic ende riepese tot hem ende hi ghinck tusschen hem bey-den ende dede hem veel vriendeliker vryn‹d›scappen aen ende naemse[n] byder hant ende troestese in hem seluen ende bleef daer lange tijt sytten, ouermits dat sijn godtelicken ontferm-herticheit die grote druck ende lijde niet langer lijde en moch ende sy soe bitterlic screyde‹n›, soe vijsten God selue die tranen van hoeren ogen, want gelijckerwijs als een moeder die een sieck kijnt heeft dat si mijnt ende lief heeft ende grote pijn heeft van screyen ende van siecte heeft me‹de›lijden ende dan hem geern troeste‹n› soude, cussenden hem dick ende menychwerf ende vryendelike woerden toe spreke‹n›de druc-kende aen hoer herte mit veel teykenen der[f. 320r] mynnen om dat sij haer kijnt van screyen gheern te vrede setten soude, also dede oec onse lieue heer ghenadegen ende ontferm-hertighen139 God mit Adam ende Eua die hi ongelijc lieuen had ende meer mynde dan ye moeder haer e[n]nyge kynt mijnnen mach. Mer Adam en dorst sijn oge niet op slaen van schem-ten ende altoes had hi sijn ogen ende sijn hoeft neder geslagen ter eerden. Ende hoe God hem beyden meer troesten, hoe sy meer weenden en en mochten niet getrost weerden noch en mochte‹n› gheen solaes ontfangen. Ghelijcker-wijs als Sunte Peter die heilige apostel, doe hi God driewerf versaect van anxt ende van verscrycken‹is›se ende daer om bitterlijcke seer screyde, want hem leeyt was. Ende[f. 320v] Godt hem al vergeuen had ende hem vertroest had in sijnre vrijsenisse, nochtant en was hi niet te vreden ende mocht niet noch en woude in ghee‹n›re[n] wijs getroest wesen van sijnen sunden, want alsoe lange als hi leefde en den haen hoerde roepen, soe screyden hi bit-terlijc seer ouermits dat hi gedacht sijn verweer-licke sunde als dat hi God versackt had stande-lic ende weenende alsoe seer dat sijn vleys van sijnen heiligen wangen ouermits heite tranen versoden was, ende wt gegroeft, alsoe dat hi daer grote gaten in sijn heilige aenschijn ende wangen had. Ende also had oec dese heilige


352 BOB MILLER

had broken God’s commandment and remained unreceptive to any happiness as long as he lived, but rather he and Eve remained weeping inces-santly.For as Saint Jerome says in the Book of the Law, no created being has ever been so holy, neither in the Old Testament nor in the New Testament, nor shall ever more be born, who felt such great remorse and did such great peni-tence for their sins as Adam and Eve did and cried out for their sins, because in all their life they never committed any mortal sin after they had broken the commandment. Neither did the two of them ever laugh during the whole of their life, neither did they enjoy any happiness or pleasure other than when God foretold to the two of them that he would atone for their sins and their misdeeds. And even more than all other creatures he (sc. Adam) was saddened because he together with Eve had seen clearly God his Creator in His glory often and many times, both in Paradise and with them on earth, because of all creatures He (sc. Christ) was the wisest and the most beautiful which was ever born to a mother.

Chapter This is about the penitence of Adam

and Eve and it was written by Saint Metho-

dius the holy bishop and martyr in a book

which is called the Revelation of Methodius,

that is to say the revelation which was

granted to him by God when he was forgot-

ten by all men and sat as a prisoner for the

sake of Christ (sc. awaiting martyrdom)How Adam and Eve lived their life after they

were driven out of Paradise. Adam delved and Eve span…

140 This apparent reference to a specific Patristic source is unclear, it might seem to refer to a commentary on Deuteronomy, or the entire Torah (Pentateuch), or it could be taken as a truncated form of the Boeck der Rechteren (Bibel 1518), i.e. Judges. Jerome did not write commentaries on Deuteronomy or Judges. If the phrase inden boeck is taken in a broader sense as about, then it could be a reminiscence of one of the prologues in the Vulgate apocryphally ascribed to Jerome.141 As is made clear elsewhere in the text (see note to f. 318r), God the creator appears to the protoplasts in the form of the Son, the Word, Christ. This passage nevertheless seems inappropriate not only because of the use of the colloquial turn of phrase ‘born to a mother’, but also because it refers to many (dick ende menych werf) face-to-face encounters of Adam with God, a motif which is not consonant with either of the narratives found here and may derive from a different source.142 From here the pericopes of the VAE will be primary while foliation will be indicated within the text.143 This phrase does not belong to VAE or to the Revelationes of Pseudo-Methodius; it may once have been a caption to an illustration which was taken into the text. However, it is possible that it has been used deliberately to make good a lack at the beginning of the Latin text. See ERFFA 1989, ‘Arbeit’, pp. 342-346, here pp. 344-345: “… Am häufigsten sieht man Adam mit der

Adam grote rouwe om dat ‹hi› ‹t›gebodt Gods gebrocken had ende en woude geen blij[c]scap ontfangen alsoe lange als hy leefde, mer bleef screyende mit Eua sonder aflaten.[f. 321r] Want als Sunte Jheronimus seit inden boeck des rechts,140 soe en heeft nye creatuer alsoe heilich geweest inden ouden testement noch inden nyen testment noch nummermeer werden en sal geboeren, die soe grote rouwe had ende penet‹e›nce dede voer sijn sunden als Adam ende Eua deden ende voer hoe‹r› ‹sun-den› scrieyde. Want si in allen hoere‹n› leeuen nye doot sunde en deden nae dat sij ‹t›gebodt gebrocken hadden. Noch nye en verlachten si hem beyde in allen hoere‹n› leuen, noch en ont-fingen si nye einyge blijscap in hoeren leuen of ghenocht dan daer af dat God hem beyden voer seyden dat hi voer hoer sunden soude vol doen ‹ende› voer hoer misdaet. Ende alsoe veel te meer bedroefde hi hem bouen alle creatueren, als hi hem mit Eua claerlijcker gesien had God sijn scepper dick ende menych werf in sijnre [f. 321v] glorie, beyden inden paradijs ende by hem inder eerden, want hi was bouen alle crea-tueren die alre wijsten ende die alre schoenste die ye van moeder lijf gheboren waert.141

Capitell.142 Dit is vander penetencien Adam

ende Eua heeft volcomelic gescreuen Sunte

Metodyus die heilige biscop ende mertelaer

in enen boeck datmen heit Reuelicio Metody

dat is die openbaeringe die hem van God ver-

thoende doe hi van allen menschen verghee-

ten was ende gheuange‹n› sat om Christi

wil.

Hoe Adam ende Eua haer leuen leyden nae

dat sy wtten paradijs verdreuen waeren. Adam ghinc spaden en Eua ghinc spynnen,143



Q (1.1) Cum expulsi essent Adam et Eva de para-disi deliciis, fecerunt sibi tabernacula et fecerunt dies luctus et lamentacionis et in magna tristitia.Q (2.1) Post autem dies septem ceperunt esurire et querebant sibi escas ut manducarent, et non invenerunt. (2.2) Et dixit Eva ad Adam: “Homo meus, esurio; vade, quere nobis escas ut man-ducemus, usquequo videamus si forsitan miser-ebitur nostri et recipiat nos Dominus Deus et revocet nos in locum quo eramus”. BRITISH: in loco ubi prius fueramus; PARIS & MILAN: in locum quo eramus; ARMENIAN: to the Garden, to our place; GEORGIAN: to the same place in the Garden.Q (3.1) Et surrexit Adam et ambulavit dies sep-tem per omnem patriam illam, et non invenit ‹escam› qualem habebant in paradiso. (3.2) Et dixit Eva ad Adam: “Domine mi, putas ne moriamur fame? Utinam ego moriar! Forsitan introducet te Dominus iterum in paradisum, quia propter me iratus est tibi Deus. Vis inter-ficere me et forte introducet te Deus in para-disum; mei enim causa expulsus es inde”. BRITISH: Et dixit Adam, Magna est in celo et in terra creatura eius; aut propter te aut propter me, nescio; PARIS: Et dixit Adam, Magna est in caelo et in terra creatura eius; Verum propter te an propter me, nescio factum est; MILAN: Dixit Adam Eve: Magna est ira in celo, et in omne creatura propter nos; ARMENIAN: Great wrath has come upon us, I know not whether because of you or because of me; GEORGIAN: Because of us a great anger lies upon all creatures, (how-ever) I do not know this: whether it is because of me or because of you.

Hacke… Ein andere, seltene gebrauchte Ackergerät ist der Spaten… / Eva (1) trauert weiter, während Adam arbeitet… (2) hält den Spinnrocken und spinnt… (3) ist die Gehilfin ihres Mannes, sei es, daß sie selbst mit hackt… oder die Ernte einbringt (etc.)… (4) Die im Abendland am weitesten verbreiteten… Bildform… zeigt den hackenden Adam und neben ihm,… gelegentlich auch in einer luftigen Hütte sitzend, Eva. Das Motiv der Hütte, das schon in der karolingischen Bibelillustration vorkommt… ist aus der ›Vita Adae et Evae‹ entlehnt.”.144 To allow comparison with all versions of the LAE the chapters and pericopes are numbered according to the system of the synopsis of ANDERSON & STONE (1999). In the Latin column, the following siglen are used: Q = MS Oxford, Queen’s College 213, from HORSTMANN 1887; G1 = the South German VAE text class edited by PETTORELLI 1998; ‘Rhenish’ (or R1/R2) = the VAE text class edited by PETTORELLI 2001-2; ‘Georgian’/‘Armenian’ = the respective versions of the Long Life of Adam and Eve taken from ANDERSON & STONE 1999; ‘British’ = the excerpts from the Long Life found interpolated in Insular manuscripts of VAE, edited by MOZLEY 1928; ‘Milan’/‘Paris’ = manuscripts of the Latin Long Life edited by PETTORELLI 1998 & 1999b; ‘Meyer’ = variants of the ‘South German’ class edited by MEYER 1878.145 MS: possibly corrected from wae(n)ten.146 MS: corrected from vynden by diacritical marks.147 Loss of the initial V from a figure of VII?148 MS: fel. Read as veel.

(1.1)144… ende si maecten145 enen tabernakel daer sy ses dagen in waeren, ende sy hadden grote rouwe van haer mysdaet.(2.1) Ende hem hongereden alte seer, [f. 322r] ende sy ghingen of sy ennych spijsen mochten wijnden146, ende doen sy twee147 dagen ghesocht hadden ende niet en vonden, (2.2) sprack Eua tot Adam: “Och my hongert alte seer, laet ons noch gaen sueken of wi yet mochten wijnden daer wi by mochten leuen, ende laet ons sien of God ons sijn ontfermherticheit toene wil ende ons weder roepen totten paradys daer hi ons wt dede werpen”.

(3.1) Doen acht dage leeden waeren stont Adam op ende socht al dat ‹lant› om ‹mer› hi en want geen voetsel. Doen keerde hi weder mit groten rouwe bewaen. (3.2) Doe sprack Eua: “Och heer, ic blijue van honger doot ende ic moet jamerlic steruen, ten sij dat ic van dy verslagen weerde. Jc weet wael dat onse heer fel148 op ‹dy vergramt is› om mijn groten sunden ‹Doen sprak Adam:› “Groet sijn onse sunden inden hemel ende inder eerden, daer om en weet ic niet oft om di of om my is, dat Gods gramscap op ons [f. 322v] comen is”.


