Skip to main content

Full text of "The fables of Aesop, as first printed by William Caxton in 1484, with those of Avian, Alfonso and Poggio, now again edited and induced by Joseph Jacobs"

See other formats











Digitized by tine Internet Archive 

in 2008 with funding from 

IVIicrosoft Corporation 

The Fables 

OP Aesop 

asibliotb^quc be Carabas Seriea. 

I. CUPID AND PSYCHE : The most Pleasant and Delect- 

able Tale of the Marriage of Cupid and Psyche. Done into 
English by William Addington, of University College in 
Oxford. With a Discourse on the Fable by Andrew Lang, 
late of Merton College in Oxford. Frontispiece by W. B. 
Richmond, and Verses by the Editor, May Kendall, J. 
W. Mackail, F. Locker-Lampson, and W. H. Pollock. 
(Ixxxvi. 65 pp.) 1887. Out of print. 

II. EUTERPE: The Second Book of the Famous History of 

Herodotus. Englished by B. R., 1584. Edited by Andrew- 
Lang, with Introductory Essays on the Religion and the 
Good Faith of Herodotus. Frontispiece by A. W. ToMSON ; 
and Verses by the Editor and Graham R. Tomson. 
(xlviii. 174 pp.) 1888. lo^f. Only a fezv copies left. 

III. THE FABLES OF BIDPAI : or, The MoraU Philo- 

sophie of Doni : Drawne out of the auncient writers, a work 
first compiled in the Indian tongue. Englished out of Italian 
by Thomas North, Brother to the Right Honorable Sir 
Roger North, Knight, Lord North of Kytheling, 1570. 
Now again edited and induced together with a Chronologico- 
Bibliographical Chart of the translations and adaptations of 
the Sanskrit original, and an Analytical Concordance of the 
Stories, by Joseph Jacobs, late of St. John's College in 
Cambridge. With a full-page Illustration by Edward 
BuRNE Jones, A.R.A., Frontispiece from a sixteenth cen- 
tury MS. of the Anvari Suhaili, and facsimiles of Woodcuts 
in the Italian Doni of 1532. (Ixxxii. 264pp.) 1888. i2.r. 

Zbc faMcB of ac5op, 

From the Bayeux Tapestry. 

Zbc jFa()lc6 of Hc0op 

as first printed by William Caxton in 14-84. 
with those of Avian, Alfonso and Poggio, 
now again edited and induced 
by Joseph Jacobs, 


History of the ^Esopic Fable. 

London. Published by David Nutt in 
THE Strand, m.d.ccclxxxix. 






He sat among the woods, he heard 

The sylvan merriment ; he saw 
The pranks of butterfly and bird, 

Tlie humours of the ape, the daw. 

And in the Hon or the frog — 

In all the life of moor and fen. 
In ass and peacock, stork and log, 

He read simiHtudes of men. 

" Of these, from those," he cried, " we come. 
Our hearts, our brains descend from these." 

And lo ! the Beasts no more were dumb, 
But answered out of brakes and trees ; 

" Not ours," they cried ; " Degenerate, ' 

If ours at all," they cried again, 
" Ye fools, who war with God and Fate, 

Who strive and toil : strange race of men, 

" For we are neither bond nor free, 
For we have neither slaves nor kings. 

But near to Nature's heart are we, 
And conscious of her secret things. 

" Content are we to fall asleep. 
And well content to wake no more, 

We do not laugh, we do not weep. 
Nor look behind us and before ; 

" But were there cause for moan or mirth, 
'Tis zve, not you, should sigh or scorn. 

Oh, latest children of the Earth 

Most childish children Earth has borne." 

They spoke, but that misshapen Slave 
Told never of the thing he heard. 

And unto men their portraits gave, 
In likenesses of beast and bird I 

A. L. 


@^^^^e^©ESOP'S Fables are the first 
•^4^ ^>^ book one reads, or at least 
^1^^ the first tales one hears. It 
» seems, therefore, appropriate 
^ to reproduce them in the first 
form in which they appeared among English 
books, translated and printed by William 
Caxton 'at Westmynster in thabbey ' dur- 
ing the spring of 1484, eight years before 
the discovery of America. Richard Crook- 
back had just doffed Buckingham's head, 
and was passing through his first and only 
Parliament the most intelligent set of laws 
that any English King had added to the 
Statute Book. Among these was one which 
excepted foreign printers from the restric- 
tions that were put upon aliens (i Ric. III. 


c. 9). At that moment Caxton was justify- 
ing the exceptional favour by producing the 
book which was to form his most popular 
production^ and indeed one of the most 
popular books that have issued from the 
English press. 

The interest of this reprint is literary 
rather than typographical : we are con- 
cerned here with Caxton as an author, to 
whom scant justice has been done, rather 
than with Caxton as a printer, whose name 
can never be uttered without the Oriental 
wish, ' God cool his resting-place.' To 
illustrate the history of printing nothing 
other than a facsimile reprint would suf- 
fice the student, and facsimile reprints of 
Caxton's heavy and rude Gothic type are 
unreadable. We have, however, repro- 
duced his text with such fidelity as we 
could command, even to the extent of retain- 
ing his misprints. If we have occasionally 
added some of our own, we shall be for- 
given by those who know the exhausting 
work of collating Gothic and ordinary type ; 

PREFACE. xiii 

we have blazoned Caxton's carelessness and 
our own on p. 318 of vol. ii. On the few 
occasions where a letter had slipped or had 
been elevated above the line, we have re- 
produced the peculiarity of the original in 
our text, as on pp. yg, 324. 

On the typographical peculiarities of the 
orifiinal — how it is composed in the fourth 
fount used by Caxton, and so on — we need 
not dilate here. Are not these things writ- 
ten, once for all, in the Chronicles of Blades 
(W. Blades' Life and Work of Caxlon, ii. 
157-60), one of the few final books written 
by an Englishman ? Caxton's ' Esope ' is 
distinguished in the history of English print- 
ing by being the first book to possess initial 
letters. A facsimile of the first of these, 
appropriately enough the letter A, is given 
at the beginning of this Preface. In the 
original every fable is accompanied by a 
woodcut : we give a few of these, reduced 
in size : they claim no merit but that of 
the grotesque. 

Our text was copied from the Bodleian 


exemplar. There are but two others — one, 
the only perfect text, in the Queen's library, 
and the other at the British Museum : the 
rest of the copies have been thumbed out 
of existence. I have corrected proofs from 
the Museum copy, having had all facilities 
given me for the purpose by the courtesy of 
Mr. Bullen. 

In the original the Fables are preceded 
by the apocryphal Life of ^sop attributed 
to Planudes. This belongs to quite another 
genre of writing — the Noodle literature. 
To have included this would have extended 
the book, already stretching beyond the 
prescribed limits of the series in which it 
appears, by nearly lOO pages. I had there- 
fore to choose whether to omit this or to 
leave out the Fables of Avian, Alphonse and 
Poggio, which have closer connection with 
the Fables of -^sop. I have elected to 
begin with folio xxvj of the original, passing 
over the Life of ^sop, with the exception of 
its first sentence, out of which has been 
concocted a title-page to the text. 


In the Introduction I had first to give 
the latest word of literary science, — there 
is such a thing, — on the many intricate 
questions connected with the provenance 
and history of the ^Esopic Fable. I have 
endeavoured to bring within moderate com- 
pass the cardinal points of a whole literature 
of critical investigation which has not been 
brought within one survey since Edelestand 
du Meril made a premature attempt to do 
so in 1854. Since his time much has been 
cleared up which to him was obscure — not- 
ably by Benfey and Fausboll on the Oriental 
sources, by Crusius on Babrius, by Oesterley 
and Hervieux on the derivates of Phaedrus, 
and by Mall on Marie de France. Owing 
to their labours the time seemed to me ripe 
to make a bold stroke for it, and to give for 
the first time a history of the ^sopic Fable 
in the light of modern research. I could 
only do this by making an attempt to fill up 
the many gaps left by my predecessors, and 
to supply the missing links required to con- 
nect their investifrations. On almost all the 

xvi PREFA CE. 

knotty points left undecided by them — the 
Hterary source of Phaedrus — who wrote ^sop 
— and why his name is connected with the 
Fables — the true nature of Libyan Fable, and 
the identity of its putative parent, Kybises — 
the source of Tahnndic Fable and its crucial 
importance for the ancient history of the 
Fable — the Indian origin of the Proverbs of 
Agur (Prov. xxx.) — the conduit- pipe by 
which the Indian Jatakas reached the 
Hellenic world and the common source of the 
Jatakas and the Bidpai — the origin of the 
Morals of Fables — the determination of the 
Indian elements in Latin Fable — the exist- 
ence of a larger Arabic ^Esop^ and its re- 
lations to the collections of Marie de France 
and Berachyah ha-Nakdan, and to Ar- 
menian Fable — the identification of Marie's 
immediate source, Alfred — the date and 
domicile of Berachyah ha-Nakdan — the dis- 
tinction between Beast-Fable and Beast- 
Satire — on all these points I have been 
able to make suggestions more or less 
plausible, which will at the worst afford ob- 

PREFA CE. xvii 

jectives for further researchj and make the 
^Esopic problem more definite henceforth. 
I have told the tale backwards, concisely 
where certainty has been reached, in detail 
on points still sub judice. 

It was time at least that some contribu- 
tion to the history of the ^sopic Fable 
should issue from England, which has done 
nothing in this direction since Bentley's 
day. For England, as I have shown, was 
the home of the Fable during the early 
Middle Age, and the centre of dispersion 
whence the Mediaeval ^sop spread through 
Europe. It owed this to its commanding 
position among the Romance nations, as 
head of the Angevin Empire, just at the 
time when European literature was being 
crossfertilized by new germs from the East. 
I hope to show before long that much the 
same history applies to the development of 
Romance. It seemed appropriate, I may 
add, to prefix this contribution to the his- 
tory of the European ^sop to Caxton's 
edition, because this has the same con- 

xviii PREFACE. 

tents and arrangement as the first printed 
^Esops in the chief languages of modern 

I have summed up the results in the 
Pedigree of the Fables ; I trust that the 
N.E. corner of this, which contains most 
of my novelties, will not turn out merely 
to contain so many critical ninepins put up 
only to be bowled over. The literary his- 
tory of each fable is given in the Svnopsis 
of Parallelisms. They are here brought 
together for the first time : Oesterley's 
references, which form the nucleus of my 
collections, have to be sought for from 
among five different works. I have omitted 
some of his references, but have added far 
more than I have omitted, more indeed 
than I have taken. For the literature of 
the last twenty years, and for the English 
and some of the Oriental sources, I have 
had to make my own collections. The 
Glossary at the end of the book is intended 
more to record for philologists Caxton's 
phraseology than to assist readers to under- 





"CClic fiffntc man cin fciner bucb in wcltlfcbcc fciSnfscbcr 
wcisbcit macbcn, ^cnn &as gcmcinc, albcvc l!in6cvtnicb 
ist, so JEsopus bcfsst. — M. Luther, Auslegung des loi 
PsaZms (1534). 

Our ^sop is Phsedrus with trimmings. That, 
to put it shortly, is the outcome of some half 
a century's investigation into the origin of the 
^sopic fable, conducted mainly by French 
scholars.* Begun by M. Robert in his elabo- 
rate edition of Lafontaine in 1825, it was 
continued in very thoroughgoing fashion by M. 
Edelestand du Meril in his Histoire de la fable 
esopique in 1854, and has culminated in the 
colossal work of M. L. Hervieux, Les fahu- 
listes latins (1884), which gives the raw mate- 

* It is but fair, however, to add the name of Hermann 
Oesterley tothe French triumvirate about to be mentioned. 
His Eomulus, die Paraphrasen des Piicedrus und die 
cesopische Fabel im Mittelalter (1870) contains much valu- 
able material in very accessible form. 

VOL. I. A 


rial, the very raw material, from which the 
history of the Latin Mediaeval ^sop can now 
be definitively settled. 

M. Hervieux's work has itself a history which 
deserves to be briefly recited. M. Hervieux, 
a lawyer of some distinction, has daughters 
whom he desired to initiate into the beauties 
of Latin literature. The choice of books suit- 
able for such young persons is, we know, some- 
what limited, and M. Hervieux wisely fixed 
upon Phsedrus, which he determined to trans- 
late for their use. But in order to translate, 
you must have a fixed text, and M. Hervieux 
found that of Phsedrus by no means fixed ; 
he found moreover that even the number of 
Phsedrine fables was an independent variable. 
His interest was aroused and he determined 
to see the matter out. And he did see the 
matter out, though everything seemed against 
him at the start ; he had received no philolo- 
gical training and had never had a Latin MS. 
in his hands. In the course of his researches 
he visited almost every library of importance 
lying between the Isis and the Elbe, between 
Cambridge and Rome. Meanwhile, let it be 
parenthically observed, the Miles. Hervieux 


had become Mesdames N. and M., and M. 
Hervieux has probably long ere this learned 
the art of being grandfather. The results 
of his critical Odyssey ultimately appeared 
some five years ago in the shape of two 
bulky tomes, running to 1500 pages, Ger- 
man in their thoroughness, German also in 
their want of nettete and couj) tVoeil.''' He 
has given in the first of these volumes a full 
and accurate account of all the MSS. of Phse- 
drus and his imitators, with slight biographi- 
cal sketches of their authors, scribes, owners 
and owners' grandfathers, and in his second 
volume he has edited the whole Corpus of 
Latin fabulists from Phsedrus to Xeckam. f It 
must be our first task to get a gi^ound-plan to 
this forest of investigations in which it is by no 
means easy to find one's way owing to the num- 
ber of the trees and the size of their branches. | 

* I hope M. Hervieux will pardon this. One of the few 
touches which lighten his pages is the recital of his patriotic 
scruples in applying to German librarians, who as a general 
rule have responded with a courtesy that might have 
softened a Hannibal. 

f With an important exception ; he has reserved Avian 
and his adapters for a future occasion. 

X M. Gaston Paris has given an admirable compte- 


We cannot, perhaps, begin better than by 
taking to pieces the book we have in our 
hands, Caxton's version of Jules Machault's 
translation of Stainhbwel's Asop, in which 
the mediaeval collections were first brought 
together in print. Caxton's book is composed 
of ten sections : the first, the so-called " Life 
of ^sop," we have omitted; the last three 
are connected with the names of Avian, " Al- 
fonce," and " Poge," which will concern us 
later. The remaining six are the " Fables of 
^sop," as we meet with them in Mediaeval 
literature. And of these, again, the first four 
are found in separate form connected with the 
name of " Romulus," whom medioeval scribes 
have at times raised to the Imperial throne of 
Rome. Let us for the present concentrate 
our attention on the information which M. 
Hervieux's pages convey as to this " Romulus," 
and the many books connected with it. 

There are three families of MSS. and ver- 
sions connected with the " Romulus " fables, 
neglecting various abstracts or combinations 

rendu of M. Hervieux's work in the Journal dcs Savants, 
1884-5, to -which I am much indebted in v?hat immediately 


of the three.* There is first the " Romulus " 
itself, consisting of eighty-three fables divided 
in the Vulgate edition rather irregularly in four 
books ; the earliest MS. of this (the Burneian 
in the British Museum) dates from the tenth 
century. Then comes a recension represented 
in a MS. formerly at Wisseburg, now at Wol- 
fenbiittel, containing eighty-two fables and 
known as the "^sopus ad Rufum." Finally 
there is a collection of sixty-seven Romuleau 
fables first published by Nilant in 1709, 
and known accordingly as the "Anonymus 
Nilanti," but now ascertained to have been 
compiled by the chronicler Ademar de Cha- 
bannes (988-1030), before his departure for the 
Holy Land in 1029. These three collections, 
" Romulus," " .^sopus ad E,ufum," t and the 
.^sop of Ademar, represent three stages back- 

* Among these the only one of interest is the collection 
contained in double form in the mediaeval encyclopaedia, 
the Speculum majus of the Dominican Vincent of Boauvais 
(1264). The "Romulus of Nilant" (not to be confounded 
with the " Anonymus of Nilant") has its interest in 
another connection. (See infra, p. 161 .J 

f For clearness' sake, I leave out of account the " Rufus " 
in what follows. Its exact relation to Ademar and Romulus 
is the subject of dispute between Oesterley, L. Mueller, 
Heydenreich, and MM. Paris and Hervieux, and I will not 
attempt to decide where such doctors disagree. 


wards to the origin of the Mediaeval ^sop. 
The " Romulus " is near, the "Rufus " is nearer, 
and the Ademar is nearest the source. This 
turns out be Phsedrus and Phsedrus alone, 
though in a moi'e extended form than we 
know him at school 

It is well-known that the book we read at 
school " 'twixt smiling and tears," contains 
some of the fables associated with the name 
of ^sop. The first five fables of the first 
book, for example, deal with such familiar 
topics as The Wolf and Lamb, The Frogs de- 
siring a King, The Jay in Peacock's Feathers, 
The Bog and Shadow, and The Lion's Share. 
On the other hand Fables equally familiar like 
The Lion and Mouse, The Toicn and Country 
Mouse, The Ass and Lap-dog, The Wolf aiid 
Kid, and The Belly and Members fail to find 
a place in the ordinary editions of Pha;drus. 
Is this because they are taken from another 
source, or did Phsedrus write more fables than 
are contained in the vulgate edition ? The 
latter is the alternative towards which we are 
led by a careful examination of the prose 
versions, especially of the ^sop of Ademar. 

Ademar's collection is, as we have said, com- 


posed of sixty-seven fables. Of these thirty- 
seven occur in the ordinary Phsedrus, and on 
inspection it becomes clear that they were 
taken direct from it with only sufficient altera- 
tion to turn them from verse to prose.* Let 
us take as an example the Fable of The Wolf 
and Crane, which will often meet us later on 
in other connections. Here is Phsedrus' ren- 
dering : — 

Fab. VIII.— Lvpvs et Grvis. 

Qui pretium meriti ab improbis desiderat, 

Bis peccat : primum, quoniam indignos adiuvat ; 

Iinpune abire deinde quia iam iion potest. 

Os devoratum fauce quum haereret lupi, 

5 Magno dolore victus coepit singulos 

Inlicere pretio, ut illud extraherent malum. 
Tandem persuasa est lure iurando gruis, 
Gulaeque credens colli longitudinem, 
Periculosam fecit medicinam lupo. 

10 Pro quo cum pactum tiagitaret praemiura : 
Ingrata es, inquit, ore quae nostro caput 
lucolume abstuleris, et mercedem postules. 

Now let us take Ademar's prose adaptation 
and arrange it in lines like the original, for 

* The earliest MS. of Ph^drus, the Codex Pithoeanus, 
is written continuously, as if in prose. 


this purpose restoring the moral to the be- 
ginning. The italicised words and inflections 
will show how slight have been the changes. 

LXIV. [Lupus et Gkuis.] 

Qui pretium meriti ab improbo desideiat 
plus peccat : primum quod indignos juvat 
importune, deinde quia in(/ratus postulat quod im- 

plere non possit * 
Lup?;s, devorato fauce wdiaeso, 
niagno dolore victus coepit singulos 
proniissio7iibus et praemio dcprecari ut illud extra- 
be refwr malum. 
Tandem persuasifm iureiurando gxwem 
gulae credens colli longitudinem 
optulit t se pericu^o, ct fecit medic«me/i lupo. 
A quo cum pactum flagitaret praemium : 
lugr&tiim est, inquit, or* nostro quod caput 
iucolume extuleris ; pro hoc et mercedem a nobis in- 
super postulare videris. 

No one can doubt that the writer of the 
prose version, execrable as it is, had before 
him the verses of Phsedrus. Or if any still 
doubt, let him compare the still more execrable 
version in the " Romulus " which forms the 

* Ademar has scarcely improved the moral. 

+ What is the subject here ? In mangling his theft to 
disguise its identity, Ademar has in effect made the wolf 
look down his own throat. 


basis of Caxton's version of the Fable (vol. ii. 
p. 13), through the French of Machault. 

8. Qui cunque malo vult benefaccre satis PECCAT 
Dc quo siTnili audlfabulam 

Oss« lupws cum dovoraref • nnum ex illis hQsit ei in 
favLcibtis • transiiersumgrauiter- Inuitaiiit liqnis 7nag- 
no pretio qui cum extraheret malum. Rogahatur 
gruis collo longo • ut prcstaret lupo mediciuam. Id 
egisset tit initteret caput et extraheret malum de fau- 
cibus. Sanus cum esset lupus ■ rogabat gruis jjctitores 
reddi sibi promissa premia. ct lupus • dicitur dixissc ■ 
Ingrata e&t ilia gruis que caput incolume exivlit • non 
uexatum dcnte nostro et mercedem sihi postuloi. 
in injuriam m.eis uirtutibus • Parabola hcc illos monct • 
qui uolunt bene faccre 7ualis.* 

Here we have had to italicise nearly the 
whole fable as verbally different from the 
Phsedrine original. Comparing the Ademar 
and the Romulus it is clear that the former 
had, and the latter had not, the actual words 
of Phsedrus as a model. But if Ademar so 
slavishly follows Phaedrus in the thirty-seven 
fables which he has in common with the Latin 
fabulist in the ordinary edition, the presump- 

* Rom. i. 8, Oest. Wherever I quote " Roin." it is to 
" Romulus," as edited by Oesterley ; " Ro " refers to the 
English version of Caxton. 


tion is that he had metrical versions before 
him in the thirty fables which do not exist in 
the ordinary Phsedrus, 

We can scarcely, however, hope to restore 
the original from Ademar's versions. It is 
clear from the above example of his method 
that he rarely leaves a line intact ; thus, only 
the fifth line is left untouched in the above, 
though the tenth is but slightly altered and 
preserves the metre even in the altered form. 
Hence we can only expect to recover a line 
here and there. And this is exactly what we 
can do. Thus, in Ademar's version of Uie 
Town and Country Mouse (Adem. 13, Ro. 
I. xii.), the iambic trimeter of the line — 

perduxit precibus post in urbem rusticum, 

proves its Phsedrine origin. So too in The Ass 
and Lapdog (Adem, 17, E,o. I. xvii.) — 

clamors domini concitatur [omnis familia], 

and in The Lion and Mouse (Adem. 18, Ro. 
I. xviii.), though again with a slight halt — 

sic mus leonem captum liberum [silvis restituit]. 


Again the Phsedrine origin of the story of 
Androclus (Adem, 35, E.o, III. i.) is proved by 
the line — 

sublatura et hominis posuit in gremio pedeni, 

or that of The Horse and Ass (Adem. 37, Ro. 
III. iii.) by the lines — 

reticuit ille et gemitu testatur deos. 

equus currendo ruptus parvo in tempore 

ad villani est missus. Nunc onustum stercore 

ut vidit asinus tali eum irrisit [verbo].* 

It is rare, however, that Ademar forgets his 
role of plagiator for so many consecutive lines, 
and in no case can we restore a complete fable 
from his version. Indeed, the only case where 
this is possible occurs in the jEsqpus ad Rufum 
in a fable, Tlie Vixen turned Maiden, which 
that collection alone possesses, though we know 
it was one current in antiquity (see infra, pp. 28, 
97). As it is of great interest historically, we 
may apply the inverse method to it, and restore 
at least this one fable to its legitimate owner, 
Phsedrus. It runs thus in the prose form (as 
given by Oesterley, Romulus, App. i) — 

• I take these examples from Riese's admirable four- 
penny Tauchnitz Fhwdrus, 1885. 



Naturam turpem nulla f ortuna obtegit • Humanam 
speciem cum uertisset iupiter uulpein • legitimis ut 
sedit in tlioris • scarabeum uidit prorepentem ex 
angulo notamque ad prajdam celeri prosiluit gradu ■ 
Supeii risere • magnus erubuit pater • uulpemque 
repudiatam tlialaniis expulit • his prosequutus : uiue 
quo digna es modo • quia digna nostris meritis non 
potes esse. 

By merely writing this in verse forna we can, 
with Burmann and Riese, restore every word 
of the original but two. 


Naturam turpem nulla fortuna obtegit. 
liumanam in speciem cum vertisset luppiter 
vulpem legitimis ut [conjsedit in toris 
scarabaeum vidit prorepentem ex angulo, 
5 notamque ad prtedam celeri prosiluit gradu. 
superi risere, magnus erubuit pater, 
vulpemque repudiatam thalamis expulit 
his prosecutus : ' vive quo digna es modo 
quia digna nostris meritis esse non potes.' 

The Phaedrine cachet of these Knes is unmis- 
takable, and the whole inquiry largely increases 
the presumption that the remaining prose ver- 
sions retain for us the subject-matter at least of 
the lost fables of Phsedrus, of which metrical 


versions must have been in the hands of the pro- 
saists. The canine character of their Latinity 
is sufficient to acquit them of any originality. 

In some cases metrical versions actually exist 
and, what is more, are found associated with 
the name of Phsedrus. In one MS. of Phae- 
drus, of which only a transcript is now extant, 
made by Perotti and published by Jannelli 
in 181 1, no less than thirty-two additional 
fables are contained, among them The Ape 
and Fox (Ro. III. xvii.), Juno Venus and 
the Hen (Eo. III. viii., about which Caxton 
was so sensitive, rather unnecessarily, it would 
seem), The Ephesian Widow (perhaps the most 
popular of all stories, see the Parallels, Ro. III. 
ix.), and The Sheep and Croiv (Ro. IV. xix.). 
Nor is this all. Attached to the editions of 
Phsedrus by Burmann and Dressier there are 
other versified fables found in MSS. of the poet. 
Altogether in one or other of these A})X)endices 
(of Jannelli, of Burmann, or of Dressier*), every 
one of the fables in " Romulus " can be traced 
to Phaedrine metrical versions, as can be seen 

* A convenient edition including all three is just now 
a great want and would form an admirable schoolbook. 
Such a book might even be made a worthy pendant to 
Rutherford's Babrius, and Ellis' Avian. 


from our Synopsis of Parallels. Indeed, the 
whole ninety-six fables which are "prosed" in 
the thi-ee forms of "Romulus" can be so 
traced.* Whether the additional fables found 
in the Perotti MS. of Phsedrus are really by 
that author or no, is another and more delicate 
question. France and Germany here take 
opposite sides. MM. Hervieux and Paris have 
no doubts on the subject, Drs. L. Miiller (in 
his edition of Phasdrus, 1876) and E. Heyden- 
reich (in Bursian's JaJireshericht for 1884, End. 
xxxix.), are not by any means so sure. Phse- 
drus was such a favourite schoolbook among 
the Romans, and formed so frequent a subject 
of rhetorical amplification and imitation that it 
seems not unlikely that some of the fables 
contained in the Appendix were products of 
Silver Latinity, and do not come down to us 
from Phsedrus himself. But, be this as it 
may, there can be little doubt that all these 
fables came down to the Middle Ages in the 

* M. Gaston Paris allows for only fifty-seven prose ver- 
sions to be found in Phsedrus and the Appendix of Jannelli. 
He rejects the additions of Burmann and Dressier. Mr. 
Rutherford also leaves them and the prose versions out of 
account in his Bahrius, pp. c.-ciii., where they would have 
afforded him another dozen parallels. 


name of Ph^drus, and were all equally regarded 
as productions of that poet. We have accord- 
ingly traced the first four books of Caxton's 
collection to their immediate source. So far, 
so good.* 


2)Hs mans abcr ^cm lEsopo 3U8cbrcibet, ist mcfns acbtcns, 
cin OcticFjt, vn5 viclcicbt nlc hein /lOcnsc!? auff ErJcn, 
lEsopus gcbcissen. — M. Luther, Etliche Fabeln aus Esopo, 
ed. Thiele, p. i. 

But nowadays we are not content with imme- 
diate sources; we seek for the Ur-iir-ovigins of 
things. Beginnings are the chief things that 
interest us,t and on the present occasion we 
can scarcely avoid the question : Whence did 
Phsedrus and the other fabulists of the Roman 
world get their fables ? Generally speaking 
Latin literature is but one vast plagiarism 
from the Greek, often bettered in the stealing 
no doubt and so justified, but still a plagiar- 
ism. In any department it may be assumed 

* The derivates of Ademar and Romulus might have 
been treated here, but I have reserved them for the sec- 
tion "^sop in England." 

t And endings or "survivals," the school of Tylor and 
Maclennan will add. 


almost as a matter of course that the model 
is to be sought for in Greece. That this is 
the case with the Latin Fable is acknow- 
ledged by its two great masters, Phsedrus and 
Avian, in their Prefaces. For besides Phsedrus 
there is another collection of Latin metrical 
fables attributed to a certain Avianus. He 
has been identified out of a number of obscuri- 
ties of the same name with a young man 
named Avienus mentioned in Macrobius' Satur- 
nalia and the date of his 42 Fahulse. fixed 
between 370 and 379 a.d.* These were 
equally popular with Phsedrus in the Middle 
Ages and " prosed " like the older fabulist. 
But they never lost their identity, and when 
Stainhowel made his collection from the Latin 
fabulists he kept the majority of Avian's 
together and gave them their proper affiliation. 
We accordingly find them under the title " The 
Fables of Auian " in our Caxton. Here then 
is another of the sections of our book which 
we can trace to its immediate source. But 

* This is Mr. Robinson Ellis' identification and dating in 
the edition which he has made of Avian in his usual exhaus- 
tive fashion. Against the date is the fact that Avienus is 
called a young man in the Saiurnalia at least thirty years 


the history is so straightforward that it ceases 
to be interesting, and we may turn with the 
greater zest to the more puzzling question : 
whence did Phsedrus and Avian get their 
Fables 1 What was their Greek source, for 
both of them own their indebtedness to Greece,* 
or, at least, to ^sop ? 

Here at first sight there seems to be no 
difficulty. There have been published no less 
than seven collections of Greek fables, all 
known by the name of ^sop, and each adding 
more or less to the Corpus Fabularuvi JEsoj)i- 
arum.f This in Halm's convenient edition 
counts 426 fables, among which most of those 
of Phsedrus and Avian find parallels, as can be 
seen by our Synopsis. Here then we seem at 
last to have arrived at the Father of the Fable 
in propria persona, and these collections have 

* Phsedrus was himself a Greek by birth. He ought to 
have tasted deeply of the Pierian spring, for he was born 
by its side. He became a slave early, and was freed by 

t Accursius (1476) had 147 ; to these Stephanus (1546) 
added 20, Nevelet (1610) 148, Heusinger (1741) 6, Furia 
(1810) 28, Coraes (1810) jj, and Schneider (1812) 2. (From 
F. Fedde, ^sopische Faheln nach einer Wiener ffS., 
1877). The latest collections by Fedde and Knoell (both 
1877) vary in treatment, not in subject, from the earlier 

VOL. I. B 


been indeed generally taken for the real -^sop. 
But the slightest critical inquiry brings with it 
the most serious doubts as to the antiquity of 
these collections. The keen glance of Bentley 
was diverted for a moment to these Fables of 
^sop, and they shrunk away before his magis- 
terial gaze as convicted impostors.* Of the two 
collections published before his time, that con- 
nected with the name of Planudes (1476), and 
the additional collection of Neveletus (1610), 
he pointed out that the former used Hebraisms 
and Middle Greek words, while the latter, 
though bearing signs of being the earlier col- 
lection of the two, quotes Job i. 21, " ISTaked 
came we from our mother's womb," &c. Both 
collections, too, bore traces of having made use 
of a writer named Babrius or Gabrias. Until 
his date was settled no conclusion covild be 
drawn about the Greek prose ^sop except that 
they could not come from the time or hand of 
^sop. Meanwhile Bentley's object had been 
attained, and Sir William Temple had lost 
another skirmish in the Battle of the Books 

* Bentley's excursus on Jilsop's Fables was contained in 
a few pages appended to his great Dissertation on 
Phalaris, to which Professor Jebb has scarcely done justice 
in his otherwise admirable monograph. 


through his bad tactics in referring to these 
fables with respect and as ^sop's. 

Henceforth the search was after this Babrius 
on whom the whole question had been shown 
by Bentley to hinge. The great critic him- 
self had recovered a few Babrian lines from 
Suidas and the prose versions, and with the 
scholar's prophetic instinct had declared for his 
late date.* Tyrwhitt followed Bentley's lead 
in his Dissertatio de Babrio (1776), and rescued 
a few more fragments, and there the matter 
rested so far as the eighteenth century was 
concerned. With the opening years of the 
nineteenth fresh activity was shown in the 
search after the Greek ^sop. Within four 
years (1809-12) no less than four editions 
appeared, t But none of the new collections 
afforded additional light on the question of 
origin : each and all, old and new, had hidden 

• It is some encouragement for us smaller fry to find the 
great scholar in the wrong in attributing the Life of ^sop 
to Planudes, whereas it existed in MSS. before the date of 
the Byzantine. He had also no suspicion that Babrius was 
a Roman. 

t That by Furia, the Leipsic reprint of Furia (with the 
addition of Fabricius, Bentley, Tyrwhitt, and Huschko 
which makes it still the most convenient collection), Coraes' 
most complete collection, and Schneider's. 


their spoor from the critical hunter by the 
simple but effectual plan of alphabetic arrange- 
ment which baffled all tracking to their source. 
Nor did any of the new lights cast their illumi- 
nation upon the great unknown, Babrius, though 
Furia's collections contained fifteen of his fables. 
At last in 1840 Minoides Menas, a Greek 
commissioned by the French Minister of Public 
Instruction to search among the monasteries of 
his native land, found a MS. containing 123 
Babrian fables in the Convent of St. Laura on 
Mount Athos, and brought a transcript to Paris 
where it was published in 1844. Rarely has 
such a discovery been so eagerly welcomed ; * 
no less than eight complete editions appeared 
within a year of the princeps. 

But the emergence of the sun of the u3^sopic 
system from the clouds that had so long ob- 
scured him, served rather to dazzle than to 
illuminate. On the important question of his 
date opinions oscillated between 250 B.C. to 250 
A.D. He was declared an Athenian, a Syrian, 

* The only parallel I can think of is the eagerness with 
which edition after edition of the Teaching of the XII. 
Apostles was edited soon after its first production. And 
there the interest was theological as well as scholai-ly. 


an Alexandrine, even an Assyrian. It was not 
till 1879 that the question of Babrius' age and 
identity was settled by Otto Crusius in a most 
thorough and convincing essay " De Babrii 
setate." * He comes to the somewhat startling 
conclusion that the Greek Fables of Babrius 
were by a Roman, f By a remarkable exer- 
cise of critical sagacity, the Babrian scazon 
is shown to be influenced by Latin metre, and 
to be an attempt, a very successful attempt, 
to utilise accent in Greek verse. Some of 
the fables are shown to be derived from Latin 
models, the eleventh, e.g., being drawn from 
Ovid (Fasti, iv. 700). Roman customs are im- 
plied in others ; it was a Roman, but not a 
Greek custom, to put figures of animals on 
sepulchral monuments as is implied in the 
Fable of TJie Lion and the Alan. I The name 
Babrius is a not unfrequent gentile name 

* Leipziger Studien, Bnd. ii. pp. 128-244. In what fol- 
lows I have ventured to disregard the "fortasse" which 
the modesty and caution of a great scholar have attached 
to each of Crusius' discoveries. 

f Boissonade, the first editor, also held this view, basing 
it on the name. 

X Not extant in our Babrius, but represented by the 
first of the tetrastichs of Gabrias or Ignatius, which were 
entirely derived from the complete Babrius (cf. Ro. IV. xv.). 


among the Romans, and is etymologically 
connected with barha. Finally, it is rendered 
probable that Babrius was one Valerius Babrius, 
and composed his fables in his quality of tutor 
to Branchus, the young son of the Emperor 
Alesander Severus (a.d. 235).! As Suidas 
states that Babrius' fables were originally in 
ten books, Crusius conjectures that they merely 
put into verse — for the first time in Greek 
letters, Babrius boasts — the AeKu/xudia of 
Nicostratus, a rhetor of the "greedy Greek- 
ling " type who was about Marcus Aurelius' 

Babrius' age and identity being established, 
it still remained to determine the extent of 
his collection. For the Athoan Codex dis 
covered by Menas is only a fragment : the 
fables are arranged alphabetically and break off 
in the middle of 0, and it is by no means cer- 
tain that it is complete from Alpha to Omikron. 
With our fuller knowledge of the laws of the 
Babrian scazon, it might seem possible to 
recover from the prose versions the missing 
fables. Two German scholars, Drs. Knoell 

•)• He must have been very young, as Severus was killed 
at the age of 27. 


and Gitlbauer, have tried to complete the task 
initiated by Bentley and carried on by Tyrwhit 
last century under much more adverse circum- 
stances, I have Mr. Rutherford's authority * 
for stating that they have disastrously failed in 
their application of the inverse method : Gitl- 
bauer, who sums up their labours, has restored 
to us, not Babrius, but only Gitlbauer's Babrius, 
quite a different thing. But for our immediate 
purpose the accuracy of the text he has estab- 
lished is of little consequence compared with 
the determination of the number and subjects 
of the missing Babrian fables. The Babrian 
scazon has such a unique appearance in Greek 
prosody that there can be little difficulty in 
tracing " survivals " of it, and we may fairly 
assume, I think, that Gitlbauer's reconstruction 
gives us the minimum number of fables in the 
original Babrius. f This he extends to no less 

* Bahrius, pp. Ixviii. and Ixxvii. I take this opportunity 
of saying that I have not been able to quote Mr. Ruther- 
ford hitherto, because on the Babrian questions with whicli 
we have been concerned he has only entered upon the 
labours of Crusius, as he himself handsomely acknowledges. 
I hope, however, that his second volume will give a definite 
settlement to the questions I am here touching with amateur 

f At the same time it is unlikely that Babrius made two 


than 293. Besides these, we may be able to 
add a few more from a collection of fifty-three 
fables in tetrastichs curtailed from Babrius by 
Ignativis, Archbishop of ISTicasa (780-850), and 
passing current under the name of Gabrias.* 
Altogether we are justified, I think, in assuming 
that some three hundred fables of the Greek 
prose ^sop owe their origin to Babrius. 

