Noah’s Ham and Jansen Enikel
1941; Routledge; Volume: 16; Issue: 4 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1080/19306962.1941.11786051
ISSN1930-6962
Autores Tópico(s)Biblical Studies and Interpretation
ResumoClick to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size NotesA Descriptive Catalogue of the McClean Collection of Manuscripts in the Fitzwilliam Museum (Cambridge, 1912), p. 62. I have been unable to obtain photostats of the MS. itself because of the war. James transcribes the note as follows: “Cham minor filiorum noe transgressor continentie quam noe indixerat in archa mulieribus seorsum et uiris similiter seorsum manentibus. Cham uero per magicam artem uocato demone transiuit ad uxorem suam dormiens cum ea. Ideo autem uehiculo demonis usus est quia noe cinerem sparserat in medio in quo notaret uestigia transeuntium ad uxores. Ceteris uero cum patre continentibus solus cham demonis ministerio simul et adiutorio mulieris amplexibus operam dedit. Noe uero precibus insistente demon cham reducere non ualuit nocturnis orationibus noe impeditus et effugatus. Unde cham ante lucem ad ceteros fratres redire compulsus est (et) per cinerem dispersum admissum facinus celere non potuit. Quo circa noe uestigia sua deprendens cham propter inobedientiam habere cepit exosum. Unde cham derisit eum post inebriationem.” The passage of the Aurora to which this is appended can be supplied from Library of Congress, Modern Language Association Deposit, No. 21 (a photostatic copy of MS. Bodley 822), f. 15b:Nominat. inde uiros. hinc uxores. quasi dicat.Non amat amplexus temporis hora mali.Ex cunctis que sunt animancia. carnis in archaBina locata manent. femina. masque simul.De mundis septena suum iuxta genus intrat.Que sunt inmunda bina locantur ibi.Augustinus ait. quod que numquam generantur.Ex coytu. non hic esse necesse fuit.Descriptive Catalogue, p. 55.Philipp Strauch, ed., Jansen Enikels Werke, MGH: Deutsche Chroniken, III (Hannover and Leipzig, 1900), 36–50.Christian examples of this punishment for sexual sin will be found in C. Grant Loomis, “Three Cases of Vaginism,” Bulletin of the History of Medicine, vii (1939), 97–98.August Wünsche, tr., Der Midrasch Bereschit Rabba (Leipzig, 1881), pp. 136, 150, 163.Gerald Friedlander, tr., Pirkê de Rabbi Eliezer (London, 1916), p. 169, where the authority is Rabbi Levitas of Jamnia. Several further references are given by the translator.Louis Ginzberg, The Legends of the Jews (Philadelphia, 1912–1938), i, 166; v, 188–189.The Finnish version, sent me by Dr. Martin Haavio from the Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura (Helsinki), was collected by H. Ihanus at the town of Tuupovaara in 1935 (KRK 156. 25). A German translation furnished by the Seura, follows: “Als die Sintflut gewesen war und alles, was am Leben bleiben sollte, mit in die Arche genommen wurde, fürchtete der alte Noah, die Sintflut könnte lange dauern und, da sich in der Arche beide Geschlechter fanden, sie würden sich paaren und so sehr zunehmen, daß der Mundvorrat nicht ausreichen würde. In dieser Furcht nahm Noah allen Männern und auch den übrigen männlichen Wesen für die Dauer der Sintflut die Eier weg. Die großen Eier legte er auf das untere Brett, und die kleinen hob er auf das obere. Als dann die Sintflut aufhörte und die Männer gehen durften, die Eier zu holen, so reichten die kleinen Männer nicht heran, von dem oberen Brett die kleinen Eier zu nehmen, sondern nahmen von dem unteren Brett die großen, und die großen Männer hatten keine Lust, sich zu bücken, vielmehr nahmen sie von dem oberen Brett die kleinen Eier, und so bekamen denn die Großen die kleinen Eier und die Kleinen die großen.” Another Finnish variant (from Kiikoinen, collected in 1935 by R. Koivusaari—KRK 30) specializes on the confusion between the hare and the bull, and explains not only the hare's scrotal disproportion but his harelip as well. In the Lithuanian variant the motivation is not continence but a game of cards, in which the animals wager their “instruments.” This variant was written down in the village of Paserbentys by Dzidas Pozingis in 1938 (November 13) from the telling of Anete Murauskient, age 80, and is preserved in the Lietuvių Tautosakos Archyvo (Kaunas) under the numbers 1808 (30). Dr. Jonas Balys, to whose courtesy I owe a copy, says there are no more Lithuanian variants like this!Italics mine. Historia Scholastica, ed. Migne, PL, 198 (1855), col. 1083. For the annotator’s Latin see note 1 above.The Evolution of Arthurian Romance, 2nd ed. (Göttingen and Baltimore, 1928), i, 169; Joseph Bédier, ed., Le Roman de Tristan par Thomas (SATF, Paris, 1902–1905), ii, 248–252.Tristan and Isolt: A Study of the Sources of the Romance (Frankfort and London, 1913), i, 221–222.Henning F. Feilberg, Bidrag til en ordbog over Jyske Almuesmål (Copenhagen, 1881–1914), iii, 500; E. Hoffmann-Krayer and Hanns Bächtold-Stäubli, Handwörterbuch des deutschen Aberglaubens (Berlin and Leipzig, 1927ff.), i, cols. 615–616; Moses Gaster, “Zur Quellenkunde deutscher Sagen und Märchen,” Germania, xxv (1880), 290-294.Vulgate Daniel 14: 13–20; see R. H. Charles, Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament (Oxford, 1913), i, 660–661. For midrashic versions see Ginzberg, Legends, i, 346; vi, 427, 432.See, for instance, Franz Pfeiffer, “Predigtmärlein,” Germania, III (1858), 419.Strauch (p. lxviii) finds evidence only of indirect use of Comestor by Enikel.P. lxxvii.P. 44.The husband is called “jung man” eight times, “junglinc” twice. He is called “man” nine times, but seven of these take place after the consummation (I omit the six cases of “man” or “mann” when used by the wife with the meaning “husband”).Antti Aarne, The Types of the Folk-tale, tr. and rev. by Stith Thompson (FF Communications No. 74, Helsinki, 1928), p. 125.Lietuvių Pasakojamosios Tautosakos Motyvių Katalogas (Motif-Index of Lithuanian Narrative Folk-lore) (Tautosakos Darbai, II, Kaunas, 1936), pp. 189–190. For the fullest treatment to date see Oskar Dähnhardt, Natursagen (Leipzig and Berlin, 1907–1912), 1, 258–267.Migne, PL, col. 1090.Edward B. M. Browne, tr., The Book Jashar (New York, 1856), p. 46.Robert Eisler, Wehenmantel und Himmelzeit (Munich, 1910), ii, 321, 328–329, 384, 566–571. For further bibliography see Ginzberg, Legends, i, 177, v, 199–201.The Riga annotator isolates the motif about Ha m s magical talents in another note. Cf. James, op. cit., p. 62.P. lxx.
Referência(s)