354 BOB MILLER

BRITISH: Et iterum dixit Eua ad Adam, Domine mi interfice me ut moriar et tollar a facie Domini Deus et a conspectu angelorum eius, ut obliuis-catur irasci tibi Dominus Deus ita forte ut intro-ducat te in paradisum, quoniam causa mei expulsus es ab eo. (Paris, Milan, Armenian, Georgian similar)Q (3.3) “Noli”, respondit Adam, “talia dicere, Eva! Ne forte iterum aliquam malediccionem introducat super nos Dominus Deus; non enim fieri potest ut mittam manum meam in carne mea. Sed surge et queramus ut manducemus et non deficiamus”.Q (4.1) Et ambulantes septem diebus (BRITISH, PARIS, MILAN ADD: Euntes quesierunt AND OMIT: septem diebus) nichil invenerunt sicut habebant in paradiso, Sed hoc tantum invenie-bant sicut animalia edebant. (4.2) Et Adam ad Evam: “‹Hec› tribuit Deus animalibus ut edunt; nobis autem erat esca angelica; (4.3) quapropter iuste et digne plangimus ante con-spectum Domini Dei nostri qui fecit nos, sed eamus et peniteamus magna penitencia (BRIT-ISH, PARIS, MILAN ADD: diebus XL); forsitan miserebitur nostri Deus Dominus et disponet nobis unde vescamur et vivamus”.Q (5.1) Et dixit Eva ad Adam: “Domine mi, dic michi quid est penitencia, et qualiter penite-bimus; ne forte laborem in nobis ponamus quam sustinere non possumus, et non exaudiantur preces nostre (5.2) et convertat Dominus Deus faciem suam a nobis, quia inique egimus. Quan-tum, domine mi, indica michi debeam penitere, quia ego induxi laborem et tribulacionem”.Q (6.1) Et dixit Adam: “Non potes tot dies penitere ut ego. Sed quod ego precipio fac, ut salueris. Ego enim quadraginta dies laboro‹se› debeo ieiunare; tu autem vade ad Tigrus flumen et tolle lapidem (6.2) et sta super ipsum usque ad collum in altitudine fluminis, et non egredia-tur sermo de ore tuo, quia indigni sumus rogare

149 There is no suggestion in the Latin or in any of the other extant LAE versions that the animals have trampled the food, or any direct statement that the protoplasts then ate it. This may be a dramatising addition of the translator. A possible explanation is that readers deduced from VAE 6, Ego enim 40 dies laboro debeo ieiunare, in the Dutch text Jc sal fasten, that the protoplasts must have eaten the food which they found (this juxtaposition probably reflects the use of different sources which were never fully reconciled in the oldest redactions). ANDERSON (1992) discusses the problem which arises from the rabbinic understanding that the curse of Genesis 3.18 implies both that Adam (and mankind) will eat the grass of the field, like the animals, and the bread made in the sweat of his brow, but that only the latter curse comes to pass (see especially pp. 13-19). See the note below on the birth of Cain (VAE 21).150 = Take care lest we untertake more than we can accomplish.151 The word ellendiger, literally exile, apparently apposite in its full meaning, is here already applied in its extended meaning of miserable.

Doe riep Eua mit luder stemmen: “Slaet my doot, vael lieue heer, op dat ic van dijn aenschijn genome‹n› weerde[n], dan sal God alle gramscap van dy vergeeten, dan sal hi dy weder doen comen ter seluer stat daer hi dy wt gewor-pen heeft. Want om mijnnen wil sijdy wtten paradijs ende wt dijnre eren geworpen”. (3.3) Doen sprack Adam: “Neen Eua, en segt dat niet meer, op dat ons God niet ander werf niet en plage. Hoe mocht dat wesen dat ic geen quaet doen en souden, als ic mijn hant stack aen mijn selfs vleys? Staet op en laet ons gaen sueken enyge spijse daer wi by leuen mogen”.(4.1) Doen ghinge‹n› sy sueken, mer si en wonden niet, mer ten lesten wonden sy cruyt dat die beesten vertreden hadden. Dat aten sy.149 (4.2) Doen [Adam] sprack Adam: (4.3) “Och, nu laet ons weenen mit groter droefheit int aenschyn ons lieue heere ende laet ons ‹doen› [f. 323r] penetencie in groter apstenycie XL dage lanck, of God onser yet ontfermen woude ende ons[e] spijse verlene wil, daer wi by mogen leuen”.

(5.1) Doen antwoerde Eua: “Och mijn heer, hoe sullen wi penetenci doen, siet dat wy niet en doen dat wi niet volbrengen en moegen?150 (5.2) Nochtant, mijn heer Adam, alstu ghe-dachte hebste penetencie te doen, soe sullen wijse doen, om dat ic u in deser eleynde[n]ger151 droefheit heb gebracht”.

(6.1) Doen sprack Adam: “‹Non potes tot dies penitere› als ic sal doen. Mer ghy sult doen alsoe weel als ghi vermoecht. Jc sal vasten XL dage ende ghi sult staen in die ryeuier Thyge-rius (6.2) tot dijnen hals ende en spreekt één voert niet, want ons lijppen niet ryn en sijn, ende om dat wi niet weerdich en sijn onse heer



dominum nostrum, quoniam labia nostra polluta sunt de lingo contradicto et illicito; et esto in aqua fluminis XXXIII diebus. Ego autem stabo in aqua Jordanis XL diebus, et forsitan misere-bitur nobis dominis Deus”.Q (7.1) Et ambulavit Eva ad Tigris flumen (7.2) et fecit sicut dixit ei Adam. (7.3) Similiter per-rexit Adam ad Jordanem et stetit usque ad col-lum super lapidem in aqua.

Q (8.1) Et dixit Adam: “Vobis dico, O aque Jordanis, condolete michi et segregamini et cir-cumdate me! Lugete pariter mecum, (8.2) non vos sed me, quia non vos peccastis sed ego”. (8.3) Statim omnia animancia venerunt et cir-cumdederunt illum, et aqua Jordanis stetit ab illa hora non habens cursum suum.BRITISH Tunc dixit Adam, Tibi dico Iordanis, condole mecum et congrega omnia animancia que intra te sunt et circumdate me et lugite mecum, non propter uos lugeatis sed propter me, quia ipsi non peccastis sed ego inique con-tra Dominum iam peccaui, neque ipsi delictum commisistis nec defraudati estis ab alimentis uestris, sed ego peccaui et ab escis mihi conces-sis defraudatus sum. Hec dicens Adam ecce omnia animancia uenerunt et circumdederunt eum, et aqua fluminis stetit in illa hora. Tunc Adam clamauit ad Dominum Deus, et rauce facte sunt fauces eius per singulos dies, et facte sunt dies decem et nouem quod lugentes erant omnia animancia cum Adam.BRITISH: see above; ARMENIAN: When 18 days of their weeping were completed,…; GEOR-GIAN: When the 12 days of his weeping were completed,…Q (9.1) Et transierunt dies decem et octo; Tunc iratus est Sathanas et transfiguravit se in clari-

152 40 days: the consensus of versions of the Long Life suggests that fourty days was the original figure for Adam with 34 days for Eve. The reading found in the Paris Long Life, and in the British text class of VAE, 47 days, has arisen from the compression of a phrase “fourty days, seven more than you”, in line with which the figure for Eve has been corrected in the British MSS but not in the Paris Long Life. Here the Dutch apparently preserves a reading which is that of the Long Life at a point where the relevant phrase of the ‘Bohemian’ text of VAE has been lost or suppressed. However, this may be a coincidence, as the Tilburg VAE 6 gives 40 days for the penance of Eve, which is a rationalising correction dependent on the 47 days for Adam. This is still significant, as the combination of 47 and 40 is characteristic of the British text class of VAE and as such evidence of the use of a source of the Long Life independent of the Paris and Milan manuscripts of the Long Life.153 See note to VAE 4.154 MS: versamynige.155 The consensus of versions of the Long Life suggests that 18 is the original number. It seems that a transition in which the 18 days weeping has been attributed to both protoplasts has been simplified in one of two ways, ‘Mozley’, Paris and Milan attributing the 18 days to Adam alone

God te bidden, ende blijft daer in staen XL dage lanc,152 ende ic sal staen in die Jordaen, of God ons yet ontfermen [f. 323v] woude”.153

(7.1) Doen ghinc ‹Eua› totter reyeuere Thyge-rius. (7.2) Ende si dede als haer Adam geheyten had. (7.3) Ende Adam ghijnc ter vloet der Joer-dane staen op enen steen totten hals toe int water,(8.1) ende hy sprack totter Joerdanen: “Lijd nu mit my ende vergaerdert al dat in u is ende dat met dy swemt, ende gaet h[e]ier by my staen ende screyt mit my, (8.2) om dat ic ghesundich heb”. (8.3) Ende doe ‹hi› dit ghesprocken had soe versamigeden154 alle dieren, vyssen ende vogelen [ende] die inder Joerdanen waren, ende quame‹n› om hem staen, ende dat water bleef al stijl staen om hem.

(9.1) Ende als Eua XXVIII155 dage van deser inder penetencie geleeden waren, soe vergramde


356 BOB MILLER

tatem angeli et abiit ad flumen Tigris ad Evam, (9.2) et invenit eam flentem; et quasi condolens incepit flere et dixir ei: “Egredere de flumine et noli plorare! Jam cessa de tristitia et de gemitu tuo quo solicita es, et Adam vir tuus! (9.3) Audivit enim Dominus Deus gemitum vestrum et suscepit penitenciam vestram, et nos omnes angeli (PARIS: nos et omnes angeli) rogavimus pro vobis deprecantes dominum, (9.4) et misit me ut educerem vos de aqua et darem vobis ali-menta que habuistis in paradiso, eo quod ita penitueritis. (9.5) Nunc ergo egredere, et perdu-cam vos in locum ubi paratus est vobis vic-tus”.Q (10.1) Hec audiens Eva credidit et exivit de aqua fluminis: et caro eius virida erat quasi herba, per frigore. (10.2) Et cum egressa esset de aqua, cecidit in terram; et erexit eam ange-lus diaboli de terra et perduxit eam ad Adam. (10.3) Adam autem cum vidisset eam et Sathanam antecedentem illam, exclamavit cum fletu dicens: “Quomodo iterum seducta es ab adversario nostro, per quem alieni facti sumus de habitacionibus paradisi et letitia eius?”.

Q (11.1) Hec cum vidisset Eva et cognovisset quod diabolus fecisset eam egredi de flumine, et cecidit super faciem suam in terra, et dupli-catus est dolor et gemitus eorum. (11.2) Adam autem exclamavit dicens: “Ve tibi, diabolica invidia, quod expugnas nos. Quid tibi contra nos? Aut quid nobis malicia tua? (11.3) Nun-quid nos abstulimus gloriam tuam? Autquid fecimus tibi? Quid fecimus quod perseq-ueris?

and Tilburg attributing them to Eve alone, while the German and ‘Bohemian’ redactions lose this phrase entirely. The ‘Rhenish’ text contains the isolated phrase Et transierunt dies decem et octo. This is placed between VAE 8 and 9, and in the absence of any explicit mention of Eve it appears to refer to Adam, as shown by the rewritten version of MS Paris BNF 5327, which runs this phrase in with the preceding rather than with the following text. However, there are variants of 28 or 38 days in the manuscripts, some of which are corrections and some in the text, suggesting that the Tilburg figure could be transmitted from the ‘Rhenish’ redaction through a lost ‘Bohemian’ vari-ant (PETTORELLI 2001 pp. 43-47).156 The presence or absence of the word ‘green’ is not important, but the phrase seer gecrenct is related to the presence of two phrases in the Armenian: her flesh was like withered grass, for her flesh had been changed from the water, which have already coalesced in the Georgian: and her flesh was withered like rotten vegetables because of the coldness of the water. See note to the version of this text in the Noordnederlandse Historiebijbel in the essay above.157 The phrase duplicatus est dolor et gemitus eorum is transferred from 11.1 to 11.2, and from Eve to Adam.158 Although it may not have originally had a technical meaning, in the context of the treatise hearers would understand this as a reference to the gloria, the Beatific Vision.