We are now in a position to dispose of the 
Greek prose fables which have for so long 
usurped the title of yEsop and are referred 
to even to this day as, primary evidence for 
the existence of the special fables in ancient 
Greece. Three hundred — three-quarters of 
them, we have seen — can only trace back to 
Babrius in the third centur}', a.d., or at most 
to the rhetor Nicostratus in the second. Of 
the remaining hundred, f some are variants 

or even three bites at the ^sopic cherry, as Gitlbauer 
assumes in giving us three versions of the same subject, e.g., 
his 115, 216, 273. 

* A useful edition of them has recently been published 
in Programm form by C. F. Miiller, Ignatii Diaconi tetra- 
sticha iambica liii (Kilise, 1886). I quote this as "Gab." 
in the Parallels, under II (Classical Antiquity), where no 
Babrian parallel exists, under III (Middle Ages), where the 
original is extant. 

t The few over the hundred are due to Coraes, who 

''REMICIUS." 25 

of the Babrian ones which are not above the 
capacity of mediaeval monks to execute, some 
are derived from the Oriental sources, Bidpai, 
Syntipas, &c., of vphich we are shortly about 
to speak, and some, it is even possible, are 
versions of the Romulus. We may accord- 
ingly sweep them from our path in our jour- 
ney to the sources of our fables. But before 
doing so, it should be pointed out that one 
section of Caxton's ^sop can be directly 
traced to them. Before any of them had 
appeared in Greek, an Italian scholar, Ranutio 
d' Arezzo, translated 100 of them into Latin 
from a MS. and published them in 1476. His 
name was Latinised as Renutius, but as there 
is no distinction in mediaeval script between 
nut and mic, his collection is known by the 
name of Remicius,* and in that form was ex- 
cerpted by Stainhowel when he made his selec- 
tion from the Latin fables extant in his time, 
and so got into our Caxton. It is some con- 
firmation of the conclusion at which we have 
arrived with regard to the origin of the Greek 

unwisely inserted the genuine remains of ancient Greek 

Fable in the prose collections. For these see infra, p. 26. 

* Lessing, one of the earliest and best of Asop-forscher, 

was the first to point this out ( Werkc, ed. 1874, ix. p. 39 seq. ). 


prose fables that I have been able to trace all 
but one of these to Babrius, either in the 
Vulgate or in Gitlbauer's edition. 

Putting Babrius and the prose versions aside 
once for all, we find oui-selves but poorly pro- 
vided with material when at last we step on 
to Greek soil and look around us for ^sop's 
fables in the fatherland of ^sop. Here is a 
complete list of the Fables given in Greek 
literature up to the fall of Greek independence 
— the only time that counts for aught, as re- 
gards literary originality. They amount to 
EIGHT* — Hesiod's The Nightingale {Op. et Dies, 
202 seq.) — the oldest fable in existence f — The 
Fox and Ape and Eagle and Fox (cf. Ro. I. xiii. ) 
of Archilochus, The Piper turned Fisherman 
of Herodotus (i. 141, cf. Be. vii.) The Eagle hoid 
tvith his 0W71 Petard (to use a telescopic title) of 
yEschylus in a fragment of his lost Myrmidons 
(ap. Schol. on Aristoph. Aves 808), Sheep and 

* I omit Plato's Grasshopj'isrs {Phced. 259), as clearly not 
a folk-fable, but concocted ad hoc. Similarly I omit the 
reference to Tlic Fox and Lion fable in the pseudepi- 
graphic Alcihiades, though it is probably early. 

+ Jotham's fable [Jud. ix. 8-15) was probably redacted 
later. At the same time the verses come in very discon- 
nectedly in Hesiod. See also infra, p. 82. 


Dog by Xenophon [Mem. II. vii. 13) and two 
fables given by Aristotle in the chapter of his 
Rhetoric, (II. xx.) which deals with the use of 
Example in oratory. One is The Horse, Hunter, 
and Stag (cf. Ro. IV. ix.) attributed to Stesi- 
chorus, the other The Fox, Hedgehog, and 
Dog-Ticks attributed to ^sop. As the latter > 
is the earliest extant fable attributed to the 
Father of the Fable, and that on so respectable 
an authority as Aristotle's, we may here give it 
in Mr. Welldon's excellent version. 

^sop again at Samos, as counsel for a demagogue 
who was being tried for a capital oflence, said that a 
fox, iu crossing a river, Avas swept down into a cleft of 
a rock, and being unable to get out, was for a long 
time iu a sorry plight, and a number of dog-ticks 
fastened on her body. A hedgehog, strolling by, 
happened to catch sight of her, and was moved by 
compassionate feeling to inquire if he should remove 
the dog- ticks from her. The fox, however, would 
not allow him to do so, and being asked the reason, 
replied, " Because these have already taken their fill 
of me, and do not now suck much blood ; but if you 
take these away, other will come, and iu their hunger 
will drain up all the blood that is left." " Yes, and 
in j'our case, men of Samos," said JSsop, "my client 
wdl not do much further mischief ; he has already 
made his fortune ; but, if you put him to death, then 
will come others who are poor, and who will consume 


all tlie revenues of the State by their embezzle- 

We may complete* the Corpus of ancient 
Greek fables, the subjects of which can be 
identified and the date approximately fixed by 
adding a dozen other fables merely referred to — 
The Heron and Eel by Simonides Amorginus 
{ap. Athen. vii. 299 C.) ; The Ass' Heart, by 
Solon ■((■/. Diog. Laert. i. 51, Babr. 95); The 
Serpent and Eagle, by Stesichorus [ap. ^lian 
xvii. 37); The Serpent and Ass by Ibycus 
(Schneidewin, Poet, grcec, X76); The Fox (with 
many wiles) and Hedgehog (with one) by Ion 
{ap. Leutsch. Paroeom. greed, I. 47 ; cf. Ex. 
V. V. ) ; The Countryman and Snake by Theognis 
(579 c/. Ro. I. X.) j Tlie Transformed Weasel by 
the dramatist Strattis, c. 400 (Meineke Frag. 
com. 441) ; The Serpent and Crab attributed to 
Alcseus {ap. Furia, note on /. 231); The Dog 
and Shadoiv by Democritus {ap. Stob. x. 69 ; 
cf. Ro. I. V.) ; The North Wind and Sun by 
Sophocles {ap. Athen. xiii. 604 D) ; The Hare 
and Hound {Vesp. 375, Ran. 1191), and per- 

* Strange to say, this is the first time such a list having 
any claims to completeness has been di-awn up. I have 
compiled it from Coraes, Wagener, and Mr. Rutherford. 


haps Tlie Two Crabs hj Aristophanes (Pax. 1083 
cf. Av. iii.); and perhaps The Ass in Lion's 
Skin by Plato {Cratyl. 411 A.; ef. A v. iv.).* 
When we come to the Greek authors of the 
Roman Imperial period — e.g. Plutarch and 
Lucian — we might add another dozen or so 
references,! but even Plutarch is later than 
Phsedrus, and the others are later than Babrius' 
original, Nicostratus. There is only one way to 
explain the paucity of reference in Greek litera- 
ture to the Beast-Fable. This only makes 
casual appearance in written literature, because 
it formed part of the folk-literature with which 
every Greek was familiar with from his youth. | 
Similarly we might search English literature in 
vain for even a reference to Jack and the Bean 
Stalk, or The Little Old Woman who led a Pig 
from Market. The Beast- Fable, as the Wes-! 
tern world knows it, is directly traceable tol 
Greek folk-lore. 

* Wagener adds Simonides' celebrated satire on woman, 
scarcely a fable. Mr. Rutherford gives references from 
Archilochus corresponding to certain of Babrius' Fables — 
Fox and Crow (77 cf. Ro. I. xv. ), Fox and Wolf {I'^o), Cat 
and Parrot (135) — but these are uncertain. 

t See Parallels Ro. II. v. ; III. i., iii., xiii., xvi. ; IV. 
xiii., XV. ; V. xi. ; Av. xx., and cf. Furia, 384-405. 

+ Archilochus refers to one of his as a.lvo% dvdpunruv. 


Here comes in the puzzle of the whole inves- 
tigation. The allusive character of the majority 
of the references in Greek literature to the 
Beast-Fable shows that the individual fables 
are not told at length by the Greek writers, for 
the simple reason that they were already fami- 
liar to the audience they were addressing. In 
other words, the Greek Beast-Fable bears the 
characteristic mark of folk-lore — anonymity. 
And yet from a certain time it is found con- 
nected with the name of a definite personality, 
that of iEsop. I say "from a certain time," 
for of the thirty or so fables enumerated 
above only the latest of the eight fables is con- 
nected with the name of iEsop. Previous 
to this, however, Soci"ates had tried to put 
in verse some of the Fables of ^sop that 
he remembered (Phcedo, 6i A). Besides, in 
Aristophanes especially we find references to 
AieuiTTov yeXoTa,, which show that the Attic 
comedians assumed that Athenian audiences 
connected the Beast- Fable with the name of 
JEsop. Such a conjunction is unique, so far 
as I am aware. No other department of folk- 
lore — folk-tales, spells, proverbs, weather-lore, 
or riddles — is connected with a definite name 


of a putative author.* The only key to the y, 
mystery that I can see is to be found in the 
mirth -producing qualities which the Greeks 
and Romans associated with the Beast-Fable 
and with the name of ^Esop. Aristophanes 
refers to the fables as ysXoh, almost the sole 
mention of Phsedrus in Latin literature is 
Martial's " improbi iocos Phsedri " (iii. xx. 5),! 
and Avian speaks of ^^llsop's fables as ridicula 
in his Preface. We may find a modern instance 
of this tendency to see the lisible in jS]sop in 
George Eliot's youthful experience. In her 
Life (i. 20) it is recorded '^ how she laughed 
till the tears ran down her face in recalling her 
infantile enjoyment of the humour in the fable 
of Mercury and the Statue Seller." To the 
child's mind of George Eliot and to the child- ' 
like minds of the Greeks it was the humorous 
properties of the -55sopic fable that was the 
chief attraction. 

Now it is with special reference to the Jest 

* There is perhaps a tendency to refer to a familiar folk- 
tale as " one of Grimm's Goblins," but that is late, and con- 
veys no real intimation of authorship. 

f Phaedrus refers to his own fables as iocos (III. Prol. 37), 
and gives as one of the claims of the fable ' quod risum 
movet' (Prol. Lib. I.). 


that we find a popular tendency to connect the 
name of a definite personal origin. From the 
days of Hierocles to those of Mr. Punch it has 
been usual to connect the floating Jest with 
representative names. Among these may be 
mentioned Pasquil, Poggio, whom we shall meet 
later, and Joe Miller,* and in later days there 
has been a tendency for jests to crystallise 
round the names of Talleyrand and Sydney 
Smith. In Mr. W. C. Hazlitt's three volumes 
of Elizabethan Jest-books the majoiity of the 
collections are connected with some definite 
personality — real, as Skelton, Scoggin, Tarleton, 
Peele, Taylor, Old Hobson (Milton's friend), 
or imaginary, as Jack of Dover and the Widow 
Edyth. The secret of all this is probably that 
the simple mind likes to be informed before- 
hand that it is expected to laugh at what is 
coming — the notice is indeed often necessary — 
and the readiest means of doing this is to con- 
nect the anecdote with some well-known name, 
in itself associated with past guffaws. It is 
probable, I think, that the name of ^sop is to 

* This name comes from Mottley's Joe Miller's Jests, 
temn. Jac. II. There is no evidence that the actor Joseph 
Miller was a wit. • 


be added to the above list of professional jesters, . 
that to the later Greeks yEsop was in short a 
kind of Joe Miller.* 

How early ^sop's name was indissolubly 
connected with the Greek Beast-Fable in a 
collected form is shown by a fact to which in 
my opinion not enough significance has hitherto 
been attached. One of the most interesting 
figures in the post -Alexandrine history of 
Athens is Demetrius of Phaleron (one of the 
Attic demes).t Born about 345 B.C., and 
educated with Menander under Theophrastus, 
he became the leading Attic orator of his day, 
and became so influential that on the death of 
Phocion, 317 B.C., he was placed by Cassander 
at the head of affairs at Athens. Here he 
'* tyrannised " in an easy-going way for ten 
years, when he was ousted from his office and 

* Curiously enough, the passage from George EUoVs Life 
just quoted is immediately followed by one in which Joe 
Miller's Jest Book is mentioned as one of the earliest books 
read by the creator of Mrs. Poyser. 

+ On him, see Grote, xii. 184, 195, 200 ; T)r. Schmitz in 
Smith Diet. Class. Biog. ; and Jebb, Attic Orators, ii. 441. 
Dohrn wrote a monograph on him, 1825 ; and another and 
more complete account was given by MM. Legrand and 
Tychon in the Memoires of the Brussels Academy, t. xxiv. 
For our knowledge of his literary productions we are 
indebted to Diogenes Laertius, V. v. 

YUL. !, C 


fled to Alexandria. There he turned from action 
to thought, and for twenty years (307-283 B.C.) 
produced book after book, and what was more, 
collected book after book, and thus formed the 
nucleus of what was afterwards the world- 
famous library of Alexandria. But he chiefly 
interests us here as a kind of Grecian Grimm. 
It is to him that we owe the collection of 
sayings of the Seven Wise Men of Greece. 
He was the first to collect Greek proverbs, 
doubtless from the mouths of the people, and 
it was probably from the same source that he 
compiled the "koytuv Ahu-xn'uv ouyayuyal, which 
Diogenes Laertius includes among his works 
(v. 80). This is the earliest collection of Greek 
Beast- Fables of which we have any trace, and 
they are thus from the first connected with the 
name of ^sop. 

Now it is a remarkable coincidence, which 
previous investigators have carelessly over- 
looked,* that Phsedrus includes among his 

* I have been struck throughout my investigations into 
this part of the subject at the apathy of classical scholars 
about points of literary history as compared with their 
zeal for textual and verbal criticism. One feels inclined 
to ask if textual criticism is the be-all and end-all of classical 


Fables (v. i) a somewhat pointless anecdote 
about Menander and this very Demetrius 
Phalereus. One cannot help asking what he 
is doing dans cette galere. And the only answer 
must be that Phsedrus had before him some 
edition of Demetrius' awayuyai, to which some 
later editor had added various anecdotes of the 
compiler. The fact is significant in many ways ; 
if an editor added anecdotes he may have added 
further fables, and we shall see later on the 
special opportunities afforded by Alexandria 
for this purpose. But be this as it may, the 
inclusion of the fable in Phsedrus' collection 
renders it almost certain that Phsedrus' Fables 
— and they form, as we have seen, the bulk 
of our .iEsop — are derived from an enlarged 
edition of Tlie Assemblies of j^sopian Fables, 
compiled by Demetrius Phalereus, c. 300 B.C. 

This completes the close parallel which the 
reader must already have observed between the 
two great masters of ancient fable — Phsedrus 
and Babrius. The one was a Greek writing in 
Latin, the other a Roman writing in Greek, 
verse. The works of neither have come down 
to us complete in metrical form ; in the case of 
both, prose versions have usurped the place of 


the original. These prose versions preserve 
here and there a line of the original in both 
cases, but do not enable us to recover it in toto. 
Each of these prose versions in collected form 
has passed current under the name of ^sop, 
and both have contributed to the body of folk- 
tales familiar to us as ^sop's Fables. 

And now we find that as Babrius probably 
only put into Greek verse a collection of Greek 
prose fables made by Nicostratus, so Phsedrus 
merely translated into Latin verse the earlier 
Greek prose collection of Demetrius Phalereus. 
May we go a step further and connect these 
two Greek prose collections of Beast- Fables ? 
Nicostratus is scarcely likely to have remained 
ignorant of Demetrius' collection, and must 
have used a later and fuller edition than Phse- 
drus did. If this be so, we can trace both 
Phsedrus and Babrius to the one source, and as 
they constitute our -3i]sop, we may round off 
the literary history of our fables by stating 
that the Fables of -^sop, as literary products, 
are the fables of Demetrius Phalereus. To the 
question, "Who wrote ^sop?" if there is to 
be only one reply ; we must answer, " Deme- 
trius Phalereus." 


This result considerably reduces -^sop's im- 
portance as regards any light he can throw on 
the Z7r-origin of the Fables with which his 
name will always be connected. Yet it is 
decidedly appropriate to include all that can 
be ascertained concerning the putative Father 
of the Fable, especially as this may account 
for the original association of his name with 
it. Unluckily this is very scanty, so scanty 
indeed that Welcker has written an ingenious 
essay to the effect that ^sop is himself a 
Fable (A7. Schr. II. 229, seq.) And as a matter 
of fact the only trustworthy notice of him 
in Greek literature is one contained in a pas- 
sage in Herodotus (ii. 134). That good gossip 
is discussing the tradition that one of the 
Pyramids had been built out of the profes- 
sional fees of Rhodopis, a renowned Hetaira. 
How could this be, asks Herodotus, since 
Rhodopis lived in the reign of Amasis ? (fl. 
550 B.C.) ; and he continues : — 

She was a Thraciaii by birth, and was the slave of 
ladmon, sou of Hephasstopolis, a Samian. yEsop, 
the fable writer,* was one of her fellow-slaves. That 

* In the original, XoyoTrohs, "story teller." It is by no 
means certain that Herodotus used it in the more special 


iEsop belonged to ladmon is proved by many facts — 
among others, by this : When the Delphians, in 
obedience to the commands of the oracle, made pro- 
clamation that if anyone claimed compensation for 
the murder of ^sop, he should receive it, the person 
who at last came forward was ladmon, grandson of 
the former ladmon, and he received the compensa- 
tion, ^sop must certainly therefore have been the 
earlier ladmon's slave. 

This passage contains all the authentic in- 
formation we have of the reputed Father of the 
Fable. That he flourished about 550 b.c, was 
a slave in Samos, and was killed, probably by a 
decree of the Delphic oracle, and that compen- 
sation (wergild) was claimed for his death by the 
grandson of his master — this is the scanty but 
probably accurate, biography of ^sop. Pro- 
bably accurate because Herodotus is reporting 
on events that only happened a hundred years 
before his time. Of these facts I am inclined 
to lay most stress on the circumstance of 
^sop's death. His was the epoch of the 
Tyrants, and I would conjecture that his connec- 
tion with the Beast-Fable originally consisted 
in its application to political controversy under 
despotic government, and that his fate was due 
to the influence of one of the Tyrants with the 


Delphic authorities, who were doubtless not 
above being influenced by powerful clients.* 
We shall see later on that the Fable is most 
efTective as a literary or oratorical weapon 1. 
under despotic governments allowing no free • 
speech. A Tyrant cannot take notice of a 
Fable without putting on the cap that fits. 
]Much of our ancient evidence points this way. 
Jotham's fable (Jud. ix. 8-15) was directed 
against Abimelech, the Israelite ruoawog. In 
our list of genuinely ancient Greek Fables, 
one is connected with the name of Theo- 
gnis who was ruined by a Tyrant, Solon made 
use of his for political purposes, and Archi- 
lochus was Satire personified. The only extant 
Fable that can be attributed to yEsop with any 
plausibility (supra, p. 2j} was used by him for 
political purposes. Our evidence is of course 
scanty, but it all points one way. ^sop 
could not have been the inventor or introducer 
of the Beast- Fable into Greece, as we find it 

* Plutarch's story of .lEsop having done them out of ' 
their fees sent by him from Crcesus is a weak (and late) in- 
vention of the enemy. For it see Eawlinson's note ad loc. 
It contains, however, an interesting variant of Joseph's plan 
for detaining Benjamin (Gen. xliv. 2). Other classical 
parallels are given by Wagener (p. 16). 


there before him. The only way therefore 
we can explain the later identification of his 
name with it is to suppose some special and 
striking use of the fahellce aniles familiar to all 
Greek children. Considering the age he lived 
in and the death he died the conjecture I have 
put forth that ^sop's name was associated 
with the Fable, because he made use of it as a 
political weapon, is the only hypothesis that 
will fit in with all the facts of the case.* 
^sop was not the Father of the Fable, but 
only the inventor (or most conspicuous applier) 
of a new use for it, and when the need for that 
use no longer existed under outspoken demo- 
cracies, his connection with the Fable was still 
kept up as a convenient and conventional 
figurehead round which to gather a specialised 
form of the Greek Jest. 

This result considerably reduces the impor- 
tance of the other fact we know of him from 
Herodotus on which previous inquirers have 
laid exclusive stress, ^sop was a slave, and 

* There are two points to meet : (i) why was the Fable, 
a part of Folk-lore, associated with a name at all ? I 
answer, because it was regarded as a jest, and there is a 
general tendency for Jests to cluster round a name ; (2), 
why with .Esop's name ? my reply is, that he first applied 
it to convince men, instead of merely amusing children as 


therefore a barbarian. As a stranger, may he 
not have introduced from some foreign country 
the fables with which his name is associated ? 
Accordingly all those who have hitherto argued 
for a foreign origin of the Greek Fable have 
made ^sop a native of the particular land 
whence they wish to trace it, and they are to 
some extent supported in their conjecture by 
the fact that A/VcoTog is an un-Greek form. 
Dr. Landsberger {Die Faheln des Sophos, 1S59), 
who on the strength of Jotham's fable and 
Talmudic reference would make Judaea the ori- 
ginal home of the Fable, makes ^sop a Syrian, 
and connects his name with the same root as that 
of Joseph.* Herr Ziindel {Rhein Mus., 1847), 
who advocates the claims of Egypt, brings our 
hero from the banks of the Nile. D'Herbelot, 
who is for identifying him with the Arabic 
Loqman, is for Arabia as iEsop's fatherland 
(Bibl. Orient., s. v. Ji'sope). Finally, it is fair 
to add that Mr. Eutherford (Babrius, 1882, p. 
xsxvi.), who is staunch for the autochthonous 

* This is not so wUd as Hitzig's suggestion that Solomon 
was acquainted with our Fables, because it is said — "And 
he spake of trees, from the cedar tree in Lebanon even 
unto the hyssop that springeth out of the wall" (i Kings 
iv. 33). 


character of the ^sopean fable, does not see 
why he may not have been " one of that large 
class of Greeks whom the fortune of war ex- 
patriated and forced to serve men of the same 
race and language with themselves." All these 
conjectures are nugatory if, as we have seen, 
the Fable can be traced before ^sop as a part 
of Greek folk-lore, and a plausible reason can 
be given for the connection of his name with it. 
But though the possibility of -i^sop having 
formed a link between Greece and some foreign 
country has lost its interest, if the above view of 
the Greek fable is correct, it does not follow that 
the question of its foreign origin is entirely a 
nugatory one. Folk-lores of vainous countries 
may influence one another, and it is still worth 
while inquiring whether this is the case with 
that particular branch of Greek folk-lore which 
we know as ^sop's Fables. Of all the sugges-' 
tions that have been made to this effect, only one 
deserves serious consideration. The Talmudic 
fables adduced by Dr. Landsberger are too late, 
Egyptian fables are practically non-existent 
(see infra, pp. 82, 91), and the four Assyrian 
ones extant (Smith, Chald. Gen. c. ix.) have no 
similarity with the Greek ones that suggest bor- 


rowing on either side. But a number of such 
resemblances have been shown to exist between 
Indian and Greek fables, rendering it advisable 
to consider their connection. This course will 
be found in the end to give some explanation of 
the sole remaining section of our Caston, which 
has not yet been traced by us to its immediate 
source. For during the course of our inquiry 
into the Greek Fable in the present section 
we have traced the seventh division of our book 
to Avian, and the sixth practically to Bab- 
rius. For the remaining section — Liber Quin- 
tus Caxton calls it, Fabulce extravagantes is 
Stainhowel's name — our best course, though a 
somewhat roundabout one, is to turn to the 
East and discuss — 


Bn5 tbc /IDastcr tola a tale. 

— Jatakas passim. 

Before launching out on the Indian Ocean of 
Fable, it is as well that we should know the 
port from which we start and the quarter to 
which we are steering. If the reader will 
glance at the Synopsis of Parallelisms at the 
end of these remarks, he will find variants given 


under Section I. {the Orient) for some seventy 
of the Fables, a sort of Oriental Septuagint, as 
we may call them. That is the datum of our 
inquiry, and the obvious question to ask is, How 

' did this resemblance come about 1 Here we 

meet with one of those general questions which 
the folk-lorist meets at every turn, and it is 
with this problem that he is at present chiefly 
engaged. To this question, stated in its 
broadest generality, there are four answers be- 
fore the world. Such resemblances between 
the folk-lores of the Aryan peoples are due to 
memories of the time when all were one people 
with a common fund of popular tradition, said 

"^* the brothers Grimm. They are due to the 

tendency of the human mind to take metaphor 
for reality, and thus change figures of speech 
into explanatory tales, was the reply formulated 
by Kuhn and made popular by the persuasive 
skill of Max Miiller. Then came Benfey with 
a solution simple and natural in itself but re- 
quiring all his vast erudition to demonstrate 
it ; folk-tales of different nations resemble one 
another, said he, for the simple reason that 
they borrowed from one another. Lastly, in 
recent years, Messrs, Tylor and Lang have 


rendered it probable that many of the resem- 
blances noted are due to the identity of the 
human mind at similar stages of culture : the 
tales are similar because the minds producing 
them were alike. 

Restricting ourselves to the Beast-Fable, it 
will be found that these four solutions practi- 
cally reduce themselves to one. Grimm's con- 
tention for a common Aryan Beast-Epic ex- 
plaining Reynard the Fox has been ruled out 
of court with costs against it. The view that 
could reduce all mythology and folk lore to a 
depax'tment of folk-etymology is generally dis- 
credited nowadays and was never seriously ap- 
plied to the Beast-Fable.* And there is a special 
reason why the views of Messrs. Tylor and 
Lang, ingenious and convincing in other de- 
partments of folk-lore, fail in regard to the 
special inquiry before us. We can understand 
how two peoples may hit upon the same ruse 
by which a wife deceives her husband or a 
slave his master. But we cannot well conceive 
two nations hitting upon the same form of the 
Apologue in the guise of the Beast-Tale, though 

* De Gubernatis' bizarre attempt in his Zoological 
Mythology (1872) was its reductio ad absurdissimum. 


the tendency to use the Beast- Tale for that 
purpose and the origin of the Beast- Tale itself 
as a "survival" of Animism* may be ex- 
plained on their hypothesis. To put a concrete 
example : if we find two peoples, who have been 
previously in contact, each making use of so 
artificial a fable as Tlie Fox and Stork, we can- 
not assume that the human mind has been 
normally at work in the two cases producing 
independently such an abnormal picture as a 
stork and a fox on visiting terms, provided 
with an elaborate dinner service, and hitting 
upon such unnatural forms of tantalisation. If 
therefore the parallelism in such cases is com- 
plete — all depends on this — we have no alter- 
native but to resort to Benfey's hypothesis, 
and, in the special case before us, for the most 
part to Benfey's own collection of such parallels 
in his magnificent Einleitung to the German 
translation of the Pantschatantra.'f 

* On this see Mr. Lang's admirable introduction to Mrs. 
Hunt's Orimm. I have discussed the general question 
of the origin of the Beast-Fable in my Bidpai, pp. xxxis. 

t An English adaptation of this, putting results in a more 
collected form, and with the addenda and corrigenda of 
the last thirty years, is a great want just now. I may 
attempt the task myself one of these days. 


For when it comes to a question of borrow- 
ing, the question of relative age comes in also. 
Borrowing is after all a mutual relation, and in 
matters like the present we can only determine 
to whom the debt is due by ascertaining who 
was first in possession of the property. When 
Greek meets Indian, Indian meets Greek, and 
the question arises which had the goods to 
dispose of. Hence the all-importance of dates 
in an inquiry of this kind, as in most literary 
and historical investigations. On the Greek 
side we are at length in a position to fix at 
any rate the first appearance in extant litera- 
ture of nearly the whole body of Fables current 
in the Greco- Roman world. Confining our- 
selves to the Caxton-Stainhowel — and with a 
few exceptions * this gives us all we need to 
arrive at a decision — we have seen that the 
first four books date from Phsedrus te7np. 
Tiberii in the first third of the first century 
A.D., the sixth traces to Babrius in the third, 
or at most to Nicostratus in the second cen- 
tury, and the seventh to Avian in the latter 
part of fourth century, while the fifth, we 

* I have only considered parallels not in our Caxton 
when the evidence is very strong indeed. 


shall see, is late, and does not come in the 
reckoning on the present occasion. We have 
indeed given strong grounds for suspecting 
that the bulk of these are ultimately derived 
from the collection made by Demetrius Phale- 
reus about 300 B.C. But the very evidence on 
which we relied showed that his collection was 
interpolated later, and we cannot therefore be 
sure about any particular fable that it is much 
earlier than the collection in which we first 
find it. As regards the earliest Gieek fables 
we have enumerated the score or so that can 
be traced in Greek antiquity on pp. 26-8, 
and on these must rest the mainstay of our 

How does it stand with the Indian evidence 
that we are to compare with the Greek ? With- 
out troubling the reader with the scaffolding I 
have had to erect and remove before arriving 
at the following results,* I may divide the 
seventy Oriental parallels in our Synopsis into 
five categories. We may first dismiss those 
occurring in the Arabic Loqman or the Syriac 

* I have found Benfey's Einleitung very awkward to 
manage. It has no index, no comparative tables, no 
detailed summary of results, and simply to understand 
many of his points one has often to look up his references. 


Sophos,* which, as we shall see later, are them- 
selves derived from, or influenced by the Greek. 
Then comes a miscellaneous collection f of 
parallels fiom the Persian Mesnevi, the Turkish 
Tutinameh, the African parallels occurring in 
African Native Literature, by Kolle, and the 
modern Indian ones given by Mr. Ramaswami 
Raju {Indian Fables, Sonnenschein, n. d.) and 
Captain Temple {Wideawake Stories, 1884). J 
Now of these the Persian and Turkish date 
late on in the Middle Ages, and the African 
Tales may be due to European as well as Indo- 
Arabic influences. With the modern Indian 
parallels the case is somewhat different. If 
we find Mr. Pamaswami Raju § giving us a 

* See Eo. II. viii. ix. svi. ; III. iii. vii. xii. xv. ; IV. ii. 
XV. xvii. ; Av. x. si v. ss. These are, of course, not all 
the parallels from these two sources, but only those in 
which I could find no other Oriental variants. 

+ See Ro. I. vi. ; III. iv. vi. xiv. ; IV. i. ; V. iv. ix. xvi. ; 
Av. X. xiii. xvii. 

X I have selected this, as Capt. Temple's Survey at the 
end gives an analysis of all the other modern Indian col- 
lections. It is, besides, one of the most readable and 
most scientific collections that have been made outside 

§ Mr. Raju's collection is perfectly uncritical, which is 

all the better for our purposes, but does not indicate his 

sources, which is so much the worse. I may mention as a 

curiosity that his tale of The Fox and Crals, p. 28, affords 

VOL. I. D 


modern Indian version of The Ass and Watch- 
dog (p. 63,) which we can trace back into 
remote Indian antiquity ; there is some pre- 
sumption that the fable of The Woodman and 
Trees (p. 47, of. Ro. III. xiv.) can also trace 
back so far, and we shall produce later on 
evidence which confirms this inference. And 
so too when we find in Captain Temple's 
collection so thorough an Indian folk-tale as 
The Brahman, Tiger, and JacJcal (p. 116, cf . 
Ex. V. iv.) which we can trace back to the 
earliest times in India, the probabilities are 
great that the twenty-second fable of Avian 
(here Av. xvii.) may also be traceable to the 
original Indian form of the current folk-tale, 
The Farmer and the Moneylender (p. 215) in 
which the farmer, being granted a wish by 
Ram on condition that the money-lender gets 
double, demands to have one of his eyes put 
out ! But we need not linger over these prob- 
abilities when we have so many actualities of 
the Indian antiquity of " iEsop's " Fables in 
the Bidpai literature.* 

a striking parallel to Alice's ballad of The Walrus and the 
Carpenter. The Tiger, Stag, and Crooodile (p. 67} is a bit 
of Munchausen. 
* I may here refer my readers to the Introduction of my 


Here again we must distinguish. The Bid- 
pai literature as analysed in all its offshoots by 
Benfey, covers a period ranging between 300 B.C. 
and 1000 A.D. We must accordingly divide the 
parallels to the Caxton occurring in it into three 
different strata. There are first what may be 
termed the Cainozoic parallels occurring only in 
the Persian and other versions made from the 
original after it had left India or in those 
parts of the Indian original that bear signs of 
late insertion. t Then we come on the parallels 
occurring in the main body of the work in its 
original and most ancient form. These de- 
serve to be mentioned at length : they are, The 
Dog and Sliadow (Ro. I. v.; Benf. § 17), The 
Man and Serpent (I. x. cf. II. x. ; B. § 150), 
Tlie Two Bitches* (I. ix. ; B. § 144), The Eagle 
and Raven (I. xiv. cf. Av. ii.; B. § 84), The Croio 

edition of the earliest English version of Bidpai in this 

f See Ro. I. i. iii. xiii. xvi. xvii. xx. ; II. iii. xiii. xiv. 
XV. XX. ; III. xiv. xvi. xx. ; IV. iv. xii. Ex. V. iii. ; Re. i. 
xvi. ; Av.vii. xvii. xxiv. These and other Greek and Indian 
parallels of this description are discussed by Benfey §§19, 
58, 77, 112, 118, 160, 220, 222, 227, 229, 230. 

* In the sequel I have not discussed Benfey's parallels 
for the Fables marked with an asterisk, as they do not 
appear to me to be close enough to necessitate the hypo- 
thesis of borrowing. 


icith Cheese and Fox (I. xv. ; B. § 143), The Lion 
and Mouse (I. xviii. ; B. § 130), Frogs desiring a 
King* (II. i. ; B. § 164), Parturient Mountain 
(Ro. II. v.; B. § 158), The Good Man and 
Scrjmit (II. X. cf. I. x. ; B. § 150), The Bald 
man and Fly (II. xii. ; B. § 105), Jay and 
Peacock (II. xv. ; B. § 29), Androclus* (III. 
i. ; B. § 71), The Ephesian Widow* (III. ix. ; 
B. § 1 86), The SicJc Lion (III. xx. ; B. § 22), 
Fox and Grapes * (IV, i. ; B. § 45), Cat and Pats 
(IV. ii. ; B. § 73), Dragon and Hart (Ex. V.f 
iv. ; B. § 150), Fox and Cat (Ex. V. v.; B. § 121), 
Serpent and Labourer (Ex V. viii. ; B. § 150), 
The Butti7ig Goats (part of Ex. V. x. ; B. § 50), 
Eagle and Weasel (Re. ii. ; B. § 84),i^(^.r and Goat * 
(Re. iii. ; B. § 143), 3Ian and Wooden God* 
(Re. vi. ; B. § 200), Tortoise and Birds (Av, ii. cf. 
I. xiv. ; B. § 84), Ass in Lion's Skin (A v. iv. ; B. § 
188), The Two Pots (A v. ix. ; B. § 139), Goose icith 
Golden Eggs (Av. xxiv.j B. § 159). Here then 
at last we seem to have our oldest Indian fables 
that can be compared with the oldest Greek 
fables. But if that were all our search 

• See note *, preceding page. 

t Parallels from Book V. do not count in the present 
connection, as there can be no doubt of their derivation 
for the most part from India. See infra, pp. 159 scq. 


after an earlier source than the Greek for 
" ^sop's " fables would be in vain. For 
the earliest form of the Bidpai cannot trace 
back earlier than the third or at most the 
second century A.D., and the whole body of 
Greek Fable can trace back as early as that if 
not earlier. But though the Bidpai must 
have been put together in something like its 
present shape at the time when Brahmanism 
was winning back the ground from Buddhism, 
it still retains survivals of a Buddhistic tone 
in many of its sections ; and some of these we 
can fortunately trace back to the portion of 
sacred Buddhistic literature known as the 
Jatakas or Birth-Stories of the Buddha. These 
tell of the Buddha's adventures during his 
former incarnations, sometimes in the shape of 
a bird, beast, fish, or tree. As some of them 
have been found sculptured on Buddhist topes 
dated in the third century B.C., they must be at 
least older than that period, and it is probable 
that many of them may really be derived from 
Sakyamuni, who flourished 453 B.C.* If, then, 

* Many may be even older. Buddha probably adopted 
the Jataka form of inculcating a moral lesson just as Christ 
made use of the Parable so popular with the Kabbis. 


we can trace any of the above Fables back to the 
Jatakas, we have come upon a really Palaj- 
ozoic * stratum of the Bidpai Fables, and are at 
last in a condition to compare the earliest 
Indian with the earliest Greek Fables. The 
Jatakas had not been published when Benfey 
wrote in 1859, but from traditional accounts 
of them in English descriptions of Ceylon,! 
he managed to trace nearly all the ^sopic 
sections of the Bidpai, which were so traceable, 
to the Jatakas. These we may now proceed 
to consider in some detail. 

I. We may begin with one which he did not 
so trace, because it does not happen to present 
any parallelism with any part of the Bidpai 
literature, and does not accordingly occur in 
the above list. It is of especial interest to us 
because it gives the earliest extant form of the 
fable of TJie Wolf and the Crane, which we have 
already traced through the Middle Ages up to 
Phsedrus. It happens also to be a good, and 
not too long, specimen of the general plan on 
which the Jatakas are formed. 

* The remaining parables occurring in the original Bidpai 
but not in the Jatakas would form a Mesozoic stratum of 
the Bidpai Parallels. See infra, p. 89. 