Satenas op hem ende quam als een engel tot Eua inder rieueren Tygerus (9.2) ende sechde sy ween‹en›de alte bitterlic ende hi sechde of hi medelijden mit haer had ende hi sechde tot haer: “Laet af ende gaet wten water [f. 324r] [ende gaet wt Eua?] ende weent niet meer, laet af van uwer droefheit ende weenegen, waer om wilste sorge‹n›, du ende Adam dijn man? (9.3) God heeft dijn screygen gehoert ende heeft dijn penetenci ontfangen, ende wi ende sijn engelen hebben God voer dy gebeden (9.4) ende God heeft my tot u geseynt, dat ic u wt desen water leyden sal (9.5) ende brenge u in een ‹plaetse› daer u spijse bereyt is”.(10.1) Als Eua dit hoerde soe gheloefde sy dat, ende sy liet haer leyden wten water der peneten-cie ende ‹want?› sy was seer gecrenct vanden couden water ende van groeter crancheit,156 (10.2) soe viel sy neder opter eerden. Ende die duuel hefs[c]e op ende hi leyde[n]se tot Adam. (10.3) Ende doe Adam haer sach ende den duuel mit haer, doen riep Adam mit weenlijcker stemmen ende seechden: “Och Eua waer is dijn werck van penetencie? Hoe bistu aldus bedroegen van onser wedersake ouermits ‹wien› wi vremt sijn gewor-den [f. 324v] vander weelden des paradijs?”(11.1) Als Eua dat hoerde[n] soe bekende si wael dattet die duuel was die hoer dit geraden had dat sy wten water soude gaen, doen viel sy neder op aenschijn opter eerden.157 (11.2) Doen waert Adams rouwe gedobbelleert ende hi riep mit luder stemmen: “O wach duuel, waer om wechtste tege‹n› ons, of wat hebben wi di mys-daen? Waer om veruolchstu ons mit scol-cheide? Wat hebben wy dy mysdaen? Wat heb-ben wy mit dijnre quaetheit te doen? (11.3) Hebben wij dijn glorie genomen,158 of wat heb-



Q (12.1) Inimice impie invidiose ingemiscens, vade responde”. Et diabolus dixit: “O Adam, tota inimicia, invidia et dolus meus a te est, quo-niam propter te est, quoniam propter te expulsus sum de Gloria mea, et alienatus de claritate quam habebam in celis in medio angelorum propter te eiectus sum in terra”. (12.2) Respondit Adam et dixit ei: (12.3) “Que est culpa mea, cum non sis lesus a me? Aut quid nos persequeris?”.Q (13.1) Respondit diabolus et dixit ad Adam: “Tu qui dicis nichil fecimus tibi, Tui causa eiec-tus sum. (13.2) Quando enim tu plasmatus es, ego a facie Dei proiectus sum et foras a soci-etate angelorum missus. Quando insufflavit Deus spiritum vite in te Et factus est vultus tuus et similitudo tua ad imaginem Dei, et adduxit te Michael et fecit ‹te ad›orare in conspectus Dei; Et Dominus Deus: ‘Ecce Adam ad imaginem et similitudinem nostram creatus est, adorate eum!’162

Q (14.1) Et egressus Michael primus adoravit, et vocavit me et dixit michi: ‘Adorate imaginem Dei sicut praecepit Dominus Deus’, et ipse Michael primus adoravit, and vocavit me et dixit michi: ‘Adorate imaginem Dei’. (14.3) Et ego respondi: ‘Ego nolo adorare Adam’. Et cum compelleret me adorare Michael, dixi ad eum: ‘Quid me compellis? Non adorabo deteriorem me et posteriorem omnis creature. Antequam fieret, ego sum, et ille me debet adorare’. Q lacks 15.1

159 MS: dyn. The scribe may have expected another noun paralleling gloriam, but the Latin shows that Satan’s own person, tibi, is the object.160 Tilburg and Q share a common lack of the substance of 12.2, whereby the introductory phrase has been retained as referring to the following pericope as well.161 Apart from the basic verb ut-gheworpen, the phrase wten paradijs gheworpen wtter hemel-scher weelden is an expansion compared to all other texts, Latin, Armenian and Georgian.162 This is the appearance of the ‘refusal’ motif which is the only motivation of the rebellion in the VAE, in contrast with the more widely used ‘pride’ motif, which is rehearsed in the Dutch treatise edited above cf. ff. 305-307. See ROSENSTIEHL 1983 for a collection of ancient texts exemplifying the two motifs. In Sermon XXII Brugman discusses the fall of Lucifer suggesting that Lucifer had foreknowledge of God’s intention to become incarnate in man, and that his rebellion was motivated by this, a scenario related to the ‘refusal’ motif: Nu mocht men vragen, waer-om dat lucifer uuten hemel viel. Hier-op antwoerden Alexander ende Bernardinus aldus: dat onse lieve here den engelen een sake voerleyde, dat was, dat hi noch der menscen natuere aenemen woude om de menscen salich te maken; ende dat en woude lucifer niet con-senteren, mer he woude hem setten tegen die wijsheit gods, ende nam dat in onweerden, dat haer die hoge, edel godheit soude mengen onder soe snoden slijm der eerden. (GROOTENS 1948 p. 258).

ben wi van dy159 gemact? Waer om veruolchste du ons totter doot?“(12.1) Doen versuchte[n] die duuel ende sechde: “O Adam, alle mijn viantscap is op dy, want om dijnen wil ben ic verwreemt van der groter claerheit die ic had bouen die engelen, daer ic wt geworpen ben”. (12.2) Doe sechde [f. 325r] Adam:160 (12.3) “Wat schout hebben wi daer aen, of wat hebbe wi di mysdaen?”

(13.1) Die duuel sechde: “Wat vraechstu my? Om dijnen wil ben ic wten paradijs gheworpen wtter hemelscher weelden.161 (13.2) Opten selue‹n› dach doen ghi ghescappen waert, waert ic geworppen van den aenschijn Gods, ende ic waert doe ghescheyden vanden aenschijn gods ende waert doe gesceyden vanden gesels-cap der engelen. Doen God den geest des leuens in di blies ende doen dijn aensicht ende forme gemaect was naden beelden Gods doen leyde u Mychel die engel voer den aenschijn Gods ende hi aenbeden di [ende sprac] ende God sprac: “Siet dit is Adam die wi gemaect hebbe‹n› nae onsen beelden ende nae onsen gelijckenisse.”(14.1) Ende die engel is voert gegaen tot alden engelen mitti ende sechde: “Aenbedt dit beelt Gods!”, (14.2) ende hi geboet my sterkelic dat ic dat beelt aen- [f. 325v] -bedt, (14.3) ende ic sechden tot Mychel: “Ic en sals niet aenbeden mijnnen mijnre den lesten van alle‹n› creatue-ren. Weet dat ic voer hem ben, ende eer dat hi was soe ben ic, ende sals niet aen beden mer hi sal my aenbeden!”

T lacks 15.1


358 BOB MILLER

Q (15.2) Et ait Michael: ‘Adorate imaginem domini Dei. Si non adoraueritis, irascetur vobis Deus’. (15.3) Et ego dixi: ‘Si irascitur michi Deus, ponam sedem meam supra sidera et ero similes altissimo’.

Q (16.1) Et iratus est michi Dominus Deus et iussit me expelli et foras mitti de Gloria mea (BRITISH: cum angelis meis): Et tui causa exul factus sum de habitationibus meis et proiectus sum in terra, (16.2) Et statim sum in dolore de tanta gloria mea.

(16.3) Et quod te vidi in leticia deliciarum mearum, tolerare non potui. (16.4) Et ideo dolo circumveni mulierem et feci te expelli de deliciis leticie tue, sicut ego expulsus sum de gloria mea”.Q (17.1) Hec audiens Adam ‹a› diabolo, exclamavit cum magno fletu et dixit: “Domine Deus meus, in manibus tuis vita mea: fac ut iste adversarius meus longe sit a me qui querit ani-mam meam perdere, et da michi gloriam quam per ipsum perdidi”. (17.2) Et statim evanuit diabolos. (17.3) Adam vero perseveravit quad-raginta diebus in penitencia, stans in aqua Jor-danis. Q (18.1) Et dixit Eva ad Adam: “Vive domine tu, domine meus! Tibi concessus est vivere, quoniam nec primo nec secundo prevaricatus es nec seductus. Sed ego seducta sum et prevari-cata, quoniam non custodivi mandatum domini Dei, et nunc ‹separa me a lumine vitae istius›169. Sed vadam ad occasum solis et ero ibi usque moriar”. (18.2) Et cepit ambulare ad partes occidentis, et cepit lugere et amare flere. (18.3) Et fecit sibi tabernaculum, habens in utero

163 MS: hi.164 MS: verthoertn, on line break.165 Isaias 14.13, Once you thought in your heart, I will climb to the sky; Higher than the stars of God I will set my throne, compare Vulgate: In caelum conscendam, Super astra Dei, Exaltabo solium meum; whereas Latin VAE and the Dutch agree with Septuagint: epanô tôn astrôn tou ouranou, Latin VAE II: supra sideri celi. This distinction arises from the use of the Hebrew word shamayim, heaven(s), as a euphemism for God, which simile is retained in the Greek but resolved in Jerome’s Vulgate. See MEYER 1878 p. 226 note to line 86.166 balinge ‹ MDutch ballinc, ‘Een van het landrecht verstokene, rechteloos verklaarde, in den ban gedane’ (MH p. 52).167 The MS twijffeach is apparently a rationalising addition, to be read as equivalent to tweevout, ‘twice’, “but I have been (fooled) twice”, perhaps with the implication ‘op twee manieren’ (MH p. 623), since ongestadich and betrogen fully cover the meaning of praevaricata et seducta, alt-hough the graphy suggests some influence on the scribe from the concept twivelachtich, in the sense ‘wisselfallig’ (MH p. 624).168 MDutch een kint begorden [of] begort hebben = ‘zwanger zijn van’ (MH p. 64).169 MS de flumine(!), an obvious corruption.

(15.2) Doe sechde Mychel: “Aenbedt dat beelt Gods! Ende doetstu niet soe sal God toernych op dy sijn”. (15.3) Doe sechde ic:163 “Vert-hoernt164 hem God op my soe sal ic mynnen stoel setten bouen die sterren des hemels ende ic wille[n] ghelijc sijn den alre ouerste”.165

(16.1) Doen waert God toernych op ‹my› ende hi geboet dat men my wt mijnre glorie werpen soud mit alden engelen. Ende weetstu dat niet, Adam, dat wi niet aenbeden, om dijne wil wt onser woeny‹n›ge balinge166 lude geworden sijn?T lacks 16.2(16.3) Ende want ic om dijnen wil wt geworpen ben soe en mocht ic niet. Doen ic dy sach inden paradijs (16.4) daer om quam ic lycstelijc tot [f. 326r] dijnen wijf ende dede di verdrieuen wtten paradijs wt dijnre weelde ende glorie”.(17) Doe Adam dit vanden duuel hoerde, soe riep hi mit luder stemmen al weenede: “O heer mijn God mijn leuen is in dijnen handen! Dese mijn wedersake doet veer van my, want hi suect mijn siel te verslijnden!”T lacks 17.2(17.3) Doe bleef Adam die XL dage inder Joe-rdaen al wt in dat water der penetencien staen.

(18) Doe sechde Eua tot Adam: “Leefstu mijn heer, God heeft di verleent leuen om dattu ier-ste ende ander werf onbedrogen bist gebleuen, mer ic twijffeach167 geweest ende ongestadich ende ic ben bedrogen ende ic heb dat gebodt ghebrocken daer om doot my wt dijnnen ogen ende ic wil in dat west syde gaen, ende blijuen daer tot dat ic steruen”. (18.2) Ende Eua ghinc van Adam [f. 326v] ten westen waert mit bit-teren rouwe ende mit grote geween ende sy



Cayn. BRITISH: habens in utero conceptum puerum trium mensium; cf. MEYER (FROM G2 OR G3): habens in utero foetus trium mensium. G1 habens in utero semen suum R1 habens in utero conceptum trium mensium R2 habens in utero puerum trium mensiumQ (19.1) Et cum appropinquasset tempus partus eius, cepit doloribus conturbari: Et exclamavit ad dominum deum dicens: (19.2) “Miserere Domine, adiuva me!”. (19.3) Nec exaudie-batur; nec erat ei requies ulla. Et dixit intra se: “Quis nunciabit domino meo Adam? Deprecor vos, O luminaria celi, dum ve‹r›timini ad ori-entem, nunciate dolores meos domino meo Ade!”. Q (20.1) Et dixit Adam intra se: “Planctus venit: ne forte iterum serpens pungnet cum Eva?”. (20.2) Et ambulans invenit eam in luctu et gemitu magno. Et dixit Eva: “Ex quo Eva vidi te, Domine mi, refrigeravit anima mea in dolore meo. Nunc autem deprecare dominum pro me, ut exaudiat te et liberet me de doloribus meis pessimis”. (20.3) Et deprecatus est Adam dominum pro Eva.

Q (21.1) Et venerunt duo angeli et due virtutes de celis, stantes a dextris et a sinistris eciam: (21.2) et Michael stans a dextris tetigit a facie eius usque ad pectus et dixit: “Vere tu liberata es, Eva, propter ‹Adam›, quoniam oraciones eius magne sunt ante dominum. Et missus sum ad te ut accipiat vestrum. Et surge et parare ad par-tum!”. (21.3) Et peperit ‹filium› et erat lucidus. Et continuo surrexit et cucurrit animalibus suis tollere herbam. Et nomen eius vocatus est Cayn.Q (22.1) Et tulit Adam pureum et Evam et per-duxit eos ad orientem. (22.2) Et misit Dominus Deus ad Adam angelum Michaelem cum sem-inibus diversis et dedit illi: Post hec ostendit ei laborare et colere terram, ut haberet fructum et viveret, ipse et omnes generaciones post ipsos.

170 MS: gorte. Influence of preceding begordt.171 The question Waer bistu Eua? is a distorted form of the reassurance Vere tu liberata es (‘Bohemian’) or Beata es tu Eva (‘Meyer’), Beata es Eva (‘Rhenish’, also ‘Mozley’).172 The translator has understood lucidus in its secondary sense as ‘beautiful’ rather than in the primary sense, ‘bright, shining’ which would correspond to the Greek reading diaphotos. The feature that Cain brings his mother a leaf of grass is omitted. 173 The exemplar may have contained ‘dede hem leeren’, but this has become redundant because the rest of the sentence has been altered to make God the direct subject excluding the mediation of Michael.174 The phrase by leuen moegen/mochten appears in sections 2.2, 3.3 and 4.3.

maecte daer een hutken. (18.3) Ende doen hadsi in hoeren lichaem begordt168 een ‹kijnt› van drie maende.

(19.1) Ende alst die tijt des barens naecten soe ‹waert sy› mit grote170 wee bewaen ende si riep tot God: (19.2) “Ontfermt du mijns God ende help my! Nu lieue heer ende helpt my!” (19.3) Ende sy en waert niet gehoert noch ouer haer en waert niet ontfermt. Doen sechde sy: “Wie sal dit boetsscoppe‹n› Adam mijnen heer? Ic biddi licht des hemels als ghi comt in dat Oest soe boetsscop dit mijnnen heer Adam!”(20.1) Ende Adam sprack tot hem seluen: “Dat screyen van Eua comt tot mij! Ic ducht dattet serpent mit hoer vecht!” (20.2) Ende hi ghinc tot Eua ende hi wantese in alte grote druck ende weenen, ende doe Adam Eua sach sechde [f. 327r] si tot hem: “Mijn heer nu ic di sie soe voel ic grote verlichtenisse comen in mijnnre sielen, want ic nu in groter pijnen ben! Nu bid onsen lieuen heer voer mij ende hi sal dy hoeren ende hij sal op my sien ende verloessen my van deser groter pijnen!” (20.3) Adam is neder gewallen ter eerden ende heeft God aen geroe-pen voer Eua.(21.1) Ter stont sijn ghecomen drie engelen ende sy stonden ter rechter syden Eua. (21.2) Die Engel Mychel bedectten haer aensicht totter borsten toe. “Waer bistu Eua? Om Adams wil ende om di te helpe soe richt di op ende bereyt dy te baren”.171 (21.3) Ende gebaerde enen alte schoenen172 soen ende ghinc lope‹n› ende sijn naem is geheyten Cayem.

(22.1) Doe nam Adam ende Eua dat kijnt ende hi leydese te samen ten Oesten waert. (22.2) Doen seynden hem God alre hande saet te seyen ende hi [dede hem]173 [f. 327v] leereden hem arbeyden ende dat lant bouwen op dat si vrucht hebben mochten daer sij ‹by› leuen mochten174


360 BOB MILLER

(22.3) Concepit iterum filium Eva, filium nom-ine Abel. Et manebat Cayn cum Abel in uno loco. (22.4) Et dixit Eva ad Adam: “Domine mi, dormiebam et vidi quasi sanguinem filii nostri Abel ingedi in ore fratris sui Caym et deglutivit eum”. (22.5) Et dixit Adam: “Ve, ne forte interficiat Caym Abel, fratrem suum! Sed separemus eos ab invicem et faciamus eis sin-gulis mansiones”.

Q (23.1) Et fecerunt Caym agricolam, Abel vero pastorem ovium, Et separaverunt eos ab invicem. (23.2) Post hec interfecit Caym Abel. Erat autem annorum CXXX. (23.3) Et post hec cognovit Adam uxorem suam et genuit filium et vocavit nomen eius Seth.Q (24.1) Et dixit Adam ad Evam: Ecce genui filium pro Abel quem occidit Caym. (24.2) Et postquam genuit Adam Seth, vixit annos CCC, et genuit filios XXX et totidem filias. Sic genuit filios et multiplicati sunt super terram in nacion-ibus suis. (25.1) Et dixit Adam ad Seth: “Audi, fili mi Seth, et referam tibi quid vidi et audivi. Postq-uam ejecti fuimus de paradiso ego et mater tua Eva, (25.2) cum essemus in oracione, venit ad nos Michael archangelus, domini nuncius: (25.3) Et vidi currus tamquam nutus et rote eius erant ignee, et raptus sum in paradiso justitie. Et vidi dominum sanctum, et in conspectu eius erat ignis ince‹n›dens intolerabilis; et multa millia angelorum antecedebant currum Dei. Et alia multa milia angelorum erant a dextris et a sinis-tris currus Dei.

‘Bohemian’ and R2 lack 26 & 27.1.180

RHENISH (PETTORELLI p. 173): Hoc uidens per-turbatus sum et timor comprehendi me et

175 MS 230 years, VAE 130 years; the Oriental and Latin Penitence sources do not date the birth of Seth; the VAE figure of 130 is that of the Vulgate, suggesting that the figure was introduced as part of the production of VAE from the Penitence in a Latin-rite country. The Dutch figure happens to be that of the Septuagint and of some Patristic traditions, but here it may be a simple error, see next note.176 MS 300, a reading shared with the suggested direct Latin source, while the wider transmission of VAE gives 800. These figures must add to 930 with the previously mentioned date of Abel’s death, normally 800 + 130, so the figure of 300 is the result either of the loss of the initial D from a figure of DCCC, or of a misreading of DCC as CCC. The latter might be suggested by the preceding figure of 230 for Abel’s death. There is no way of deciding which error may have arisen first and which figure was a rationalising adjustment.177 From here the ‘Penitence’ or ‘Mozley’-related variants cease. This suggests that the source was only available for the first part of the Life, a situation analogous to that assumed by PETTO-RELLI (1999 pp. 258-265) for the additions to the insular ‘Mozley’ class of manuscripts (see essay above).178 MS: aenschicht, affected by the foregoing aenschijn.

ende oec al haer toecommelingen. (22.3) Daer nae ontfinc Eua een kijnt ende hiet Abel. Ende Cayem ‹ende Abel› woenden te samen. (22.4) Ende op een tijt sprac Eua tot Adam: “Ic sach in mijnen droem, mijn heer Adam, dat bloet Abels, ons kijns Abels, in Caeyams handen”. (22.5) Doe sech Adam tot Eua: “O wach, ic docht dat Caeyem Abel doot slaen sal! Laetse ons van een doen voenen”. Doen maectse elc een huyt.(23.2) Sy maectte‹n› van Cayem een ackerman ende van Abel een scaeps herde. (23.3) Mer daer nae sloech Cayam Abel doot. Doen was Abel out XII jaer ende doe was Adam out CC jaer ende dertich.175 (23.3) Daer nae wan Adam enen soen die [f. 328r] hiet hi Sedt.T lacks 24.1(24.2) Doe hi Sedt gewonnen had doe leefden hi noch drie hondert jaer176 ende wan noch sonen ende dochteren.177

(25.1) Hier nae dede Adam tot hem comen Sedt sijnen soen ende sechden aldus: “Nu hoer my mijn lief kijnt ic sal dy vertellen dat ic gesien heb ende gehoert heb, nae dien dat ic wten para-dijs geworpen was. (25.2) Doen ic mit dijnre moeder in mynne ghebede ‹was› (25.3) doe sach ic enen snellen wagen als ene snellen wijnt, sijn raderen waeren vuorich ende ic waert daer op gewoert inden paradijs der rechtueerdicheit Gods, ende ic sach den heilige God sijn aenschijn was gelijc den gro[n]t verscrijckelijc vuer. Dusent engelen waren aen die rechter syde ende aen die luchter syde.(26.1) Ende als ic dit sach soe waert ic seer ver- [f. 328v] -weert, soe viel ic op myn aensicht178 ter eerden voer hem. (26.2) Ende hi sprac tot



adoraui coram deo super faciem terrae. Et dixit mihi dominus: “Ecce tu morieris, quare prae-teristi mandatum meum, quia in primis audisti uocem uxoris tuae, quam dedi in potestatem, ut haberes eam in uoluntate tua, et obedisti illi in uerba praeteristi.RHENISH (PETTORELLI p. 175): Et cum haec uerba dei audiui, procidens in terram, adoraui dominum et dixi…Q (27.1 midway)… Et dixi: ‘Converte, Dom-ine, animam meam in requiem tuam, quia morior. Et spiritus meus exibit de corpore meo. (27.2) Ne proicias me a facie tua quem de limo plasmasti, Domine! Ne despicias quem nutriv-isti gracia tua! (27.3) Et ecce verbum ‹tuum› incendit me’. Et dixit ad me Dominus Deus: ‘Quoniam figuracio cordis et corporis mei fac-tus est, diligens scienciam, propter hoc non tol-leretur semon tuum usque in secula ad minis-trandum michi’.

Q (28.1) Et cum hec verba audissem, prosterni me in terra et adoravi dominum dicens: ‘Tu es Deus eternus et summus, Et omnes creature dent tibi honorem et laudem. (28.2) Tu es super omne lumen effulgens lux incomprehensibilis, virtus vivens: tibi dicam laudem et honorem spiritualem. Viventem me facies et omne genus humanum multitudine misericordie tue’. (28.3) Et postquam adoravi dominum, statim Michael Archangelus Dei apprehendit manum meam et ejecit me de paradiso visitacionis Dei.(Tilburg lacks VAE 28.4-29.10, probably because these passages were already lacking in the Latin exemplar. These passages are not reproduced here)

Q (30.1) Et postquam factus est Adam annorum nongentorum triginta, sciens quoniam dies vite sue finirentur, dixit: “Congregentur ad me uni-versi filii mei, et benedicam eis antequam moriar, et loquar cum eis”. (30.2) Et congregati sunt in tres partes in conspectu patris ante ora-torium ubi adorabat Adam dominum. (30.3) Et cum congregati fuissent, omnes una voce dixerunt: “Quid tibi, ut quid congregasti nos? Aut quare jaces in lecto?”. (30.4) Respondit

179 MS: du moetstu, ‹= ecce tu morieris, the scribe has taken nu = ecce as du, but moetstu sterven already has the full force of tu morieris. This error has arisen within the Dutch transmission.180 The Rhenish text is closer to the Tilburg text than ‘Meyer’ or ‘Mozley’.181 MS: wertp.182 MS: ewichiet.

my: “Nu moetstu179 steruen om dattu mij‹n› gebodt gebrocken hebste ende heues gehoert die stem dijns wijfs. Ic gaf dy een gebodt dattu daer niet ouer gaen en soudste mit dijnen wil ende du heues dijn wijf onderdanich gheweest ende niet my”.(27.1) Doen ic dit hoerde viel ic neder ende ic aenbede mijnen God ende ic sechden: “O heer almechtich ende ontfermhertich, heilich ende goedertieren! Mijnnen naem en moet niet wt gedaen weerden wt uwen gedenckenisse ende siet mij‹n› ziel want ic sterue sal als mijnne geest scheyde sal van mijnen lichaem ende sa‹l› gaen wt mijnnen mont (27.2) ende werpt181 dan niet van dijnen aensicht die du heues gescappen ende die du heues ghe- [f. 329r] -benedijt mit dijnre gracie”. (27.3) Doe sechde God die heer tot my: “Die fyguer dijns herten myt die const daer om en sal ic die niet laeten veruaren van uwen sade mer het sal ewelic due-ren om my te dienen”.(28.1) Ende doe ic dit hoerde ende ic aen beden den heer mijnnen God ende ic sechde: “O mijn ‹heer› ende mijn God, du bijste die ewige God ende die alre ouerste! Allen dijn creatueren moeten di louen ende eren (28.2) want du biste bouen alle licht, dat waerachticge licht sonder beghinsel ende sonder eynde, onbegrijppelic licht ende doechd ewelic leuende! Allen crea-tueren geuen di lof ende eer! O du leuende God in ewicheit182 doet genadich den menschelicke gheslecht ende grote dingen doen by bermher-ticheit!” (28.3) Ende doen ic onse heer aen gebeedt had, doe greep [f. 329v] mij die engel Mychel ende leyden my wtten paradijs.

Van adams doot (30.1)

Doen Adam out was IX.C jaer ende XXX ende hi wist dat sijn dage souden eynden, doe sprac Adam tot Eua: “Laet ons vergaderen al ons kijnderen op dat ic se gebenedien eer ic sterue ende dat ic mit hem sprecken”. (30.2) Ende doe worden sijn kijnder vergadert in drie hopen ende si stonden voer hoeren vader voer dat huys ‹daer-in› hi God aen beden plach. (30.3) Doense alle verghadert waren doen sprake‹n› sy allen wt enen mont: “Vader, waer om est dat wi allen


362 BOB MILLER

Adam et dixit: “Ffilii mei, male michi est, dolo-ribus afficior”. Et dixerunt ei omnes filii: “Quid est, pater, male habere”?.