+ Chiefly Upham, Sacred Books, and Hardy, Manual of 

J ATA K AS. 55 


[V. Fausboll, Five Jdtakas, pp. 35-8.t] 

^ srrbirf Tjabc fcoc Dane i\)tt. — This the Master told, 
while living at Jetavana, concerning Devadatta's 
treachery. "Not only noiv, bhikkhus, but in a 
former existence was Devadatfa tingratefid." And 
having said this, he told a tale : — 

In former days -when Brahmatlatta reigned in 
Benares, the Bodhisat was born in the region of 
Himavanta as a white crane. Now it clianced tliat 
as a lion was eating meat a bone stuck in his tlu'oat. 
Tlie throat became swollen, he could not take food, 
his suffering was terrible. The crane seeing him as he 
was perched on a tree looking for food asked, "What 
ails thee, friend?" He told him why. "I could 
free thee from that bone, friend, but dare not enter 
thy mouth for fear thou mightest eat me." "Don't 
be afraid, friend, I'll not eat thee, only save mj' life." 
"Very well," says he, and caused him to lie down on 
his left .side. But thinking to himself "Who knows 
what this felloAv will do," he placed a small stick 
upright between his two jaws that he could not close 
his mouth, and inserting his head inside his mouth 
struck one end of the bone with his beak. Where- 
upon the bone dropped and fell out. As soon as lie 
had caused the bone to fall, he got out of the lion's 

* This first appeared in European literature in De la 
Loubere Royaume de Slam (1691), ii. 25. 

t I have ventured to English Prof. Fausboll's version, 
which was intended merely as a "crib" to the Pali text. 


mouth striking the stick with his beak so tliat it fell 
out and then settled on a branch. The lion gets well 
and one day was eating a buffalo he had killed. The 
crane thinking "I will sound him" settled on a 
branch just over him, and in conversation spoke this 
hrst verse (gatha) — 

" 31 scrfaicE })abc toe trnnc tljcc 
STo tf)c best dC our abilttg 
ming at tiic Beasts ! gour fHajfstg ! 
SSaijat return sljall iuc get from tijec ? " 

In reply the Lion spoke the second verse — 

" '31s 31 fecti on blooii 

Slnli alttags Ijunt for pcen 
'^i$ mud) that tfiou art still alifae 
|i]ai)ing once been betineen mg Uctth" 

Then in reply the crane said the two other verses — 

" 5EngratEfuI, totng no gooti, 

|iot tsoing as l)e iuoulti fae ione bg 
In l)itn tfjere is no gratttutic 
^0 scriiE Jjtm is useless. 

" |l)ts frtentJshtp is not toon 
33g tije rleavest gnoti SecD. 
Better SoCtlo iaitljtirato from Ijtm 
fleitljer cnigtng nor abusing." 

And having thus spoken the crane flew away. 

The Master having givcii this lesson, summed up 
the Jdtaka thus : ''At that time, the Lion was Deva- 
datta aiid the crane was I myself." 


The part in italics is termed the " Story of 
the Present," that in ordinary type the " Story 
of the Past." These are extant in Pali rever- 
sions of Cingalese translations of the original 
Pali, Of this last the verses (gdtha) are " sur- 
vivals," and probably date from 400 b.c. The 
stories were probably written down as commen- 
tary on the grdhas, with the first lines of which 
they invariably begin. The significance of 
these gdthas will concern us later on. 

So much for the form of the Jataka. The 
subject-matter is so clearly parallel to the fable 
of The Wolf and Crane, which we have seen 
current in the Greco- Roman world, that it is 
impossible not to surmise some historical con- 
nection between the two. What that precisely 
is we may leave for discussion till we have fur- 
ther evidence before us. 

II. We may next take the Jataka version of 
The Ass in the Lion's Skhi (No. 189 in Faus- 
boll's edition, Slha-Cama Jataka, tr. Rhys- 
Davids, pp. v. vi.). A hawker used to dress 
his ass in a lion's skin, and thus obtained gratis 
forage for him, as the watchmen of the fields 
dared not go near him to drive him away. 
One day, howevei-, they plucked up courage, 


and summoned a posse of the villagers, and 
surrounded the pseudo-lion, who, in the fear of 
death, hee-hawed. Then the Buddha, who had 
been re-born as one of the villagers, said the 
first gatha — 

" Z\)xs is! not a lion's roarinif, 
itlnr a tigrr's, nor a pantijer's; 
IBrrssrlJ in a lion's shin, 
'E'fs a iarctcijcti ass tijat roars." 

and the hawker i^eturning just as the ass died 
from the blows, recited the second — 

" ILong mtgf)t tfjc ass 
CTIati in a lion's sfuit 
p?abc frti on tljc barleg green, 

ISut Ijc bragcti ! 
Snti tfjat moment fje rame to ruin." 

Here again the similarity of the Greek and 
Indian fables is too pronounced to leave much 
doubt about a historic connection. As Mr. 
Ehys- Davids remarks, the Indian fable gives 
a motive for the masquerade which does not 
exist in the Greek version. 

III. Among the Jatakas translated by Dr. 
R Morris in the Folk-Lore Journal (II. -IV.), 
I have found one which gives a parallel to The 
Dog and Shadow fable, which Benfey could 


not trace farther than the Ur-Pantschatantra 
{% 191). It is No. 374 of FausboU's edition, 
bears the euphonious title of CulladhanuggaHa 
Jataha, and in abstract runs as follows (cf. 
FLJ. ii. 371 seq.). An unfaithful wife elop- 
ing with her lover arrives at the bank of a 
stream. There the lover persuades her to strip 
herself, so that he may carry her clothes across 
the stream, which he proceeds to do, but never 
returns. Indra seeing her plight changes him- 
self into a jackal bearing a piece of flesh, 
and goes down to the bank of the stream. 
In its waters fish are disporting, and the 
Indra-jackal, laying aside his meat, plunges 
in after one of them. A vulture hovering 
near seizes hold of the meat and bears it 
aloft, and the jackal returning unsucessful 
from his fishing is taunted by the woman, who 
had observed all this, in the first gatha. 

" © Jackal so bvoion, most stupiti arc oott, 
|lo skill Ijabc pou got, nor knotolctigc, nor iot't ; 
gour fisJj nou !)abc lost, jour meat is all gone, 
SlnH uoto sou sit ijricbtng all poor anB forlorn." 

To which the Indra-jackal retorts the second 
gdtha — 


" S!)c faults of otijcrs! cajsp arc to iScc, 
TSut Ijarn inDceti our oiun arc to licTjoIn ; 
Cbp IjuiSlianti tijou Ijajst Iog!t, anti lober tkc, 
SlnH nolu, 31 ixieen, tl)ou grieucst o'er tT)p losiis."* 

Here we miss the (somewhat unnatural) 
episode of the dog (or jackal) mistaking the 
image for the meat, but otherwise the parallel 
is sufficiently close to render borrowing prob- 
able, f It is scarcely likely that two nations 
would independently hit upon the loss of a 
piece of meat as a symbol of the punishment of 

IV. Our next example of the Palaeozoic 
stratum of the Bidpai, which is found also in 

* These rjdthas are imitated in the Pantschatantra thus 
{Pants. V. viii. , p. 311, Benfey's trans.) : — 

Bk. V. Str. 64. The fish swims in the waters still, the 
vulture is off with the meat : 
Deprived of both fish and meat, Mistress 
Jackal, whither away ? 

Str. 65. Great as is my wisdom, thine is twice as 
great ; 
No husband, no lover, no clothes, Lady, 
whither away ? 

f In the Arabic ^sop, Loqman (No. 51), the animal is a 
dog, as in the Greek, and the meat is captured by a vulture, 
as in the Indian form. Benfey thinks the image in the 
water is derived from The Hare and Elephant, which may 
be the origin of our Fox and Goat (Re. iii. ; Benf. § 143). 


Buddhist Birth- Stories, shall be that entitled 
by Caxton, Of the tortoise and of the other 
hyrdes (Avian il). Caxton, and Avian his 
original,* are hard put to it to find an appro- 
priate moral to a rather senseless apologue. 
But in vs^hat we cannot help regarding as the 
true original, the Kacchapa Jakata (Fausboll, 
No. 215, Pthys-Davids, pp. viii.-x., reprinted 
in my Bidpai, pp. Ixv.-lxvii.), the fable is 
directed against chatterboxes. Two young 
hamsas, friendly with a tortoise, offer to cai'ry 
him to their favourite pasture ground, if he 
will bite a stick which they will carry ; they 
warn him, however, to keep his mouth closed 
during the flight. While on the wing all the 
birds of the air collect about the curious 
spectacle, and make remarks by no means 
complimentary about the tortoise. His natu- 
ral disposition to loquacity overcomes him, and 
opening his mouth to expostulate with them, 
he loses hold of the stick and falls to the 
trround. Buddha utilises the incident to 

* It occurs also in Babrius 115, where the tortoise offers 
all the treasures of the Erythrsean sea for its aerial journey, 
a trait which, as Mr. R. Ellis remarks, points to an Indian 


reprove a loquacious king by summing it up in 

the gdtha — 

" Fcrtio, tf)c tottoisE feillcti i)imsclf 
S5Rf}tlst uttering Ijts boicc, 
djaugf) \)c fajas Ijollitng tiQ\)t tfje stich 
ISg a iDorli ijimsclf ijc slciu. 

" 33eIiolti f)iin tijcn, © ciccllcnt in slrcngtfj 
SnU sprafe ixiisc iuartis not out of season. 
Hau src fjobj bg ijis talking ofacrmucf) 
Srijt tortoise fell into tijis ioretcfjeti pligfjt." 

This fable has probably had injfluence on that 
of The Eagle and Raven (E.o. I. xiv.), and is 
probably not disconnected with the story of 
the death of JSschylus by an eagle dropping a 
tortoise on his bald cranium ; this occurs for 
the first time as late as ^Elian (vii. 17). 

V. I will now put in the Jataka variant for 
the well-known fable of The Wolf and Lamh, a 
parallel which has not hitherto been pointed 
out. It is the Dipi Jataka (FausboU, No. 426, 
translated by Dr. Morris, Folk-Lore Journal, 
iv. 45). A panther meets a kid ; what follows 
is sufficiently indicated by the gdthas they 
utter : — 

" Fan, ©w mg tail fjaije gon stept, gou false^speaJting 
gou fjabe ione me inuclj fjarm, gou careless 
goung tf)tng. . . . 


A'id. ^our face bas tcbjarts mc, nour tail iuag ati= 
seen, . . . 
PJob tfjcn coula 2 trcatJ on tfjc cnti of gour tail? 
/•(/w. fHg tail is full long auU rcacljcs sa far 

as to cobcr tljc cartlj anti its quarters all four, . . . 
J^obj tljcn roulB gou miss to step on mg tail? 
/fid. €a aboiU gour long tail, ® ^antljcr JjrprabcB, 
Cfjrougfj tlje air niB E tomr, auU toucfjcti not tf)e 
grountr. . . . 
Fttn. © iviti, K tiiti src gou come tljrougfj tljc air ; 

2ri;c 33easts gou alarmcU anij frigljtcntti full 

sore, . . . 
^nti tijus gou quite spoilt tf)e fooB t^at 31 eat." 

" S;t)us e'm tfjc tittle i>iti in piteous terms 
Bin beg tlje Pantficr iSparc Ijer tenticr tljroat. 
But Ije atljirst for blooU BiO tear Ijer tljroat, 
Snti tfjen fjer manglrt botig grccliilg ate. 
SUnhinti of speeclj, unjust tljc iuickcB is, 
flor listens Ije at all to reason's boirr." 

If this occurred alone, the parallelism would 
not be sufficient to make any borrowing hypo- 
thesis necessary. But taken in conjunction 
with the other examples, it becomes probable 
that the form with which we are familiar is 
merely a softening down of the Indian exagge- 
rations due to the Greek sense of xai^og. We 
have another variant of a similar kind in The 
Cat and Chicken (Re. iv.). And I have found 
a Tibetan version of this very Jdtaka contained 


in Schiefner's collection of Thibetan Tales (Ral- 
ston's Trans., ISTo. xxix.) ; the personages have 
actually become The Wolf and the Sheep, from 
which it is but a slight step to our familiar 
Wolf and Lamb. 

VI. The Bald Man and Fly (Ro. II. xii.) finds 
a parallel in an exaggerated form in two Jdtakas, 
which are obviously variants of one another, to 
speak Hibernically. These are JSTos. 44 and 45 
of Fausboll's edition, and have been translated 
by the Bishop of Colombo in Journ. Asiat. Soc. 
(Ceylon Branch), vol. viii. 167-70.* In the first, 
the Malcasa Jdtaka, a mosquito settles on the 
"copper-basin-like head" of a carpenter, who 
requests his son to relieve him of the annoy- 
ance. The son seizes an axe, and nearly hits 
the mosquito. The result is summed up in the 
gdtha — 

"JSfttcr aiot^cfoc 

5rf)an a fricnti of sense htxttt ; 
STfjE stuptB son to ivtll tljc gnat 
l^ts fatijcr's fjcatipicrc deft." 

The other, or Rohini Jdtaka, merely changes 
the sex and the weapon. Its gdtha runs — 

* No. 44, also by Weber, Ind. Stud., iv. 387, from the 
text of the Jataka supplied him by Fauaboll. 


" Better a sensible cncmg 

Ciban a fool, Ijofccfacr feintr fje be ; 
Hr.ok at sillg iaoI)int : 
S{)c's ftillcB i)er motfjer, anU sore beeps sfje." 

It is to be observed that the moral is quite 
different in the fable current among the Greeks, 
as represented by Phsedrus (V, ii. ed. Riese). 
Indeed missing a fly is not such an extraordi- 
nary circumstance that we need go all the way 
to India in order to explain it. 

VII. There are also two Jatakas which re- 
semble the Fable of the The Fox and Crow, in 
so far that we find a fox (jackal) and crow 
flattering one another. In one (the Jambu- 
kliadaka Jdtaka, Fausboll, No. 294, tr. Rhys- 
Davids, p. xii. ) a crow is eating Jambus when 
he is thus addressed by a passing jackal — 

" SIIEIio mng tijis be, fa^ose rtclj anti pleasant notes 
proclaim fjim best of all tfjc singing birlis, 
S2Earbling so siwcetln on tfjc Sambu-branelj, 
ffiSaijcre like a pcacoek Ije sits firm ani grantt." 

To which the crow replies 

" ' Kis a bjflUbreti goung gentleman fcfjo fenofos 
STo speak of gentlemen in terms polite ! 
ffiooB sir— totiose sf)ape anfl glossg eoat refaeal 
El)e tiger's offspring— cat of tfjtse, C prag ! " 

VOL. I. E 


Buddha in the form of the genius of the 
Jambu tree, comments in the thii-d gdtha — 

" (Too long, forsaotfj, H'fae borne tfje sigJjt 
©f tfjcse poor cljatttrrrs of Itrs— 
SCIjc Tcfusr^tatcr anb tfje offaI=cattr 
Bclauimg tacf) otljrr." 

The positions are reversed in the Anta 
Jataka (Fausboll, No. 276 tr. R Morris, F.-L. 
J. iii. 363) the gdtJias of which will explain the 
situation — 


"Sill \m\ to tfjfc, © fttng of beasts, 
^ lion's strrngtfj Host tijou possess, 
Snti sfjoulBcrs faroati just like a bull ; 
Perljaps gou'll leabe a hii for me." 


"iFull iocll fiotfj fje JuTio is of gentle fairtfj 
i^noiu Ijoia to praise a iuell-faretr gentleman. 
CTome Buion, iear crobj, iuttf) necfe like peaeoek's Ijue, 
amait I;ere atof)ac anti cat tljg fill of flcslj." 

Buddha, (in form of an Erawa tree). 

" ©f beasts tfje jackal failest is anS iuorst, 
®f biris tije croia is least estermeU anU praiseli, 
(lEraSrias are tlje trees in orBer last, 
%x(n no5jj togetljer come tljc lotoest ttjrec." 

VIII. The goose that lays the golden eggs 


may next engage our attention. She j&nds her 
Indian analogue in the flamingo that moults 
golden feathers and is plucked bare by her 
greedy owner (SuvannaJiwnsa Jdtaka, Fausboll, 
136, tr. R. Morris, F.-L. J iv. 171). The moral 
is the same — 

" 33c content initfj iufiat's gifacn, seek not to get more, 
©'rrgrcetig tfje ioirluD, unsatcB tlico are. 
SiLUjrn tf)e golu flamingo feas stripped of fjts plume 
Itjts featfjcrs of golu all tticir colour UtB lose." 

IX. There is a Jataka which has peculiar 
interest for us in the present connection, though 
the Fable which it parallels is not among those 
of Stainhowel or Caxton. It rejoices in the 
name of Suvannakakkata Jataka, is No. 389 in 
Fausboll's edition, and has been translated by 
Dr. Morris in Folk-Lore Journal, iii. 56. A 
Brahmin has a crab for a friend and a crow 
for an enemy. The latter induces a serpent to 
poison the Brahmin, whereupon the friendly 
crab seizes the crow. What follows is told in 
the gCdhas — 

" (Tljc fjisstng snake iuitlj fjoott outspreati, 
Wi)t crab full near Oia come, 
Sis frtenti in neeti to Ijclp a frienti, 
33ut ijtm tljc crai lilj sicje." 



" Cf far tijt man be tba so fast arc fjclU 
3Lrt ijim arise anti E'll tijc facnom irafe, 
i£vclcase at once tljc croUj anU \\\t, mg fritnti, 
Before tljc poison strong o'ercomcs tijc man." 


" 2i:f)C serpent FII release, tljc crob not get, 
llje shall remain a inljilc toitljin mo dabs ; 
33itt bljen to ijealtfj 51 sec mn frienB restores, 
E'en as t^e snake tije crob 31 bill set free." 

He fulfils the promise by nipping off both their 
heads "as clean as a lotus-plant." Crabs are 
not so frequently in the habit of seizing ser- 
pents and conversing with them that we can 
consider the following fragment of a Greek 
scholion or table-song quite unconnected with 
the above Jataka — 

6 KapKivos Clso ?(pci 
X'J'^'i TOP (xpLV "Kajidiv. 
evdvv XPV T°^ eroLpov ififiep 
Kal nh cTKoXia (ppovetv* 

* Furia, Coraes, and Benfey attribute this to Alcasus ; 
Wagener and Mr. Kutherford deny the attribution. The 
latter, however, grants the archaic flavour of the style. At 
the same time the full fable in the Greek Jisop (Halm, 
346) has only a slight resemblance to the Indian. 


X. (FniiP not " Sausages!."— O/ic, says the '• Story of 
the Present " of the Munika Jataka (Fausboll, No. 
30, tr. Kliys-Davids, pp. 275-7), it happened at the 
Jeiavana Monastery that one of the monks fell in. 
love. On that occasion the Teacher asked the monk, 
"Is it true what tliey say, that yoti are love-sick ? " 
"It is true, Lord!" said he. ''What about?" 
"My Lord! 'tis the allurement of that fat gii-l." 
Then the Master said, ' * monk ! she will bring evil 
upon you. Already in a former birth you lost your 
life on the day of her marriage, and were turned into 
food for the multitude." And he told a tale :— 

[Once Avhen Brahmadatta was reigning in Benares 
the Bodisat Avas a large red ox, and ■\vas called ' Big- 
red ; ' he had a brother named ' Redlet.' The daughter 
of the house was an lieiress engaged to be married, 
and they were fattening up a pig named Munika 
( = 'Curry-bit-ling,' vidgo Sausages) for the wed- 
ding feast, Eedlet complains to Big-red that they 
have to do all the carting on grass and straAv, while 
Munika is fed on boiled rice for doing nothing. In 
answer Big-red says the gatha — 

" (lEttbp not ' 'S)ausian;c!ei,' 
'5ris Ocatilp foot! T)c catsf, 
<2Eat pour cfjaff, ann lie content, 
'Ctsi t\)z Sign of IcngtTj of life." 

Soon after Munika became Munika indeed, and Bed- 
let was comforted.] 

Then the Master made the connection and summed 
vp the Jataka by saying : 'He ivho at that time was 
Sausages the Pig was the love-sick monk, the fat girl 


was as she is noiv, Redlet was Ananda, but Big-red 
teas I myself. ' * 

We can be sure that the " Tale of the Past " 
reached the West, since it is found almost 
exactly in the same form (with the substitu- 
tion of asses for oxen) in the Jewish Midrash 
Rabba* (Great Commentary on the Penta- 
teuch and the Five Rolls) on Esther iii. i, 
where its foreign origin is shown by the refer- 
ence to pig as suitable festival diet, and the 
use of the word Kalends for festival. And if it 
got as far as Syria (probably via Alexandria) 
there is little doubt it was current elsewhere in 
the Hellenic world, and we accordingly find an 
obvious variant of it in the Greek fable of The 
Calf arid the Ox (Halm, 113; Avian, ed. Ellis, 
36), while Phaedrus' Asimos et Porcellus (V. iv.) 
seems to be a corollary on it. 

XI. The peacock is an Indian native, and was 
too rare in Greece to give rise to a folk-fable. 

* I have thought the "Story of the Present" interesting 
enough in this case to be given in full. 

f It was by mistake that Benfey (p. 229) attributes this 
to Berachyah Hanakdan. There is therefore no need, with 
Mr. Rhys-Davids (I.e.), to assume a direct passage of the 
Jataka to the West in the thirteenth century. Dr. Lands- 
berger, I may observe, pointed out the Indian parallel 
(Fabeln des Sophos, p. xxxvii). 


Under these circumstances we may connect the 
two fables in our collection dealing with the 
brilliant bird {Juno, the 'peacock, and the night- 
ingale, Ro. IV. iv., and Tlie crane, and pea- 
cock, Av. xii.) with a Jataka which has at 
least this much in common with those that it 
lays stress on the vanity of the bird. It is the 
Nacca- Jataka (No. 32 of Fausboll's edition tr. 
Rhys-Davids, 291-4) in which the King of the 
Golden Geese seeks a mate for his heiress, and 
selects the peacock. He in the exuberance of 
his joy exclaims, " Up to to-day you have not 
seen my greatness," and proceeds to show his 
dancing powers. In so doing he exposes him- 
self and the haughty monarch says the gdtha — 

" pleasant is gour cry, brilliant is gotir barft, 
Almost Ititc tijc opal in its colour is gour neck ; 
CTfje fcatfjcrs in gour tail rcaci) about a fatfjom's Icngtlj, 
2Sut to sucij a Hancer 2 can gtijc no Iiaugfjtcr, sir, of 
mine ! " * 

XII. Among Phsedrus' fables, though not 
among Caxton's, there is one (I. xx). in which 
some dogs, to get at a hide at the bottom of a 
river, set to work to drink the river up, so as 

* The Nacca- Jataka is figured on the sculptures of Bhar- 
hut, though in a fragmentary condition (Cunningham, Stupa 
of Bliarhut, pi. xxvii. 11). 


to reach it; they burst in the process.* This 

is paralleled by the Kaka-Jdtaka in which crows 

try to drink up the sea with a similar object. 

(Fausb. 146 ; tr. K Morris, F.-L.J. iv. 59.) The 

gdtha runs : 

" CE'cn noio our iucarp jatoss Do acl^e, 
©ur moutljsi tnUccD arc parc1)cl3 ano nrp, 
5i5Ee Sxiorfe aim toil, no rrgt, no truce, 
anil still again tlbc sea Botlj fid." 

The analogy is not so noteworthy but for the 
fact that two of the best-known Jatakas (given 
in Benfey, §82, from Hardy Manual 106 and 
Hiouen Tsang, I. 325) relate how the Buddha 
overcame the opposition of Indra by his perti- 
nacity in attempting to bale out the sea (or a 
river in the second case).t We can be certain 
that the former of these reached the West, since 
the Jewish Midrash Rabba on Esther iii. 6, I 
find, compares Haman to a bird that had built 
its nest by the sea-shore, and attempted to 
carry away the advancing sea inland. 

* Cf. too Rom. App. 43, where a fox does the same in 
trying to get at the moon in the river, which he mistakes 
for (green ?) cheese. This is an Indian trait (cf. Benf. i. 
p. 349). And cf. Nights with Uncle Remus, xix. 

t Cf. Sydney Smith's celebrated image of Mrs. Partington 
repelling the Atlantic with a mop. The Buddhist feeling 
in the matter would be to applaud the courage and faith of 
the good lady. 


XIII. Another Jataka which parallels an 
-^sopic Fable not in our collection is the Viro- 
cana Jataka (Fausb. 143, tr. R. Morris, F.-L.J. 
iii. 353). Here a lion adopts a jackal, who at 
last comes to think himself a veritable lion, and 
once requests his foster-father to stand aside 
while he shows the king of beasts the proper 
way to bring down an elephant. The result is 
disastrous, as is shown in the gdtlia : — 

CT)^ Ibcat ii gpitt, t\)f bratnsi arc oojtng out, 
an broken arc t\iy> rtliji lip tijts Ijiicfc licast^ 
31n 0orrp plifjljt tijoii ftnlicgit tl;pgclf to^tiap, 
jFuII toell, 31 )sitt\\, tljoti art consptcuous noio. 

There is another Jataka of a similar character 
given by Hardy (3Ia?iual of Buddhism, 233, aj). 
Benf. i, 104), in which a Jackal is taken as a 
servant by a lion, who gives him a share in his 
booty. He waxes fat, and seeing one day that 
he has four legs, two canine teeth, two ears, and 
a tail, just like the lion, determines to start 
business on his own account. He emits his 
little roar, but no beast fears him, and he cannot 
bringdown any prey. Benfey, § 29, points out 
the close analogy of one of Aphthonius' fables 
(c. 350 A.D.) in which a fox serves a lion, be- 
comes proud, tries his own hand, and perishes 


(Halm, 41). He omits to notice the great simi- 
larity of Phaed. I. xi {Asinus d Leo Venantes, 
cf. R. lY. X.), where the ass and lion go a-hunt- 
ing together and the ass emits his terrible bray, 
this time, however, with more effect. I am the 
more inclined to suspect a foreign origin for 
this owing to the unnatural conjunction of an 
ass and a lion as fellow-hunters, and am inclined 
to think the ass has got into the story through 
some mistranslation, which occurs most fre- 
quently in the names of birds, beasts, and fishes, 
as every one knows who has had much to do 
with translation.* I would add that it seems 
to be a story like one of those contained in the 
above Jatakas to which a certain Eabbi referred 
when he taunted another with the proverb, 
" The lion has turned out a fox " (Talm., Baba 
Kama, ii7a).f 

XIV. We may close our comparison of the 

* They are almost like proper names ; provided some 
animal is mentioned the version construes ; e.g. jEsop's 
fable {supra, p. 27) is generally spoken of as the Fox and 
Horse-Leeches. I suspect also that something of the same 
kind has occurred, Phted., I. v. (Ro. I.iv. ), to make Vacca, 
CapeUa, Oris, fellow-hunters with Leo. Sea infra, p. 166. 

+ Landsberger, p. xlvii., refers the saying to a fable 
analogous to Babr. loi, Halm, 272, which may again be 
referred back to the above Jatakas. Cf. too Av, 40. 


Jatakas with one that bears some relation to 
the closing fable of Stainhowel's collection, 
really from the Romulus but included in the 
" Fables of Poge" (Fox, Cock, ^ Dogs, p. 307). In 
the Kukkuta Jdtaka (tr. Morris, F.-L.J., ii. 2,33^ 
cf. Cunningham, Stupa of Bharhut, 77) a cat 
approaches a cock perched on a tree and tries 
in vain to inveigle him down, as is told in the 
gdthas : — 

" Cat. © lobrlg fiirti, bjttfj fcatfjcrs brtgfjt of f)ur, .... 
FIl ht tfjo toifr, tljou sijalt fjaiac nougjjt to pag. 
Cock. TSMt btrlis pair not Suitfj quairupelis. 

<&a, seek anntijrr mate rlscSuljerc. . . . 
IHang ioilcs fjaSjc iDomcu clcbcr, gooB men tfjrg faiill 

WS,ii\) soft anU oilg faorlis, as i^uss iooulti cfjcat t^c 
cock. . . ." 

At first sight the analogy with the mediaeval 
form does not seem very close. But I think I 
can show by a curious piece of evidence that 
the present form of the Jataka has been trun- 
cated, and that in its original version there was 
some reference to a third dramatis persona. 
For the Kukkuta Jdtaka happens to be one of 
those sculptured on the coping of the Stupa of 
Bharhut, and is accordingly figured in Sir A. 
Cunningham's monograph (PI. xlvii. 5). We 



can be certain of its identity, since the name of 
the Jataka is inscribed above the figures.* From 
the facsimile which we give it will be observed 




that there is an object at the foot of the tree 
which is evidently of importance in the story, 

* This may possibly be a case of the traditional migra- 
tion of illustration to which I called attention in my Bidpai, 
pp. xx.-xxiii. 


but does not occur in the present version of the 
Jataka. General Cunningham suggests that 
it represents the bunch of bells worn by Nautch 
girls, and is placed in the sculpture as a symbol 
of the wakefulness of the cock. I think it 
however more likely that it represents the 
presence of a watcher behind the tree, as 
occurs in the Greek form of the Fable (Furia, 
88; Halm, 231), and in the Romulus here.* 
The original form of the Fable would thus be 
merely a variant of the Biter hit formula. In 
the form in which it occurs in the present ver- 
sion of the Jatakas, the story is not rounded 
off, and it only serves to illustrate the peculi- 
arly Buddhistic conception of the innate cor- 
ruption and deceit of the feminine nature. 

Thus far the evidence of the Jakatas, and — 
important point — no further.! I have been 

* By a most remarkable coincidence, James, in his ver- 
sion of the Fable (No. xxxii. p. 22), has a reference to the 
bell ; " The Cock replied, ' Go, my good friend, to the foot 
of the tree, and call the sacristan to toll the iiell.'" But 
there is nothing to warrant this in the Greek original. 

t I have rejected The Conceited Jackal (Supra XIII.), 
regarded as a proposed variant of the Daw in peacock's 
feathers ; the Baveru J. (F.-L. J., iii. 124) is closer. The 
ISammodamdna J. (No. 33) is not close enough to the Lion 
and Four Oxen (Av. xiv.), nor the Sakuna J. (No. 36) 
to The Hwallow and Birds (Ro. I. xx. ; Avian, 21), though 
they have the same moral. 


taken to task for declaring my conviction that 
the Pali scholars have played out their best 
trumps in dealing with this question. {Bidpai, 
Introd., li., note). After having gone more 
fully into the matter I still retain that opinion. 
The whole of the Jfitakas have now been pub- 
lished, and if any very striking analogy with 
^sop's Fables had been found among them, we 
should doubtless have heai-d of it. Dr. Morris' 
selections in the Folk-Lore Journal ranged over 
the first four hundred and fifty of the Jiitakas, 
and the remaining hundred are not likely 
to have a richer yield, as they are those with 
the longest gdthas. At any rate, we cannot 
permit the Pali scholars to win tricks with 
cards which they keep up their sleeve ; and 
the above dozen or so instances must stand for 
the present as representing the contribution of 
the Jatakas to the question of the origin of 
« ^sop's Fables." * 

But this contribiition, though scanty, is im- 
portant. The Jatakas, or at least the gdthas, 
in archaic Pali, which form the nucleus of 

* What is wanted for folk-lore purposes is an abstract of 
all "the stories of the past," with a translation of their 
gdthas. This could be got within a volume of a size similar 
to Mr. Rhys-Davids'. 


them, were carried over to Ceylon in a complete 
form 241 B.C. ; they had been sculptured in the 
Stupa of Bharhut about that date ; they formed 
a topic of dispute at the Buddhist Council of 
Vesali, c. 350 B.C., and we can scarcely fix their 
collection, very nearly in their present form, 
at least as regards the gdihas, at much later 
than 400 B.C. This is before any contact be- 
tween Greek and Hindoo thought can be taken 
into account.* Besides this, the stories have, 
in the majority of cases, nothing Buddhistic 
about them, and were evidently folk-tales 
current in India long before they were adapted 
by the Buddhists to point a moral ; and some 
of them were probably used by Buddha himself 
for that purpose in the fifth century B.C. 
Altogether, the probabilities are strong that 
we have in them genuine and native products 
of Indian thought, and that where we find 
them later among the Greeks they are borrowed 
products. At any rate, we may accept this 
as a provisional result which renders it worth 
while putting in and considering the other In- 

* The fii'st notice of India in Greek literature is in one 
of the fragments of Hecataeus (fl. 500 B.C.). Cf. Bunbury's 
Ancient Geography, i. 142. But see infra, p. 100. 


dian evidence of a later date before summing 

We may first take some references found by 
Weber and Liebrecht in the Mahabharata, 
which may serve as an appendix to the Palaeo- 
zoic stratum of the Bidpai. The Mahabharata 
is the Indian Iliad and Odyssey and .^neid and 
Gerusalemme Liberata and Orlando Furioso and 
Faerie Queene ; at least it is equal to all these, 
and more also, in point of bulk. Such a huge 
mass affords grand accommodation for inter- 
polation, and parts of the Indian epics have 
been dated as early as the Upanishad stage of 
the Vedic literature, and others as late as the 
Christian era. It is, accordingly, impossible to 
use references occurring in it with much con- 
fidence, as to their date, except that we may be 
sure it is B.C., and so anterior to Phfedrus. 
Such analogies to Greek fables as have been 
observed in it * occur by way of casual reference, 
somewhat in the same way as the earliest Greek 

* There has been no system.itic search made through the 
Mahabharata ; Weber owns that he had only made a per- 
functory one. It is from this quarter accordingly that we 
may anticipate the largest addition to our knowledge of 
the existence of ^sop's Fables in India that yet remain 
to be made. Cf. Benf. i. 554 seq., on the probabilities of 
Abstemius' Fable, No. 70, being derived from Mb. xii. 4930. 


Fables enumerated on p. xliv. This has its 
importance, as showing that in India, as in 
Greece, the fable was current among the people, 
and formed part of their folk-lore. It confirms, 
too, the impression that the Buddha, in using 
the fable, was only applying a general practice 
of his day. 

XV.-XVII. Three of these references we 
may dismiss very shortly. Liebrecht has found 
a very explicit reference to The Man and Serpent 
(Ro. I. X.) in Holtzmann's translation of parts 
of the Mahabharata.* There seems also to be 
a reference to Tlie Oak and Reed (Ro. IV. xx.) 
in the complaint of the sea, that rivers bring to 
it oaks but not reeds (Mh. xii. 4198).! Again, 
the request of the camel for a long neck in The 
Camel and Juiiiter ( Av. vii. ) finds its analogue in 
the Indian epic (Mh. xii. 41 75). J That the last 
two of these reached the pale of Hellenism is 
proved by their appearance in Jewish writings, f 

* Indische Sagen, 2nd edition, II. 210 [ap. Jahrb. eng. u. 
rom. Phil. iii. 146). I cannot find it in the first edition, 
the only one accessible to mo. 

t It is, perhaps, worth while remarking that it is from 
the twelfth book of the Mahabharata that three books of 
the ?7r-Bidpai were taken (Benfey, 219-22). 

+ They occur in form of proverbs: "Be flexible as the 
reed, not stiff as the cedar" (Talm. Taanith 20a); "The 
VOL. I. F 


XYIII. Finally, there is a reference in the 
Mahabharata (xiv. 688) to a fable similar to The 
Belly and Members (Ro. III. xvi.), which de- 
serves closer attention, as it is, in many ways, 
the most remarkable fable in existence. A 
variant of it, or something vei-y like it, was 
discovered six years ago by M. Maspero in a 
fragmentary papyrus, which he dates about the 
twentieth dynasty (c. 1250 B.C.). It is, conse- 
quently, the oldest fable in existence, and as 
such we may give it : — 

Trial of Belly v. Head — wherein are published the 
pleadings made before the supreme judges — while 
their President watched to unmaslc the liar — his eye 
never ceased to watch.* The due rites having been 
(jone — in honour of the god Avho detests iniqiiity — 
after the Belly had spoken his plea — the Head began 
a long harangue : — 

' 'Tis I, 'tis I, the rafter of the whole house— wlience 
' the beams issue and where they join together — all 
' the members ... on me and rejoice. My forehead 
'is joyous — my members are vigorous — the neck 
' stands firm beneath the head — my eye sees afar off 

camel asked for horns and had his ears cut off" (Talm. 
Sanh. 1066). 

* I have ventured to substitute this for the "pleurer" 
of M. Maspero which gives no sense, though be makes out 
of it a very pathetic (and very French) picture of the judge 
weeping at the eloquence of the advocate — before the 
speeches are delivered. 


' — the nostril expands and breathes the air — the 
' ear opens and hears — the mouth sends forth sound 
' and talks — the two arms are vigorous— and cause a 
' man to be respected — he marches Avitli head erect — 
' looks the great in the face as well as the lowly . . . 
' 'Tis I that am their queen — 'tis I the head of my 

* companions . . . Who Avould play a trick — or is 
' there any would say — " Is it not false ? " Let them 

• call me the head — 'tis I that cause to live . . . ' * 

Here the fragment breaks off, and we cannot 
tell if judgment went with the plaintiff as in 
the Roman fable. For it will be observed that 
the fable, if fable it can be called, takes the 
form of a mock-trial, corresponding, as M. 
Gaston Paris has pointed out, to the debai 
which is so familiar in mediaeval French litera- 
ture, t From this point of view the debat of 
Belly and Head affords us the earliest example 
of legal procedure extant. 

We again meet with the fable in the Upani- 
shads, whence it doubtless got into the Maha- 
bharata, and perhaps too into the Zend 
Yaqna : — 

* Academie des Inscriptions, Siance of sth Jan. 18S3, 

P- 5- 

t As a matter of fact a kind of dibat on this very subject 
was published in 1545, Cinq Sens de I'homme. There was 
also a Mysttre on the same subject (Migne, Diet. d. Myst., 
s. V. Membres). 


Dispute of the Senses and the Soul.* 

The senses disputed among themselves saj'ing, "I 
am the tirst, I am the first." They said : " Let us go 
out of the body, whichever shall cause the body to 
fall by its departure shall be the first." The word 
departed, the man spoke no more, but he still ate, 
drank, and lived ; the sight departed, the man saw 
not, but still ate, drank, and lived ; [and so with the 
hearing, &c.] ; the mind went forth, intelligence left 
the man, but he still ate, drank, and lived. The soul 
departed, no sooner was it without than the body fell. 
[They again disputed and tried who could raise the 
body with the same result.] 

A similar apologue existed among the Buddh- 
ists as we knovr from the fact that it exists 
in the Chinese Buddhistic work Avadanas (No. 
105) ; it occurs also in the Pantschatantra : — 

The Bird with Two Heads. 