Q (31.1) Tunc filius eius Seth dixit: “Pater, ne forte desideres de fructu paradisi unde edebas, et contristaris desiderio? Indica ergo michi, pater, si ita est, et vadam prope paradisum et mittam pulverum in caput meum et maxima deprecans dominum deum, et forsitan exaudiet me et mittet angelum suum, et afferet michi de fructu quod desideras, ut manduces et oblivis-caris”. (31.2) Respondit Adam: “Non, fili, non desidero, sed dolores pacior”. (31.3) Respondit Seth et dixit:”Quid est dolor, pater? Noli nobis abscondere, sed dic nobis!”.

Q (32.1) Et respondens Adam dixit: “Audite, filii mei! Quando fecit nos Deus, me et matrem vestram, et posuit nos in paradiso et dedit nobis fructum omnis arboris ad edendum, et dixit nobis ut de arbore sciencie boni et mali que est in medio paradisi non comederemus; (32.2) et ipse Dominus partem paradisi dedit michi et matri vestre, scilicet partem orientis et Eburien que est contra aquilonem ‹dedit michi›, et matri vestre dedit partem austri et partem occidentis.

Q (33.1) Et dedit nobis Dominus Deus angelos duos ad custodiendum nos. (33.2) Et ut venit hora, ascenderunt angeli in conspectu domini adorare. Statim habuit locum adversarius diabo-lus absentibus angelis Dei et seduxit matrem vestram ut manducaret de arbore illicita et con-tradicta. (33.3) Et manducavit et dedit michi.

Q (34.1) Et statim iratus est nobis Deus et dixit michi: ‘Quoniam dereliquisti mandatum meum quod statui tibi, ecce inducam in corpore tuo LXX plagas doloris, ab inicio capitis usque ad ungulas pedum per singula membra torquens’. Et deputavit inflacionem doloris una cum

183 MS: mach screyen. cf. Bibel 1518, f. iiir, Genesis ad 3.3 dat wi machschien niet en sterven, Bibel 1523 ibidem: op dat wi bi avonturen niet sterven en souden. There seems to be no dialectal or chronological reason for the scribe to be unfamiliar with MDutch machschien = misschien, so this is an iteration error caused by the frequent occurrence of schreyen in the preceding text.184 Note that MS vanden hout = VAE: de fructu.185 MS: truy. MDutch strooyen, strouwen, struwen all = ModDutch strooien (MH pp. 584-585).186 sic Here Tilburg is especially close to the variant of MS Q, ‘Eburien’, while MS D, Harley 495 has the reading in partem orientis et borialis (MOZLEY p. 138 line 21 & note). (HORSTMANN corrected to ‘boree’)187 This version of events contrasts with the different emphasis found in the preceding treatise.

vergadert sijn in deser steden?” (30.4) Doe ant-woerden Adam: “Mijn kijnder, mij is alte wee van veel ongemaxs”. Doe spracken alle die kijnder: “Vader, welck sijn alle die ongemac-ken die du heues?”(31.1) Doe sprac Sedt: “Vader, machschien183 [f. 330r] ghi hebt begeert vanden hout184 des paradijs daer ghi af aet inden paradijs daer om licdste dus bedrueft. Wilstu dat ic gae totter poert des paradijs ende dat gemul ‹s›truy185 op myn hoeft ende dat ic neder val op die eerde ende dat ic screyn ende roep voer der poerte des paradijs tot onsen heer? Licht hi mocht my hoeren ende seynden my sijnnen engel die my brocht vander vrucht die ghi begeert”. (30.2) Doe sprac Adam: “Mijn lief soen Sedt, dat en begeer ic niet, mer ic ben siec om dat ic heb veel ongemaects in mijnnen lichaem”. (30.3) Doe seechde Sedt: “Vader, wat is dat? Des en weet ic niet”.(32.1) Doe sprac Adam: “Mijn lieue kijnder, doe mij God gemaect had ende mit uwer moe-der inden paradijs geset was soe gaf ons God van allen vruchten der bomen te eten ende hi verboedt ons vanden ‹bome› der ku‹n›ste ende der [f. 330v] weetenheit niet te eten welc staet int myddel des paradijs. (32.2) Doe gaf God my[n] dat paradijs ende dijnre moeder, ende gaf my tot mijne deel die oest sij‹de› ‹die› tot Ebroen186 wa‹e›rt. Ende hi gaf dijnre moeder dat suytwest.(33.1) Ende hi gaf ons twee engelen die ons hoeden souden. (33.2) Op een tijt woerde‹n› die engelen ‹gegaen› om God te aenbeden ende ter stont wist die duuel ende quam terstont tot dijnre moeder ende bedroechse ende gaf haer te eten vander vruchten die ons verboden was, (33.3) ende ‹si?› nam ende adt, ende gaf mij voert.187

(34.1) Ende ter stont waert God op mij verbol-gen, ende hi seide mij: “Om dattu mijn gebodt hebste gebrocken soe sal ic ouer dijnen lichaem seynden LXXII plagen ende menygerhande droefheit al vanden beghine dijns hoefts totten nagelen dijnre voeten soe suldy gepijnicht



ardoribus. (34.2) Hec autem misit Dominus ad me et ad omne genus humanorum”.

Q (35.1) Hec dicens Adam ad omnes filios suos, comprehendit‹ur› magnis doloribus, et clamans magnis doloribus constrictus decebat: “Quid faciam infelix, positus in tantis doloribus?”. (35.2) Et cum vidisset Eva eum flentem, cepit et ipsa flere dicens: “Domine Deus, in me transfer dolores eius, quia ego peccavi et non ipse”. Et dixit ad Adam: “Domine mi, da michi partem dolorum tuorum, quoniam hec mea culpa accidunt tibi”.Q (36.1) Et dixit ad eam Adam: “Exurge et vade cum filio tuo Seth et vade prope portas paradisi et mitt‹it›e pulverem in capite vestro et prosternite vos in terra et plangite ante conspec-tum Domini Dei. (36.2) Forsitan miserebitur et mittet angelum ad arborem misericordie de qua currit oleum vite, et dabit vobis ut ungatis me ex eo, ut quiescam ab his doloribus quibus con-sumor”.Q (37.1) Et abierunt Seth et mater eius in partes paradisi. Et dum ambulant, ecce subito ‹venit› serpens bestia et impetum faciens morsit Seth. (37.2) Et cum vidisset Eva, flevit dicens: “Heu michi! Maledicta sum, quia non custodivi pre-cepta Dei”. (37.3) Et dixit ad serpentem bes-tiam: “Heu maledicte, quare non timuisti mit-tere te in imaginem Dei, aut quare prevale‹runt› dentes tui?”.

Q (38.1) Respondens bestia dixit voce humana: “O, Eva, nunquid ad vos est malicia nostra?

188 VAE et uxor tua has been transferred from the previous sentence.189 MS: totten, elsewhere in this text tot-hen, ‘(up) to the’, here take as = tot-een, = als-een.190 This intrusive phrase is evidence of a mis-translation caused by taking comprehenditur as the beginning of a phrase such as: when he had gathered all his children together, when it actually leads into the concept: when he was gripped by pains.191 The source may have jumped from arborem… to.vite. No equivalent reading has been found elsewhere.192 The first phrase is an assimilative adjustment to the identity of the serpent as found in the preceding treatise. The approximation to the curse of Genesis, that humans will be bitten in the heel, may be an influence from the same source.193 MS tegen die deerne Gods om teghen haer te vechten… VAE (and all other LAE versions): ymaginum dei, which is correctly translated as beelt Gods in the following passage. A rationali-sing and dramatic correction, since Eve is in character in her role as servant tending paradise and in charge of the beasts there, and as a mother takes the attack on her son as aimed against herself. The reference to the image of God in man is thus reserved to Seth. There may also be a continuing influence from the treatise, which emphasises the emnity between the seed of Eve and the serpent.194 MS: vond, read as voud = woud.

weerden”. (34.2) Dit gaf God ‹my› ende dijnre moeder188 [f. 331r] totten189 eenre castyenge ende oec alle dat menschelicke geslecht”.(35.1) Dit sprack Adam tot alle sijnen kijnde-ren. [Doe hi sijn kynderen.]190 Ende doe hi aldus gequelt was mit groten wee, riep hi mit luyder stemmen: “Wat sal ic doen onsalich kattijf!” In deser groter pijnen weenden hi bitterlijc. (35.2) Als Eua dat sach ‹sechde si›: “O heer, verlaet Adam dese grote pijn ende seynse op my, ‹want?› icse verdient heb”.

(36.1) Doe sprack Adam: “O Eua, nu neemt Set dijnen soen ende ganc mit hem ter naester poer-ten des paradijs ende werpt gemulle op u hoeft ende valt neder ter eerden ende bid God voer my, (36.2) hi mocht mynre ontfermen ende seynde sijnen engel totten boem des leuens.191 Och mocht ic daer enen dropel af crijgen mede te saluen mijnen lichaem, soe waer ic verloest van deser groter pijnen!”(37.1) Ter stont ginc Set mit sijnre moeder ten paradijs waert. Ende opten wech quam [f. 331v] die duuel in gelijc des serpents gelijc ende sloecht Set achter aen sijn been192 ende beet hem alte seer. (37.2) Als Eua dit sach soe waert sy onuerduldich ende sy weenden seer ende sechde: “O wach mijns vermaledide viant!” (37.3) Noch riepse mit luyder stemmen: “Vermal‹ed›ide beest, hoe bistu aldus coen dattu dorste setten tegen die deerne193 Gods om teghen haer te vechten?”(38.1) Doe sprac dat serpent: “O Eua, alle mijn quaetheit is tegen di! (38.2) Sich Eua, hoe destu


364 BOB MILLER

Nunquid contra vos est dolor furoris nostri? (38.2) Dic michi, Eva, quomodo apertum est os tuum ut manducares fructum quo precepit Dominus ne comederes, nunc autem non potes portare si tibi incepero pungnare!”.Q (39.1) Tunc Seth dixit: Increpet te Deus! Stupe et obmutescito, maledicte inimice con-fuse perdite, recede ab imagine Dei usque in diem quando Deus te jusserit producere in pro-bacionem. (39.2) Et dixit bestia ad Seth: Ecce recedo sicut dixisti, a facie imaginis Dei. Sta-timque recessit bestia, sed plagato dentibus. Q (40.1) Seth autem et mater eius ambulaverunt in partes paradisi. Tuleruntque pulverem terre et posuerunt super capita sua, et prosternaverunt se in terram super faciem suam et planxerunt cum gemitu magno, (40.2) deprecantes Domi-num Deum ut misereretur Ade in doloribus suis et mitteret angelum suum ut daret eis oleum de arbore misericordie.Q (41.1) Orantibus autem eis et deprecantibus horis multis, ecce angelus Michael apparens dixit: (41.2) “Ego missus sum a Domino con-stitutus super corpus humanum. Tibi dico, Seth: Noli lacrimare orando et deprecando oleum de ligno misericordie ut perungas patrem tuum Adam propter dolores; Q (42.1) dico enim tibi quod nunc nullo modo ex eo poteris accipere. Sed novissimis diebus quando consummati fuerint quinque millia et quingenti anni: (42.2) Tunc veniet super terram amantissimus Dei filius Christus Ihesus resus-citare corpora mortuorum. (42.3) Et ipse Dei filius vivens baptizabitur in flumine Jordanis. Et cum egressus fuerit de aqua Jordanis, tunc de oleo misericordie sue omnes creature credentes in se accipierunt (42.4) et ‹erit› oleum miseri-cordie in generacionem et generacionem his qui renacentur ex aqua et Spiritu sancto in vita eterna. Tunc descdendet in terris amantissimus Dei filius et introducet patrem suum Adam ad arborem misericordie sue.Q (43.1) Tu autem Seth, vade ad patrem tuum, quoniam completum est tempus vite eius: Adhuc sex dies et exiet anima de corpore eius

195 MS: ghien.196 MS: ghinse si.197 sic, should probably be V.M.V.C, compare Latin VAE I Meyer: nisi in novissimus diebus, quando completi fuerint quinque milia et quingenti anni, JOHNSON reports MS variants of 6,500, 5,050, 5,200, 5,199, and 5,228 (JOHNSON 1985 p 274). With the possible exception of that of 6,500, these dates all result from the reinterpretation of this passage as a reference to the Harro-wing of Hell by Christ, whereas the wording of the Greek and other versions, preserved inadver-tently in the Latin phrase in novissimus diebus (omitted in the Dutch), clearly refers to the Escha-ton or Last Judgment.

dijnen mont op om te eten vanden appel die u God verboden had. Voud194 ic u str‹a›effe, ghi en195 mocht u niet verantwoerden!”

(39.1) Doe sprac Set: “Onse heer moet di straf-fen, siet di seluen ende laet dat beelt Gods in vreden totter tijt dat di God beueelt!” (39.2) Doe sechde ‹dat› serpent: “Set, ic gae nu van-den beelt Gods”. Ende sy wordens quyt. Doen ghingen si196 voert.