Once on a time on Mount Himavat there was a bird 
named Jivanjiva. This had one body and two heads, 
one of which used to eat fine fruit to give strength and 
vigour to the body. The other became jealous and 
thought, "Why should that head always eat line 

* I take this from the Italian abridgment of Signer 
Prato, who has vrritten an interesting paper on L'Ay.ologo 
di Menenio Agrippa in Archivio por trad, popolari, iv. 
25-40. The full text of the Zend version is given by 
Buraouf, Sui- h Ya(;na, notes pp. clxxii. seq. 


fruit, of which I never taste one ? " Accordingly it 
ate a poisonous fruit and the two heads perished at 
the same time.* 

I have also found a Jewish variant, though 
with a somewhat different moral : — 

The Tongue and the Members. 

{Schocher Tob on Ps. xxxix. i). 

A Persian King sick unto death was ordered the 
milk of a lioness (Heb. Lchia). [A man obtains it 
after many adventures.] On his return the mem- 
bers disputed in the night. The feet said, ' Had 
we not gone the milk had not been got ' : the 
hands, ' We milked ; that was the chief thing ' : 
the eyes, ' But for lis the lioness could not have 
been found out.' The heart reminds them of her 
wise counsels. At last spoke the tongue, ' But for 
me where would you have been ? ' To the retorts of 
the other members, the only reply is, " You'll soon 
see ! " Next morning the man came before the King 
and handing him the milk, said, ' There is the milk 
of the bitch' (Heb. Kalha). [The man is ordered ofF 
to execution.] On the scaffold the members wept 
but the tongue laughed. ' What did I tell you ? 
Are you not all iu my power? However, I'll take 
pity on you ? ' The tongue called out, ' Lead me once 

* Cf. the Midrashic apologue of the quarrel between the 
head and tail of the serpent which should go first. The 
tail leads the head a merry dance ; " so it is when the lowly 
lead the great" {Midr. liabba, Deut. § 5). 


more to the King.' In his presence it said, ' I have 
truly brought you the milk of a lioness, Sire. Kalba 
is Arabic for lioness.' They tasted, and tried, and 
found it right, and sent the man away with great 
gifts. Then said the tongue, ' See now, life and 
death are in my iiand ' (Pro v. xviii. 21). 

But there is a still more striking use of 
the fable by a Jew. There can be little doubt 
that St. Paul had a similar fable* in his mind in 
the characteristic passage (i Cor. xii. i2-26).t 

The body is one, and hath many members, and all 
the members of the body, being many, are one body. 
. . . For the body is not one member but many. If 
the foot shall say, Becaiise I am not the hand, I am 
not of the body ; it is not therefore not of the body. 
And if the ear shall say. Because I am not the eye, 
I am not of the body ; it is not therefore not of the 
body. If the whole body were an eye, where were the 
hearing ? If the whole body were hearing, Avhere Avere 
the smelling ? . . . And if they were all one member, 
where were the body ? But now they are many 
members, but one body. And the eye cannot say to 
the hand, I have no need of thee ; or again the head 
to the feet, I have no need of you. Nay, much rather, 
those members of the body which seem to be more 
feeble are necessary : and those parts of the body 

* The passage combines the Indian idea of the contest 
of the members with the Konian notion of the organic 
nature of the body politic. 

t E. v., omitting the theological inferences. 


■which we think to be less honourable, upon these we 
bestow more abundant honour ; and our unconielj'' 
parts have more abundant comeliness ; whereas our 
comely parts have no need . . . And whether one 
member suffereth, all the members suffer with it, or 
one member is honoured, all the members rejoice 
with it. 

As this passage is the foundation of the 
docti'ine of the Visible Church, and indirectly 
of the conception of the Body Politic (of which 
Hobbes made such quaint use), we cannot well 
overrate the importance of the fable on which 
it is founded. 

We have thus seen this fable of the Body 
and its Members with its Belgian motto, 
L'union fait la force, forming part of the sacred 
literature of Egyptians and Chinese, of Bi-ah- 
mins, Buddhists, and Magians, of Jews and 
Christians.* The reader must not, however, 
assume that these are all necessarily derived 
from one source. On the contrary, I have 
given the various versions at length as an 
instructive example how different nations may 
hit upon very much the same apologue to illus- 

* As it occurs also in the legendary history of Rome, 
and in the quasi-sacred pages of Shakespeare, wliere it fills 
the wliole of the second scene of the first act of Coriolanus, 
we might add Romans and Englishmen to the above list. 


trate the same idea. Carefully examined, the 
various versions may be reduced to four inde- 
pendent ones. The Egyptian dehat stands by 
itself, the Brahmin Contest of Senses and Soul, 
occurring in the Upanishads, recurs in the 
Indian epic, in the Persian scripture, and, 
possibly through the latter, in Jewish com- 
mentaries, and may thence have influenced St. 
Paul. The lost Buddhist apologue of The Bird 
with Tivo Heads found its way to China, and 
was received into the Bidpai literature. The 
Roman fable is remarkable as being the only 
fable of its kind in Latin literature which can 
claim to be current among the Romans.* It 
occurs late, and may have been interpolated by 
Livy, like so much of his work. But on the 
whole I am inclined to regard it as a genuine 
Roman folk-fable, and another instance of the 
sporadic use of the fable — as in the Egyptian 
example above, or in Cyrus' fable of The Pl-per 
turned Fisherman (Herod, i. 141), or in Jotham's 
and Joaz' fables in the Old Testament (Jud. ix. 
8-15 j 2 Kings siv. 9) — by nations who have 

* Ennius has a reference to The Piper turned Fisherman 
(Re. vii.), and to The Swallows and other Birds (E,o. I. xx. ). 
But he was acquainted with Greek, and might have got 
the first from Herodotus. 


not otherwise shown a turn towards that par- 
ticular form of the apologue. The whole in- 
quiry ought to make us careful in the future 
how we admit borrowing without sure evidence 
either of identity of the fables or of contact 
between the nations using them. 

For there still remain a number of Indian 
parallels to our fables, in what I call the 
Mesozoic stratum of the Bidpai literature — pas- 
sages, that is, which formed part of the origi- 
nal form of the book, but cannot be traced back 
among the Jatakas. Taken by themselves, they 
could scarcely be adduced as valid evidence, as 
they cannot be traced back even as early as 
300 A.D., when the Greco -Roman collections 
were already in existence. But the Jatakas 
have shown us evidence of similar stories being 
current in India from five to seven centuries 
before that, and the analogues from the Indian 
epic can trace back nearly as far. Besides Indian 
writers were veritable Jeremy Diddlers in the 
way of literary borrowing, and the whole of the 
Bidpai, even in its earliest form, strikes one as 
a vast plagiarism. It becomes, therefore, pro- 
bable that the Bidpai stories of the Mesozoic 
stratum have the same antiquity as the Jatakas 


or the Mahabharata. We may therefore pro- 
ceed to add to our previous parallels such of 
these as have close analogy with Greek fables, 
being somewhat more particular as to the 
closeness of the parallelism than we were in 
the case of the Jatakas or the epic refer- 

XIX. We may begin with the fable of The 
Lion and Mouse, which occurs in the Pantsclia- 
tantra in the form of The Elephant and the 
Mice (II. App. I, Benf. ii. 208-10). The mice 
had made a settlement by the banks of a river 
whither elephants came to drink, and on their 
way disturbed and crushed many of the mice. A 
deputation is sent to the king of the elephants, 
who graciously commands his troop to select 
another passage to the watering-place. Soon 
after the troop are captured in pits and then 
bound to trees.* The king sends for aid to the 
mice, who come and gnaw away the thongs and 
free the whole troop. There is one decisive 
criterion which proves the priority of the In- 
dian form and the dependence of the Greek 

* In the Southern redaction there is but one elephant, 
and he is not bound to the tree. The mice rescue him by 
filling up the pit. Cf. Benf. i. 324. 


upon it. Elephants are frequently bound by 
cords to trees, lions never are. 

The Indian origin of this fable would be 
rudely shaken, however, if we could trust the 
inferences Herr Lauth drew from a Leyden 
papyrus which he discovered, and the pertinent 
part of Avhich he translated as follows : * — 

[Lion catches mouse who speaks as follows] : ' O 
'Pharaoh, my superior, O Lion, if thou eatest me, 
'thou wilt not fill thyself ; thy hunger will remain, 
' Preserve for me the breath of life as I preserved it 
'for thee in thy trouble ... on thy unlucky day.' 
Then the Lion reflected and the Mouse said to him : 
' Remember the hunters ; one had a line to bind thee, 
' another a leash. There was also a cistern dug before 
' the lion ; he fell in and the lion was prisoner in the 
'pit ; he was pledged by his feet. Lo, there came a 
' little mouse before the lion and freed thee.t There- 
'fore, reward me. I was that little mouse.' 

There, sure enough, we have the fable of 
The Lion and the Mouse in Egyptian literature, 
and the question arises how and when did it 
get there. Now the Leyden papyrus (I. 384) 
is written in demotic, i.e., sometime between 

* Munich Sitzungsberichte, 1S68, ii. 50. Die Thierfahel 
in Egypten. 

t The mixture of persons is due to Herr Lauth, who, it 
is perhaps worth while adding, was the author of some wild 
theories about Mose dev Egypter. 


500 B.C. and 200 A.D., and the latter terminus 
is the more likely since other parts of the 
papyrus contain Coptic versions of the Ritual 
of the Dead, But Herr Lauth was not satis- 
fied with this : he finds a comic picture of a 
mouse driving a chariot in the celebrated 
satiric papj'rus of Turin which dates about 1 150 
B.C. He therefore calmly assumed that the 
above fable was of the same date, and this bold 
bad assumption has passed vid Sir R. F. Burton 
and the versatile Prof. Mahaffy {Proleg. Anc. 
Hid. 390) into the article ' Beast Fable ' of 
Chambers's Cydopcedia, and a whole pyramid 
of theory about the African origin of the fable 
has been based upon it, the apex of which is 
downward in the sand. There can be little 
doubt that the Egyptian fable is a late con- 
veyance from the Greek. 

XX. Our nest example will illustrate not 
alone the derivation of a Greco-Ptoman fable 
from the Indian, but also Benfey's analytical 
powers. In the fable of The Good Man and 
Serpent (Ro. II. x.), he has traced, without any 
reasonable doubt, the survival of an Indian 
fable, which we find complete and consistent in 
its Indian form, but which is only preserved in 


unmeanin£: fragments in Greek and Latin fable. 
We can best indicate the relationship of the 
three different versions, by displaying them 
side by side, and indicating by a series of bars 
the passage where the classic fables have failed 
to preserve the original. 


A Brahmin once observed a 
snake in his field, and think- 
ing it the tutehiry spirit of the 
field, he offered it a libation 
of milk in a bowl. Next day 
he finds a piece of gold in the 
bowl, and he receives this each 
day after offering the libation. 
One day he had to go else- 
where and he sent his son with 
the libation. The son sees the 
gold, and thinking the serpent's 
hole full of treasure, deter- 
mines to slay the snake. He 
strikes at its head with a 
cudgel, and the enraged ser- 
pent stings him to death. The 
Brahmin mourns his son's 
death, but next morning as 
usual brings the libation of 
milk (in the hope of getting 
the gold as before). Tlie ser- 
pent appears after a long delay 
at the mouth of its lair, and 
declares their friendship at an 
end, as it could not forget the 
blow of the Brahmin's son, nor 
t'.ie Brahmin his son's death 
from the bite of the snake. 

—Pants. III. V. (Lenf. 244-7). 


- - - A good man had be- 
come friendly with the snake, 
who came into his house and 
brought luck with it, so that 
the man became rich through 

it. One day he struck the 

serpent, which disappeared, and 
with it the man's riches. The 
good man tries to make it up, 
but the serpent declares their 
friendship at an end, as it could 

not forget the blow. 

— rhxd. Dressl. VII. 2S (Rom. 
II. xi. ; Ro. II. x). 


A serpent stung a farmer's 
son to death. The farmer pur- 
sued the serpent with an axe, 
and struck off part of its tail. 
Afterwards fearing its venge- 
ance he brought food and honey 
to its lair, and begged reconcili- 
ation. The serpent, however, 
declares friendship impossible, 
as it could not forget the blow 

nor the farmer his son's 

death from the bite of the 

— Jisop Halm 96" (Babrius- 
Gitlb. 160). 


While in the Indian fable every action is 
properly motivated, the Latin form does not 
explain why the snake was friendly in the first 
instance, or why the good man was enraged 
afterwards, while the Greek form starts 
abruptly without explaining why the serpent 
had killed the farmer's son. Combine the 
Latin and Greek form together, and we practi- 
cally get the Indian, which is thus shown by 
Benfey's ingenious analysis to be the source 
of both. 

XXL In Babrius (95), though not in Caxton, 
there is a fable of a fox enticing a deer to the 
cave of a lion no less than twice by an appeal 
to his ambition. On the second occasion the 
lion seizes the beast and kills it. Going away, 
he finds on his return the heart of the deer 
missing. Making inquiry from the fox (who, 
of course, has eaten it), he is answered that an 
animal that could have been induced to put 
itself twice in the power of a lion could have 
no heart {i.e., sense). Exactly the same story, 
finishing with the same witticism, occurs in 
the Pantscliatantra (lY, ii.), except that an ass 
occurs instead of a deer, and his amorous pro- 
pensities are played upon to induce him to 


return a second time. Which of these is the 
original, which the derivate ? Both Weber 
(Ind. Stud, iii 388) and Benfey (§ 181) are 
strongly in favour of the Greek, more on 
general grounds than for any specific reason. 
I think I can reverse their result. There 
exists a Jewish variant {Jalkiit on Exod., § 182) 
in which the ass asks toll of King Lion and 
is killed ; the heart disappears, and the fox 
declares the ass had no heart or he would not 
have asked toll of a lion. Now here the dupe 
is an ass, as in the Indian fable, not a deer, as 
in the Roman. No one will nowadays suggest 
that the Jewish writer obtained the story from 
a Roman source, changed the deer to an ass, 
and then transmitted it to India. It must have 
been vice versa. The story got to Alexandria 
with the ass as the dupe, passed thence to 
Judaea and Rome, and in the latter place was 
transformed by Babrius into a deer. We shall 
see later on that this is not an isolated instance 
where the Jewish evidence turns the scale in 
favour of Indian origin.* 

* In the particular case before us, we might add that 
the reference to the heart as the seat of intelligence 
exactly corresponds to the Sanskrit hrdaye, whereas 
Achilleb' taunt to Agamemnon of KpaSii] iXarpoio would 


XXII. A couple of strophes of the Pantschn- 
fantra, III. 13, 14, Benfey, ii. 215) bear remark- 
able resemblance to the fable of The Two Pots 
(Av. ix.). They run as follows : — 

13 Who cannot put mp with thhigs from pride 

oft falls through his equals ; 
When two unbaked pots strike together, 
tliey both break in two. 

14 To vie with the mightj'^ 

brings oft death to the lowly ; 
Like a stone that breaks a pot, 
the mighty remain unhurt. 

Here again, as in many previous instances, I 
can produce a Jewish parallel in the Talmudic 
proverb, "If a jug fall on a stone, woe to the 
jug, if a stone fall on a jug, woe to the 
jug" (Mid?: Est. ap. Dukes' Blumenlese,'^o. 530). 
The Jewish form is nearer the Indian (str. 14) 
than that we are accustomed to from Avian, a 
fact not without its significance, as we shall see. 
Taken by themselves, the three cases might be 
regarded as fortuitous coincidences. But it 
should be emphasised that we cannot take such 
cases by themselves. The strength of the chain 

seem to imply that it was regarded by the Greeks rather 
as the seat of courage. 


of tradition, against all catenary laws, depends 
on its strongest not upon its weakest link. Wlien 
we have so strong a case as The Wolf and Crane 
or The Countryman, Son, and Snake, these commu- 
nicate their strength to their weaker brethren, 
because if we prove borrowing in one or two 
cases, the probabilities of borrowing in the latter 
cases become stronger in proportion, and what 
look like fortuitous coincidences turn into cases 
of borrowing. And examined more closely, the 
particular case we are considering is not so for- 
tuitous as it looks. Thei-e are many ways in 
which the dangers of ambition can be expressed 
symbolically.* It wovild be indeed strange if 
three nations independently should hit upon 
the fragility of an earthen pot to express the 
idea. It is for this reason that the Fable affords 
such a stronghold for the Borrowing theory; 
its symbolical chai"acter renders it doubly im- 
probable that two nations should independently 
hit upon the same symbol, unless an extremely 
obvious one, for the same moral lesson. 

XXIII. We may conclude this part of our 

* "Set a beggar on horseback," "Vaulting ambition 
o'erleaps itself," The Ass as Lapdog formula, are among 
those that occur to me at this moment of writing. 
VOL. I. G 


inquiry with an Indian parallel to The Maiden 
transformed into a Cat, which we have previously 
traced back to Phsedrus. I must confess the 
analogy does not appear to me so striking, but I 
include it in deference to Benfey's opinion, which 
is the more noteworthy, as he is generally 
inclined to trace Indian to Greek fables rather 
than vice versd, as here. The Indian story runs 
as follows {Pants. III. xii. ; Benf. ii. 262-6) : — 
A Brahmin saves a mouse and turns it into a 
maiden, whom he carefully educates. "When 
nubile, he determines to marry her to the most 
powerful being in the world. He goes to the 
sun, but the sun declares that clouds can 
obscure him, while the mouse-maiden declares 
he is too hot for her. The clouds in their turn 
confess inferiority to the winds before which 
they scud, while they are too cold for the mouse- 
maiden. The winds again yield to the moun- 
tain, against which they storm in vain, while 
the mouse- maiden objects to their unsteady 
conduct. The mountain is too hard for 
the mouse - maiden, while it confesses that 
the mice are stronger than it, since they 
bore through its interior. Finally the Brah- 
min goes with his adopted daughter to the 


Mouse King, and asks her her pleasure. ' But 
' she, when she saw him, thought, " he is of my 
' own species ; " her body became beautified by 
' her hair standing on end fx'om joy, and she 
' said, " Papa, make me into a mouse and give 
' me to him as a wife, so that I may fulfil the 
' household duties suitable to my species." And 
' he made her into a mouse by the might of his 
' sanctity, and gave her to him as a wife.' 

The story, it will be seen, has, in common 
with the classic fable, the transformation of a 
lower animal into a maiden, her being given in 
marriage, and the mora), 

Naturam expellas furca, tamen usque recurret. 

On the other hand, the marriage in the Phae- 
drine form occurs before the revelation of the 
true nature, and the maiden is an enemy of the 
mouse in disguise. I should therefore hesitate 
before granting any influence of the Indian on 
the Greek fable, but for two points which tell 
in favour of it. The first is that it postulates so 
strongly the animistic theory of metempsycho- 
sis, which has remained active in India during all 
historic time, while in Greece we meet with it at 
best as a " survival ; " in the Roman fable itself 


it is regarded as so strange that it requires the 
power of Jupiter to effect the change, and even 
he only does it as an experiment, which fails, to the 
merriment of the other gods. The other point 
is that there is a certain amount of evidence that 
the episode of strong, more strong, stronger, 
stronger still, and strongest, reached the west, 
at least as far west as Syria. For in Jewish 
legends about Abraham we find him arguing 
with Nimrod that fire should not be worshipped 
because water can put it out ; nor this, because 
the clouds carry it; nor those, because the 
winds bear them ; nor these, because man can 
withstand them.* 

If we allow, with Benfey, the Indian origin 
of The Cat-Maiden, then certain important 
points follow. For we find the fable referred 
to by Strattis (c. 400 B.C.), and by Alexis (c. 
375 B.C.), before Alexander's expedition to 
India. We must accordingly allow for some 
percolation of Indian stories, possibly through 
Persia, to Greece, as early as the fifth century 
B.c.t This would render it more likely that The 

* Ber. rah. § xxxviii. cf. Beer. Lcbcn Abrahams, 11 and 
n. 92. Similarly in the Talmud, Baba hatra loa. 

f Liebrecht traces a story that the Cardians lost a battle 
because their steeds had been trained to dance to music, 


Doc; and Shadoio and others (see infra., p. 129) 
had also penetrated thence at an early date into 
Greece. I would add that the peculiar assump- 
tion that the mice are stronger than the moun- 
tains among which they burrow may have 
provoked the Greeks that heard the tale to the 
burlesque of a fable immortalised in Horace's 

Parturiunt montes, nascitur ridiculus mus. 

We have now before us all * the evidence on 
which we are to decide whether the Greeks 
derived their fables, all or some, from India. 
The most strangely diverse answers have been 
given to this question by those who have con- 
sidered it at length. Two classical scholars, 
A. Wagener (in his Memoire sur les rapports des 
apologues de VInde et de la Grece, Brussels, 1854)! 

told by Charon of Lampsacus (fl. 470 B.C.) to a Buddhistic 
legend, now only extant in the Chinese Avadanas (No. 10). 
Zur Volksk. p. 27. 

* Or nearly all, see infra p. 110 seq. I may remark that 
I have been exceptionally rigid in cases occurring only in 
the Bidpai and have entirely rejected those in which the 
probabilities are of Greek origin for the Indian variants. 
For our present purpose these have only a secondary import 
for us. 

t Wagener has the merit of having been practically the 
first to give detailed instances of the resemblance of 
Indian and Greek fables. He selected twenty examples 


and 0. Keller ( Untersuchungen uber die Geschichte 
d. griecli. Fahel, Leipzig, 1862), declare most 
strongly for the Indian origin. Two Indian 
authorities, A. Weber (who discusses each of 
Wagener's points seriatim in his Jndischp Studie?i, 
End. III. 327-72) and T. Benfey, are inclined to 
trace all resemblance between the two to Greek 
influence percolating through the Greco-Bactrian 
kingdoms, left in the backwater of Alexander's 
invasion. Weber bases his conclusion chiefly 
on aesthetic grounds ; the Greek fables are too 
clear-cut and artistic to have been derived from 
the longueurs of Indian fable. To this might 
be replied from the standpoint of evolution 
that it is not the most definite which comes 
first, and fi'om the standpoint of classical 
scholarship that the fables in which Weber 
sees such classical finish are the Greek verses 
of a Roman or mediaeval prose derivates from 
these. Benfey is less decided in favour of India ; 
in six cases (§§ 29, 130, 143, 150, 158, and 200 ; 
cf. supra XIII., XVIIL, XIX., XX., XXIII.) 
he allows Indian influence. But in some fifty 

with excellent judgment, one quarter of them turning out 
afterwards to be Jatakas, and eight occurring in the above 


other cases he declares for a Greek origin, and 
traces the Indian parallels, often very slight 
ones, I may observe, to Hellas. He draws a 
distinction, which seems to me quite illusory, 
between fables in which the animals act like 
human beings and those in which they behave 
naturally, and restricts the former to India.* 
This of course gives the majority to Greece, 
since many fables are merely applications of 
the Beast- Anecdote. But what was, or ought 
to have been, the determining factor in Benfey's 
mind in determining the relative priority of 
the two sets of fables he is considering, those 
occurring in the Bidpai literature and their 
Greek parallels, is the comparatively late date at 
which the Bidpai fables are first found. Strictly 
speaking, we first know of them by the Pehlevi 
translation, executed under Khosru Nushirvan 
about 550 A.D. They are probably a couple 
of centuries earlier, and some of them can 
be traced to the Jatakas which, we now know, 
are nearly a thousand years older than Nushir- 
van. But Benfey had no reason for suspect- 

* If the distinction were valid, every fable in which an 
animal is represented as speaking should be traceable to 


ing so early a date for the Jatakas; and at 
the same time classical authorities placed 
Babrius much earlier than what we now know 
to be his date. Under the circumstances Ben- 
fey was justified* in giving priority to the set 
of fables which make the earlier appearance in 
literature so far as the materials at his disposal 
enabled him to judge. We now know the 
chronological order of the various sets of fables 
which come into dispute to be as follows : — 



Parallels. Strata of Bidpai. 


I.-XIV. Pateozoic. 


(«Mpra, pp. 26- 








XIX. -XXIII. Mesozoic. 

Additions to 

(C/. note^p. 51.) Cainozoic 

While Benfey's chief Indian source came last 

in chronological order, he was perfectly justified 

iu treating it as the recipient. I cannot help 

thinking that the determination of the early 

date of the Jatakas would have, in his opinion, 

transposed the relation of borrower and lender. 

* In my Bidpai. p. slvii., I spoke somewhat disparag- 
ingly of Benfey's judgment for this, not taking the above 
considerations into account. It was my judgment that 
was at fault. 


Of recent years the relative position of clas- 
sical and Indian scholars has changed. Mr. 
Rutherford, in the Introduction to his edition 
of Babrius, dismisses the possibDity of Indian 
influence in a few contemptuous phrases. How 
is it possible, he asks, that a nation so original 
as the Greeks should be indebted for their 
fables to the childish Orientals, with their page 
after page of weak moralising, capped by a 
so-called fable ? And so, with a lofty wave of 
the hand, he bids the Indians go to their appro- 
priate diet (Kuveg Tpo; i/mbtov is his phrase), and 
passes on. Now, such sesthetic tests of origin 
have been proved to be illusory over and over 
again ; and, as a matter of fact, we know that 
the Greeks were much indebted to Orientals 
both in art and religion ; why not in literature ? 
We might very well ask Mr. Butherford how 
he judges of the superior beauty of the Greek 
fable ; which of the eight fables which, as we 
have seen, form the Corpus of genuine Greek 
fable, does he regard as a model ? I must con- 
fess that, notwithstanding their length, I find 
much animation and dramatic point in the 
" Stories of the Past " contained in the Jatakas, 
as is but natural, considering that the animistic 


spirit vitalises them. The gathas, too, put the 
chief points of each Jdtaka in very concise and 
striking form. But apart from all this, ques- 
tions of origin cannot be dismissed in this 
lofty way. When we find cases of similarity 
so close as those of The Wolf and Crane, The 
Ass in Lion's Skin, The Lion and Mouse, and 
Tlie Countryman and his Son and the Snake, 
there can be no doubt there has been borrow- 
ing on one side or the other. It is, as the 
Germans say, a case of either-or. And con- 
sidering that the Jatakas belong to the Canon 
of Buddhist Scriptures, into which foreign in- 
gredients would enter with the greatest diffi- 
culty,* and, as a whole, are much earlier than 
the main body of Greek fable as it has come 
down to us, the alternative must rest with them. 
There can be little doubt that most of the 
Greek fables enumerated above — with perhaps 
a few others — are derived from Indian ones 

* It is but fair, however, to state that the Bishop of 
Colombo (Journ. Ceyl. Asiat. Soc, viii. 114) considers 
that the shaping of the Losakd J. (No. 41) has been in- 
fluenced by some form of the Odyssey. It is possible, too, 
that the Mahosadka J. (Rhys-Davids, p. xiv.) preserved 
some form of Solomon's judgment brought to Ophir (Abhira 
at the mouth of the Indus) by Phoenician sailors. But 
see infra, p. 131. 


similar to, or identical with, those contained 
in the Jatakas. 

But not all, or nearly all, Greek fables are 
so derived, as Mr. Rhys- Davids contends in 
the interesting Introduction to his transla- 
tion of the first forty Jatakas (Buddhist Birth 
Stones, I., Trtibner, 18S0). For to reach this 
conclusion Mr. Rhys- Davids has to make two 
assumptions, one of them wrong in point of 
fact, the other wrong in point of method.* He 
assumes that our " ^sop " is derived from the 
Greek prose versions attributed to Planudes, 
which he takes to have been brought together 
for the first time late in the Middle Ages, after 
the Bidpai literature had had time to reach 
Greece. We have seen that, on the contrary, 
our ^sop is mainly Phsedrus in prose, and 
that the Greek prose -^sop is for the major 
part Babrius in prose. It follows that our 
" -(S]sop " could not have been influenced by 
the Bidpai literature, which does not reach 
Europe till the eleventh century. The other 
assumption is "that a large number of them 

* To say nothing of a third equally erroneous assumption 
that the Bidpai (in all its branches too) is entirely derive 
from the Jatakas. 


[^sop's Fables] have been already traced back, 
in various ways, to our Buddhist Jataka book, 
and that almost the whole of them are pro- 
bably derived, in one way or another, from 
Indian sources " {I. c. p. xxxv.). The large 
number referred to turns out, we have seen, 
to be no more than a dozen. Now the Corpus 
of Greco-Roman fable amounts to 500 (Phag- 
drus 200, Babrius 300), or say 300 themes, 
allowing for doublets and pseudo-fables (expan- 
sions of proverbs, &c.*). It is probable that 
the Jatakas contain as many; of the first 50, 
28 are either beast-tales or beast-fables. It 
is idle to talk of a body of literature amounting 
to 300 numbers being derived from another 
running also to 300, when they have only a 
dozen items in common. And Mr. Rhys- 
Davids' further argument that because some of 
the Greek fables can be shown to be derived 
from the Jatakas, therefore it is probable that 
most of them were so derived, savours somewhat 

* On this see some interesting remarks by Mr. Ruther- 
ford, L c. xliii.-vii. Of the 148 Babrius fables contained 
in Mr. Rutherford's edition, only 16 occur in PhaBdrus, to 
which may be added another dozen in the prose derivates 
of Phsedrus. 


of the Fallacy of the Priest of Neptune.* 
' Revere the Deity, my son, and pay his fees,' 
said he, ' see the number of votive tablets pre- 
' sented by those who vowed them to the god 
' and were thereby saved from drowning.' ' But 
' where, holy father,' asked the irreverent tar, 
' are the votive tablets of those who vowed and 
' were not saved ? ' We may grant the Pali 
scholars every credit for the dozen votive tablets 
erected to the honour of Buddha in the temple 
of -^sop, but we must at the same time point 
to the 300 places where votive tablets are not. 
Of course, if only a few Jatakas were extant, 
and among these a considerable proportion 
found parallels in Greek fable, Mr. Ehys- 
Davids might be justified in assuming that a 
similar proportion of parallels would have 
occurred in the missing Jatakas. But all the 
Jatakas are extant, and we can only allow the 
Pali scholars to count the parallels which they 
can prove to exist among the Jatakas in 

* This fallacy so rife in investigations of this kind has 
never received a name. Formally, it is a sub-species of the 
Fallacy of Accident (a dicto secundum quid ad dictum sim- 
pliciter). It is the method by which statistics may be 
made 'to prove anything,' and in that science might be 
called the Fallacy of Selection. 


existence. And these, as we have seen, amount 
at present to no more than a dozen or so. 

As a contrast to the case of the Jatakas, we 
may consider the Talmudic fables, which are of 
interest also in many other connections, as we 
shall see. The industry of Jewish scholars * 
has only been able to unearth about thirty 
fables from the vast expanse of Talmudic and 
Midrashic literature. Yet, few in number as 
they are, they are of crucial importance critic- 
ally. I have little hesitation in saying that 
they have given me the clue to the whole 
international history of the ancient fable, t 

In order to substantiate this somewhat 

* Dr. Landsberger in the introduction to his edition of 
Die Fdbeln des Sophot, Dr. Back in a set of papers in 
Graetz' 3Ionatsschrift, between 1876 and 18S6, and Ham- 
burger in his Rcalencyclopddie des Talmud, s.v. Fahel. I 
have myself been able to add seven to the scanty list, 
chiefly by a careful scrutiny of Talmudic proverbs, as 
given in Dukes' Blumenlese. 

t Dr. Landsberger missed the crucial importance of the 
Talmudic beast-fables, because (i) he was ignorant of their 
Indian analogues except in the five cases where his name 
is mentioned, (2) he was occupied in maintaining the 
wild thesis of the Jewish origin of Greek fable, i.e. of 
the derivation of a body of 300 fables, some of which can 
be traced back to the fourth and fifth centuries B.C. from 
some 25 to 30 fables, the earliest of which is of the begin- 
ning of the second century A.D. 


startling assertion, I must analyse somewhat 
minutely the whole body of Talmudic fables, 
dividing them into five classes as follows : 

(i.) Talmudic fables common to the classical 
and the earlier strata of Indian fables. We 
have already seen this in the cases of The Oxen 
(Asses) and Pig (X. Landsb. p. xxxvii.), The 
Proud Jackal (XIII. Landsb. xlix.), Oak and 
Reed (XVI. Landsb. Hi.), Camel and Horns 
(XVIL), The Ass' Heart (XXL), and The Two 
Pets (XXII. ), and we shall shortly see that it 
applies to The Lion {Wolf) and Crane (I.). 

(2.) Talmudic fables found among the classi- 
cal ones and likewise in later strata of the 
Indian ones. These include The Lean Fox 
{Midr. Koh v. 14 Babr. 86 c . Benf. § 19) The 
Mouse and Frog (I. iii. Bacher Agada d. Amorder 
42), Alan and Wood (Eo. III. xiv.), Man and 
Two Wives (Re. xvi. Ph. II. ii),* and what is gene- 
rally known as the only extant example of the 
300 Fox-Fables of R. Meir, The Fox. and Lion 

* The Jewish references for these two classes will be 
found in the Synopsis of Parallels. They are mostly from 
the Midrash Rabba or Great Commentary on the Penta- 
teuch and Five Rolls. There is a German translation of 
this by Dr. A. Wuensche {Bihliotheca Balhinica, Leipzig, 


(Av. (Ellis) 24 cf. Benf, § 62).* I have, however, 
come across another, which affords an extremely 
cuiious variant of the Gellert formula, which 
has hitherto escaped notice, though it happens 
to be the earliest in existence. It runs as fol- 
lows (Pesilda, ed. Buber, p. 79 6) : — 

" 212ai;en a man's! iuaps please tT;e JLom, 
J^e mal\ct^ cUm 'i)is cxiemie& to be at peace tottlj 
T)tin" (Prov. xvi. 7). 

R. Meir said : That refers to that doj,'. Once the 
shepherds had milked their flock. While they were 
away, a serpent came aud licked some. The dog 
observed this, and when the shepherds returned to 
drink the milk, the hound began to bark at them, as 
who should say, ' Diink it not ! ' But they did not 
understand him. Then he himself licked some of the 
milk and died straightway. They buried him and 
erected to him a cairn, and it is called to this day 
" The Dog's Grave." 

This form occurs late in the Bidpai (cf. 
Benf., § 202), but is found in Babrius-Gitl. 255 
(Halm. 120). I would add that the idea of an 
animal (or Buddha in the guise of an animal) 
sacrificing his life for others is an essentially 

* This is only extant in two late and discordant versions 
of the tenth (Hai Gaon) and eleventh (Rashi) centuries 
(Hamburger, I. c.) 


Buddhistic one, and occurs frequently in the 
Jatakas, notably in the beautiful Jataka of the 
Banyan Deer (Fausboll, No. 1 2, tr. Rhys-Davids, 
205-10), and still more in the celebrated Susa 
Jataka (Fausboll 316, tr. Morris, F.-L. J., ii. 336), 
in which Indra, in reward of the hare's self- 
devotion, places its image on the moon, where 
it is to be seen to this day. Every Buddhist 
thinks of that type of self-sacrifice whenever 
the moon is full.* 

(3.) Talmudic fables found in India, but not 
among the classical ones. These include Bird 
and Waves (XII.), Head and Tail of Serpent 
(XVIII.), Tongue and Members (XVIII. ), Strong, 
Stronger, Strongest (XXIII. Landsb. liii.). The 
Fox and Fishes (Talm. Beracoth, 6ib, cf . the Baka 
Jataka, reprinted in my Bidpai, pp. Iviii.-lsiv., 
and Dr. Back, ap., Graetz' Monatsft., 1880, p. 
24), and The Reanimated Lion ( Vajikra rahba, § 

* I was asked by a friendly critic in the Daily News 
why Buddha should be identified with the Rabbit in the 
Uncle Remus stories, the chief of which, The Tar Bahij, I 
had traced to the Jataka of the Demon with the Matted 
Hair {Bidpai, Introd., pp. xliv.-vi.). I would account for it 
by a reference to the Su/a Jdtaka. I may add that Mr. 
Andrew Lang has since found the Tar Baby a step nearer 
India in the West Indian Islands (Longman's Mag., Feb. 
1889). See also infra, pp. 136-7, 

VOL, I. H 


2 2, cf. Pants. V. 4, Benf. § 204, Landsb. Ixiv. 
= Sanjivaka Jdtaka). 

(4.) Then come the Talmudic fables to be found 
among the Greeks, but not in India. These 
are : ' Man's years are those of Horse, Ox, and 
Hound' (Midr. Koh. i. 2, Babr. 74,* Landsb. 
Iviii.), The Shepherd and Young Wolf {Jalkut, 
§ 923, cf. Halm 374 ( = Babrius-Gitl., Lands- 
berger, p. Ixii.). To these I would add The 
Croio {Serpent) a7id Pitcher ("A serpent was 
seen pouring water in a flask full of wine, so 
as to get at the wine," Talm. Aboda sara, 30a, 
cf. Av. XX.); TJie Fir and Bramble (Av. sv, 
"Firs are only good to cut down," Shemoth 
Rdbba, gjb); perhaps The Daio in Peacock'' s 
Feathers (" Crows adorn themselves with their 
own as well as others' property," Midr. Est. 2)T,b, 
cf. Bo. II. XV.); and The Scorpion and Camel ("A 
scorpion was trodden under foot by a camel ; * I'll 
soon reach your head,' said he," Jalk. § 764 ap., 
Dukes' Blum. No. 565, cf. Av. xxiii.).t 

* If I had space it -would be interesting to trace the 
influence of this on Shakespeare's Seven Ages of Man (As 
you like it, II. vii.). Cf. Taylor, Firqe Ahoth., iii, and 
Low, Lehensalter, 22 and notes. 

+ The idea of a mouse biting an ox in the apologue of 
Avian does not seem very consistent, and looks more like a 
m isunderstanding. 


(5.) Finally, we have the Talmudic fables for 
which I have not been able to find either Indian 
or classical analogues : Chaff, Straw, and Wheat 
(Ber. Bab., § S3), who dispute for which of them 
the seed has been sown : the winnowing fan 
soon decides (cf. Matt. iii. 12) ; The Caged Bird 
{Midr. Koh., § 11), who is envied by his free 
fellow, possibly a variant of the Munilca JCdalia ; 
The Wolf and Two Hounds who had quarrelled ; 
the wolf seizes one, the other goes to his rival's 
aid fearing the same fate on the morrow {Sifre, 
i. 157): this looks like a variant of The Lion and 
Oxen {Ay. xiv.) ; The Wolf at the Well {Midr. 
rah Esther, § 3), which is covered with a net : 
"If I go down," says he, "I am caught; if I 
do not, I perish of thirst : " The Cock and Bat 
(Talm. Sanh. 986), who sit by one another 
awaiting the dawn : says the cock, " I wait 
for the daylight for that is my signal ; but 
thou ? — the light is thy ruin : " and the grim 
Beast- tale of The Fox as Singer {Midr. rah. 
Esther iii. i) which, as it is short, we may 
give :— 

The Lion once gave a feast to the beasts of forest 
and field, and spread over them the skins of lions, 
wolves, and other wild beasts. After they had eaten 


and drunk they asked : ' Who'll sing us songs ? ' and 
looked at the Fox. "Will you join,' said he, 'in 
the chorus with me ? " " Yes," they all cried. He 
said : — 

AYhat he has shown us above 

Soon he'll show ua below. 

Q We have now before us the whole extent of 

the Talmudic Beast-fables,* and it is not diflfi- 
cult to see how strongly they contrast with 
the Greek or Indian collections. Both these 
consist of about 300 fables, of which not more 
than a score or so can be traced elsewhere, 
whereas the Jewish list runs to about thirty, 
of which all but six, or perhaps only four, can 
be traced either to India or Greece, or both. 
It is the obvious inference that the Beast- 
fable in Judsea is a borrowed product, and the 
only question is from which of the two sources 

* I have confined myself strictly to these, and have 
therefore omitted The Euphrates and Tigris, The Lie and 
Destruction (but cf. Babr. 70), and The Sun, Moon, and 
Stars before God (and similar "holy" fables, to use Dr. 
Back's distinction). Hamburger gives the names of two 
fables, The Lion and Fox, and The Cat and Weasel, with 
a wrong reference (Ber. rah., § 88), which I cannot check. 
I fancy the former is but a doublet, of which there are 
many in his list, of The Fox as Singer, and the latter is 
a reference to the proverbial saying when enemies join, 
" Cat and Weasel are married " (Talm. Sank. losa). 


it has been derived.* All our evidence turns 
in favour of India, For where the Greek and 
Indian forms of the fables common to the three 
differ, the Jewish form agrees with the Indian, 
not the Grecian. We have already seen a triad 
of instances of this (TJie Belly and Members, 
Tlie Two Pots, and Tlie Ass' Heart) ; we may 
now find a fourth in the earliest Talmudic fable 
that can be dated. This turns out to be our 
old friend The Wolf {Lion) and Crane, which 
runs thus in the Great Commentary on the 
Pentateuch {Ber. Rahha, ad. loc.) : — 

[Gen. xxvi. 28. anti toe saiB : let tTierc lie ciien 
nolu an oatT) tettotrt tiiS.] 

In the daj's of R. Joshua ben Chananyaht the 
wicked ruler gave permission to rebuild the Temple. 
[But the Samaritans plotted against this and arranged 
that the condition should be that it should be rebuilt 
on a different site, Avhich would destroy its sacro- 
sanctity. The Jews on receiving the message met in 

* The smalhiess of the total number precludes the 
l)ossibility of the Jews having had access to more than 
one collection. 

f " I care not if my lot be as that of Joshua ben 
Chananyali ; after, the last destruction he earned his bread 
by making needles, but in his youth he bad been a singer 
oil the steps of the Temple, and had a memory of what 
was, before the glory departed," says Mordecai in Daniel 
Deronda, chap. xl. 


the Vale of Beth Rinion and midst tears and cries 
determined to disobey the Emperor's command. K. 
Joshua ben Chanan jah * was sent to quiet them.] He 
went to them and told them this fable : A lion had 
devoured a beast and a bone thereof stuck in his 
throat. He issued the proclamation " Whoever will 
come and take out this bone for me, shall receive his 
reward." An Egyptian partridge came by, which has 
a long beak : it put this into the lion's jaws and 
pulled out the bone. "Give me my reward," it 
thereupon said to the lion. "Go," answered he, 
"thou canst laugh and say that thou hast gone in 
and out of a lion's jaws in safety." So too we 
may rejoice, added the speaker, that we have been 
received into this nation and shall get out of it in 

Professor Graetz, in an elaborate excursus, 
(Geschichte der Juden Bnd. iv., note 14), has 
shown that the event here referred to took 
place in the year 118 A.D., which is accordingly 
the date of the earliest Talmndic fable which 
can be chronologically fixed, f As a matter of 
fact it is probably twenty or thirty years earlier, 

* He was called ' ' The man of the golden mean " (Graetz, 
Oesch. iv. p. 15). He gave utterance to the noble saying, 
" There are saints among the Gentiles, and they too have 
a place in Heaven" (Tos. Sank., c. 13, ap. Graetz, Lc. 
427). On some piquant passages between him and early 
Christians see Giidemann Religions geschl. Studien. 

t Dr. Joel fixes the occurrence under Trajan two years 
earlier. — Blicke, i. p. 17 seq. 


as we shall see, but the public use of the fable 
probably dates from 1 18 A.D., and here again we 
see the fable beginning its career in a new home 
as a political weapon. But just at present we 
may notice how this new example confirms the 
three former ones in agreeing with the Indian 
form of the fable on the point in which it differs 
from the Hellenic, viz., in making the chief 
actor a lion instead of a wolf. If R. Joshua 
had known of the Grecian form he could 
scarcely have avoided using it in a case where 
it would have been natural to identify Rome 
with a wolf in the significant hint with which 
he concluded his harangue. This clinches the 
Indian origin of the Talmudic Beast fables, 
and it only remains to ask how and by whose 
means they came from India to Judaea. I fancy 
I have been able to discover even this point by a 
careful study of the short and simple annals of 
the fable in the Talmud, which run as follows.* 

* Hamburger luckily gives liis fables in chronological 
order, though with many doublets and wrong refer- 
ences. I may mention that though the bulk of Talmudical 
and Midrashic works are anonymous, most of their con- 
tents can be dated, since the autliors of the statements 
are given in tlie majority of instances, and modern Jewish 
science has established the dates and sequence of these 
with tolerable accuracy. 


We first hear of Beast-fables in the Talmud 
in connection with R. Jochanan ben Saccai, 
who established the schools of Jabne (near 
Jaffa) after the destruction of Jerusalem (70 
A.D.), and there founded Rabbinical Judaism. 
Of him it is said (Talm. Succa, 28a, and 
parallel passages), " He did not leave out of 
the circle of his studies even the Mishle 
Shualim (Fox- fables) and the Mishle Kobsim." 
The last phrase has puzzled the commentators 
and lexicographers greatly ; the nearest they 
can get to it is "the fables of the washermen." 
For the moment we will reserve the solution 
of this mystery. We next hear of R. Meir * 
living in the middle of the second century, 
knowing 300 Fox-fables, t Then the history 
finishes with the statement of the Mishna 
(Sota, ix. 15), "With the death of R. Meir 
(c. 190 A.D.) Fabulists ceased to be." Now let 

* Two monographs have recently been written on this 
teacher : R. Levy, Un Tanah (Paris, 1883), and A. Blumen- 
thal, Rahhi Meir (Frankfort, 18S8). The latter contains a 
chapter on his fables (pp. 97-107). It was he, it will be 
observed, who told the Gellert story (supra, p. 112). 

t The exact words {Synh., 386) are " R. Meir had {pesh 
lo) 300 Fox-Fables." As we have seen, only one is extant, 
as indeed was the case in Talmudia times (See W. Bacher, 
Agada d. Tanaiten, ii. 7). 


us try and interpret these seemingly discon- 
nected jottings. 

We must first settle what Mis/ile Kobsim 
means. Now there is an uniform Greek tra- 
dition that a special class of fables called the 
Libyan were collected by a Libyan named 
Kybisas, Kybisios, or Kibysses. Diogenian 
(p. 180) says, 0/ hi VLh^iSav iviBT7]v yn'sG&ai rov tibovg 
TovTov; Theon (ed. Walz., i. p. 17), xai K{jf3iaiog 
v/t AifSur;; fivrj/JLOviViTai vtto rnuv u; /MvSo':roi6g,* and 
Hesychius says of Av^iKclXcyoi. Xa,aaiXm^ (firioi 
Ki/SvvTOv (?. Ki/Svaiov) ib^-lv 7oug Xoyoug Tourovg {ap. 
Hartung, Bahrios, p, 176). Babrius himself in 
his second prologue couples him with ^sop : — 

TTpQros de, (paffiv, elire iraLalv "EWrjvwv 
At'cwTTos 6 aocpSs, elwe Kal At/3i;<TTtfots 
Aoyovs KLpvacTT]^. 

The first, they say, (who) spoke (fables) to the sons 
of the Hellenes was ^sop the wise, and [the first who) 
spoke fables to the Libyans [was) Kibysses. 

Now the slightest rounding of a corner of a 
letter, transforming mem (D) into samech (D), 
would change the inexplicable Mislde Kobsim, 

* I owe these references to Mr. Rutherford, who, how- 
ever, thinks them all due to an eai-ly misreading of 
Al^vk6s. This is out-Cobeting Cobet. 


" fables of washermen," into Alishle Kuhsis, 
"fables of Kybises," * and with the Greek 
tradition before us there can be little doubt that 
the change is justified, and that the Talmudic 
statement gives us evidence of the collection of 
Libyan fables by Kybises as late as 80 or 
90 A.D., the period of K. Jochanan ben Saccai's 
chief activity. 

After his time we hear no more of the Mishle 
Kybises, as we may now call them, and I think 
I can also suggest a reason for this. When 
E,. Meir revived the study of fables a century 
later, he only knew of a collection of 300 Mishle 
Shu'alim (Fox-fables). t Now Crusius has ren- 
dered it probable that Babrius in the third cen- 
tury merely put into verse a collection of Greek 
fables made by Nicostratus in the first half of 
the second, and Gitlbauer's edition of Babrius 
has rendered it tolerably certain that the total 

* Something like this suggestion was made by Roth in 
Heidelherger Jahrhucher, i860, p. 55, but in an opposite 
direction, explaining Ky hisses from Kohsim! It attracted 
however no notice from either Talmudic or classical scholars. 
Indeed its significance could not be seen till the dependence 
of the Talmudic fables on India had been established. 

f They are only once more mentioned as being known to 
R. Simon bar Kappara [Eoh. rah. i. 3), a pupil of R. 


number of Babrian versions, and therefore of 
Nicostratus' collection, was almost exactly 300. 
We can guess, too, from Babrius' statement 
given above that Nicostratus merely put to- 
gether the collections of Demetrius and of 
Kybises, so that all Jewish students of Greek 
letters * would find would be Nicostratus' com- 
plete collection of 300 fables. And looking 
back at the statement which begins the Tal- 
mudic history of the fable, we can interpret 
more exactly the Mislde Shu'alim which R, 
Jochanan ben Saccai studied as well as the 
Mislile Kyhises. This was in all probability 
Demetrius' collection, so that "Fox Fables" is 
the Hebrew equivalent for our ^sop's Fables.! 
But though R. Jochanan may have known of 
the "^sopic " collection, all our evidence goes to 
show that he used the other of Kybises exclu- 
sively, either because its Oriental tone attracted 

* There were many such, though the practice was con- 
demned {cf. M. Joel, Blicke i.). Of Elisha ben Abujah, the 
Faust of the Talmud, and R. Meir's teacher, it is even said 
that the words of Homer were never absent from his lips. 

+ The title recalls Aristophanes' coinage, dXcxJireKi^eiv 
("to foxify," Vesp. 1240), which, as Mr. Rutherford re- 
marks (p. XXXV.), calls up a whole series of adventures in 
apologue. Cf. tlie French proverb, Arcc un renard, on 
renarde. Mishle Shu'alim was the title given by Ber- 
achyah Hanakdan to his collection of fables (infra, p. 168). 


him, or, as is more likely, because it was the 
shorter and better suited for translation. For 
Phsedrus' collection, and that of Demetrius, on 
which he founds, runs to over two hundred, and 
Nicostratus', which includes these and that of 
Kybises, only makes three hundred, leaving 
under a hundred for the "Libyan" collection. 
Now it is a remarkable coincidence that of the 
six classic fables found in the Talmud without 
Indian parallels (class 4 above) five are Babriau 
and not Phsedrine, or, in other words, from the 
Addenda of ISTicostratus, i.e., from Kybises. 
And the sixth, if it be a reference to the Jay in 
PeacocThS feathers, is in a form which, as we shall 
see (p. 165), indicates a different origin than 
Phsedrus. This clinches the matter and enables 
us to identify nearly thirty fables (classes i to 
4 above) as the " Libyan fables " of Kybises. 

A careful comparison between Phaedrus as 
we can restore him from his derivates and 
Babrius in Gitlbauer's edition would enable us 
to restore with some probability the contents 
of the lost Fables of Kybises.* I cannot afford 
space for such a comparison, but I would 
remark that Stainhowel has already done part 
* But see the reservation on p. 151. 


of the work in his ^sop, and therefore in 
Caxton's, which we have before us. For after 
he had given the Romulus, which contains the 
nucleus of Phsedrus-Demetrius, he selected from 
Remicius and Avian, which we have seen to be 
derived from Babrius, the fables which did not 
exist in the Phsedrus. In other words, these 
two books of the Caxton represent the Libyan 
fables of Kybises just as the first four 'represent 
the ^sopian jests of the ancients. 

I suspect that Avian has effected the same 
distinctions for us in his collection. In his pre- 
face he speaks of having before him both 
Phaedrus and Babrius ; yet as a matter of fact 
he seems to have conscientiously avoided repeat- 
ins: in Latin verse the fables that Phsedrus had 
already given in Latin verse.* It is probable 
therefore that unconsciously to himself he was 
really giving for the most part a selection from 
the Libyan Fables of Kybises. It is at any 
rate remarkable what a large proportion of his 

* The only exceptions are Av. 34 = Ph. iv. 24, and Av. 
37= Ph. iii. 7, in both cases with variations in the dramatis 
personcE. In this paragraph I refer to the coraplete Avian 
as edited by Mr. Ellis, by Arabic numerals, adding Ptoman 
numerals in brackets when they also occur in Stainhiiwel's 
selection, and therefore in our Caxton. 


fables have an Oriental tone. We have already- 
seen this in the case of Av. 2 (ii.), 5 (iv.), 8 
(vii.), 16 (Ro. IV. XX. but not from Phsedrus), 
33 (xxiv.), 36, 40 ( = IV., II., XVI, XXII., 
XVIL, VIII., X., XIII.), while 18 (xiv.), 19 
(XV.), 24, 27 (xx.), 31 (xxiii.) occur as Talnmdic 
parallels in classes 2, 4, and 5. Besides this, 
The Sivallow and Birds (21, cf. Ro. I. xx.) and 
Tlie Avaricious and the Envious (22, xvii.) occur 
in Cainozoic strata of the Bidpai (Benf. §§21, 
112), the latter indeed, as we have seen, occur- 
ring in Capt. Temple's Wideaioake Stories as a 
current Indian folk- tale ; it does not occur in 
Babrius or Halm. I may add that The Boy 
and Thief (25, xviii. ), is exactly of the type of 
Noodle stories found ad nauseam in Indian 
story-books (cf. Benf. § 146 and Mr. Olouston's 
Booh of Noodles), while The Sow and Lord (30) 
has again the joke about want of heart (sense) 
which we have met with before in The Ass' 
Heart (XX.).* Besides these we have two fables 
about apes (14, xi. ; 35, xxv.) and one of a 
tiger (17, xiii.), which are Indian, not Greek 
animals. There are also slight indications in 

* But see Mr, Ellis' note on 1. 14, showing that the 
Romans used cor in the same way. 


the texts of Avian's originals which point to a 
"Libyan" or Indian original. In 2 (ii.) the 
Tortoise in the Babrius offers treasures of the 
Erythraean Sea for his aerial voyage. The 
Babrian original of The Crow and Peacock (15, 
xii.) begins A'ljSvaaa ys^avog, and ^lian, in speak- 
ing of The Crow and Pitcher (27, xx.), which 
does not occur in Babrius or Halm, relates the 
anecdote of a Libyan crow. All this seems to 
indicate the Libyan (i.e., Indian) origin of Avian, 
and enables us to identify at least those mentioned 
above as Libyan, and not -^llsopic, Fables.* 

In making such a marked distinction between 
^sopic and Libyan fable, I am but reverting 
to one which the ancients themselves em- 
phasised throughout their treatment of the 
fable, t .^schylus prefaces his fable of The 
Eagle J with the words — 

(LS' earl, /llvOwv tQv AiPvcttikQiv kKsos. 

* See the complete list drawn out on p. 153. 
t There is a third class termed Sybaritic, Milesian, and 
Cyprian, but these refer not to Beast-fables but to broad 
jests of the kind that have been always associated with 
the fable. See infra, p. 203. 
+ Represented in English literature by Byron's lines : — 
" So the struck eagle, stretch'd upon the plain. 
No more through rolling clouds to soar again, 
View'd his own feather on the fatal dart, 
And wing'd the shaft that quiver'd in his heart." 


When Aristotle is discussing the use of the 
Fable in oratory {Rhetoric, ii. 20) he speaks 
of fables "whether of the ^sopic or Libyan 
kind." Babrius, as we have seen, speaks in 
one breath of iEsop for the Greeks, and 
Kibysses for the Libyans. The rhetoricians 
kept up this tradition to a very late date. And 
even Julian the Apostate, in his interesting 
Seventh Oration, devoted to the fable, retains 
the distinction. There was thus throughout 
Greek literature a conscious recognition that a 
certain number of fables were foreign importa- 
tions, and these were labelled vaguely as " Lib- 
yan," a word that covered all dusky-skinned 
races. We are now in a position to interpret 
it as " Indian via Egypt." * 

We can go even a step further, I think, and 
distinguish between two different streams of 
" Libyan " (Indian) influence reaching Hellas. 
If we examine the list of ancient Greek fables 
given pp. 26-28, we are now able to identify 
as " Libyan " The Ass' Heart, by Solon, The 
Countryman and SnaJce of Theognis, The Eagle 

* There is an exact analogy for this kind of nomenclature 
in our own name for the figures we use. "We call them 
"Arabic numerals ; " the Arabs themselves spoke of them 
as " Indian signs." 


hoist with his own Petard of ^schylus, The Trans- 
formed Weasel of Strattis, and The Dog and 
Shadoio of Theognis. Now of these only the last 
is traceable to a Buddhistic Jataka, and the dif- 
ference here is great enough to suggest that it is 
from an Indian Beast-fable existing prior to 
Buddha, and adopted by him or his followers. 
There only remains The Ass in Lion's Skin, sup- 
posed to be referred to by Socrates when he says 
{Crati/l. 41 ia), "I must not quake now I have 
donned the lion's skin," which may, as Wagener 
suggests, only refer to the stage representations 
of Bacchus or Hercules. Socrates would scarcely 
write himself down an ass, and if the fable were 
referred to, the whole point of it, the betrayal 
by the bray, is omitted. With this exception 
then, if it be an exception, the earliest " Lib- 
yan " fables are non-Buddhistic. But later on 
there is much evidence showing that an infu- 
sion of Jatakas came to the Western world. 
In Avian (and therefore, if I am right, in the 
"Libyan" portion of Babrius) we have The 
Ass in Lion's Skin, Tlie Tortoise and Birds, 
The Goose with Golden Eggs, and The Proud 
Jackal (40) ; in Babrius The Asses and Pig (cf. 
Av. 36); and in the Talmud The Lion and 

VOL. I. I 


Crane, The Bird and Waves, Fox and Fishes, 
and Gellert, the Buddhistic character of which 
I have shown. All these, on our hypothesis, 
come from the Libyan fables of Kybises, and 
it becomes therefore probable that that col- 
lection was mainly or largely identical with the 

There is another curious piece of evidence 
which seems to show that the Jataka stories 
reached the Hellenic world. Among the Bud- • 
dhist Birth-Tales is one (tr, Rhys-Davids, pp, 
siv.-vi.) in which a Yahshini, or female demon, 
seizes a child left by its mother for a moment 
and claims it as her own. The two claimants 
are brought before the future Buddha, who 
draws a line on the gi'ound, orders the women 
to stand on each side of it and hold the child 
between them, one by the legs the other by 
the arms. Whichever of the two, he decides, 
shall drag the child over the line shall possess 
it. They begin hauling, but the infant cries, 
and the mother lets her child go rather than 
hurt it. Then the future Buddha knows who 
is the true mother, gives her the child, and 
makes the Yahshini confess her true nature, 
and that she had wanted the child to eat it 


up. In short, we have the Judgment of Solo- 
mon attributed to Buddha. It is not impos- 
sible that the two may be connected. If the 
incident really occurred in Israel, as is possible, 
for it bears the stamp of Oriental * justice, 
it would be just the kind of story to be carried 
out to Ophir, which we now know to be Abhira 
at the mouth of the Indus, whence came the 
peacocks, monkeys, and almug trees — all with 
Indian names — to bedeck the court of Solo- 
mon (i Kings X. 22). 

M. Gaidoz, however, in an interesting set of 
papers in the variants of Solomon's Judgment 
(Melusine, 1889), traces the Hebraic from the 
Indian form, basing his conclusion on the late 
date at which the Book of Kings was redacted, 
and I am inclined to agree with him, for the 
additional reason that I think it highly probable 
that another section of the Bible connected with 
Solomon's name is derived from an Indian 

* A recent instance occurred in Persia during the absence 
of the Shah. A farmer complained that a soldier had eaten 
his melons without payment. "Which soldier?" asked 
the Shah's sou, who was dispensing justice. The man was 
pointed out and denied it. " Rip him up," said the Per- 
sian prince, "and if it is found that he has been eatin;^ 
melons, you shall be paid, if not, woe betide you." Sure 
enough the soldier had been eatinsr melons. 


source. The following parallels will at least 
serve to render this probable : — 


4. Wlio has gone up to heaven 

and come down ? 
Who has gathered the wind 

in his fists ? 
Who has bound up the 

waters in a garment ? 
Who has established all the 

ends of the earth ? 
What is his name, and 

what his son's, if thou 


15. The horseleech has three 

daughters, t they say 

alway, " Give, give." 
There are three things 

never sated. 
Yea, four that never say 

" Enough :" 
She61 is never sated with 

Nor the womb's gate with 

Earth never sated with 

And fire says never 


Rig Veda and Bidpai. 
Who knows or who here can 

Whence has sprung — whence 

this creation— 
From what this creation arose, 
Wliether any made it or not? 
He who in the liighest heaven 

is its ruler, 
He verily knows, or even he 

knows not. 
{Rig Veda,yi.. i29(Muir,SamA;. 
Texts, V. 356.)* 

Fire is never sated with fuel, 
Nor the streams with the ocean, 
Nor the god of death with all 

Nor the bright-eyed one witii 

Pants.,1. str. 153 (also i/a/iafeft. 
iv. 2227).! 

* I owe the reference to Prof. Cheyne, Job, 152. 

t From Bickell's reconstruction of the test. 

X Prof. Graetz (Gesch. i. 348) notices the closeness of the 
parallel which, he agrees, argues borrowing from one side 
or the other. He decides for Jewish pi'iority owing to the 
late date of the Hitopadesa, being unaware of the other paral- 
lels, and that it occurs in the Bidpai and the Mahabharata. 


18. There be three things too 

wonderful for me, 
Yea, four which I know 

19. The way of an eagle in the 

air. . . . 
The way of a ship through 
the sea. 

21. Under three things earth 

And four it cannot bear : 

22. Under a servant when 

And a fool filled with meat, 

23. Under an odious woman 

And a handmaid heir to 
her mistress. 

The path of ships across the 

The soaring eagle's flight 

Varuna knows. 
Rig Veda, cf. Muir's Metr 
Trans. 160.* 

A bad woman wedded, 
A friend that's false, 
A servant become pert, 
A house full of serpents. 
Make life un supportable. 
UUopadesa, ii. 7 (cf. Pants., I. 
str. 472). 

It is, to say the least, remarkable that all the 
Indian parallels that have been found to the 
Old Testament, so far as I am aware, should 
occur in this one chapter. The second parallel 
again is so close that, as Prof. Graetz admits, 
there must have been borrowing on one side or 
the other. The arrangement in fours, which is 
distinctive of this chapter, is, I may add, a 
common Indian literary artifice ; I have counted 
no less than thirty instances among the strophes 
of the First Book of the Pantsc.hatantra.f 

• Quoted as a'coincidence by Prof. Cheyne, 1. c. 
t Str. 3, 46, 72, 114, 115, 140, 141, 144, 153, 171, 172, 
180, 18S, 192, 253, 269, 301, 310, 312, 322, 335, 337, 385, 


Considering that the chapter is, according to 
all critics, of very late origin, and the text 
itself attributes a foreign origin to it,* and 
that there is plenty of other evidence for 
foreign elements in the Old Testament,! 
it becomes highly probable that the Proverbs 
of Agur were derived from India via Arabia, 
and that we must allow for an earlier J as well 
as later " Libj-an " influence on Hebrews, as 
we have seen reason to allow it for Greeks. And 
all this confirms the possibility that Solomon's 
Judgment is an adaptation of an Indian folk- 
tale to the Jewish monarch. 

But be all this as it may, we have icouo- 

386, 420, 425, 442, 467. Besides there are many triads 
(str. 51, 84, 113, 174, 234, 257, 263, 280, 292, 364, 449), in 
some cases beginning like " There are three that win earth's 
golden crown : the hero, the sage, and the courtier " (str. 
51) ; "There are three things for which men wage war: 
land, friends, gold" (str. 257). 

* " The words of Agur, the son of Jakeh of Massa," i.e., 
an Arabian [cf. R.V. margin). 

f There are Sanskrit words in Kings, Greek words in 
Daniel, Arabisms in Job, the scapegoat (Azazel) is a Persian 
importation, and Mr. Tyler has sought to prove with 
some plausibility traces of Epicureanism and Stoicism in 

+ The Two Pots occur in Ecclus. xiii. 20 ; the reference 
to the Persian King in The Tovgue and Members [supra, 
p. 85) seems to imj^ly that it did not come from the Mishle 


graphic evidence of an interesting kind, that 
the Judgment became known to the Greeks and 
Romans. By a remarkable coincidence, two 
ancient representations of the Judgment were 
found within two years. One brought to light 
by M. Longperier in 1880 was engraved on an 
agate that could be traced back to Bagdad via 
Bucharest ; its age cannot, however, be decided 
with any great accuracy. But the other was 
found at Pompeii, and cannot, therefoi*e, be 
later than 79 a.d. M. H. Gaidoz, who has 
figured the two in Melusine for 1889, comes to 
the conclusion that the Ptoman version is not 
derived from a Jewish or Christian source.* 
If so, it must have come from the Jatakas, and 
as we have seen other Jatakas which came to 
the Hellenic world in all probability in the 
collection of Kybises, this, too, may have been 
among them. I have found a slight piece of 
evidence from Rabbinic sources, which confirms 
this conclusion. The great difference between 
the Jewish and the Indian form of the story 

* He leaves out of account, however, the fact that both 
representations have the bisection test as in the Jewish, and 
not the haulinp:, as in the Indian form. It is possible, how- 
ever, that the latter is a tender Buddhistic softening of the 
original Indian folk-tale preserved in the Jewish legend. 


is that in the latter the non-mother is a Rishi 
or demon. In commenting on the storj, E,ab, 
a teacher of the third century, declares that the 
mother's opponent was a demon (c/. Jellinek, 
Beth Hamidrash vi. p. xxxi.). Have we here 
another trace of the Mishle Kuhsis ? If so, 
it would be a further point towards the Bud- 
dhistic tone of Ivybises' " Lybian Fables." 

After all, it should not surprise us to find 
evidence of Buddhistic influence percolating 
into the Greco- Rom an world. A movement 
which disturbs to its depths a whole ocean of 
human feeling will naturally radiate its influ- 
ence, if only in ripples, to all parts in con- 
tinuity with it. Perhaps the most remarkable 
instance of the insidious spread of Buddhistic 
tales is that I have already called attention to 
among the Negroes of the Southern States.* In 
Uncle Reimis I pointed out the identification of 
the central story of the collection. The Tar- 
Bahy with the Jataka of the Demon with the 
Matted Hair, and the situation is so remark- 
able and the resemblance so striking that the 
identification seems to have been generally 
accepted. Yet this would seem to identify 

* Introd. to Bidpai, pp. xliv.-vi., cf. supra, p. 113 n. 


Brer Eabbit, the hero of the collection, with 
Buddha himself. I have found a remarkable 
corroboration of this incarnation in Mr. Harris' 
sequel, Nights icith Uncle Remus, which appeared 
this year. Not to speak of several close paral- 
lelisms with Indian * Tales, there is one whole 
chapter (xxx.) devoted to Brer Babbit and his 
famous Foot, its mystical and magical virtues 
as a fetish. I need scarcely remind the reader 
of the enormous development of the worship 
of Buddha's Foot in later Buddhism, and 
there can be little doubt that the South 
Carolina negroes still retain a " svirvival " of 
this, t And if Buddhistic influences have thus 
spread from India through Africa to America, 
we can more easily understand the shorter and 
quicker transit from India to Egypt or Home. 

There are certain indications apart from our 
Lybian Fables which speak for a spread of 
Buddhistic thought in the Greek- speaking 

* Some of these are allied to our FabuIcE Extravagantes, 
See Parallels Ex. V. iii. iv. xvi. We can trace the first of 
these in Africa (Bleek, Reineke Fucks in Africa, p. 23). 

t But compare Black, Folk-Medicine, 154, for something 
similar in Northamptonshire. Mr. Clodd has a biblio- 
graphical note on "The Hare in African Folk-Lore" iu 
F.L.J, vii. 23. 


world. There is much in Pythagoreanism in 
the later stages leading on to !Neo-Pythagorean- 
ism which has affinity with the Buddhistic 
system (of. Zeller, Phil d. Griech. iii. h. 67). 
There is much too in the mysterious sect of the 
Essenes, their monastic organisation, celibacy, 
vegetarianism, and abstinence from wine, 
which smacks of Buddhistic influence.* Again, 
the degradation in the status of women due to 
early Christianity, to which Dr. Donaldson has 
recently called attention [Contemp. Rev. Sept. 
1889), is neither Jewish nor properly Christian, 
i.e., personal to Christ, but is distinctively and 
characteristically Buddhistic. All these chime 
in with our Fables in making for some incur- 
sion of Buddhistic ideas in the Greek-speaking 
world about the beginning of the Christian 

This makes it of some theological importance 
to determine the date of the introduction of 
the Fables of Kybises. For this purpose it 
will be necessary to examine somewhat closely 

* This is, however, denied by Bishop Lightfoot [Colos- 
sians, 395) as part of a general apologetic argument against 
writers like Hilgeufeld, who go too far in attempting to 
prove derivation from Buddhism instead of mere influence 
by it. 


the Oriental portions of Phsedrus on similar 
lines to those we adopted in dealing with Avian. 
We may as well deal with all Phsedrus that is 
extant (82 of the Vulgate, 30 of the Appendix, 
and 54 additional in the Romulus, Eufus, and 
Ademar, 166 in all), so as to complete a pi-o- 
visional determination of the Indian elements 
in Latin Fable.* We have seen above reason 
to include in these Ph. I. i. (V.), iii. (XI.), iv. 
(III.), viii. (I.), xiii. (VII.), XX. (XII). III. xviii. 
(XL ), xix. (XV)., IV. xxiii. (XXIIL), V. iii. (VI.), 
iv. (X.), and in the mediseval prose versions 
Ro. L xiv. (IV.), xxiii. (XIX), 11. X. (XXL), 
and The Fox, Cat and Dog,] (XIV), Rtif. 
V. ix. (XXIIL). Besides this their presence 
in the Talmud vouches for the Oriental origin 
of Ph. 11. ii., Ro. I. iii, III. xiv.J Then there 
are a number in which occur Indian animals — 

* The reader will do well here also to compare the 
Table 011 p. 153. 

t In the Romulus used by Stainhowel this was IV. iS, 
as we know fiuni his table of contents. He transferred it 
to the end of the book after his selection from Poggio ; 
hence with us it is Tog. vii. 

X It is just possible that these may be a survival of the 
Mishle Shu'a/im, which we saw reason to identify with 
jEsop's Fables pure and simple, that is, Demetrius' collec- 
tion, the original of Phsedrus. Cf. supra, p. 123. 


ape (Ph. I. X., III. iv., App. i., Ro. IV. viii., 
Adem. 8),* peacock (Ph. I. iii , III. xviii. ), 
crocodile (Ph. I. xxv.), and panther (Ph. III. 
ii). We may add to these four others which 
occur in later Oriental sources, and at the same 
time do not occur in the mediaeval collection of 
Marie de France, f These are TJie Fox and 
Stork (Ph. I. xxvi., Ro. II. xiii.), Fox and 
Grapes (Ph. lY. iii., Ro. IV. i.), Bat, Birds, 
and Beasts (Ro. III. iv.), and Fox and, Wolf 
Ro. III. vi.). Finally we may add a group of 
tales which are not Beast-Fables at all, but 
which are found in the East ; their presence 
among the Phaedrine Fables can scarcely indeed 
be explained, except on the theory that they 
were in the Oriental book whence his Indian 
Fables were taken. These are TJie Man and 
Two Wices (Ph. II. ii., Re. xvi.), AndrocUts (Ro. 
III. i.). The Ephesian Widoio (Eo. III. ix.), and 
Mercury and the Two Women (App. 3). The 
last is a variant of The Three Wishes, on which 

* At tlie same time it is worth remembering that one of 
the earliest Greek fables, that of Archilochus, has au Ape 
for a hero {supra, p. 26). 

t The reader will learn the reason for this restriction 
later. It (lid not apply to Avian, owing to the general 
probability of the majority of his collection being Oriental. 


Mr. Andrew Lang has a learned and chatty 
but somewhat inconclusive monograph in his 
Perrault, xlii.-li. The Phsedrine form, though 
the earliest, is not mentioned by Mr. Lang, 
and we may therefore give it in outline. Two 
women entertain Mercury unawares and rather 
shabbily, one a young mother with a baby in 
the cradle, the other a lady of the same profession 
as ^sop's fellow-slave, Rhodopis. On leaving 
the deity manifests himself, and grants them 
each a wish. The mother wishes that she may 
see her first-born when he has a beard, the 
other that whatever she touches may follow 
her. Soon the mother finds her cradled babe 
embellished with a beard, while her friend in 
raising her hand to wipe away the tears her 
laughter had produced, finds her nose following 
her hand, and on this effective situation the 
scene closes. We shall see later on a further 
stage of this story. 