(40.1) Doen se quamen voer[t] dat paradijs soe worpen sy gemullen [f. 332r] op haer hoeft ende wielen mit hoere aensicht ter eerden ende si weende seer (40.2) ende baden [ende] God om den olye der ontfernysse tot Adam behoef.

(41.1) Ende als sy in haren gebede lagen, quam tot hem die engel Mychel ende hi sechde[n]: “Ic ben gesant tot u”, (41.2) ende hi sechde: “Ic ben geordeneert dat menschelike geslecht te bescermen ende ic seg u Set, o mensche Gods, wilt niet screyen noch bidden om den olye der ontfermnisse tot dijns vaders behoef,(42.1) want hi en sals niet crijgen voer dat leden sijn V.C197 jaer. (42.2) Dan sal comen die mijn-like soen Gods ende verwecken dat licham dijns vaders ende noch weel heilige die noch mit hem steruen sullen. (42.3) Ende als die tijt comt soe sal dijn vader gedopt werden in die rieuyer der Joerdanen, hi selue mitter olye der ontfermher-ticheit ‹ende› alle die geen die gedopt sullen weerden [f. 332v] inden water des heiligen geest in dat ewige leuen, (42.4) dan sal die mijn-like soen Gods uwen vader leyden totten boem der ontfermherticheit.

(43.1) Set, ganc weder tot dijnen vader, want dat eynde sijns leuens is na by. Want sijn siel sal van sijnen licham scheiden nae ses dagen dat



et videbis mirabilia in celo et in terra et in lumi-naribus celi”. [LEGEND] And he gave him three seeds which he was to lay under his father’s tongue (sc. after he died), from which would grow the tree of life.Q (43.2) Hec dicens Michael statim recessit a Seth. Et reversi sunt Seth et Eva. Attulerunt autem secum odoramenta, idest nardum et cro-cum, calamum et cynamonium.Q (44.2) Et cum pervenissent ad Adam, dixerunt quod serpens bestia morserat Seth. (44.2) Et dixit Adam ad Evam: “Ecce quod fecisti nobis! Induxisti nobis plagam magnam, delictum et peccatum in omnem generacionem istam. Et hoc quod fecisti post mortem meam referes filiis tuis! (44.3) Quoniam sibi exsir-gent ex nobis laborantes non deficient, sed mal-edicent nos, dicentes (44.4) ‘he‹c› mala intulerunt nobis parentes nostri qui furunt ab inicio’”. Hec audiens Eva cepit lacrimari et ingemiscere.

Q (45.1) Post sex vero dies venit mors ad Adam. (45.2) Qui cum cognovisset quia venit hora mortis sue, dixit ad omnes filios suos: “Ecce sum annorum nongentorum et triginta. Et cum mortuus fuero, sepelite me contra Dominum in agris habitacionis illius”. (45.3) Et factum est, cum cessasset loqui, tradidit spiritum.

Q (46.1) Tenebratus est sol et luna per dies sep-tem. Et ecce Seth amplexatus est corpus patri sui lugens desuper. Et Eva cum esset respiciens intextas manus habens super caput et super genua, et omnes filii flentes amarissime,

[LEGEND] Eve took the three seeds and put them into Adam’s mouth.

198 VAE III ‘Thompson’ = VAE F1, from MS Huntingdon 1342, f. 13a: Et recessit angelus in paradisum et attulit ei ramusculum trium foliorum de arbore sciencie boni et mali,… (THOMPSON 1933 p. 278).199 MS: O Eva.200 The Latin readings found here are confused, perhaps giving rise to the rationalising correction Jehosephat, which will have been influenced by texts such as the Noordnederlandsche Historie-bijbel, cited above in the essay, or by its Latin sources.201 gaf sijnen geest, cf. form without op also on f. 335r.202 MS: lichaems, affected by vaders.203 MS: om helsdet, from MDutch ommehelsen, here = ommehelsde het.

ghi hem gesien hebt; ende als hi verscheyden is soe suldy groet wonder sien aenden hemel ende inder eerden”. [LEGEND] Ende hi gaf hem drie greynen die hi leggen soude onder sijns vaders tonge daer af soude ‹wassen› den boem des leuens.198 (43.2) Ende hier mede scyet die engel van hem. Ende Eua ende Set quamen weder tot Adam ende sy brochten mit duerbaer cruyde.

(44.1) Ende doen sy by Adam quamen soe vertel-den sy dinck dat hem inden wege was gemoet. (44.2) Doe sprac Adam tot Eua: “O wat hebste gedaen, du heues my [f. 333r] in plagen ende in pijnen ende in sunden ende groet verdriet gebrocht dat voer gaen op al ons na commelijnge! (44.3) Vertelt dat dijnen kijnderen, want sy sullen comen die dese pijn niet en sullen moegen lijden mer sy sullen daer in bederuen op dat sy ons niet en ver-malidien, ende seggen: (44.4) ‘Dese pijn comt ons van onser jersten olders’”. Doen hi dit ges-echt had weenden si alte bitterlic, ende och199 Eua, die mit alte groet droefheit beweende.(45.1) Doe dit ses dage ouerleeden waren soe genaecten Adam den doot. (45.2) Soe geuoel-den hi dat die ueren sijnre doot bi was, doe dede hi voer hem comen allen sijn kijnder ende hi sprac: “Mijn lief kijnder, ic ben nu out IX.C jaer ende XXXII jaer. Nu moet ic van u schei-den. Ende als ic doot ben soe begraeft my tegen den hof Gods dat is in dat dal van Josewat.”200 (45.3) Ende dit seggende sijnnen kijnderen soe benedide hi alle sijn [f. 333v] [sijn] kynderen ende nam oerlof ende gaf sijnen geest.201

(46.1) Ende ter stont liet die sonne ende die maen ende sterren hoer schynen ende in VII dagen en lichten si niet en het waert grote tempest. Set werp hem op sijns vaders lichaem202 ende om helsdet203 mit grote rouwe ende dref grote mijs-baer. Eua was in grote rouwe ende weeneden jamerlic. Sy lach opter eerden ende had Adam handen op hoer hoeft ende haer kijnderen ween-den alte bitterlic om den heer haeren vader.[LEGEND] Eua nam die drie greyne ende lee-dese Adam inden mont.


366 BOB MILLER

(46.1bis) Ende als Eua lage[n]204 in groter droefheit mit haren kijnderen opter erden,205 (46.2) doen quam die prijns der engelen Sunte Mychel staenden bijdt hoeft Adam ende sechde: (46.3) “Set, staet op en comt mit my ende sich dijn vader, wat God mit hem geoer‹d›ineert heeft ende hoe God sijns heeft ontfermt, als dijn ghescappenen [f. 334r] man”. Doe ghinc Set mitten engel Mychel.(47) Die engelen hoerde synghen dese woerde ‘Gebenedijt is in sijnen hant werck, want hi hem grote mijnne heeft ghetoent’.(48.1) Doen sach Set die ‹hant Gods›206 houden den licham sijns vaders ende hi ‹gaf hem› Mychel die Hi gebodt: (48.2) “Neemt desen licham in dijnre hoeden totter tijt toe dat ic comen sal in verlatenisse der pijnen; inden eynde der tijt sal ic sijn droefheit verwandelen in groter blijscappen ende vrouden, (48.3) dan sal hi sitten in die coren207 des geens208 die Eua ende hem bedrogen heeft”.(48.4) Noch sprac onse heer totten engel: “Haelt drie dobbel samyte ende pelle ende dect daer mede dat lichaem Adams ende op Abel sijnen soen ende grafse!” (48.5) Doe quam al dat hemeliche heer der engelen ende ghinge voer. Doe waert gheheilich den slaep sijns doots. (48.6) Ende doe sy quamen in Ebroen209 der heiliger stat, Mychel ende Gabreylle210 groeuen [f. 334v] daer den licham Adams mit synen soen Abel seer weerdilicke ende dit en weet nyemant dan Set ende Eua alleen. Doe dit al was voldaen sprac Mychel tot Eua ende tot Set: “Alsoe du nu gesien hebt soe suldy voer‹t›meer u dooden begrauen”.

[FILLER] And as Eve lay with her children on the ground in great distress…Q (46.2) Ecce Michael apparuit stans ad caput eius, et dixit ad Seth: (46.3) “Exurge desuper corpus patris tui et veni ad me et vide quid dis-posuerit de patre tuo Dominus Deus qui miser-tus est ei”.

Q (47) Et ecce omnes angeli cantantes tubis dixerunt: “Benedictus es, Domine, qui misertus es prothoplausto tuo Adam”. Q (48.1) Et cum vidisset manum extensam Domini tenentem Adam, tradidit eum Michaelis Archangelo dicens: (48.2) “Sit in custodia ‹tua› usque in diem separacionis in suppliciis usque in annis novissimis, quibus convertam luctum eius in gaudium; (48.3) Tunc sedebit in tronum illius qui eum supplantavit”. (48.4) Et dixit ad Michaelem et Oraelem angelos: “Afferte tres sindones bissinas et expandite ‹super› corpus Ade et ‹aliis› sindonis vestite Abel filium eius”. (48.5) Et processerunt omnes virtutes angelorum ante Adam, ut sacrificarent dormicionem illius. (48.6) Et sepelierunt eum et Abel in partibus paradisi, videntibus autem Seth et Eva, matre eius, alio nemine. Et dixerunt ad eos angeli Michael et Orael: “Sicut vidistis, ita sepelite mortuos vestros”.

204 MS: laugen. The normal form here is lagen. This may be taken as one of the scribe’s false plurals.205 Repetition of foregoing material after the insertion of the legend of the wood of the cross.206 The Dutch text avoids using genitive forms or constructions of heer, preferring always Gods. The plural form houden does not necessarily indicate the plural form handen of fem. hant, while the Latin suggests a singular.207 Cf. Latin Tronus. The Dutch is betrayed as a late corruption because there is no question of the righteous sitting in the heavenly choirs.208 MS: des geens, die = of those who, illius qui, the genitive –s and apocope of the final -e cause the spelling geens for genes.209 VAE Sepelierunt Adam et Abel… in partibus paradisi. The location of Adam’s grave in Hebron is not drawn from VAE, but is found in PPA, where Adam lives and dies in Hebron after the Expul-sion, and is also found in other sources where it is based on the assumption that the dust from which Adam was made was taken from Hebron. However, here the mention of Hebron may be influenced by the prior corruption which suggested that Hebron was one of the quarters of paradise (f. 330v).210 In most VAE manuscripts the two angels are Michael and Uriel. The Greek LAE lists Michael, Gabriel, Uriel and Raphael, but the mention of Gabriel in the Dutch text is unlikely to be an original reading; in many Latin manuscripts the name Uriel is corrupted, inviting a rationalising correction to Gabriel.



(49.1) Ende nae ses dagen bekende Eua dat sy steruen soude ende sy dede voer hoer ‹comen› allen haer kijnder, Set hoeren lieuen soen mit allen sijnen broederen ende mit XXX susteren. Doe sprac Eua tot hem: (49.2) “Nu hoert mijn lieue kijnder, ic sal u vertellen wat ic gesien ende ghehoert heb: Nae dat u vader ende ic ‹t›gebodt Gods ghebrocken had, soe seynden God den engel Mychel, die sechde my dat (49.3) om uwer misdaet ende uwer naecomelinge so‹u›de God noch die werelt oerdelen ende pla-gen mitten water ende vuer.(50.1) Nu verstaet my wael, myn lieue kijnder, dat ic nu gebieden sal: Maect nu twee steene taeffelen ende die ander van sclym der erden ende scrijft daer in dijns [f. 335r] vaders leuen ende dat ghi van ons beyden gesien ende ghe-hoert hebt (50.2) ende eest211 dat God die werelt ierst mitten water oerdelt, sal die eerden taefel vergaen ende die steenen taefel sal blijuen, ende oerdelt ‹God› ierst mitten vuer, soe sal die eerde taefel blijuen, ende hoe dattet daer sal altoes een taefel blijuen”. (50.3) Alsoe Eua ‹dit al?› ende noch meer dingen geseit had soe hefse haer hande ten hemel waert ende knyel-dese opter eerden ende aen riep God menych werue ende si sprack hem lof ende daer mede gaf sy hoeren geest.(51.1) Doen weende allen die kijnder seer bit-terlijcke ende groeuen weerdelicke, ende als sy se twee dagen hadden beweent, soe quam die engel Mychel: (51.2) “Set, mensche Gods gy en sult u doode ouer VII dage niet beweenen, want God ruste opten VIIden dach van allen sijnen wercken den achtenden dach te beteyke-nen212 die verrijsenisse”.(52) Daer nae maecte Set die twee taeffelen die een vander [f. 335v] eerde ende die ander van-der steene en hi screift daer dat leuen sijns vader ende sijnre moeder, alsoe als sy ‹hem› beuolen had, al dat van hem ghesien ende ghehoert was. Ende dese twee taeffelen ‹sette hi› in dat huys daer ‹syn› vader Adam God aen te beden plach213. En nae der deylouyen waert die stee-nen taefel ghewonden ende besien, meer nye-ment en conse gelosen214 wat daer in stont. Daer

Q (49.1) Post sex vero dies quas mortuus est Adam, cognovit Eva mortem suam: et congre-gavit omnes filios et filias suas, videlicet Seth cum XXX fratribus et totidem sororibus. Et dixit Eva ad omnes: (49.2) “Audite me et ref-eram vobis: Postquam ego et pater vester trans-gressi fuerimus preceptum Domini, dixit Michael Archangelus: (49.3) ‘Propter prevari-caciones vestras generi vestro peccatum super-induxistis: Dominus iram iudicii sui primum per aquam postea per ignem. In his duobus judi-cabit Dominus genus humanum. Q (50.1) Sed audite, filii mei, ffacite ergo tabu-las lapideas, et alias de terra luteas, et scribite omnem vitam patris vestri, que a nobis audistis et vidistis. (50.2) Si per aquam judicabit Domi-nus genus vestrum, tabule lutee silventur… (MEYER et tabulae lapideae permanebunt. Si autem per ignem iudicabit genus nostrum, tabulae lapideae solventur et de terra deco-quentur.)” (50.3) Et cum hec omnia dixisset Eva filiis suis, expandit manus seas in celum orans. Et inclinavit genua sua in terris adorans Dominum Deum graciasuqe agens tradidit spiritum.