Let us now compare this analysis of the 
Oriental elements of Phsedrus with our former 
one of Avian. In the first place the number 
of these elements, though seemingly greater, is 
proportionably less. We found reason for 
tracing to the East some 20 of Avian's 42 


fables, whereas the i66 extant fables of 
Phaedrus, almost exactly four times as many, 
yield us only 36 parallels, some fifth against 
Avian's half. Then again, the proportion of 
the parallels which we have included on general 
and therefore very precarious grounds, is very 
large, 1 2 out of the 36. The parallehsms too are 
not so close as in the case of Avian {e.g., Tlie 
Ass in Lion's Skin, Oalc and Reed, Camel 
asking for Horns). Even where the action is 
similar, the dramatis personx vary ; the ele- 
phant becomes a lion (XIX.), the Hon a wolf 
(I.), dogs take the place of crows (XII.), the 
mouse-maiden becomes a vixen (XXIII.), The 
analogies with the Talmud which, we saw reason 
to think, preserves the Kybissean Fables with 
greatest accuracy, are few and far between. 
Altogether the Phasdrine analogies strike one 
as fainter echoes of the Lybian fables than the 
Talmudic or Avianian forms, for which we 
have a certain amount of warrant that they 
came from the collection associated with the 
name of Kybises. To sum up, so far as we 
can draw conclusions from such uncertain mate- 
rials, it seems tolerably certain that Phsedrus 
was unacquainted with the Kybissean fables. 


and that his Oriental elements represent the 
earher stratum of Lybian fables current among 
the Greeks. Indeed, we know this to be the 
case with The Countryman and Snake, The Dog 
and Shadow, and The Vixen-Maiden (see p. 28). 
Altogether, our former conclusion that Phasdrus 
merely translated Demetrius, receives further 
confirmation from, our examination of his Ori- 
ental elements.* If we are to seek for a definite 
source for Phsedrus' Oriental elements, the only 
liint I can find is in his lines (III. Prol. 52) — 

.si Phryx iEsopiis potuit, si Anacharsis Scytha 
re.ternam famam condere ingenio suo 

where Anacharsis " the Scythian," almost as 
vague a term as Lybian, is coupled with ^sop, 
just as Babrius, 2co years later, couples Kybises 
with him. But I can find no other record of a 
tradition connecting Anacharsis with the his- 

* The reader will have observed that throughout this in- 
vestigation I am assuming that neither Phsedrus, Babrius, 
nor Avian made any original contribution to the Fable. I 
think this is justified, (i) because they were chiefly occu- 
pied with translating and versifying, (2) we can trace every 
one of the 241 fables of Lafontaine, who had more original 
genius than all three together, (3) what they did add was 
by way of anecdote, not of fable {e.g., Ph. I. xiv., II. v., 
III. xi. ; A;^>j). viii. ; Avian, 10). Cf. Riese, p. iv.**. 


tory of the fable, and for the present we may 
content ourselves with the negative statement 
that Phaedrus' Oriental fables were not derived 
from the collection associated with the name of 

What follows ? This at least that we are able 
to fix the introduction of the Fables of Kybises 
within a very few years. Phsedrus was writ- 
ing after the fall of Sejanus (a.d. 31), and 
R. Jochanan b. Saccai was studying the Fables 
of Kybises about 80 a.d. They must therefore 
have been introduced in the intervening half 
century. If so, we can give a pretty shrewd 
guess as to the conduit-pipe by which they 
reached the western world.* About the year 
50 A.D. a freedman of Annius Plocanus, sailing 
in the Er}i.hraean Sea, was caught by the 
monsoon, and carried out to Hipporus, a port 
of Ceylon, one of the many claimants for 
identification with Solomon's Ophir. Here he 
was taken captive, but was kindly treated, and 
learnt the language. His accounts of the great- 

* Mr. O. Priaulx collected all that is known, or can 
be conjectured, about the direct communications between 
India and Rome, from Augustus to Justinian, in his 
Indian Travels of ApoUoniuSfdic. (liOud. 1873). I take my 
facts from him, pp. 91-8. 


ness of Home impressed the King, Chandra Muka 
Siwa (152 A.D.), so much, that he determined to 
send an embassy thither. Accordingly he sent 
one Rachias, probably a Prince Royal [Ragart), 
and three other nobles, who, accompanied by 
Plocanus' fi'eedman, reached Ptome in safety, 
and interviewed the Emperor Claudius (t 54 
A.D.) It was from them that Pliny obtained his 
account of Taprobane (Ceylon), and there can 
be little doubt that it was from one of them, 
or their retinue, that the Fables of Kybises 
were procured. We could not desire a more 
appropriate origin than Ceylon for a collection 
of tales related to the Jatakas, which have 
themselves come from Ceylon in these later days. 
I say, "related to the Jatakas," for it now 
seems time to point out that the Fables of 
Kybises, or the forty or so of them that we can 
identify in the Talmud and Avian, could not 
have been any edition of the Jatakas. For 
only about a dozen of those forty can be iden- 
tified with Jatakas (or, at least, with those 
accessible in translations). Besides this, it is 
diflSicult to see how any form of the Jatakas 
could become connected with a name like that 
of Kybises. What we want is a collection of 

VOL. 1. K 


fables connected with some such name, and 
containing others besides those contained in 
the Jatakas. I may add that a similar collec- 
tion is also required to explain the existence 
of Jataka elements in the Bidpai. A careful 
scrutiny of the Jatakas has, I think, put me 
on the track of what we want. "Quand on 
cite," says M. Leon Feer, one of the greatest 
authorities on the Jatakas, "quand le Jataka 
pali cite un Buddha, c'est ordinairement Kag- 
yapa, le pred^cesseur de Qakyamuni" (Journ. 
Asiat., 8*^ s^rie, t. iv. p. 308). Kasyapa was the 
twenty-seventh of the twenty- seven Buddhas 
that had preceded Sakyamuni, was therefore the 
latest and the one most likely to have some his- 
torical reahty. Of him it is said {Niddndkathd, 
str. 246, tr. Rhys-Davids, p. 51), " The birthplace 
of the Blessed One was called Benares, Brah- 
madatta the Brahman was his father, . . , and 
the Nigrodha-tree his Bo-tree. His body was 
twenty cubits high, and his age was twenty/ 
thousand years." Now it is a remarkable cir- 
cumstance that all the Jatakas I have seen, 
which have analogy with classical or Talmudic 
fables, are ushered in as regards the " Story of 
the Past " by the words, *' Once on a time 


when Brahmadatta was reigning in Benares." 
Of the fifty- six Jatakas contained in Mr. Rhys- 
Davids' book, and in the Jo^lr. Ceijl. Asiat. Soc, 
viii., no less than thirty-seven thus begin, twentj^- 
four of which are beast-fables.* It looks very 
much like as if these (with possibly others) 
existed in a separate collection under some such 
title as Itiahdsa Kdsyajm, " thus spake Kas- 
yapa," and that the Buddhist compiler had 
calmly appropriated them on the plea that the 
said sage was merely one of the previous incar- 
nations of the Buddha, t Now, from the way 
in which Babrius speaks of Kybises, it is clear 
that he was regarded as the father of the 
Lybian fable, just as .^sop was of the purely 
Greek fable. It does not seem too hazardous 
to identify the Lybian sage Kybises of the 
Greeks with the Indian sage Kasyapa, from 
whom the Buddhists took the majority of their 
fables, on the plea that he was a pre-incarna- 

* There are a couple of examples, supra I. and X. The 
painstaking I\I. Feer, I observe, has counted 372 instances 
out of the 547 .Tatakas where Benares is the locality of the 
Story of the Past (J A. 1873, p. 547). 

t It is as if the later Pythagoreans had assumed that 
the soul of ^sop had transmigrated into that of Pytha- 
goras, and incorporated our fables in the Pythagorean 
scriptures, if there had been any. 


tion of Buddha. If I were a German privat 
docent I might perhaps go a step further and, 
remarking that K is sometimes dropped in 
Aryan roots * especially when they are loan- 
words,+ I might suggest that Kasyapa and 
the un-Greek Ahuroc are not unrelated. But 
just at present we have perhaps balanced enough 
of theory on the comer of a letter in the Talmud, 
and I will therefore make the suggestion a pre- 
sent to any young German scholar who desires 
to be "extraordinary." 

All this evidence renders it worth while 
considering a suggestion which I already made 

O in the Introduction to Bidjmi (p. xlviii.) on ct 
priori grounds. The fable is a species of the 

Xk Allegory f and it seems absurd to give your 
Allegory, and then give in addition the truth 
which you wish to convey. Either your fable 
makes its point or it does not 1 If it does, you 
need not repeat your point : if it does not, 
you need not give your fable. To add your 
point is practically to confess the fear that your 

* The Latin amor is from V KAM, our it from V KI. 

t Our ape (Germ. Affe) is from the Sanskt. Kapi, the 
woi-d from which the Heb. Koph is also derived ( i Kings 
X. 22). 

X The morals of fables are called ' A\}\.7]-/6piai in llomaic. 


fable has not put it with sufficient force.* 
Yet this is practically what the Moral does, 
which has now become part and parcel of a Fable. 
It was not always so, it does not occur in the 
ancient classical fables. That it is not an organic 
part of the fable is shown by the curious fact that 
go many morals miss the point of the fables, f 
How then did this artificial product come to be 
regarded as an essential part of the fable? 
Now, we have seen in the Jatakas, what an 
important role is played by the gdthas or moral 
verses which sum up the whole teaching of the 
Jatakas. In most cases I have been able to 
give the pith of the Birth-stories by merely 
giving the gatlias, which are besides the only 
relics which are now left to us of the original 
form of the Jatakas. Is it too bold to suggest 
that any set of fables taken from the Jatakas or 
their source would adopt the (jdtha feature, and 

* This is the weakness of George Eliot's art, especially in 
her later manner. 

t I am afraid I must report that Mr. Walter Crane has 
very bad morals, at least in his Baby's Own JSsop. " Small 
causes may produce great results " is his comment on The 
Lionandthe Mouse; "Our friend, our enemy," his enig- 
matic explanation of The Two Pots ; " Watch on all sides," 
his summary of The Blind Doe, rather cruel advice to a 
one-eyed animal. 


that the Moral would naturally arise in this way ? 
We find the Moral fully developed in Babrius * 
and Avian, whom we have seen strong reason 
for connecting with Kybises' Libj'an fables. 
We may conclude the series of conjectures on 
which we have been engaged for the past few 
pages, by suggesting that the Morals of fables 
are an imitation of the gdtlias of Jatakas as they 
passed into the Libyan collection of Kybises. 

Meanwhile let us estimate how far our discove- 
ries, if discoveries they are, will aid us in the 
specific task on which we are engaged in this sec- 
tion, to determine which of the Oriental LXX. 
of our collection {supra, p. 44) can be traced 
back to India. Theoretically, on the lines laid 
down above, every additional fable in Babrius 
or his derivates that cannot be traced to Phse- 
drus should come from the " Libyan " collec- 
tion of Kybises. But we do not know the full 
contents of Phsedrus, though we can calculate 
its extent tolerably accurately at 200 mem- 

* I am aware that Mr, Rutherford rejects all the morals 
of Babrius ou account of their ineptitude. It is the chief 
weakness of the school of Cobet to obelise passages on 
subjective grounds. It is obviously more difficult to point 
a moral than adorn a tale, and we ought to expect a falling 
off in the moral. 


bers.* Of these we are ignorant of the sub- 
jects of some fifty numbers, and we cannot 
tell of any Babrian fable that it was not among 
these. Besides which we cannot be certain 
that the collection of Kybises was not inter- 
polated at Alexandria as we know that of 
Demetrius to have been. Altogether we can 
only be absolutely certain of the Indian origin of 
any of the exclusively Babrian fables when we 
can give chapter and verse for its actual exist- 
ence in India, and as a rule I should require 
chapter and verse of a date anterior to the 
Christian era. I think, however, we may 
waive this requirement in the case of fables 
which can only be found late in India, but 
are found in the Talmud (our second class 
sujjra, p. Ill), or even those that are found 
only in the Talmud (class 4). Besides these, 
however, there are a certain number of fables 
that through glaring inconsistencies, or their 
familiar reference to Indian animals, argue an 

* This calculation is M. Gaston Paris' (Journ. des Savants). 
We can trace 57 of the prose versions among 127 of the 
extant metrical ones ; therefore the remaining 39 which 
cannot be so traced will allow for some 87 additional 
metrical fables no longer extant, the subjects of 48 of which 
are therefore no longer to be ascertained. 


Indian origin when taken in conjunction with 
the rest. Altogether we have been able to make 
a provisional determination of the Oriental ele- 
ments in Latin fable, and have summed up our 
results on the next page in such a way as to 
indicate the amount of evidence for each.* Out 
of the 208 fables composing it (166 Phsedrus, 
42 Avian) 56 are there traced with more or 
less plausibility to India, and of these 45 occur 
in our Caxton, but only 25 out of the Oriental 
LXX. which formed the starting point of our 
inquiry {supra, p. 44). 

Of the remaining forty-five for which we 
have Oriental parallels, which are either slight 
or late, we cannot in any specific case be cer- 
tain of an Indian origin, as they may have got 
to India by the mediation of Islam, which had 
contact with both the Hellenic and the Indian 
world. t As soon as the Prophet's creed had 

* I must reserve the more intricate and delicate task of 
determining the Indian elements in Greek fable for another 
occasion. The Caxton and the European iEsop generally 
is more directly derived from Latin than from Greek fable. 

t I must confess I do not see much evidence for an earlier 
and direct influence of Hellenic on Indian fable, on which 
Weber and Benfey lay so much stress. See, however, Sir 
W. Hunter's Indian Empire, c, vi. for Greek influence on 
North-West Indian art. 


PHiEDIlUS (c/. pp. 139-40). 

I. i. Wolf and Lamb (Ro. i. 

2, V.) * 
iii. Jay in Peacock's Feathers 

(ii. 15, XL) 
iv. Bog and Shadow (i. 5, IIL) 
V. Lion's Share (i. 6) 
viii. Wolf and Crane (i. 8, 

I., T.) 
.V. Wolf, Fox and Ape (ii. iS) 
xi. Ass and Lion hunting (i v. 10) 
xiii. Fox and Crow(i. 16, VII.) 
XX. Dogs and Hide (XII.) 
XXV. Dogs and Crocodile. 
xxvi. Fox and Stork (ii. 13, Be.) 

II. ii. Man and Two Wives 
(Ee. xvi. T.) 

III. ii. Panther and Shepherds 
(iv. 5) 

iv. Butcher and Ape. 

xviii. Juno and Peacock (iv. 4, 

xix. Countryman and Snake 

(i. 10, XV.) 

IV. iii. Fox and Grapes (iv. 
I, Be.) 

.xxiii. Mountain in labour (ii. 
5, XXIII.) 

V. iii. Bald man and Fly(ii. 11, 

iv. Ass and suckling Pig (X.) 


App. I. Ape and Fox (iii. 17) 
3. Mercury and Two 
Women (Be.) 

13. Ephesian Widow (iii. 

9, T. ?) 


Ro. i. 3. Rat and Frog (Be, T.) 

14. EagleandRaven(IV.) 
23. Lion and Mouse 


Ro. ii. 10. Countryman and 
Snake (XX.) 
iii. I. Androclus (Be.) 

4. Bat.Birds, Beasts (Be.) 
6. Fox and Wolf (Be.) 
14. Man, Axe, and Wood 
(Be, T.) 
iv. 8. King of Apes. 
(18.) Cat, Fox, and Dog 
(Pog. vii. XIV.) 


8. Snail and She- Ape. 

AVIAN (c/. p. 126). 

2. Tortoise and Eagle (ii. IV.) 
5. Ass in Lion's Skin (iv. II.) 
8. Camel asking for Horns 

(vii. XVII., T.) 
II. Two Pots (ix. XXIL T.) 

14. Ape-mother (xi.) 

15. Crane and Peacock(xii. XI.) 
1 5. Oak and Reed (Ro. iv. 20, 

XVI., T.) 
17. Hunter and Tiger (.xiii.) 
iS. Four Oxen and Lion (xiv. 

T. ?) 
19. Fir and Bramble (xv. T.) 

21. Swallow and Birds (Ro. i. 

20, Be. T.) 

22. Avaricious and Envious 

(xvii. Be.) 

24. Hunter and Lion (Be. T.) 

25. Boy and Thief (.xviii.) 

27. Crow and Pitcher (.xx. T.) 

30. Sow and Lord (XXI. T.) 

31. Mouse and Ox (xxiii. T.) 
33. Goose with Golden Eggs 

(xxiv., VIIL) 

35. Ape and Twins (xxv.) 

36. Ox and Heifer (X. T.) 

40. Leopard and Fox (XIII. T.) 

* References in brarkets are to the corresponding fables in Caxton ; the 
larfco Roman numerals .and letters to the Itiilian and Talmudic evidence 
fupra, pp. 51. 116. I.-XIV. Jakatas ; XV.-XVIII. Mahabliarata ; XIX.-XXIII. 
bidpai ; Be. additions to Bidpai ; T. Talmud aud Midrush. 


been spread from India to Spain, the con- 
querors laid down the sword and took up the 
pen. In search of models they turned to 
Greece, and chiefly by means of Syrians had 
the literary treasures of Hellas made accessible 
to them in Arabic versions of Syriac transla- 
tions of the chief Greek authors in science and 
philosophy. Was iEsop also included among 
these ? That is the question we must set our- 
selves to answer as we turn our backs on India 
and cry, Westward Ho ! 

Earlier investigators into the history of the 
^sopic Fable were led off the trail for a while 
by a collection of Arabic fables, mostly identi- 
cal with the ^sopic, and attributed to the sage 
Loqman, who gives a title to a Su7'a of the 
Koran (S. 31 of the vulgate, 82 of ISTbldeke- 
Rodwell).* We now know that the fables are 
late, and derived from the Greek. Dr. Lands- 

* Sir R. F. Burton has collected the Arabic learning: on 
Loqman in his Nights (Lady Burton's edition, vi. p. 260). 
M. Derenboarg: in the Preface to his edition (Berlin, 1858) 
gives reasons for considering him a doublet of Balaam, and 
the book attributed to him as the work of a Christian of 
the thirteenth century. The identification, I may add, is 
rendered certain by Petrus Aljjhonsus (ii. 7), " Balaam 
qui lingua Arabica vocatur Lucaniam," which Schmidt 
did not understand, but is clearly a misreading for 
" Lucman. " 


berger, some thirty years ago, unearthed a 
series of sixty-seven fables in Syriac,* which 
had clearly intimate relation with our Loqman, 
since thirty-nine out of the forty-one Arabic 
fables are identical with the Syriac. Di\ Lands- 
berger attempted to found upon them an utterly 
untenable theory of the Judaic origin of the 
Beast- Fable (Die Faheln des Soj^hos, 1859), but 
critical investigation showed that they were 
a late translation from the Greek, f Indeed 
fifty-one of the fables are identical with that 
number out of a collection of sixty-two Greek 
fables attributed to a Persian sage, Syntipas, 
and published by Matthai a Moscow pro- 
fessor at the end of last century (1781). This 
collection has never yet been adequately ex- 
amined so as to definitely settle its jyovenance-l 
It is probable enough that some of the fables 
of Syntipas are Oriental ones that had perco- 

* Or rather JudEeo-Syriac, since they were found written 
in Hebrew characters and were printed first as Chaldaic 
(Chofes Matmonim, 1844). 

t The late Prof. Wright dates them as the eleventh 
century (art. " Byriac" in Ency. Brit.), and mentions that 
the name Sophos is found as Isophos and Josophus in other 
MSS. , showing its identity with ^Esop. 

J Eberhard gives an edition of the text in his Fabulce 
yrcBCCB romaitenses I. (Teubner, 1876). 


lated into the Lower Greek Empire. But the 
majority are a redressing of the ordinary -^sop 
(i.e. of Babrius), and the eighty fables con- 
tained in the Syntipas-Sophos-Loqman * can- 
not be used as independent witnesses for the 
Oriental origin of any of our fables, while the 
Loqman collection may account for the presence 
in India of certain of ^sop's fables at a late 

I have, however, come across traces of 
another Arabic vEsop, which would probably 
account for even, more, as it is four times as 
large as the Loqman. In the India Office 
Library there is, or was, a Karshunic MS. 
(Loth. Cat. Arab. MSS. India Off., 1049), ^'•^•> 
Arabic written in Syriac characters, con- 
taining no less than 164 fables. The char- 
acter in which it is written implies that the 
Arabic fables were translated from the Syriac, 
the ordinary course from the Greek, and the 
large number of fables proves that it is diffe- 
rent from the collection associated with the 

* I have not gone minutely into the matter, but I fancy 
that the Armenian fabulist Vartan derives from the same 
source. It is possible too, I think, that the tetrastichs of 
Ignatius (supra, p. 24) were derived from a selection from 
Babrius, which was the parent of the whole school. 


name of Loqrnan. Unfortunately the MS. has 
been mislaid, and I cannot therefore use it for 
the purposes of the present inquiry.* There 
is, however, other evidence of an Arabic ^sop 
larger than the Loqrnan. In the Biblioth^que 
Rationale at Paris there is a collection of 144 
'• Fables of ^sop " in Arabic (MS. Arabe Suppt. 
1644).! Altogether there is strong evidence 
of a large body of ^Esopic fables derived from 
the Greek passing current in the Arabic-speak- 
ing world, and so reaching India and afford- 
ing the late parallels occurring in the Cainozoic 
stratum of the Bidpai and in the later sources 
(supra, pp. 49, 51). Till we arrive at earlier 
evidence, these cannot be used as proving the 

* Of course I may be mistaking an igriotum pro magnifico 
in attributing so much importance to this MS. But the 
mere chance of its crucial importance for the mediaeval 
history of the Fable should cause it to be diligently searched 
for. Survivals of the Syriac original may exist in liodiger's 
ChreM. Si/riaca, 1870. 

t See Appendix, which I owe to my friend Dr. R. Gottheil, 
who kindly undertook to search for an Arabic ^sop among 
the Oriental collections he was visiting in Europe. There are 
also fables, he informs us, in MSS. suppt. 1647, 1739, and 
2197. He refers me likewise to Pertsch, Catalogue of the 
Gotha Oriental MSS. IV. 447, which is not accessible to me. 
We clearly need an article on the Arabic .lEsop similar to 
that of Dr. Klamroth's " Ueber den arabischen Euclid," 
ZDMG., 1881, 270-326. 


Oriental origin of any of the Greco-Roman 
fables, which are probably their parents or 
cousins rather than their children. 

But though the larger Arabic ^sop of which 
I have found traces cannot throw light on the 
iEsop of antiquity it may serve to elucidate, as 
we shall soon see, cei'tain obscure points in the 
mediaeval ^sop. For besides the fables current 
in antiquity we find in the mediaeval collections 
a set which cannot be traced back to the Greco- 
Roman world. For their peculiarities we have 
to take a sudden leap from Arabia to England, 
and henceforth study 


L'sopct apclims cc Kvrc 
®uil travcilla c fist cscrire 
E)c (Brill en Xatin Ic tuvna. 
Hi reia Hlvrcj qui mult Tama 
%c tianslata puis en engleis 
E jo I'ai rim^ en franceis. 
— Marie db Fbanck, JFables, Epil. vv. 13-18. 

The formula with which we started these 
investigations was, "Our ^sop is Phsedrus 
with trimmings." We have now seen the 
nature and source of some of these accessories. 
The sixth and seventh sections of the Gaston 
connected with the names of Remicius and 


Avian have turned out to be ultimately derived 
from Babrius, and we have seen reason to 
trace them further back to the " Lybian " fables 
of Kybises. There still remains the fifth book 
of our collection to be accounted for — the Comet 
Fables, Fabulce extravagantes, as Stainhowel 
called them. These differ much in chai-acter 
and style from those we have previously been 
considering. They are much longer, to begin 
with ; they are filled with elaborate conversa- 
tions between the beasts. Again, though cus- 
tom has attached a moral to them, they do not 
seem primarily intended to point one. They 
belong rather to the Beast-Tale or Beast-Satire 
than to the Beast-Fable proper. Their nearest 
analogue in literature is the so-called Beast- 
Epic of Reynard the Fox. This diversity in 
style by itself argues a difference of origin for 
this part of our collection. They represent, we 
may say at once, the mediaeval additions to 
^sop which are associated with the name of 
Marie de France. 

This lady is one of the most striking figures 
in Middle English literature. Her linguistic 
ability would by itself stamp her as no ordi- 
nary figure. All three works of her are trans- 


lations into French of the Anglo-Norman dia- 
lect. One is from a Latin account of The 
Purgatory oj St. Patrick. Another is a version 
of some Breton Lais, some of the weirdest 
things in mediasval literature.* Her third and 
most extensive work is a collection of 103 (106) 
Fables, which she declares she translated from 
the English of King Alfred, in the lines I have 
quoted at the head of this section.! Let us first 
examine into the truth of this statement. 

We cannot do better than put ourselves in 
the hands of Herr Mall, who has concentrated 
his energies on Marie de France for the last 
quarter of a century, and has recently summed 
up the results of his labours. | He has first to 

* These have recently beea edited admirably by Wamcke, 
with variants by R. Kohler. Ellis gives an abstract of them 
in his Metrical Romances, and Mr. O'Shaughnessy Englished 
a few in his Lays of France. 

t They are given in the text of Herr Mall. The first, 
and as yet only edition of Marie's Fables was by Roquefort, 
in 1820. The above lines, however, had been early quoted 
from MS. sources, and are given in Howell's Litters. (See 
my edition, p. 592 and note.) There is no doubt about the 
reading " Alvrez," though earlier corruptions changed it at 
times to " Henris," whence our Fables have been attributed 
to Henry I. and Henry II. 

J "Zur Geschichte der mittelalterlichen Fabelliteratur, " 
in Ztsft f. rom. Phil. ix. 161-203. This supersedes his 
earlier dissertation De Maria ceta'.e, &c. (Halle, 1867). 


discuss the claims of a set of Latin Fables found 
in three MSS. at London, Brussels, and Got- 
tingen (hence termed by him the LEG fables), 
which certainly contain the additional fables 
found in Marie de France, and have accordingly 
been termed the " Romulus of Marie " by M. 
Hervieus, while Oesterley printed them as an 
Appendix to his edition of Romulus. Herr Mall 
points out first, by one of these pieces of minute 
analysis in which Gorman scholars delight,* 
that the oi-der of the fables has been disturbed 
by the transposition of certain leaves in the 
fable of The Belhj and Members, which begins 
in jSTo, 33 and finishes in K'o. 73. He is thus 
enabled to ascertain that the LEG consists of 
three parts — (i) 45 fables selected from the 
Romulus of Nilant; (2) a selection of 15 fables 
from the ordinary Romulus, at the end of which 
comes the announcement quod sequitur addidit 
rex Affrus, which refers to (3) 74 additional 
fables, most of which are to be found in Marie. 
Are these from the Latin original of Marie ? is 

* The most striking instance I can recall is the manner 
in which Lachmann determined the extent, the missing, 
mutilated and blank leaves, and the average number of 
lines on a page of the lost archetype of Lucretius. Cf. 
Munro's Lucretius, i. 26-8. 1 

VOL. I. L 


the further question to be settled by Herr Mall. 
He decides in the negative, by pointing out 
that in the LBG version of the Mouse Maiden 
(evidently derived from the Bidpai, I may 
parenthetically observe, of. supra, p. 98), the 
mouse after all her travels in search for a hus- 
band, comes at last to marry a mule ! an evident 
mistranslation of Marie's mulet, archaic French 
for mouse. In other words, the set of Fables 
whose trade-mark is LBG is a translation from 
Marie, and not vice versd. 

We have accordingly to turn to Marie herself 
for a solution of the true origin of her fables, 
whether from a Latin or an English source, 
and in the latter case whether this was really 
one of King Alfred's literary gifts to England. 
Previous inquirers had pointed to the esistence 
of English forms in Marie's French — wihet 
(56 1. 27, "gnat"), which Wace expressly men- 
tions as an English word [Bom. du Mou, 8164), 
ividecoc (huitecox, 24 1. 20, cf. A. Lang, Perraidt, 
p. xlix., "woodcock") and welke (13 1.), which 
is no less than our humble "whelk."* But, 
as Herr Mall points out, these words may have 

* To these I would add the still more striking example 
of hus, our "house," used by Marie for "door" (63 1. 87). 

''SEPANDE." 163 

formed part of the ordinary Anglo-Norman voca- 
bulary, and may therefore have been still used 
by Marie, though translating from the Latin. 
He has sought, therefore, for a mistranslation 
or misapplication of an English word similar 
to that which enabled him to determine the 
origin of " LBG." He finds it in Marie's word 
sepande, which does him yeoman's service. She 
uses it three times (31 1. 34, 65 1. 10, 97 1. 7), 
and in each case later copyists have not been 
able to make anything of the word for which 
they have substituted Nature, or Destinee, or 
Deuesse. This clearly un-French word, which 
even Marie could not make out, is no other 
than the Old English participial form sceppend, 
" shaper " or " creator," corresponding to the 
familiar German word Schiqjfer. Herr Mall 
deduces from it not only that Marie did use an 
English original, as she states, but also that it 
could not have been in Anglo-Saxon or from 
the hand of King Alfred (though the Latin 
author, he adds, was probably named Alfred, 
which would account for the mistake). The 
omission of the c in sepande proves that it 
was a Middle En<i:lish, not an An":lo-Sason 


form in the original.* Finally, Herr Mall 
fancies he has come across a trace of the 
Middle English original in a couple of lines 
quoted in Wright's Latin Stones, 52 — 

" Of aye ich the l)rou5te 
Of athcle ich ne mi5te," 

which are sufficiently close to serve for the 
original of Marie's 

"De I'oef les poi jo bien geter . . . 
Mais nient fors de lur nature,'' t 

On Marie's epoch Herr Mall has at present 
nothing definite to say, except that the Pur- 
gatory of St. Patrick which she translated is 
later than 1198. As her Lats reached Iceland 
about 1245, this fixes her floruit in the earlier 
half of the thirteenth century. 

So far Herr Mall, who, instructive as he is, 
leaves us still in the dark as to the proven- 
ance of the sixty-six or so new fables with 

* I would add that both ividecoc and welke are nearer the 
Middle English than the West-Saxon forms, widucoc and 

t There is probably, I would sviggest, a still longer sur- 
yival in the Middle English version of the Wolf LearniiKj 
to Read given by Douce, Illustrations to Shakespeare, 525, 
according to Du Meril, 156 ; I cannot find it. 


which Marie's name is connected. Taking 
up the inquiry at this point, I would first 
inquire whether, as we have seen Mai-ie at 
least half-right in attributing her fables to an 
English version of (King) Alfred, she may not 
be as much in the right in tracing them to a 
Greek source. It is indeed unusual for a 
mediseval writer to connect the name of ^sop 
with Greek at all, as he was regarded as a 
Latin poet even as late as 1485 (Du Meril, 91, 
163), Again, at times where she has the same 
fable as the Romulus and the Greek versions 
she is nearer the Greek form. Herr Fuchs, who 
has written an elaborate monograph on The Daio 
in Peacock's Feathers,"^ has observed that Marie 
(58) has a raven for her hero, who competes for 
the crown of beauty of the birds, as in the Greek, 
instead of a Jay as in the Latin iEsop (cf . supra, 
p. 1 2 4). Du M^ril {Poesies inedites, 1 8 5 4, p. 158) 
points out that in Marie's version of The Dog 
and Shadoio, her dog passes across a bridge t 
and carries cheese, instead of swimming in the 
stream and holding meat as in Phajdrus, while 

* Die Krdhe die mil fremden Fcdern sich schmiickt. 
Berlin (Dissert.) 1886. 

t This trait has passed from her into the modern tradi- 
tional versions. 

i66 jESOP in ENGLAND. 

she has a curious variant ( 1 1 ) of The Lion^s 
Share, in which the lion's partners are carnivo- 
rous, as is natural, instead of Phsedrus' cow, 
goat and sheep, as is absurd,* In this the 
^sop of Alfred, as we now may call her original, 
comes nearer to the Greek (Halm, 260) than to 
Phsedrus. And when we speak about an early 
mediaeval writer coming nearer to the Greek, 
we can of course only mean one thing, that he 
^ has approached it via Arabia. If we find a 

\ writer of the twelfth or thirteenth century 
quoting Aristotle, Euclid, or Galen with some 
approach of accuracy to the original, we may 
be certain that he has had access by means of 
O Latin versions to the Arabic translations of 
these authors. And indeed, to revert to our 
present instance, how could the Arabic elements 
of Alfred's ^sop have crept into it unless as 
interpolations in an Arabic ^sop 1 For we 
find in Marie, and therefore there were in 

f Alfred's -^Esop, such distinctively Eastern tales 
as The Ass' Heart (Marie, 61, siqira XXI.), The 
Good Man and Serpent, nearly in a complete 
form (Marie, 63, supra XX.), Tlie Mouse-Maiden 

* Curiously enough this is immediately followed by the 
ordinary version {12). 


(Marie, 64, siq^ra XXIII.) and The Three Wishes 
(Marie, 24, Benf. § 208), which we found reason 
to reckon among the Oriental elements of 
Phsedrus {supra, p. 140). Considering the 
evidence I have produced of a larger Arabic 
-^sop into which these stories could easily creep 
in from Al Mokaffa's Kalilah iva Dimnah, we 
are justified in looking out for an Alfred who 
knew Arabic in searching for the original of 
Marie's Fables. 

I think I have hit upon the very man 
in the following passage of Roger Bacon's 
Compendium Studii (ed. Brewer, p. 471). He 
is speaking of the need of a knowledge of the 
original tongues. 

"But fai- greater errors happen in translating philo- 
sophy. Wherefore, when a many translations on all 
kinds of knowledge have been given ns by Gerard of 
Cremona, Michael the Scot, Alfred the Englishman, 
Hermann the German, and WiUiam the Fleming, 
you cannot imagine liow many blunders occur in 
their works. [Besides, they did not even know 
Arabic] In the same way Michael Scot claimed 
the merit of numerous translations. But it is cer- 
tain that Andrew a Jew laboured at them more than 
he did. . . . And so witli the rest." 

This Alfred, so Mr. Thomas Wright informs 


us {Biograpliia Literaria, Anglo-Norman period, 
s. v.), flourished about 1170 A.D.,* and this, or 
a slightly later date, would just give time for 
an English translation of his version of the 
Arabic ^sop, from which Marie de France 
could execute her own version, say about 
1220 A.D.f 

Not only have I identified this Alfred, but 
I fancy I can show that he too, like Michael 
Scot "and the rest," had a Jewish dragoman 
at his side helping him with his version. For 
there is another collection of Fables evidently 
connected with the same origin as that of 
Marie's. It is in Hebrew rhymed prose, has 
the Talmudic name for ^sop's Fables, Mislile 
Shu'alim, and has for author R. Berachyah 
ben Natronai ha-Nakdan or the Punctuator, 
a name used by Jewish writers of the twelfth 
and thirteenth centuries for Massorite or 
Grammarian. His collection runs to 107 

* Herr Wiistenfeld, in the Gottingen Ahhandlungen, 
xxii, 85-9, gives him a Komewhat later date, basing on the 
first English bibliography, J. Bale Scriptores Britannice, 
cent. iv. § xxxv. 

t William Long-Sword, Henry II.'s natural son, Marie's 
"le cumte Willaume, le plus vaillant de cast royaume," 
for whom the Fables were written, died iu 1226. 


fables, against the 103 or 106 of Marie.* 
Of these he has 38 in common with her and 
with the Romulus and with the variations 
from the Romulus.f His jay, like hers, is 
a crow, his dog crosses a bridge with cheese 
in its mouth, as hers does, and above all he 
has both the carnivorous (52) and the grami- 
nivorous version (11) of The Lion's Share. 
This by itself would be sufficient to prove his 
connection with the ^Esop of Alfred. But 
besides these he has fifteen others J of the 
additional fables of JNIarie, including The Mouse 
Maiden (Berach., 28), and The Ass' Heart 
(Berach., 105). There are three others. The Man 
and Pit (B. 68), The Man and Idol (95), and 
The Treasure (104), taken from the Arabic 
Bidpai, § a couple more also from Oriental 

* 103 in Roquefort's edition, but a couple or so exist 
elsewhere. Cf. Ex. V. iv. 

t See Index, s.v. These are mainly due to Dr. Stein- 
.schneider's painstaking collation in the Israel. Lettcrhode, 
viii. 28-9. There are besides ten in Avian which Dr. Stein- 
schneider missed. 

X Ber. 19 (M. 21), Rom. App. 60; B. 26, cf. 59 (M. 56) 
App. 31 ; 28 (64) 61 ; 36 (73 : 88) 28 ; 39 {contra 22) 24 ; 45 
(3i) 27 ; 50 (74) 36) ; 77 (75) 37 ; 81 (38) 22 ; 83 (72) 35 ; 84 
(71) 25 ; 85 (59) 32 ; 86 (103) 71 ; 94 (98) 20 ; 105 (61). 

§ For the first and last see my Bidpai Contents, C 4 and 
A r ; for the other Benf. § 200. The former occur in the 


sources, The Chicken and Fox (B. 32, cf. De 
Gvibernatis Zool. Mytli. ii. 131 ), and a dispute of 
Wolf, Fox, and Dove (B. 69) as to their relative 
age, which parallels curiously the same dispute 
between The Partridge, Monkey and Elephant, 
in the Tettira Jdtaka (Fausb. 37, tr. Rhys- 
Davids, 310 seq.). Besides these there are four 
which could only come from the Greek : The 
Mule's Pedigree (B. 66, Halm 157), Tlie Lion's 
Traces (B. 93, H. 63), a curious variant of -^sop's 
Fable The Fox and Dog-Ticks (B. 102, supra 
p. 27), and a still more curious illustration of 
the fable referred to by Bacon {Essays, 54), "It 
was prettily devised of ^sope ; The Fly sate 
upon the Axle-tree of the Chariot wheele and 
said, What a Dust doe I raise ? " (cf. B. 90).* 
One seems taken from the Talmud (B. 6, Fox 
and Fishes, cf . supra, p. 1 1 3), and for eighteen 
neither Dr. Steinschneider nor I can find 
parallels,t though many resemble incidents in 

Arabic and not in the Indian Bidpai, the first being the most 
renowned apologue in the Barlaam and Josaphat set. See 
my forthcoming Earhi English Lives of Buddha, pp. 15-16. 

* This has puzzled Mr. W. A. Wright and the other 
Baconian commentors, who leave it severely alone ; it is 
Abstemius', No. 17, cf. Ro. ii. 16. 

+ Lamh, Earn, and Lion (25), Ox, Lion, and Kid (30). 
Frogs and Oxen (34, cf. Ro. ii. 20), Cat and Mouse {46), 


the Reynard cycle,* as do some of those 
common to Berachyah and Marie. 

This analysis shows that Berachyah's Fables 
are of the same family as Marie's, that they 
include a large infusion of Indian ingredients 
traceable through the Arabic, and much also 
which must have come indirectly from a purely 
Greek collection. In other words, they confirm 
strongly the conclusion we drew from an ex- 
amination of Marie's collection that it must be 
traceable to an Arabic source. 

The reader would probably care to see a 
specimen of his work. I have selected one 
which he has in common with Marie, and is a 
type of the additions made by Alfred to the 
^sop of Antiquity : it savours more of the 
Beast- Satire. I have endeavoured to imitate 

Wild Boar and Goat (48), Lion and Lizard (58), Lion and 
Animals (70), Parrot and Princess (71), Ram and Ten 
Sheep {72), Sheep, Goat, and Shepherd (82), Camel and herd 
of Camels (87), Terrible Knight (89), Wulf and Fox {gi). 
Bull and Owner (92), Leveret and Leverets (97), Lion, Goat 
and Pox (98), Crow and Carrion (99), Pirate and Sliip (loi). 
* Beracb, 100, contains the incident of the Fox fishing 
with tail in ice. I cannot here discuss the possible light 
these, and other indications I have observed, may throv^r 
on the Oriental origin of Reincke Fuchs. The latest and 
best word on this is that of E. Voigt in the Introduction to 
his edition of Yscmgrimus (Stuttgart, 1884). 


the rhymed prose or doggrel, which is again an 
Arabic trait, that will be familiar to English 
readers from recent translations of The Arabian 

The Fable op the "Wolf and the Animals, 

[Mishle Slmalim (" Fox Fables ") of Beracliyah 
Hanakdan, No. 36]. 