Q (51.1) Et postquam factus est fletus magnus, sepelierunt Evam omnes filii eius. Et cum essent lugentes diebus IIII, apparuit angelus Seth dicens: (51.2) “Ne amplius lugeatis quam sex dies mortuos vestros, quia quis septima dies signum resurrerectionis est. Et in die septtimo requievit Dominus ab omni opere suo quod pat-rarat”.Q (52) Tunc Seth fecit tabulas lapideas et luteas et scripsit in eis vitam patris Ade et vitam matris sue Eve, et posuit eas in medio ‹domus› patris sui in oratorium ubi oravit Adam Dominum. (RHENISH Et posuit tabulas in medio domus patris sui in oratorio, ubi orabat Adam domi-num. Et post diluvium a multis videbantur hom-inibus tabulae illae scriptae et a nemine lege-bantur.)

211 MS: eest preceded by ist.212 MS: beteynteken.213 MS:…ende hi screift daer dat leuen sijns vader ende sijnre moeder, alsoe als sy my beuolen had, al dat van hem ghesien ende ghehoert was. Ende dese twee taeffelen ‹stelte› ic in dat huys daer myn vader Adam God aen te beden plach. This passage apparently in Seth’s own words is part of the narration in all known sources. The transition from narrative to direct speech is inchoate.214 MS: gelosen, which could be interpreted as = glosen = uitleggen, but may be a mistake for gelesen.


368 BOB MILLER

nae quam die in215 coninc Salamon handen. Ende hi ouersachse mer‹ke›licken, mer hi en const216 niet ‹lesen› wat daer in stont. Hi ghinc in sijn gebedt ende hi badt God dat hi hem ver-thoenen woude wat daer in stont ghescreuen, ende doen hi in sijnen gebede lach, doen open-baerden hem die [f. 336r] engel Gods ende sechden tot hem: “Ic was die Sets hant ‹hielt› doe hi dit screef ende sulles weten ende ver-staen dat dese scryft is van Adam ende Eua leu-ens ende dese tafel is ierst geset in die stat daer Adam te beden plach ende is ghescreuen wtten mont ende lippen mit Sets hant”. Amen.

(Q) Salomon namque sapientissimus inventis eisdem tabulis deprecatus est dominum: et apparuit ei angelus dicens: “Ego sum qui tenui manum Seth ut scriberet de ferro in lapides istos. Et ecce cognosces scripturam, ut scias ubi sunt lapides et ubi oratorium Domino Deo”. Tunc Salomon supplevit templum Domino Deo. Et vocavit illas litteras achilicas, quod est latine lapidicas, id est sine labiis doctrina scriptas digito Seth.

Tilburg lacks 53-54 of QTilburg lacks 55-57 of ‘British’

215 ›in‹ written above line.216 MS const = conse ’t.

LITERATURE

AERTS, W.J., & G.A.A. KORTEKAAS (1998). Die Apokalypse des Pseudo-Methodius. Die ältesten griechischen und lateinischen Übersetzungen. 2 volumes. CSCO 569-570 Subsidia 97-98. Louvain.

ANDERSON, Gary A. (1992). The Penitence Narrative in the Life of Adam and Eve. Hebrew Union College Annual 63 1992 pp 1-38, reprinted in ANDERSON, Gary A., STONE, Michael E., & TROMP, Johannes, eds. (2000). Literature on Adam and Eve. Collected Essays. Studia in veteris testamenti pseudepigrapha XV. Leiden. pp 3-42.

ANDERSON, Gary A., & STONE, Michael E. (1999). A Synopsis of the Books of Adam and Eve. Second Revised Edition. Early Judaism and its Literature 17. Atlanta.

BAARDA, Carleen & Jos. M.M. HERMANS (1992). Brabantse Handschriften. Tilburg.BABILAS, Wolfgang (1968). Untersuchungen zu den Sermoni subalpini, mit einem

Exkurs über die Zehn-Engelchor-Lehre. Münchner Romanistische Arbeiten 24. München.

BARNEY, Stephen A., et al. (2006). The Etymologies of Isidore of Seville. Cambridge.BERJEAU, Jean Philibert (1863). Geschiedenis van het heylighe Cruys; or, History of

the Holy Cross. Reproduced in Fac-simile from the Original Edition printed by J. Veldener in 1483. Text and Engravings by J.Ph.B. London.

BERTRAND, Daniel A. (1987). La vie grecque d’Adam et Ève. Introduction, texte, tra-duction et commentaire. Recherches Intertestamentaires 1. Paris.

BETTENSON, Henry Scowcroft (1982). Augustine. City of God. Harmondsworth.Bibel 1518 – Den bibel ghetranslateert ende vermeerdt… Claes de Graue, Antwerpen

1518.Bibel 1523 – Hier beghint die Bibel int duitsche neerstelick overgheset… Pieter Kaetz,

Delft 1523.CRAMER, Nicolaas Adrianus (1908a). Inleiding op eene uitgave der Reis van Jan van

Mandeville, naar de Middelnederlandsche handschriften en incunabelen. Leiden.CRAMER, Nicolaas Adrianus (1908b). De Reis van Jan van Mandeville, naar de Mid-

delnederlandsche handschriften en incunabelen. Vanwege de Maatschappij der Nederlandsche Letterkunde te Leiden uitgegeven door N.A.C. Leiden.



DE BRUIN, C.C. (1937). De Statenbijbel en zijn voorgangers. Leiden.DE BRUIN, C.C. (1980). Tleven ons heren Ihesu Christi. Het pseudo-Bonaventura-Lu-

dolfiaanse Leven van Jesus. Verzameling van Middelnederlandse Bijbelteksten, Miscellanea II. Leiden.

DE JONGE, Marinus (2003). Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament as Part of the Chris-tian Literature. Studia in Veteris Testamenti Pseudepigrapha 18. Leiden.

DE JONGE, Marinus & Johannes TROMP (1997). The Life of Adam and Eve and Related Literature. Guides to the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha. Sheffield.

DENIS, ALBERT-MARIE, & JEAN-CLAUDE HAELEWYCK (2000). La Vie d’Adam et Eve. pp. 3-58 in: Introduction à la littérature religieuse judéo-hellénistique Tome I. Turnhout.

DOBSCHÜTZ, Ernst von (1912). Das Decretum Gelasianum de libris recipendis et non recipendis in kritischem Text herausgegeben und untersucht. TU 38,4. Leipzig.

Douay Version – The Holy Bible, Douay Version, Murphy Edition, Baltimore Maryland n.d.

DUSTOOR, Phiroze Edulji (1930). Legends of Lucifer in Early English and in Milton. Anglia 54 pp 213-269.

EHRMAN, Bart D. (2003). The Apostolic Fathers. 2 volumes. Loeb 24-25. Cambridge MA.

EIS, Gerhard (1935). Beiträge zur mittelhochdeutschen Legende und Mystik. Unter-suchungen und Texte. Germanische Studien 161. Berlin.

ELDRIDGE, Michael D. (2001). Dying Adam With His Multiethic Family. Studia in Vete-ris Testamenti Pseudepigrapha 16. Leiden.

ERFFA, Hans Martin von (1989). Ikonologie der Genesis. Die christlichen Bildthemen aus dem Alten Testament und ihre Quellen. Erster Band: Genesis 1-11. München.

FRASSEN, R.P. Claudius (1901). Scotus Academicus seu universa doctoris subtilis the-ologica dogmata. Editio nova. Six volumes. Roma.

GANSER, Günther (1985). Die niederländische Version der Reisebeschreibung Johanns von Mandeville. Untersuchungen zur handschriftlichen Überlieferung. Amster-damer Publikationen zur Sprache und Literatur 63. Amsterdam.

GNEUSS, Helmut (1971). Review of Ogilvy (1967), Books known to the English 597-1066. Anglia 89 pp 129-134. (Halle).

GNEUSS, Helmut (2001). Handlist of Anglo-Saxon Manuscripts. A List of Manuscripts and Manuscript Fragments Written or Owned in England up to 1100, Med. and Renaissance Texts and Stud. 241. Tempe, AZ.

GNEUSS, Helmut (2003). Addenda and corrigenda to the Handlist of Anglo-Saxon Manuscripts. Anglo-Saxon England 32 pp. 293-305

GRAESSE, Theodor (1890). Jacobi a Voragine Legenda Aurea, vulgo historia Lombar-dica dicta. Editio tertia. Breslau. Reprint Osnabrück 1965.

GREENE, David, & KELLY, Fergus (1976). The Irish Adam and Eve Story from Saltair na Rann. Volume I. Text and Translation by D.G. and F.K. Dublin.

GROOTENS, P., S.J. (1948). Onuitgegeven sermoenen van Jan Brugman O.F.M. Studiën en tekstuitgaven van Ons Geestelijk Erf VIII. Tielt.

GYSSELYING, Maurits (1983). Rijmbijbel/Tekst. Uitgegeven door M.G. Corpus van Mid-delnederlandse Teksten (tot en met het jaar 1300) Reeks II: Literaire Handschrif-ten, Deel 3. Leiden.

HAELEWYCK, J.-C. (1998). Clavis Apocryphorum Veteris Testamentum. Turnhout.HERMODSSON, Lars (1959). Dat boec van den houte. Eine mittelniederländische Dich-

tung von der Herkunft des Kreuzes Christi. Uppsala Universitets Arssrift 1959: 1. Uppsala & Wiesbaden.


370 BOB MILLER

HILL, Robert C. (1986). Saint John Chrysostom. Homilies on Genesis 1-17. Washington DC.

HORSTMANN, Carl (1887). Nachträge zu den Legenden 10. Vita prothoplausti Adae & de ligno cruce. Archiv für das Studium der neueren Sprachen und Literaturen 79 pp 459-470.

ISIDORE HISPALIENSIS. Quaestiones in Veteris Testamentum. In Genesim. Patrologia Latin 83 Paris 1862 cc.207-288.

ISIDORE HISPALIENSIS. Sententiarum Libri Tres. Patrologia Latin 83 Paris 1862 cc.537-758.

JOHNSON, Marshall D. (1985). Life of Adam and Eve. pp 249-295.in: Charlesworth, James H., ed. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha II. Expansions of the “Old Testament” and Legends, Wisdom and Philosophical Literature, etc. London.

KAESTLI, J.-D. (2003). Le mythe de la chute de Satan et la question du milieu d’origine de la Vie d’Adam et Ève. pp. 341-354 in: Early Christian Voices, Essays in Honor of François Bovon. ed. D.H. Warren et al.. Biblical Interpretation Series 66. Leiden 2003.

KATONA, Lajos (1904). A Teleki-codex legendái. Értekezések a nyelv- és széptu-dományok köréböl Kiadja a Magyar Tudományos Akademia 18 Kötet, 10 Szám. 80pp. (Pest).

KNITTEL, Thomas (2002). Das griechische “Leben Adams und Evas”. Studien zu einer narrativen Anthropologie im frühen Judentum. Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism 88. Tübingen.