The Wolf, the Lion's prince and peer, as the foe of 
all flesh did appear ; greedy and grinding, he con- 
sumed all he was finding. Birds and beasts, wild 
and tame, by their families urged to the same, brought 
ai;ainst him before the Lion an accusation, as a mon- 
ster worthy of detestation. Said His Majesty, " If lie 
uses his teeth as you say, and causes scandal in this 
terrible way, I'll punish him in such a way as to 
save his neck, if I may, and yet prevent you becom- 
ing his prey." Said Lion to Wolf, "Attend me to- 
morrow, see that you come, or you'll come to much 
sorrow." He came, sure enougli, and the Lion spoke 
to him harsh and rough. "What by doing this do 
you mean ? Never more raven the living or live by 
ravening. What you shall eat shall be only dead 
meat. The living you shall neither trap nor hunt. 
And that you may my words obey swear me that 
you'll eat no flesh for two years from to-day, to atone 
for your sins, testified and seen : 'tis my judgment, 
you had better fulfil it, I ween." Thereat the Wolf 
swore right away no flesh to eat for two years from 
that day. Ofl" went Sir Wolf on his way, King Lion 


stopped at court on his throne so gay. Nothing that's 
tleshly for some time did our Wolf eat, for lilce a 
gentleman he knew how his word to keep. But then 
came a day when he was a huugred and he looked 
hither and thither for meat, and lo, a fat sheep fair to 
look on and goodly to eat (Gen. iii. 6). Then to 
liimself he said, " Who can keep every law ? " and his 
thoughts were bewildered with what he saw. He said 
to himself, " It overcomes me the longing to eat, for 
two years day by day must I fast from meat. Tliis 
is my oath to the king that I swore but I've thouglit 
how to fulfil it as never before. Three sixty-five are 
the days in a year. Night is when you close your 
eyes, open them, then the day is near." His eyes he 
closed and opens straightway. It was evening and 
it was morning, one day (Gen. i. 5). Thus he winked 
till he liad numbered two years and his greed returned 
and his sin disappears. His eyes fix the goat (sic) 
they had seen and he said, " See beforehand I have 
atoned for my sin," and he seized the neck of the 
goat, broke it to pieces, and filled up his throat as he 
was wont to do before, and as of yore Ids hand was 
stretched out to the beasts, his peers, as it liad been 
in former days aud years. 

The story is told with considerable humour, 
and the Biblical verses are wittily applied. In 
Marie (73) and the usual versions the wolf 
meets the sheep during Lent, with the greeting, 
" Good morrow, Salmon ! " and, refusing to 
be convinced of his mistake, makes a fish 
meal off mutton. I cannot help thinking that 


the story is ultimately to be traced back to 
some modification of the Vaha Jataha (Fausb. 
300, tr. K Morris, F.-L.J. iii. 359), the sub- 
stance of which is sufficiently indicated by its 

" a toolf iMTjo It'Deti lip ottjcrs' teaclj 
3nli ate rtcir flcjs!) ann liloon. 
Din make a Uoto to hccp tlje fast 
anD Ijolv nap oisseriie. 

T)Ut 3Inlira jSooit Bit) note Ijis toto, 
a goat's * form fjc assumcn j 
■SCfje murncrouiS luolf IjtjS Uoiij forsook 
anD tiieo t1;e goat to scije." 

AVho was this Berachyah Nakdan, whose 
collection is of such critical importance for 
the mediaeval history of the Fable, f and when 
and where did he live ? This has been a long- 
standing subject of dispute between Drs. Stein- 
schneider and Neubauer, the two greatest living 
authorities on medifeval Jewish literature, and 
I hesitate to interfere, especially as I happen 

* iV.^.^There is a curious vacillation between sheep 
and goat in Berachyah's version. 

t It is for this reason that I have gone into such detail 
about the Mishle Shualim. I have ventured to repeat Dr. 
Steinschneider's collation, because it has been overlooked, 
owing- to the obscure quarter in which it appeared, and 
because I have been able largely to supplement his parallels. 


to difTer from both in holding that he lived and 
wrote in England towards the end of the twelfth 
century.* It is due to them that I should give 
my reasons at some length. They are as fol- 
lows :— (i) The earliest mention of him occurs 
in the work of an English Jew, The Gnyx Book 
{Sejjher Hassoham), of R. Moses ben Isaac, who 
must have died before 1215.! (2) His other 
translation is of the work of an Englishman of 
the twelfth century, the Quest! ones Naturales of 
Adelard of Bath. (3) The authorities he chiefly 
quotes, Abraham ibn Ezra (Browning's " Rabbi 
ben Ezra") and Solomon Parchon, are those 
generally quoted by English Jews ; the former 
visited England in 1158. (4) England was the 
seat of a school of Nakdanim or Punctuators 
in the twelfth century, all those known of that 
date (Moses ben Yomtob, Moses ben Isaac and 
Samuel) being located in this country. (5) Ber- 
achyah somtimes uses French, the ordinary lan- 

* It is perhaps worth while stating that I arrived at this 
result during my researches on the early history of the 
Jews in this country, long before I was aware of its import- 
ance for the history of the Fable. See my note in Jew. 
Quart. Rev. i., p. 183. 

•\ His tombstone was then removed by the Barons to 
fortify Ludgate (Stow Survey, ed. Thoms, p. 15). See my 
letters in The Academy, Jan. 12, Feb. 2, 1889. 


guage of the English Jews at this period and 
later,* and London was the chief centre of the 
French-speaking world under the Angevin kings. 
(6) Seemingly the oldest MS. of the Fables is one 
which once belonged to Cotton, and is probably 
therefore one of the few Hebrew MSS. belonging 
to the early Jews of England which have never 
left England (see Neubauer's Catalogue, No. 
1466, 7, and cf. Letters of Eminent Meii (Cam. 
Soc), p. 103). (7) Finally, during the course of 
some researches at the Record Office I have found 
an Oxford Jew named " Benedictus le punc- 
teur," paying a contribution to Richard I. on 
his return to captivity, f We could not have 
a closer translation of Berachyah (the blessed), 
ha Nakdan (the Punctuator), and there has 
always been a tradition that Oxford Jews helped 
towards the foundation of the University. Few 
identifications of mediseval personages rest on 
stronger grounds than these, and we may fairly 
assume, I think, that Berachyah Nakdan lived 
in England about 1190 a.d., and was known 

* I have published an interesting letter in French from 
an English Jew as late as 1280 in the Revue dcs etudes j wives, 
1889, p. 258. 

f "OxONiA... De Bhdicto le punet''- xxvj s. & viij S p 
eod." (MiscelL Queen's Bcmemhr. SS^I^ mem. 1. ad imum.) 


among Englishmen as " Benedict le puncteur." 
If so, "tve can scarcely imagine the two men, 
Alfi-ed and Benedict, translating from the 
Arabic independently, and it is but the slightest 
step fiu'ther to assume that Benedict (Bera- 
chyah) the Jew was to Alfred the Englishman 
what Andrew the Jew was to Michael the Scot, 
as indeed Roger Bacon implies in asserting the 
same of " all the rest." * While aiding Alfred, 
Berachyah worked at the Fables on his own 
account, and thus produced the Fox Fables 
(3Ieshle Shualim) which have so long puzzled 
critics to account for their provenaiice.f I may 
add that about the same time over in distant 
Armenia the vartabied Eremia (Dr. Jeremiah) 
was translating from the Arabic a collection of 
164 fables under the title Agho-VesaJdrJc (The 
Fox Boolc),X that the two collections of Marie 

* The only other alternative is that Berachyah translated 
Alfred's Latin. But I know of no such translation into 
rhymed prose, which was an Arabic invention, and was used 
by the Jews chiefly to translate Arabic. Prof. Chenery 
published a Hebrew version in rhymed prose of Hariri's 
Makamen a few years ago. 

t See Du Meril, pp. 26-8, and Lessing, Werke, vi. 
p. 52, scq. 

X Du Meril, p. 30, who mentions casually the similarity 
of the title to that of Berachyah's. It must be remembered, 
however, that the latter is Talmudical. A French trans- 
VOL. I. M 



and Berachyah, which are certainly from the 
same source, amount between them to 163 
separate fables, and that the India Office Arabic 
MS. contains, or did contain, 164 fables. Such 
numerical coincidences rarely happen by acci- 

On general grounds indeed we might assume 
that any new incursion of Beast-Fables during 
the twelfth century would occur in this country, 
for during that period England was the home 
of the Fable. A glance at the Pedigree which 
heads this Introduction will confirm this. Herr 
Mall locates the Romulus of Nilant and the 
LBGr fables in England, the earliest MSS. of 
Fahulce rhythmiccB are still here. The most 
popular collection of Fables in the late Middle 
Ages was one of the first three books of the 
Romulus, in tolerable Latin verse, passing under 
an infinity of names.* To one of the many 
MSS. M. Hervieux found the colophon — 

lation of Eremia's Fables seems to have appeared in 1676, 
at the end of an abridged translation of Moses of Khorene. 
I have not been able to find this in any of the great English 

* Garicius, Garritus, Galfredus, Hildebertus, Ugobardus 
de Salmone, Walthenis, Salo, Salone, Serlo, Bernard de 
Chartres, Accius and Alanus (Oesterley, Bovi. p. xxiv. ). 


" Gualterus Anglicus fecit hunc libium sub nomine 

which fixes Walter of England as the author of 
the collection hitherto known as the Ayionymus 
Neveleti. From this were derived no less than 
two French metrical versions, besides an Italian 
one in verse. Then again there was another 
collection in Latin verse done by Alexander 
Neckam *(ii57-i2i7, foster-brother of Richard 
I., and author of De naturis rerum in the Rolls 
Series), which gave rise to two French ver- 
sions. We have just seen the important col- 
lection associated with the name of Alfred, 
the only original contribution to the Fable 
in the Middle Ages, being composed in Eng- 
land about the same time, and giving rise 
to a Middle English and a French vei-sion — 
that of Marie de France — which in its turn 
gave rise to an Italian and to two Latin ver- 
sions, from one of which a Dutch version, by 
one Gerard, introduced Alfred's yEsop to Teu- 
tonic Europe. It would indeed be difficult to 

* His real name was Alexander Nequam (= "Naughty 
Alick"), but this caused so much unmerciful ridicule 
that he changed the spelling of his name. 


suggest where else but in England Berachyali's 
fables could have been produced. 

Nor should I be surprised if some at least 
of the many adaptations in French verse, known 
by the name of Ysopet, were also made in this 
country. We are too apt to forget that litera- 
ture, like commerce, follows the flag, and that 
London in the latter half of the tweKth century 
(115 4- 1206) was the capital and centre of the 
French-speaking world. The Angevin Empire 
during those years included Normandy, Brit- 
tany, Maine, Anjou, Toulouse, Aquitaine, and 
Gascony, and the poets and literary men of 
that vast tract of country looked to London for 
recognition and reward. Nearly two-thirds of 
the French writers of that period are con- 
nected with the court of England ; nor do they 
all write in Anglo-Norman.* If these writers 
had written in Latin we should include them in 

Biographia literaria anglo-normannica,'\ but 
because they happened to write in the court- 

* I calculate this from elaborate lists I have made 
from M. Gaston Paris' admirable Literature franfaisc du 
meyen age. 

f Bishop Stubbs' admirable lectures on "Learning and 
Literature at the Court of Henry IL" [Lectures vi., vii.) 
only deal with Latin writers. 


language — French — we allow them to be en- 
gulfed in the ITistoire litter aire de la France* 

I hope to develope elsewhere the thesis that 
England in the latter half of the twelfth cen- 
tury was the nidus, to use a biological term, 
of the whole Romantic movement which char- 
acterises mediaeval literature. At present I 
would point out that this country was cer- 
tainly the home of the Fable during that 
period, and that it is therefore probable that 
some at least of the French Ysopets were com- 
posed here. 

"We can observe the English love of the 
Fable outside the special collections devoted 
to it. It is possible that the predilection can 
be traced to the Norman element, for one of 
the few material relics of William the Con- 
queror, the famous piece of tapestry now at 
Bayeux, attributed to the fair hands of his 
Queen Matilda, contains representations of a 
dozen ^sopic fables on the lower border of the 

As they represent the first contact of Eng- 

* As it is, we have permitted M. Hervieux to compile 
his Corpus Fabularum medii cevi from MSS. the majority 
of which were in English libraries. 


land with the Fables, we have selected four of 
them — our old friend The Wolf and Crane, The 
Fox and Croiv, The Eagle and Tortoise, which 
has been broken literally in two, and The Wolf 
and Lamh — as a suitable frontispiece to this 
introduction to the first English printed version 
of them.* They are represented with some 
spirit and sense of humour, considering the 
impracticable nature of their medium. t It is 
probable that they are to be affiliated with the 
collection of Ademar, since Matilda was fi-om 
Flanders. Indeed M. Comte observes that the 
figures are closely alHed to those given in the 
Ley den MS. of Ademar. There is a certain 
amount of likeness between the Bayeux Wolf 
and Lamb and that figured in our Caxton, 
which derives through a French imitation of 
Stainhowel's woodcut, which probably repro- 

* They have been taken from J. Comte's photographic 
reproductions of the Tapestry {La tapisserie de Bayeux, 
Rouen, 1879), pi. iv.-vi. Others occur on pi. i (Tiuo 
Bitches ?), iv-vi. {Nulla vestigia), vii. {Fox and Goat), 
viii. {Lion's Share), x.-xii. {S^callow and Birds), xl. {Ass 
in Lion's Skin ?), xiv. {f Ephesian Widow). Du Meril 
(p. 176) adds Fox and Grapes, but I could not identify 

+ We have endeavoured to reproduce the stitching of 
the tapestry. 


duced the traditional representation in MSS. 
The Bayeux version deals, however, with the 
first act of the tragedy; the wolf, it will be 
observed, is lapping the stream which the 
needlewoman has carefully represented run- 
ning down to the lamb. The presence of The 
Eagle and Tortoise from Avian among the 
Romulean Fables requires some comment. It 
illustrates the early date at which the more 
popular portions of Avian were interpolated in 
the Romulus.* The fact that the Fables were 
chosen to adorn a great national monument is 
sufiicient to indicate their popularity among 
the Normans, among whom we find the same 
throughout their predominance in England, t 

When John of Salisbury in the next century 
bears from the mouth of a Pope the venerable 
apologue of The Belly and Members (ii. 6. 24) 
Poly., it is an Englishman, Nicholas Brakespeare 

* Our Eo. IV. XX. [Oak and Reed) is not in the Burneian 
Romulus. I suspect, too, that Ro. I. xx. (Swallow and 
Birds, Eom. I. xix. ) is an earlier interpolation from 

t The presence of iEsopic fables on the Tapestry used 
to be one of the arguments against its authenticity (Free- 
man, Norm. Conq., iii. S71-2). The argument was invalid, 
since we know of MSS. of the Fables of the tenth {Rufus, 
Burneian) and eleventh (Ademar) centuries. 


(Adrian IV.), speaking to an Englishman. 
When Ptichard Creur de Lion, after his return 
from captivity in 1194, wished to rebuke the 
Barons for their ungrateful conduct, he told 
them the Eastern apologue of The Ulan, Lion, 
and Serj)e7if, who were all three rescued from 
a pit by a peasant. The lion shortly after- 
wards brings his benefactor a leveret, the ser- 
pent a precious jewel, but the man, on being 
applied to for the promised reward, drives 
away his deliverer. This is no other than the 
Karma Jdtalva (given by Benfey from a Tibetan 
version, pp. 195-8), though Richard doubtless 
had heard it orally, as the ungrateful one is 
said to be Vitalis, a Venetian.* 

But it is in the popular literature of anecdote 
and sermon that we find the popularity of the 
Fable in England best verified. When Odo de 

* Matthew Paris' addition to Disset [suh. anno 1195, ed. 
Luard, ii. 413-6). See Benfey's interesting and long § 71. 
Cf., too, Go war, Conf. Aman. v. 6, ed. Morley, 276-8. We 
may have here the clue to the relationship between Bera- 
chyah's collection and that of the Armenian Eremia, since 
Cyprus, the home of Richard's Queen, Berengaria, was at 
that time in intimate relations with Armenia (cf. Stubbs' 
Lectures, p. 161). Isaac Comnenus, the Basileus of Cyprus, 
whom Richard deposed, had been for some time ruler of 
Armenia. It is not, however, in Marie or Berachyah. 


Cerintonia (? Sherington in "Warwick) in the 
tliirteenth century collected his Narrationes, 
more than half were fables, and the same applies 
to John of Sheppey in the next century. John 
of Salisbury's Polycraticus has several fables ; so 
has Mapes' Poems, and even Neckam's De Na- 
titris Reram. The collections of examples for 
the use of the clergy in their sermons by Holkot, 
by Bromyard (^Surnma Predicanthmi), or by 
Nicole Bozon, an English Franciscan monk, 
who wrote in French (Romania xv. 343, G. 
Paris, Lit. franc- au moijeji age, §§ 81, 152), are 
filled with fables. The poets also made use 
of them. Gower and Lydgate occur in our 
Parallels, and Chaucer seems to have been 
acquainted with Alfred's -(35sop.* 

As the Middle Ages died away, England lost 
her hegemony in the realm of Fable, and at the 
invention of printing it was Germany that took 
the lead in spreading a knowledge of ^sop 
through Europe, by means of printed books. 
The first German book printed was Boner's 
Edelstein of 100 fables. HeLnrich Stainhowel 
brought together in his Asop the four books of 

* The quotation from Ysope in llic Tale of MelihcEUS 
seems to refer to Extrav. vii. 


the Romulus, really as we have seen prose ver- 
sions of Phsedrus, and selections from the other 
collections, 1 7 from the century of Greek fables 
translated by Ranuzio, 27 from the prose ver- 
sions of Avian, and 1 7 from a source which has 
never yet been identified, and called by him 
V Fabulce Extravagantes. For the majority of 
these I have found parallels in Marie or 
Berachyah, or both, and it is possible that we 
have in the Fabulce Extravagantes a German 
revision of Alfred's ^sop.* At any rate they 
are of the same branch, and represent Alfred's 
collection in the modern European -55 sop. For 
Stainhowel's Asop f is the parent of all the 
printed ^sops of Europe. He himself gave a 
German translation of his Latin text. Jules 
Machault, a monk at Lyons, next translated 
the fables into French, and Caxton, without 
much loss of time, turned this into English in 

* It is from them that we get The Dog and Manr/er and 
The Fox (with manywiles) anci Cat (with one), which occur 
in the Greek, but not in the Latin Jilsop. This is, as we 
have seen, a characteristic mark of Alfred's ^sop. The 
only MS. containing the Extravagantes is the Breslau MS. 
of Petrus Alphonsus. 

t Oesterley edited this for the Stuttgart Literarischer 
Verein, End. 117, but very perfunctorily, and missing a 
grand opportunity. 


the winter and spring of 14S3-4. Next year 
an Italian version of Stainhbwel by one Tuppo 
appeared at Venice, then a Dutch version was 
made from the French of Machault in 1490, 
and Spain, late as usual, added ^sop to her 
printed books by the hands of the Infante 
Henrique in 1496.* All these editions — Latin, 
German, French, English, Italian, Dutch, and 
Spanish, have the Fables ari-anged in the same 
order, and are illustrated by woodcuts plainly 
copied from one another. Thus in explaining 
W\e provenance of our Caxton, we have practi- 
cally performed the same task for the European 
-^sop : our bibliography would serve equally 
well mutatis mutandis, for the first edition 
of -^sop in German, Latin, French, Italian, 
Dutch and Spanish.! 

Our Caxton is an average specimen of the 

* Conservative Spain has remained true to the Stainhbwel 
ever since. I have a duodecimo of the early part of this cen- 
tury, still following his order, and with plates which are 
merely reductions of the earliest woodcuts. There was a 
Catalan version made from this in 1682 (Du Meril, p. 161). 

t I have, however, given a predominance to the English 
references, as is but natural. The French references are 
to be found in Robert's or Regnier's Lafontaine, the German 
in Oesterley's scattered references (chiefly in his edition of 
Kirchhof ), and in Kurz' excellent edition of Waldis, and the 
Italian, partly, in Ghivizzani. 


worthy printer's style and literary attainments. 
These do not reach a very high standard, nor 
was there much opportunity for the display of 
any great literary gifts in the translation of 
such mediocre productions as the mediaeval 
Latin prose versions of Phasdrus, Avian, and 
the rest. At times he stumbles in his render- 
ing, at times he calmly reproduces a French 
word for which he had no translation handy ; 
most of the words in our glossary are Gallicisms 
of this sort. The important thing to notice 
about Caxton's relation to our literature is the 
admirable taste he displayed in the selection of 
EngKsh works which he considered worthy of 
being printed. A History of the World (Higden's 
Polychronicon),a. History of England (Chronicle), 
a Geography {Description of Britain), an 
encyclopaedia of science, such as it was {Mirrour 
oftliQ World), and proverbial philosophy (Dides, 
Moral Proverbs), were among his contributions 
to knowledge. For practical life he- had to 
offer manuals of behaviour {Courtesy, Good 
Manners), a family medicine {Gouvernal of 
Health), the legal enactments of his time 
{Statutes of Hen. VII.), the noble game {Chesse), 
a courtier's guide (Curial), and a knight's 


(Order of Chivalrij). As " stuff o' the imagina- 
tion " he provided his countrymen with charac- 
teristic specimens of the three great English 
poetic names — Chaucer, Gower, Lydgate (Can- 
terbury Tales, Gonfcssio Amantis, Chorle and 
Bird), and equally characteristic examples of 
mediseval romance, classical (Recueil, Eneydos, 
Jason), national (Charles, Arthur), allegorical 
(Fame, Love), and satirical (Reynard). In 
ghostly instruction his books taught the Chris- 
tian how to pray (Fifteen Oes), how and when 
to be edified (Festial, Four Sermons), what ex- 
amples to follow in life (Golden Legend), how 
to die (Art and Graft of Dying, Deatlibed 
Prayers), and what to expect after death (Pil- 
grimage of the Soul). Altogether considering 
Caxton was publisher as well as author and 
printer, he showed himself fully ahead of the 
taste of his day and went far towards producing 
the hundred best books in English for his day 
and hour. 

Not least did he show his taste and insight in 
selecting our -i3llsop for one of his most am- 
bitious productions. After all, the books that 
are really European may even at the present 
day be counted on the fingers of one hand, and 


^sop is one of the five if they reach to so 
many,* Merely regarded from the number of 
editions it went through,! Caxton's ^sop was 
his most popular production. But the popu- 
larity of such a book as ^sop is not to be 
judged by the number of reprints any particular 
version of it goes through. To take a modern 
instance, booksellers tell us that the only book 
of fairy tales that will take with the general 
public is "Grimm's Goblins." Yet there is no 
particular version of this that rules the book- 
market, and it is rather the number of versions 
that affords the strongest testimony to their 
popularity. So with iEsop ; it is the number 
of competing adaptations that speaks most 
clearly for its hold on the popular mind. It is 
of course impossible for me here to go through 
all these, and I must content myself with point- 

* The Bible (i.e., Genesis, some Psalms and the Gospels), 
Ji]sop (selections in reading-books) and Eobinson Crusoe 
are, so far as I can think, the only really j^opular books 
throughout Europe, i.e., which every European who can 
read has read. I would add The Pilgrims Progress, but 
fear that English prepossessions cause me to exaggerate 
its wide-spread popularity. (I doubt, e.g., whether it is 
much read in Russia.) 

t Six, the princeps (14S4), Tynson's (1500), Waley's (1570), 
Hebb'stwo (1634, 1647), and Roper's (1658), 


ing out the versions that found most favour 
with English folk in the generations that suc- 
ceeded Caxton.* 

The popularity of ^sop in the sixteenth 
century was shown by a curious \ise of them 
made by W. Bullokar, the earliest English 
spelling reformer. In order to convince his 
countrymen of the unwisdom of their ways, he 
selected the most popular book he could think 
of to exemplify his own more perfect way of 
spelling, and published "^sop3 Fabl} in tru 
OrtSgraphy" (1585). But Caxton had too 
strong a hold on English affection to be re- 
placed, and he held sway far into the seven- 
teenth century. Towards the end of this, how- 
ever, his diction began to fail to be under- 
standed of the vulgar. John Ogilby offered the 
English public the additional attraction of verse 
and of " sculptures " by Hollar and Barlow 
(1651, 1668). Sir Roger L'Estrange gave the 
further advantage of adding most of the new 
sets of fables that had been edited abroad, so 

• The British Museum publishes at a nominal price the 
article " J5sop" of the printed catalofrue. This contains 
some 500 numbers, of which about 120 refer to English 
editions. This, of course, has to be supplemented by the 
articles "Bidpai," " Babrius," "Fable," and "Phajdrus." 


that his collection (500 numbers against the 
160 or so of Caxton's), is still the most ex- 
tensive in existence.* It has besides some 
place in the European history of the fable, as 
188 fables of it passed by way of German into 
Russian, and there gave rise, so far as I can 
learn, to Krilof and his school.! A factitious 
interest was given to ^sop in the learned 
world towards the end of the seventeenth 
century, by its forming a side issue of the 
Phalaris controversy J which probably helped 
to keep L'Estrange's bulky tome in demand to 
the tune of seven editions. He inflicted on 
^sop the additional indignity of " applications " 

* A fine reprint of it was published a few years ago by 
"John Gray & Co." 1879. 

f On him see the late Mr. Kalston's Krilof and his Fables. 
Krilof, I may add, was only the chief of a whole school of 
of Russial fabulists (Chemnitzer, Dimitrief, Glinka, Gon- 
charof), who afford another instance of the political use of 

X Prof. Jebb {Bentley, pp. 52, 72), notices a curious 
instance of this. All the fat had originally been spilt on 
the fire by the young editors of Phalaris speaking of ' ' the 
singular humanity " of the King's Librarian (Bentley) in 
refusing them the use of a MS. of Phalaris. In Alsop's 
collection of Greek fables with Latin translations (1698) 
there is mention of "the singular humanity "of The Dog 
in the Manger. As this is the last fable of the set it was 
probably added for the sake of the sting in its tail. 


in addition to " morals " ; these were intended 
to promote the Jacobite cause, 

L'Estrange was succeeded on the vEsopic 
throne of England by the Rev. S. Croxall, 
whose reign lasted throughout the eighteenth 
century, and whose dynasty still flourishes 
among us in the Gliandos Classics. It says 
much for the vitality of ^sop that he has sur- 
vived so long under the ponderous morals and 
" applications " — Whig against L'Estrange's 
Jacobitism — with which the reverend gentle- 
man loaded his author. It is probable, how- 
ever, that ^sop came to the public with slighter 
impedimenta than these. Last century was 
the era of the chap-book and the caterers of 
Aldermary Churchyard did not omit specimens 
of ^sop among their wares. I can scarcely 
commend the selection they made. The only 
chap-book .5l]sop in the British Museum (that 
reprinted by Mr. Ash ton in his Chap-books), 
seems to have gone out of its way to select the 
dozen most obscure fables ; three of them in- 
deed I cannot even trace elsewhere. Perhaps 
the compilers were looking for novelty rather 
than familiarity and assumed that the fables 
better known to us would be also known to 

VOL. I. N 


their customers through reading-books. For 
it is by means of selections in reading-books 
that ^sop has been most widely spread; I 
myself must confess my indebtedness to the 
venerable Mavor for my first introduction to 
^-Esop, and many of my readers will have had 
the same experience.* The spread of ^sop's 
Fables among the people is proved by the 
existence of many popular proverbs derived 
from them.t But how they got to the people 
and how they are transmitted there is singularly- 
little evidence to show. The collectors of popu- 
lar tales and traditions, who have now exhausted 
Europe, have left yEsop's Fables aside, seem- 
ingly of malice prepense. They seemed to have 
thought that they would be ofFeiing nothing 
new in such well-known apologues, whereas it 
would be of extreme interest to study the 
variations they underwent as they passed from 
mouth to mouth. I 

* For this reason I have included Mavor in my biblio- 
graphy. I have used the 322nd edition, the earliest I could 
get access to. 

f I have given for England a score or so examples from 
Mr. Hazlitt's collection. He omits, however, owing to his 
plan, proverbial expressions like dog in the manger, &c. 

X Partial exception is afforded by Hahn's Grieek. 
Mdhrchen, which contains three (87, 91, 93). Curiously 


There is still another means by which ^sop 
reaches the folk, and especially the little folk, 
and that is by pictorial illustration. Most of 
the -^sops that have been popular among us 
for the last half-century, have appealed to the 
eye as well as the understanding. The Rev. 
T. James, had the luck to have his new version 
of the fables (1848), adorned by the pure and 
classic outline of John Tenniel. This has 
caused his version to be a favourite one, and 
early impressions command a high price. The 
Rev. G. F. Townsend, who edited no less than 
two entirely different ^sopic collections in 
two years, one an adaptation of Croxall (1S66, 
now in the Chandos Classics) toning down his 
ponderosities, the other a selection of 300 trans- 
lated from the Greek Prose ^sop (1867), em- 
bellished the latter with some very passable 
designs of H. Weir. Recently two of the best 
known illustrators of books have applied their 
skill to the ever young ^sop. If ever there 
was a man who seemed specially designed by 

enough they are all from the Fabula extravapantes (iv. 
V. X.). Is it possible that they retain traces of a Middle 
Greek derivate of the original of Alfred's ^sop? There 
are also a couple among the Nivernais folk-tales, collected 
by M. A. Millin in Archivio jior trad. pop. iv. 


every natural gift to make ^sop live again in 
line, tone, and colour, it was Randolph Calde- 
cott ; who that remembers his dog in TJie House 
that Jack Built, will deny the assertion ? Yet 
he denied it himself practically in his own 
attempt, which can scarcely be pronounced a 
success; perhaps he was too much taken up 
with his maladroit plan of accompanying each 
fable with a modern instance.* Mr. Walter 
Crane has succeeded better in his Bahi/s Own 
jEsop, and has given us 65 admirable decorative 
designs taken from -(Esop. But he suffers from 
the malady of us all — over- seriousness, and has 
left out of his ingredients that pinch of humour 
that has savoured the fabulist and kept the 
^sopic jests of the ancients sweet throughout 
the ages.t 

Their vitality and power in England have 
been shown in various ways. They have re- 
ceived the flattery of imitation from many 

* The plan may have been suggested by a similar col- 
lection done by Mr. Charles Bennet somewhere in the 
"sixties." Prof. Rankine performed a curious tour de 
force by inventing fables to correspond to well-known iun- 
signs, e.g., Pig and Whistle, Goat and Compasses, &c. 

f I have collated all the English editions here mentioned 
for the parallels : they will serve at least to show the 
relative popularity of each fable. 


hands; only two of these many attempts at 
*' original " fables deserve notice. John Gay 
tried to be the English Lafontaine, but de- 
parted from his model in attempting to add 
new fables instead of contenting himself with 
adorning the old ; he only succeeded in one 
case, The Hare with many Friends. In our own 
days Lord Lytton has tried to allegorise the 
complexities and subtleties of modern life in 
" Fables in Song," but the task was a hopeless 
one from the start, ^sop's Fables have suf- 
fered too from the parodist* and the caricatu- 
rist, and in all the curious ways in which the 
modern world shows an inverted respect for 
things of old ^sop has shown that he has 
obtained a lasting hold on the minds of men, 

Vivu' volat per ora virAm.t 

* The best of these I have seen is a little volume of 
FaUes out of the [New York] World, by "G. Washington 
Jisop " but they are poor fooling at the best. 

t The fables live yet. I have noticed a couple of in- 
stances of effective use of them in Mr. Stevenson's latest 
masterpiece, The Master of Ballantrae (The Viper and 
File, p. 206, and The Goose with Golden Eggs, p. 300). 



AiauTTiKov yiXoiov t) av^apiTLKov. 

— Akistoph. Vesp. 1259. 

®mne genus fabularum probatur contra bomlnes. ©uis cnim 
mains nisi bomo. et quis bonus nisi bomo ? 

Romulus II. Prol. 

We have now commented upon all the sections 
of our Caxton which contain Beast-Fables pure 
and simple. There still remain two others 
which, interesting as they are in their way, 
have but slight connection with our subject, 
and must therefore be dismissed somewhat 
cavalierly. They owe their place in the Euro- 
pean -i3ilsop to Stainhowel, who gives an elabo- 
rate but lame excuse for inserting them. At 
the same time they are both interesting in 
themselves, and illustrate a characteristic ten- 
dency of the fable which has clung to it 
throughout its history. For this reason I 
have retained them in the present reprint, 
especially as one of the Romulus fables has 
got mixed among them. 

The first set of Fahulce colledoe, as Stainhowel 
called them, are a selection from the DiscipUna 
clericalis of Petrus Alphonsus, a Spanish Jew, 


of the beginning of the twelfth century. All 
that is known of him is that his Jewish name 
was Moses Sephardi (the Spaniard), and that 
he was baptized by the name of Petrus Alphon- 
sus under the auspices of Alfonso II. (Petrus 
Raimundus) in 1 1 06. He wrote an interesting 
set of dialogues between the old Adam of Moses 
Sephardi and the new man of Petrus Alphonsus, 
in order to convert the Jews. But he chiefly 
interests here as the compiler of a collection of 
tales from Jewish and Arabic sources, intended 
for seasoning to sermons, and so termed Dis- 
ciplina clericalis. There can have been few 
ladies attending service in those days, for 
few of the tales admit of being told '• in the 
pi"esence of Mrs. Boffin." They were extra- 
ordinarily popular, however, and spread through- 
out Europe fi'om Spain to Iceland.* They are 
interesting for their early date, being the first 
set of Oriental tales to reach Europe. They 
introduced a new genre into European literature, 

* The only edition accessible of them is that appended to 
Gering's Islensk jEventyri. V. Schmidt's edition is rare, 
and that of the Societd des lihliopkiles was almost "printed 
as MS.," as the Germans say. Schmidt's text was re- 
printed in vol. clvii. of that omnium gatherum, Migne's 
PatrologicE Cursus. 


for Alfonso (Pere Aunfors) is the father of the 
Fabliau, and thus the grandfather of the Italian 
novel, and so an ancestor of the Elizabethan 
Drama. It is curious that the esprit gmdois 
of the Fabliaux is largely traceable to a book 
of translations from the Arabic originally in- 
tended for ghostly instruction, and so entitled.* 
The other set of the Fahulx Colledaz are a 
selection of the milder specimens of the Facetise. of 
Poggio Bracciolini (1381-1459), apostolic secre- 
tary to eight successive Popes. He is still better 
known as one of the most indefatigable col- 
lectors of classical MSS. : almost all the editiones 
principes of the classic authors were made from 
MSS. collected by Poggio. The only MS. 
which he left of his own was a collection of 
anecdotes grivoises, which got into print some 
ten years after his death. They represent the 
Humanist reaction against the over-strained 
and somewhat sensual chastity of mediaeval 
Christianity. They are mostly tales of a kind 

* It is probable that Alfonso's collection was originally 
much larger, and that many more of the fabliaux might 
be traced to it, De Castro speaks of the Escurial copy 
being in three books, a division of which there is no trace 
and for which there is opportunity in the thirty-nine tales 
of the extant collection. I regret I did not examine the 
MS. on my visit to the Escurial aliad agens, last year. 


which we do not tell or print now-a-days ; or 
which, to speak more frankly, we only tell when 
we are young and only print privately in limited 
editions of 1000 copies.* The few that have 
got into the Caxton have passed through the 
censorship of two Teutons, of colder and manlier 
mould than the apostolic secretary of eight 
popes, and I have merely had to omit one as 
being only suitable for the newspaper reports 
of the Court of Probate and Divorce. 

The Fahulx Collectx represent a tendency 
by which the fable has been marked throughout 
its history. Throughout ancient times it was 
regarded as a species of the Jest, a kind of 
Beast-Jest, as it were. This aspect is its point 
of contact with the Obscene Tale which has 
always been connected with it ; the Beast- Jest 
and the Beastly Jest go together. And both 
forms are just the kind of tale which passes 
easiest . by word of mouth from men of one 
nationality to those of another. Sir Robert 
Walpole gave the brutal excuse for the freedom 
of his talk that obscenities were the one topic 

* There is of course a whole literature of this kind, the 
mere description of which fills seven volumes of a Biblio- 
graphic de I'amour, a veritable Cloaca Maxima of biblio- 

202 F ACETIC. 

in which men of all shades of political opinion 
were interested after dinner. The folk-lorist 
has to recognise much the same with regard to 
the social intercourse of men of different 
nations. Hahn, in the admirable introduction 
to his collection of GriechiscJie unci alhanesische 
Mdhrchen (1864), makes it a great point against 
the borrowing theory of the diffusion of folk- 
tales, that the only kind which he had observed 
to pass between men of various nationalities 
during his travels in the Levant, was the 
Schwank, Droll or Jest. It is accordingly im- 
portant from this point of view to emphasise 
the Jest-like nature of the Fable which thus 
becomes exempt from Hahn's objection to the 
borrowing theory. Perhaps, the secret of the 
matter is, that neither the Beast Tale nor the 
Obscene Jest touch upon any of the prejudices, 
local, national and religious, which separate the 
the various sections of mankind. They are 
both " universally human " to use the technical 
term of folk-lore ; they both, let us rather say, 
appeal to the common animality of man. 

Meanwhile it is possible that the collections 
on which we are commenting have a connec- 
tion, somewhat closer than mere resemblance, 


with the " Sybaritic Jests," which are so closely 
connected with ^sop's Fables in antiquity. 
Alfonso's Discipline for the Clergy probably 
represents the offscourings of Levant talk 
into which some of the Milesian Tales of the 
ancients may have penetrated.* Poggio again 
was likely to be on the scent for the more 
malodorous portions of Latin literature, and 
his Facetiae may preserve some that could trace 
back to the luxury and vice of Sybaris, This 
result would at any rate complete the repre- 
sentative character of our collection. The first 
four books of it can be traced back to Demet- 
rius' Assemblies of jEsopian Tales. The selec- 
tions from Remicius and Avian preserve for 
us, it is probable, pai-ts of the Lybian Tales of 
Kybises, the Fabulce Fxtravagantes represent 
the mediaeval ^sop of Alfred. Is it possible 
that the Fabliaux of Alfonso and the Facetiae of 
Poggio are in any way survivals of the Milesian 
and Sybaritic Jests that always went hand-in- 
hand with the Ancient Fable 1 t 

* The latest account of these is by E. Rhode. Verhandl. 
d. 25, Phil.-sammlunf/, p. 66. 

t It was this contamination with broader elements that 
caused Luther to set about making a cleaner collection of 
the albern Kinderbuch so Esopus hcisst. 