King James – Holy Bible. Authorised King James Version. Oxford n.d.KOCK, Thomas (1999). Das Buchkultur der Devotio moderna. Frankfurt am Main.KOCK, Thomas (2002). Lektüre und Meditation der Laienbrüder in der Devotio moderna.

Ons Geestelijk Erf 76 pp. 15-63.LECHNER-SCHMIDT, Wilfried (1990). Wortindex der lateinisch erhaltenen Pseudepigrap-

hen zum Alten Testament. Texte und Arbeiten zum neutestamentlichen Zeitalter 3. Tübingen.

LINDSAY, W.D. (1911). Isidori Hispalensis Episcopi Etymologiarum sive originum Libri XX. 2 volumes. Oxford. (first edition lacks pagination)

MERK, Otto, & MEISER, Martin (1998). Das Leben Adams und Evas. Jüdische Schriften aus hellenistisch-römischer Zeit Bd II Lieferung 5. Gütersloh.

MERTENS, Thom (2007). The Sermons of Johannes Brugman, OFM (†1473): Preserva-tion and Form. pp. 253-274 in: Roger Andersson, ed., Constructing the Medieval Sermon. Turnhout.

MEYER, Wilhelm (1878). Vita Adae et Evae. Abhandlungen der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-Philologische Klasse 14 Teil III pp 185-250.

MEYER, Wilhelm (1882). Die Geschichte des Kreuzholzes vor Christi. Abhandlungen der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-Philologische Klasse 16 Teil II pp 101-166.

MH – Middelnederlandsch Handwoordenboek, bewerkt door J. Verdam… en van het woord sterne af opnieuw bewerkt door C.H. Ebbinge Wubben. ’s-Gravenhage 1932.

MH-Supplement – Middelnederlandsch Handwoordenboek – Supplement door J.J. Van der Voort Van der Kleij. Leiden-Antwerpen 1983.

MILLER, Bob (1998). Eine deutsche Versübersetzung der lateinischen ›Vita Adae et Evae‹ in der ›Weltchronik‹ Heinrichs von München. pp 240-332 in: Studien zur ›Weltchronik‹ Heinrichs von München. Band 1. Überlieferung, Forschungsbericht, Untersuchungen, Texte. Hg. Horst Brunner. Red. Dorothea Klein. Wiesbaden.



MILLER, Bob (2003). Fünf deutsche Prosafassungen der Kreuzholzlegende Post pec-catum Adae. pp. 289-342 in: Vestigia Bibliae 24-25 (for 2002-2003).

MOZLEY, John Henry (1928). The Vita Adae. Journal of Theological Studies (OS) 30 pp 121-149.

MURDOCH, Brian O. (1972). The Fall of Man in the Early Middle High German Bibli-cal Epic. GAG 58. Göppingen.

MURDOCH, Brian O. (1974). The Recapitulated Fall. A Comparative Study in Medieval Literature. Amsterdamer Publikationen zur Sprache und Literatur 11. Amsterdam.

MURDOCH, Brian O. (1976). The Irish Adam and Eve Story from Saltair na Rann. Volume II. Commentary by Brian O. Murdoch. Dublin.

MURDOCH, Brian (2009). The Apocryphal Adam and Eve in Medieval Europe. Verna-cular Translations and Adaptations of the Vita Adae et Evae. Oxford.

MW – Middelnederlandsch Woordenboeck, van E. Verwijs en J. Verdam. ‘sGravenhage 9 volumes and two supplements 1882-1952.

NODES, Daniel J. (1985). Avitus. The Fall of Man. De spiritualis historiae gestis libri I-III. edited by D.J.N. Toronto Mediaeval Latin Texts 16. Toronto.

Nova Vulgata – Nova Vulgata bibliorum sacrorum editio, editio typica altera, Libreria editrice Vaticana 1998.

OGILVY, Jack David Angus (1967). Books known to the English 597-1066. Cambridge Massachusetts.

PETRUS COMESTOR, Historia Scolastica. Patrologia Latin 198 Paris 1855 cc.1050-1072.

PETTORELLI, Jean-Pierre (1998). La Vie latine d’Adam et Eve. Archivum Latinitatis Medii Aevi (Bulletin du Cange)56 pp 5-104.

PETTORELLI, Jean-Pierre (1999a). La Vie latine d’Adam et Eve, analyse de la tradition manuscrite. Apocrypha 10 pp 195-296.

PETTORELLI, Jean-Pierre (1999b). Vie latine d’Adam et Eve, recension de Paris, BNF, Lat. 382. Archivum Latinitatis Medii Aevi (Bulletin du Cange)57 pp 3-52.

PETTORELLI, Jean-Pierre (2001) Vie latine d’Adam et Ève. Familles rhénanes I. Archi-vum Latinitatis Medii Aevii (Bulletin du Cange) 59 pp. 1-73

PETTORELLI, Jean-Pierre (2002a). Vie latine d’Adam et Ève. Familles rhénanes II. Archi-vum Latinitatis Medii Aevi (Bulletin du Cange) 20 pp. 171-233.

PETTORELLI, Jean-Pierre (2002b). Deux témoins latins singuliers de la Vie d’Adam et Ève, Paris, BNF, LAT. 3832 & Milan, B. Ambrosiana, O 35 Sup. Journal for the Study of Judaism 33 pp. 1-27.

PETTORELLI, Jean-Pierre (2003). Essai sur la structure primitive de la Vie d’Adam et ève. Apocrypha 14 pp. 237-256.

PRANGSMA-HAJENIUS, Angelique M.L. (1995). La Légende du Bois de la Croix dans la littérature française médiévale. Assen.

REUSCH, Heinrich (1886). Die Indices librorum prohibitorum des sechzehnten Jahrhun-derts. Gesammelt und herausgegeben von H.R.. BLV 176. Tübingen.

RIGOLLOT, L.M. (1877-1878). Ludolphus de Saxonia. Vita Jesu Christi ex evangelio et approbatis ab ecclesia catholica doctoribus sedule collecta. 4 volumes. Paris-Brussels.

ROSENSTIEHL, J.M. (1983). La chute de l’Ange. pp. 37-60 in: Écritures et traditions dans la littérature copte. Cahiers de la Bibliothèque Copte 1. Louvain.

RUH, Kurt (1999). Geschichte der abendländischen Mystik. Band IV Die niederländi-sche Mystik des 14. bis 16. Jahrhunderts. München.

RYAN, Granger, & Helmut RIPPENBERGER (1941). The Golden Legend of Jacobus de Voragine. New York.


372 BOB MILLER

SALMON, Paul (1963a). Der zehnte Engelchor in deutschen Dichtungen und Predigten des Mittelalters. Euphorion 57 pp 321-330.

SAVAGE, John J., trans. (1961). Saint Ambrose. Hexameron, Paradise, and Cain and Abel. The Fathers of the Church 42. Washington DC.

SCHELLEKENS, J.W.M. (1992). De verstrooiing der Bossche handschriften. Ons Geeste-lijk Erf 66 pp. 307-317.

SCHENKEL, Carl (1896). Sancti Ambrosii Opera Pars Prima Qua continentur libri Exa-meron, De Paradiso, etc... CSEL 32 pars I, Prague, Vienna, Leipzig.

Septuaginta – Septuaginta Id est Vetus Testamentum graece iuxta LXX interpres edidit Alfred Rahlfs. Editio minor. Stuttgart 1935.

SHERWOOD-SMITH, Maria C., & Patricia STOOP (2003). Repertorium van Middelneder-landse preken in handschriften tot en met 1550. Leuven.

SINGER, Samuel (1898). Zu Wolframs Parzifal. in: Abhandlungen zur germanischen Philologie. Festgabe für Richard Heinzel. pp 353-436. Halle.

SPAAPEN, B. (1961). Middeleeuwse Passiemystiek. Ons Geestelijk Erf 35 pp 167-185.STALLINGS-TANEY, Mary (1997). Iohannes de Caulibus. Meditaciones vite Christi, olim

S. Bonaventuro attributae. Corpus Christianorum Continuatio Mediaevalis 153. Turnhout.

STONE, Michael E. (1992). A History of the Literature of Adam and Eve. Atlanta.SUCHIER, Hermann (1883). Denkmäler Provenzalischer Literatur und Sprache. Erster

Band (all published). Halle.TESKE, Roland J., trans. (1991). Saint Augustine on Genesis, Two Books on Genesis

Against the Manichees, and, On the Literal Interpretation of Genesis, an unfini-shed book. The Fathers of the Church 84. Washington DC.

THOMSON, S. Harrison (1933). A Fifth Recension of the Latin Vita Ade et Eve. Studi Medievali Nuova Serie 6 pp 271-278. (Turin).

TIDEMAN, Jan (1844). Dboec van den Houte, door Jacob van Maerlant. Werken uitge-geven door de Vereeniging ter bevordering der Oude Nederlandsche Letterkunde, Eerste Jaargang Tweede Aflevering. Leiden.

TIMMERMANN, Waltraud (1994), Article Viertöchterstreit, in: Verfasserlexikon, Die Deutsche Literatur des Mittelalters, 2nd ed., ed. Burghart Wachinger et al., Ber-lin & New York 1978-, Band IX cc.396-402.

TRAVER, Hope (1907). The Four Daughters of God. Bryn Mawr College Monographs: Monograph series 6. Bryn Mawr, Connecticutt.

TROMP, Johannes (2002). The Textual History of the Life of Adam and Eve in the Light of a Newly Discovered Latin Text-Form. Journal for the Study of Judaism 33 pp. 28-41.

TROMP, Johannes (2005). The Life of Adam and Eve in Greek. A Critical Edition. Pseu-depigrapha Veteris Testamenti Graece 6. Leiden.

VAN DEN BERG, Marianus Kornelis Antonius (1998). De Noordnederlandse historiebij-bel, Een kritische editie met inleiding en aantekeningen van Hs. Ltk 231 uit de Leidse Universiteitsbibliotheek. MSB LVI. Hilversum.

VAN DE VEN, Jeroen M.M. (1994). Over Brabant geschreven handschriften en archi-valsche bronnen in de Tilburgse Universiteitsbibliotheek, Deel I, Middeleeuwse handschriften en fragmenten. Miscellanea Neerlandica 8. Leuven: Peeters.

VAN DIJK, A (1948). Verspreide Sermoenen van Jan Brugman uitgegeven door A.v.D. Klassieke Galerij 41. Antwerpen.

VAN TOL, Johannes Fredericus J. (1934). Middelnederlandse en Middelnederduitse Sidrac-handschriften. Tijdschrift voor Taal en Letteren 1934 pp 30-59. (Til-burg).



Vulgate – Biblia Sacra iuxta Vulgatam Clementinam Nova editio… ed. Alberto Colunga & Laurentio Turrado. 6th ed. B.A.C. 14. Madrid 1982.

WEBER-GRYSON – Biblia sacra iuxta vulgatam versionem. Ed. Robert Weber, Roger Gryson et al., 4th ed. Stuttgart.

WEST, M.L. (1971). Early Greek Philosophy and the Orient. Oxford.WESTERMANN, Claus (1994). Genesis 1-11. Translated by John J. Scullion. Minneapo-

lis.

SUMMARY

A manuscript of circa 1500-1525 contains the only extant Dutch translation of the pos-sibly first-century Pseudepigraphon the Life of Adam and Eve, integrated into a treatise on the Fall of Lucifer and of Adam and Eve. This work is transmitted as a reading for lay brothers or sisters, in this particular case probably Franciscan Tertiaries, in the circles of the Devotio moderna. The text of the Life is situated within the known redac-tions of the Latin text. It is found to be a late redaction which nevertheless displays contamination from readings very close to those of the oldest known Latin witnesses of the text. The motifs found in the treatise are discussed against the background of Patristic ideas on Lucifer and the protoplasts and their reception by mediaeval Francis-can thinkers. It is emphasised that an important aspect of the discovery is that the Life of Adam and Eve is not merely transmitted as a historical narrative but is integrated into a meditation on the themes of temptation, sin and penitence as understood within the Devotio moderna. Some similar material used in the sermons of Jan Brugman is exam-ined, and some contrasts in the way the material is used are highlighted. The combina-tion of the two texts, the Pseudepigraphon and the mediaeval treatise, may have been intended as a tool for comparative study within the meditational programmes of the Devotio moderna. The late Middle Dutch text is edited, the treatise with an English translation and the Life with a parallel Latin text of the relevant redaction.

Adress of the author: 11 Sparsey Place, Oxford OX2 8NL, United Kingdom – [email protected]


A Dutch Translation of The Life of Adam and Eve 1. THE LIFE OF ADAM AND EVE

Documents

Transcript of A Dutch Translation of The Life of Adam and Eve 1. THE LIFE OF ADAM AND EVE