204 FABLE. 

Having said so much of Fables, it only 
remains to say something about the Fable. 
For the dictionary-maker we may define it 
as a short humorous allegorical tale, in which 
animals act in such a way as to illustrate a 
simple moral truth or inculcate a wise maxim.* 
This definition, somewhat unwieldy, we fear, will 
distinguish the Beast- Fable from the Allegory 
proper by its shortness and its use of animal 
actors, and from the Parable by the latter char- 
acteristic and its humorous tinge.f Its anec- 
dotic character differentiates the Fable from the 
proverb, from which it is often otherwise diflS- 
cult to distinguish it. The Arabic proverb about 
the ostrich, They said to the camel-bird, " Fly ; " 
it said " I am a beast : " they said " Carry ; " it 

* Some fables, i.e., teach us an elementary lesson in 
moral psychology, others give us some advice in some of 
the simpler relations of life. It might be added that a 
literary comment in general adds the truth or maxim in the 
form of a Moral. 

t There are some good remarks on the distinction between 
the Fable and the Parable in Trench's Lessons on the Par- 
ables. He points out that the use of animals in the Fable 
prevents its application to the higher ethical relations of 
men with which the Parable mainly deals. It is probable 
that this may account for the Jewish neglect of the Fable, 
for which the Hebrews showed some aptitude in the earlier 
periods when the best minds of the nation were less strenu- 
ously occupied with the higher problems of life. 


said " I am a bird," is on the border-line between 
the two.* It is of more importance to distinguish 
the Beast- Fable from the Beast-Tale in general, 
and even from the Beast-Satire. It is a highly 
specialised form of the Beast-Tale, distinguished 
by its moral tendency. The Germans speak of 
a certain kind of novels as forming the class of 
TendeJiz- Roman. The Fable, as we use the 
word,! is in a similar way what a German 
might call a Tendenz-Tier-Sclnoanl\ and may be 
further distinguished from the Beast-Satire by 
the characteristic that its " tendency " is moral 
and not satirical. I may perhaps render clearer 
the distinctions I wish to make by giving them, 
more meo, in a genealogical table, in which, how- 
ever, the poverty of our folk-lore terminology 
will cause me, I fear, to use many a term of 
forbidding and Teutonic description. 

* Our proverb, A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush, 
is a Fable in petto. The ready passage of fable into proverb 
and vice versd shows the indistinctness of the border line 
between the two. Cf. supra p. 108. 

t Modern English has specialised it to apply only to the 
Beast-Fable. In earlier times it was applied to any tale. 
Dryden's Fables are stories of men and women, not of 



The Tale ^ 


The DroU 

Fairy -Tale 

Obscene Jest 






(e.g. Reynard, 
Uncle Remus) 


The Fable 


I I 

Greek Indian 

"^sopic" "Lybian' 

The Fable, according to this classification, is 
a Moral Tendency-Beast-Droll. It is impor- 
tant to make these somewhat fine distinctions, 
as much confusion has been caused in the 
discussion of the origin of the Fable by a 
neglect of them.f Writers who desii-e to 
make the Fable "universally human" point 
to animistic beast-tales or satiric beast-drolls 
in Polynesia, Caffraria, Assyria, and so on. 
But in so doing they leave out the differentia 
of the Fable, and forget that they have failed 
to find any moral tendency in their so-called 

* The classification is rough, and does not profess to be 

f I must confess myself a sinner in this regard in my dis- 
cussion on this point in my BLdpai, pp. xxsix. -xlix. 


Polynesian, Assyrian, or Hottentot Fables. 
Of course it is difficult to draw the distinction, 
and many animistic Beast-Tales and Beast- 
Satires occur in the collection of Fables we 
have been considering. The simplest criterion 
is perhaps to be found in Horace's line, 

Mutato nomiue de te Fabula narratur. 

The best Greek and Indian Fables come home 
to one at once on the mere statement of the 
case, and this " coming home " quality is their 

The artistic qualities needed to produce this 
effect are seemingly simple, but they have rarely 
been fovmd cunningly mixed in the due propor- 
tions. The situation depicted in the action should 
be grotesque ; its very incongruity is part of 
the convention of the Fable. A crane with its 
neck voluntarily inserted halfway down a lion's 
throat, a jay bedecked with peacock's plumes, 
a mouse nibbling at a hon's toils; these things 
never were on sea or land. It is therefore this 
un-nature that causes us to recognise that more 
is meant than meets the ear, that we are not 
merely going to hear a Beast-Anecdote (of 
which The Crow and Pitcher may be taken as 

2o8 FABLE. 

a type). It depends upon the tone in which 
the extra-implication is suggested whether the 
Beast-Tale has become a Beast-Satire or a 
Beast-Fable, If the narrator slily points the 
finger of scorn at the world as it too often is — 
the world of self-interest, greed and cunning — 
the result is a Beast-Satire. If what is imphed 
refers to the world of moral ends, the realm of 
self-abnegation, of gratitude, and of affection, 
we have a Beast- Fable. The choice of beasts 
as the medium of satire or morality naturally 
restricts the motives which can be depicted. 
The life of animals as observed by man, or at 
least by early man, is seemingly one monotonous 
round of greed, cruelty, revenge, and self-seek- 
ing, brightened only by parental joys. It is 
accordingly with those vices and this virtue 
that the Fable chiefly deals. All that is meant 
by culture — knowledge, beauty, love, considera- 
tion for others — is beyond its range. Hence 
the adaptation of the fable to the childish 
and childlike minds.* I may add that as part 
of the convention of the Fable we have types 
of virtues and vices represented by special 

* Its lessons, however, are not very elevating ; it is 
rather its humour that appeals most strongly. 


animals : courage by the lion, greed by tlie wolf, 
cunning by the fox, brute strength by the bear, 
innocence of the lamb, and so on. It is pos- 
sible that it was by this specialising of types 
that early man began his lessons in moral 
abstx-action ; to him cunning was foxiness, mag- 
naminity leonineity, cruelty wolfhood. Even 
to the present day we have no other way of re- 
ferring to one of the ruling motives in a capi- 
talistic society than by speaking of The Dog 
in the Manger. 

It follows from all this that the Fable is 
a highly specialised form of the universally 
human tendency to tell a Tale. We should 
not therefore be surprised if it only occurs in 
full vigour in one or two of the great civilisa- 
tions. We have seen sporadic examples of the 
Beast-Fable, or perhaps rather Beast-Satire, 
in Egypt, Judaea, Rome, and Arabia, but the 
Fable proper, in full and free development, is 
only found in Greece and India. This result 
at first sight seems to tell strongly in favour 
of Benfey's borrowing theory of the diffusion 
of folk-tales and of Herr Gruppe's " revela- 
tionist " views as to the origin of myths. But 
the highly specialised character of the Fable 

VOL. I. O 



prevents us from applying results obtained 
from consideration of its history to the more 
general question of origin, while its Droll 
character will explain its moi'e easy trans- 
mission. These considerations minimise the 
general bearing of our results, which would 
otherwise be conclusively decisive in favour 
of Benfey, M. Cosquin, and Herr Gruppe. * 

The specialised character of the Fable again 
renders it diflQcult to speak of it in any abstract 
or general way. We cannot speak of Fable in 
general when we only know of Greek and of 
Indian Fables in particular. This suggests 
that we may get more easily at their Wesen 
by studying their Werde?i. This is the more 
necessary, as hitherto we have told the tale of 
the Fable backwards more in the order of dis- 
covery t than of development, more in logical 
than chronological progression. The reader 

* Another point of difference is that the transmission of 
the Fable, so far as we can trace it, has been almost en- 
tirely literary. It is only in the early " Libyan " Fables 
tliat we seem to see any evidence of oral tradition of 
Fables from one nation to another. 

t It may interest the reader to know that most of my 
new points occuiTed to me as I came to examine and write 
upon the various divisions of my subject. This will at 
anyrate be proof that I did not arrive at them d priori 
ia the interest of any particular theory. 


will pi'obably be glad to have the somewhat 
abstruse and complicated inquiries on which we 
have been engaged summed up for him in the 
shape of a Short History of the Fable.* 

Most nations develope the Beast-Tale as part 
of their folk-lore, some go further and apply it 
to satiric purposes, and a few nations afford 
isolated examples of the shaping of the Beast 
Tale to teach some moral truth by means of the 
Fable properly so-called. But only two peoples 
— independently — made this a general practice. 
Both in Greece and in India we find in the 
earliest litei'ature such casual and frequent 
mention of Fables as seems to imply a body of 
Folk-Fables current among the people. And 
in both countries special circumstances raised the 
Fable from folk-lore into literature. In Greece 
during the epoch of the Tyrants, when free 
speech was dangerous, the Fable was largely 
used for political purposes. The inventor of 
this application or the most prominent user 
of it was one ^iSlsop, a slave at Samos whose 

* It is well perhaps to warn the reader that two-thirds 
of the Short History of the Fable he is about to hear 
consists of discoveries or hypotheses of my own which have 
not yet gone through the ordeal of specialist criticism. 

212 FABLE. 

name has ever since been connected with the 
Fable. When free speech was established in 
the Greek democracies, the custom of using 
Fables in harangues was continued and en- 
couraged by the rhetoricians (Arist. Rliei. ii. 
20), while the mirth-producing qualities of the 
Fable caused it to be regarded as fit subject 
of after-dinner conversation along with other 
jests of a broader kind ("Milesian," "Sy- 
baritic") This habit of regarding the Fable as 
a form of the Jest intensified the tendency to 
connect it with a well-known name as in the 
case of our Joe Miller, About 300 B.C. Deme- 
trius Phalereus, whilom tyrant of Athens and 
founder of the Alexandria Library, collected 
together all the Fables he could find under the 
title of Assemblies of jEsopic Tales. This col- 
lection, running probably to some 200 Fables, 
after being interpolated and edited by the 
Alexandrine grammarians, was turned into 
neat Latin iambics by Phsedrus, a Greek freed- 
man of Augustus in the early years of the 
Christian era. 

In India the great ethical reformer, Saky- 
amuni, initiated (or adopted from the Brahmins) 
the habit of using: the Beast-Tale for moral 


purposes, or in other words, transformed it into 
the Fable proper. A collection of these seems 
to have existed mdependently in which the 
Fables were associated with the name of a 
m}i;hical sage, Kasyapa.* These were appro- 
priated by the early Buddhists by the simple 
expedient of making Kasyapa the preceding 
incarnation of the Buddha. A number of his 
itiahdsas or Tales were included in the sacred 
Buddhistic work containing the Jdtahas or 
previous-births of the Buddha, in some of 
which the Bodisat (or future Buddha) appears 
as one of the Dramatis Personse of the Fables 
(the Crane, e.g., in our Wolf and Crane being 
one of the incarnations of the Buddha). The 
Fables of Kasyapa or rather the moral verses 
(gdthas) which served as a memoria technica to 
them were probably carried over to Ceylon in 
241 B.C. along with the Jatakas. About 300 
years later (say 50 A.r>.) some loc of these were 
brought by a Cingalese embassy to Alexandria, 
where they were translated under the title of 
"Libyan Fables," which had been earlier 

* Not to be confounded with Buddha's chief disciple of 
the same name, for whom see Mr. Rhys-Dtivida' Buddhism, 
pp. 59, 61, 189. The identity of name may have helped 
the more easy appropriation of Kilsy;i;)a's Itiahdsas. 

214 FABLE. 

applied to similar stories that had percolated to 
Hellas from India; they were attributed to 
" Kybises." This collection seems to have in- 
troduced the habit of summing up the teaching 
of a Fable in the Moral, corresponding to the 
gdtha of the Jatakas. About the end of the first 
century A. D. the Libyan Fables of "Kybises" 
became known to the Rabbinic school at 
Jabne founded by R. Jochanan ben Saccai 
and a number of the Fables translated into 
Aramaic and are still extant in the Talmud 
and Midrash. 

In the Roman world the two collections of 
Demetrius and " Kybises" were brought together 
by Nicostratus, a I'hetor attached to the court 
of Marcus Aurelius. In the earlier part of the 
next century (c. 230 a.d.) this Corpus of the 
ancient fable, ^sopic and Lybian, amounting 
in all to some 300 members, was done into 
Greek verse with Latin accentuation (choli- 
ambics) by Valerius Babrius, tutor to the young 
son of Alexander Severus. Still later, towards 
the end of the fourth century, forty-two of 
these, mainly of the Libyan section, were trans- 
lated into Latin by one Avian, with whom the 
ancient history of the Fable ends. 


In the Middle Ages it was naturally the 
Latin Phaedrus that represented the ^sopic 
Fable to the learned world. A selection of 
some eighty fables was turned into indifferent 
prose in the ninth century, probably at the 
Schools of Charles the Great.* This was attri- 
buted to a fictitious Romulus. Another collec- 
tion by Ademar of Chabannes was made before 
1030, and still preserves some of the lines of 
the lost Fables of Phsedrus. The Fables became 
especially popular among the Normans. A 
number of them occur on the Bayeux Tapestry, 
and in the twelfth century England, the head 
of the Angevin empire, became the home of the 
Fable, all the important adaptations and ver- 
sions of iEsop being made in this country. One 
of these done into Latin verse by Walter the 
Englishman became the standard uSlsop of 
mediaeval Christendom. The same history ap- 
plies in large measure to the Fables of Avian, 
which were done into prose, transferred back 
into Latin verse, and sent forth through Europe 
from England.! 

* Cf. Ebert, AUg. Litt. d. MUtelalters, n. 32, 54. 

t I should perhaps have made some reference to a col- 
lection [Speculum Sapientioe) associated with the name of 
St. Cyril, which is the most original of the mediaeval sets 

2i6 FABLE. 

Meanwhile Babrius had been suffering the 
same fate as Phsedrus. His scazons were 
turned into poor Gi'eek prose, and selections of 
them passed as the original Fables of ^sop. 
Some fifty of these were selected, and with the 
addition of a dozen Oriental fables, were attri- 
buted to an imaginary Persian sage, Syntipas ; 
this collection was translated into Syriac, and 
thence into Arabic, where they passed under 
the name of the legendary Loqman (probably a 
doublet of Balaam). A still larger collection of 
the Greek prose versions got into Arabic, 
where it was enriched by some 60 fables from 
the Arabic Bidpai and other sources, but still 
passed under the name of ^sop. This collec- 
tion, containing 164 fables, was brought to 
England after the Third Crusade of Richard I., 
and translated into Latin by an Englishman 
named Alfred, with the aid of an Oxford Jew 
named Berachyah ha Nakdan, who, on his own 
account, translated a number of the fables into 
Hebrew rhymed prose, under the Talmudic title 

of fables. Graesse has shown that it is of the thirteenth 
century. Why then does he still style it, with Nicholas of 
Pergamus' Dialogus Creaturarum, (of the fourteenth) Die 
beiden altesten latein. Fahelbiicher d. Mittelalters (Stutt- 
gart, 1880) ? 


Mislile Shualim (Fox Fables). Part of Alfred's 
^sop was translated into English alliterative 
verse, and this again was translated about 1220 
into French by Marie de France, who attributed 
the new fables to King Alfred. After her no 
important addition was made to the mediaeval 

With the invention of printing the European 
book of ^sop was compiled by Heinrich Stain- 
howel, who put together the Romulus with 
selections from Avian, some of the Greek prose 
versions from Ranuzio's translation, and a few 
from Alfred's ./Esop. To these he added the 
legendary life of ^sop and a selection of some- 
what loose tales from Petrus Alphonsus and 
Poggio Bracciolini, corresponding to the Milesian 
and Sybaritic tales which were associated with 
the Fable in antiquity. Stainhowel translated 
all this into German, and within twenty years 
his collection had been turned into French, 
English (by Caxton, the book before us), Italian, 
Dutch, and Spanish. Additions were made to 

• The popularity of .<Esop in the Middle Ages was due to 
the general predilection for allegorical teaching. This can 
be traced to the need of symbolical exegesis of the Old 
Testament. Cf. Diestel, Gcsch. d. alt. Test, in christl. 
Kirche, 1869. 

2i8 FABLE. 

it by Brandt and Waldis in Germany, by 
L' Estrange in England, and by Lafontaine in 
Trance; these were chiefly from the larger Greek 
collections published after Stainhowel's day, 
and, in the case of Lafontaine, from Bidpai 
and other Oriental sources. But these additions 
have rarely taken hold, and the ^sop of modern 
Europe is in large measure Stainhowel's, even 
to the present day. Selections from it passed 
into spelling and reading books, and made the 
Fables part of modern European folk-lore.* 

We may conclude this history of ^sop with 
a similar account of the progress of ^sopic in- 
vestigation. First came collection ; the Greek 
JEsop was brought together by ISTeveletus in 
1610, the Latin by Nilant in 1709. The main 
truth about the former was laid down by the 
master-hand of Bentley; the equally great critic 
Lessing began to unravel the many knotty points 
connected with the mediaeval Latin ^sop. His 

* An episode in the history of the modern ^sop deserves 
record, if only to illustrate the law that ^sop always begins 
his career as a political weapon in a new home. When a 
selection of the Fables were translated into Chinese in 1840 
they became favourite reading with the officials, till a high 
dignitary said, "This is clearly directed against ws," and 
ordered ^sop to be included in the Chinese Index Expur- 
gatorius (R. Morris, Cont. Rev. xxxix. p. 731). 


investigations have been carried on and com- 
pleted by three Frenchmen in the present cen- 
tury, Robert, Du Meril, and Hervieux ; while 
three Germans, Crusius, Benfey, and Mall, have 
thrown much needed light on Babrius, on the 
Oriental ^sop, and on Marie de France.* 
Lastly, an Englishman has in the present pages 
brought together these various lines of inquiry, 
and by adding a few threads of his own,t has 
been able to weave them all for the first time 
into a consistent pattern, which, he is painfully 
aware, is sadly wanting in grace and finish, but 
which, he trusts, will not need henceforth to be 
entirely unravelled. 

So much for the past of the Fable. Has it 
a future as a mode of literary expression ? 
Scarcely ; its method is at once too simple and 
too roundabout. Too roundabout; for the truths 
we have to tell we prefer to speak out directly 

* These are the chief names ; others, Hke Landsberger, 
Wagener, and Oesterley, approach them near. The Index 
contains, I believe, every name that has contributed any 
suggestion of importance to ^sopic research. 

t For these see Preface, p. xvi. I might have added 
some hundreds of new parallels recorded during the course 
of this essay and in the Appendix and Synopsis. But these 
crop up as part of the day's work with every serious 
student, and, apart from their bearing on some general 
line of argument, are merely Curiosities of Literature. 

220 FABLE. 

and not by way of allegory. And the truths 
the Fable has to teach are too simple to corre- 
spond to the facts of our complex civilisation ; 
its rude graffiti of human nature cannot repro- 
duce the subtle gradations of modern life. But 
as we all pass through in our lives the various 
stages of ancestral culture, there comes a time 
when these rough sketches of life have their 
appeal to us as they had for our forefathers. 
The allegory gives us a pleasing and not too 
strenuous stimulation of the intellectual powers; 
the lesson is not too complicated for childlike 
minds. Indeed, in their grotesque grace, in 
their quaint humour, in their trust in the 
simpler virtues, in their insight into the cruder 
vices, in their innocence of the fact of sex, 
iEsop's Fables are as little children. They are 
as little children, and for that reason they will 
for ever find a home in the heaven of little 
children's souls. 



MS. Supplemente Arabe, No. 1644. On Title page iu 
pencil "Fables d'Esope." Rather modern manuscript. 
Headings in red. Each fable is repeated twice. The 
story is generally the same ; but the moral different. 
The second redaction seems generally to be shorter 
than the first. 

I. Eagle and Fox (Ro. i. 13, Synt. 24, Soph. 25). 2. 
Fox and Goat (Re. 3, cf. 79). 3. Eagle and Scarabaeus 
(? Ro. i. 14). 4. Fox and Lion (? Ro. i. 4, Soph. 26, cf. 
109). 5. Nightingale and Sparrow-Hawk (Ro. iii. 5). 6. 
"Weasel and Hen (? Re. 4). 7. Fox [commences "A fox 
was made prisoner in a net. Its tail was cut off and it 
fled ; and on account of its great shame it made use of a 
stratagem, &c."] (Halm, 46). 8. Fox and Hanging-Lamp. 
9. Hens and Partridge (Halm, 22). 10. Hunter of Birds 
and the Viper (Halm, 275). 11. Fox and Crocodile (Halm, 

* Kindly communicated by Dr. R. Gotthoil, who desires it to 
be understood that the translation of ttie titles is merely tentative, 
as be had no time to study the contents of the MS. or revise the 
translatian. I have added identifications of about two-thirds of 
the Fables, so far as the mere titles rendered this possible. 


37). 12. The "Writing Beast (? ?). 13. Fox [commences 
"A fox went into the shop of a certain man, &c."] (? Ro. 
ii. 14). 14. Conceited man (Halm, 203). 15. Charcoal- 
burner and Fuller (Halm, 59). 16. He who promised 
that which was impossible. 17. Frogs (? Eo, ii. i). 
18. Two Hunters (? Av. 8). 19. Old Man and Death 
(Halm, 90, Synt. 2, Soph, 3). 20. Decrepit Old Man 
and Physician (e/. 30). 21. Husbandman and his 
Children (? Ex. v. 13). 22. Man and Dogs (? Halm, 
95). 23. Widow and Hen (? Av. 24, Loq. 12, Soph. 
61). 24. Wicked Man (Halm, 55). 25. The Accidents 
of Fortune (? Halm, 316). 26. Enemies (Halm, 144). 27. 
Mouse and Cat (? Re. 8, Soph. 39). 28. Fox and Louse (? 
^sop's Fable, supra, p. 28). 29. Dolphin and Fish (Halm, 
116). 30. Physician and Sick-man (Halm, 169, cf. 20, 39). 
31. Dog and Wolf (Ro. iii. 15). 32. Dog and Hen (Halm, 
225). 33. Lion and Gift (or fetter). 34. Cook and Dog 
(Halm, 232). 35. Lion, Ass, and Fox (Ass' Heart, xxi.). 
36. Lion and Bear (? Halm, 247). 37. Butcher. 38. Dove 
and Ant (Re. 11). 39. Sick-man and Physician [cf. 30). 40. 
Ass and Husbandman (Ro. iii. 18). 41. Hunter and Sparrow. 
42. Executor (?). 43. Young Man and his Mother (Re. 14, 
cf. 130). 44. Tiller and the Sea (Halm, 94). 45. Pome- 
granate and Apple. 46. Peacock and the Raven (Ro. ii. 
IS, Soph. 56). 47. Sow and the Fox (? Ro. ii. 4). 48. 
Mole (? Furia, 177). 49. Bad Grapes and the Chamois. 
50. Swallow and the Bat. 51. Bird and the Child (? j^aWo, 
c. ix.). 52. Hornets and ?. 53. Hares and Frogs (Ro. ii. 
8). 54. Ass and Horse (Ro. iii. 3). 55. Tortoise and 
Eagle (Av. 2). 56. Lover of Gold (Halm, 412). 57. Goose 
and the Sparrow-hawk (? Halm, 170). 58. Man and the 
Flea (Re. 15). 59. Men and Stag. 60. Stag and Mortar 
(? Halm, 227). 61. Stag and Lion (Halm, 128, 129). 62. 


The Lion, Ass, and the Hen (Halm, 323). 63. Dog and 
the Husbandman (? Soph. 67). 64. Sow and the Bitch 
(Halm, 409). 65. Lion and the Wolf (? Halm, 255). 66. 
Serpent and the Lobster (cf. 144). 67. Tiller and the Wolf 
(? Halm, 2S3). 68. Eagle and the Geese. 69. Lobster and 
the Fox (? Halm, 36). 70. Man and his Wife [commenc- 
ing : "A woman had a drunken husband, &c."] (Halm, 
108). 71, The Abyssinian (Loq. 17, 23, Soph. i. 59). 72. 
Divining Woman (? Halm, 112). 73. Woman and her 
Slaves (? Halm, no). 74. Cricket (? Halm, 400). 75. 
Suail (? Halm, 214). 76. Cat and the ?. 77. Tiller. 78. 
Wolves and the Honey. 79. Goat and the Wolf (cf. 2). 
80. Two Men [commences : "Two men were walking on a 
road when one of them found a bird. Then the other one 
turned to him, &c."]. 81, Man and the Dogs. 82, Singer. 
83. Haven and Serpent (Halm, 207). 84. Raven [com- 
mences : "A man seized a raven and bound its foot, &c."]. 
85. Man and Savage (Av. 22). 86. Hermes (?) and Zeus (?) 
(Furia, 365). 87. Wolf and Darkness. 88. Robber and Hen 
(Halm, 19s). 89. Hares. 90. Ant [commences " In olden 
times they imagined that the ant was formerly a dissatisfied 
husbandman, &c."] 91. Raven and Turtle-dove. 92. Ass 
and Fox (?Ro. iv. 13). 93. Ass and Raven (?Halm, 330). 
94. Wild Ass (Halm, 321). 95. Hen and Swallow. 96. Ser- 
pent. 97. Dove. 98. Raven and its Mother (Ro. i. 19). 90. 
Ass and? 100. Ass and Frogs (Halm, 327). loi. CoUec- 
tors(?). 102. Ass and Fox (?Ro. iv. 13, cf. 92). 103. Camel 
and Men (?Halm, 180). 104. Dove and Raven. 105. Rich 
Man and his two Sons. 106. Tiller. 107. Eagle (? Halm, 
4). 108. Hunter and Fish (? Av. 16). 109. Lion and 
Fox (cf. 4, Soph. 45). no. Man and Image (Re. 6, Soph. 
52). III. Olive and Standard (or "boundary-post"?) 
(? Halm, 124). 112. Eye-tooth (?) and Sparrow-Hawk. 


113. Man, Dog, and their Fellows. 114. Foolish Hunter. 
115. Bulls and Lion (Av. 14, Synt. 13, Soph. 17). 116. 
Circle (?) and Fox (? Ro. ii. 14). 117. Man and Hen (Synt. 
27, Soph. 30). 118. Criclcet and Ant (Ro. iv. 17, Synt. i, 
Soph. 2). 119. Goat and Eye-Tooth (?). 120. Plougher 
and Serpent (Ro. i. 10). 121. Bear and Old Woman. 
122. Trumpet-blower (Av.-EUis, 39). 123. Mule (Halm, 
157). 124. Ass. 125. Man and Woman. 126. Man and 
his Daughter. 127. Camel and Lion. 128. Lion and Pig. 
129. Lion and Mouse (Ro. i. 18, Soph. 27). 130. Young 
Man and his Mother (c/. 43). 131. Fox and Thorn-bush 
(Re. 5). 132. Raven and Fox (Ro. i. 15). 133. Two 
Fishes. 134. Bustard. 135. Gazelle. 136. Two Imbeciles. 
137. Man and Scorpion (? Soph. 34). 138. Camel (Halm, 
180-2). 139. Astronomer (Halm, 72). 140. Ox. 141. Ass. 
142. Dog. 143. Serpent and Plougher (? Ro. ii. 10, Loq. 
24, Soph. 12). 144. Boa and Lob,ster (cf. 66). 


Ro.= four books of " Romulus ; " Ex.V. = Extravagantes, here 
Book V. ; Re. = Remicius ; Av.= Avian; Al. = Alphonse ; 
Po. = Poggio ; asterisks mark illustrations ; Arabic figures 
indicate pages of vol. ii. 

Androclus, see Lion and 

Ant and fly, Ro. II., xvii. 55 
Ant and dove, Re., xi. 206 
Ant and grasshopper, Ro. IV., 

xvii. 123 
Ape and fox, Ro, III., xvii. 94 
Ape and son, Av., xi. 229 
Ape and two children, Av., 

XXV. 246 
Ass and boar, j-^^Lion and ass 
Ass and horse, Ro. III., iii. 67 
Ass and lion, Ro. IV., .\. 115 
Ass and sick lion, see Lion, 

wild boar, &c. 
Ass and wolf, Ro. IV., xiii. 119 
•Ass and lap-dog, Ro. I., 

xvii. 24 
*Ass in lion's skin, Av., iv. 219 

Bald man and fly, Ro. II., 

xii. 48 
Bat, birds, and beasts, Ro. 

III., iv. 70 
Bawd and kitten, Al., xi. 281 
Bee and Jupiter, Re., xii. 207 
VOL, I. 

Belly and members, Ro. III., 

xvi. 92 
Bitches, two, Ro. I., ix. 14 
Blind man and wife, .A.I., xii. 

Boar and wolf, Ex.V., ii. 130 
Bush and aubier tree, Av. , xv. 

234 [Fir and bramble] 
Butcher and wethers, Ro. IV., 

vi. 109 

Camel and flea, Ro. IV., xvi, 

Camel and Jupiter, Av., vii, 

224 [asking for horns] 
Carpenter, Re., xiii. 208 
Cat and chicken. Re., iv. 197 
Cat and rat. Re., viii., 202 
Cock and precious stone, Ro. 

Crabs, old and young, Av., 

iii, 218 
Crane and peacock, Av., xii. 

*Crowand pitcher, Av.,xx, 240 



Debtor, Po. , [ix.] 310 
Disciple and sheep, Al., viii. 

Dog and shadow, Ro. I., v. 10 
Dog and sheep, Ro. I., iv. 8 
Dog in manger, Ex.V. , xi. 165 
Dog, old, and master, Ro. II., 

vii. 40 
Dog, wolf, and wether, Ex.V., 

XV. 180 
Dogs, two, Av. , vi. 222 
Doves, kite, and sparrow- 
hawk, Ro. II., ii. 34 
Dragon and hart, Ex.V., iv. 

Dream-bread, Al., v. 266 

Eagle and fox, Ro. I. , xiii. 19 
Eagle and raven. Re., i. 191 
Eagle and weasel, Re., ii. 193 
Eagle with nut and raven, Ro. 

I., xiv. 20 
Ephesian widow, Ro. III., \x. 


Falconer and birds, Ro. IV., 

vii. no 
Father and bad son, Ro. III., 

xi. 84 
Father and three sons, Ex.V., 

xiii. 172 
Fellows, two, Av. , viii. 225 
Fir and bramble, see Bush and 

Fisher, Re., vii. 201 
Fisher and little fish, Av., xvi. 

Flea and man. Re., xv. 212 
Fox and bush, Re., v. 199 
Fox and cat, Ex.V., v. 137 
Fox and cock, Ex.V., iii. 132 
Fox, cock, and dogs, Po., vii. 

Fox and crow, see Raven and 

Fox and goat, Re., iii. 195 

*Fox and grapes, Ro. IV., i. 

Fox and lion, Ro. IV., xii. 

Fox and mask, see Wolf and 

*Fox and stork, Ro. II. , xiii. 49 
Fox and wolf, Ro. III. , vi. 74 
Fox, wolf, and lion, Ex.V., ix. 

Friendship, rare, Al., i. 247 
Frog and fox, Av. , v. 221 
*Frogs and Jupiter, Ro. II., 

i. 32 

Genoese, Po. [x.] 312 
*Goat and wolf, Ex.V., vi. 139 
Goose with golden eggs, Av., 
xxiv. 245 

Hares and frogs, Ro. II., 

viii. 42 
Hart and hunter, Ro. III., vii. 

Hart and ox, Ro. III., xix. 96 
Hart, sheep, and wolf, Ro. II., 

xi. 47 
Hawk and birds, Ro. IV., xi. 

Hedgehog and kids, Ro. IV., 

xiv. 120 
Horse, hunter, and hart, Ro. 

IV., ix. 113 
Hunter and tiger, Av., xiii. 

Hunting and hawking, Po., 

iv. 297 
*Husband and two wives, Re., 

xvi. 213 
Husband, wife, and mother- 
in-law, Al., x. 279 

Jay and peacock, Ro. II., xv. 

Juno, peacock, and nightin- 
gale, Ro. IV., iv. 105 



Juno, Venus, and goddesses, 
Ro. III., viii. 78 

King of apes, Ro. IV., viii. 

King log and king stork, see 

Frogs desiring king 
Knight and servant, Ex.V, 

xvii. 183 
Knight and [Ephesian]wido\v, 

Ro. III., ix. 79 

Labourer and children. Re., 

xvii. 215 
Labourer and nightingale, 

Al., vi. 269 
Labourer and pielarg. Re. , ix. 

Lion and ape, Ro. III., xx. 

Lion and ass, Ro. I., xi. 16 
Lion and bull, Av. , x. 228 
Lion, cow, goat, and sheep, 

Ro. I., vi. II [Lion's share] 
Lion and goat, Av., xix. 239 
Lion and horse, Ro. III., ii. 

Lion and rat (mouse), Ro, 

I., xviii. 26 
Lion and shepherd, Ro. III., 

i. 62 [Androclus] 
Lion and statue, see Man and 

Lion, wild boar, bull, and 

ass, Ro. I., xvi. 22 
Lye of oil, Al., iii. 259 

Man, good, and serpent, Ro. 

IL, X. 45 
Man and lion, Ro. IV., xv. 

121 [statue] 
Man, lion, and son, Ex.V, 

xvi. 183 
Man and serpent, Ro. I. , x. 15 
Man and weasel, Ro. II. , xix. 


Man and wood, Ro. III., xiv. 

Man and wood-god, Re., vi. 

Marriage of sun, see Thief and 

Merchant and ass, Ro. III., 

xviii. 95 
Milvan and mother, Ro. I., 

xix. 28 
Money found, AL, iv. 263 
Money recovered, Al., ii. 256 
Monsters, Po. , v. 301 
Mountain in labour, Ro. II., 

V. 38 

Mouse, town and country, 

Ro. I., xii. 17 
Mule, fox, and wolf, Ex.V, i. 

Mule and fly, Ro. II., xvi. 54 

Nightingale and sparrow- 
hawk, Ro. III., V. 72 

Nulla vestigia, see Fox and 

Oak and reeds, see Tree and 

Ox and frog, Ro. II. , xx. 61 
Ox and rat, Av. , xxiii. 244 
0.\en, four (and lion), Av. , 

xiv. 233 

Palmer and satyr (blow hot 
and cold), Av. , xxii. 242 

Panther and villains, Ro. IV. 
v. 107 

Parson, dog, and bishop, Po., 
vi. 305 

Phoebus, avaricious and envi- 
ous man, Av., xvii. 236 

Pilgrim and sword, Ro. IV., 
xviii. 128 

Pillmaker, Po., [xi.] 313 

Piper turned fisherman, see 



Pot, copper and earthen, Av., 

ix. 227 
Priests, worldly and unworldly, 

Caxton, 315 

Rat and frog, Ro. I., iii. 7 
Raven and fox, Ro. I. , xv. 21 
Rhetorician and crookback, 
Al., vii. 272 

Satyr and man, see Palmer 

and satyr 
Serpent and file, Ro. III., 

xii. 86 
Serpent and labourer, Ev.V., 

viii. 144 
Sheep and crow, Ro IV., xix. 

Shepherd boy (wolf!), Re., x. 

Sow and wolf, Ro. II., iv. 37 
Stag in oxstall, see Hart and 

Swallow and birds, Ro. I., xx. 


Tailor and king, Al., xiii. 

Thief and dog, Ro. II., iii. 35 
Thief and mother, Re., xiv. 

Thief and sun, Ro. I., vii. 12 
Thief and weeping child, Av., 

xviii. 238 
Tortoise and birds, Av., ii. 217 
Town and country mouse, see 

Tree and reed, Ro. IV., xx. 


Villain and young bull, Av. , 

xxi. 241 
Viper and file, see Serpent and 


Weasel and rat, Ro. IV., ii. 

Widow, Po., [xii.] 314 
Wind and earthen pot, Av., 

xxvi., 247 
Wolf and ass, Ex.V., vii. 141 
Wolf and crane, Ro. I., viii. 

Wolf and dog, Ro. III., xv. 90 
Wolf and fox, Ex.V., xiv. 176 
Wolf, fox, and ape, Ro. IL, 

xviii. 57 
Wolf and hungry dog, E.x.V., 

xii. 166 
Wolf and kid, Ro. II., ix. 44 
Wolf, labourer, fox, and 

cheese, Al., ix. 276 
*Wolf and lamb, Ro. I. , ii, S 
Wolf and lamb, Ro. II., vi. 

39 [and goat] 
Wolf and lamb, Av., xxvii., 

248 [kid] 
Wolf and nurse, see Woman, 

Wolf, repentant, Ex.V., x. 156 
Wolf, shepherd, and hunter, 

Ro. IV. iii., 103 
Wolf and skull, Ro. II., xiv., 

Wolves and sheep, Ro. III., 

xiii. 87 
Woman and Holy Ghost, Po. , 

i. 292 
Woman and hypocrite, Po. , 

ii. 294 
Woman, old, and wolf, Av., 

i. 216 
Women, two, Po., [viii.] 309 

Young man and whore, Ro. 

III., X. 82 
Young woman and husband, 

Po., iii. 296 


"So the tales were told ages before ALsop; and asses under 
lion's manes roared in Hebrew ; and sly foxes flattered in Etrus- 
can ; and wolves in sheep's clothing gttashed their teeth in Sajtskrit, 
no doubt." — Thackeray, Newcomes, ch. i. 

[Unless otherwise mentioned, the whole of the Fables are 
found in the same order and with the same enumeration in 
the German of Stainhovvel, the Latin by Sorg, the Dutch 
Esopus, Spanish Ysopo, the Italian of Tuppo, and the French 
of Machault. The same applies to ' Romulus ' for the first 
four books. The arrangement of Parallels is— I. The Orient; 
II. Classical Anliquity , including the Greek prose versions 
("^sop," ed. Halm) which belong to, III. Medieval, to 
the invention of printing ; IV. Modern Foreign, including 
a few writers like Boccaccio, who would belong formally 
to preceding period : my secondary sources are given at the 
end of this section ; V, Modern English. The ancient and 
mediaeval parallels are given nearly in exienso : for later 
appearances in Continental collections reference is made to 
Oesterley and Robert, vfho give the Teutonic and Romance 
literatures respectively: a few items of literary interest are 
sometimes selected from these sources. The English parallels 
are mainly from the collections of Ogilby (Og. ), L' Estrange 
(L.), Croxall (C), James (J.), Townsend (T.), Caldecott 
(Cald.), and Crane (Cr. ) ; the last only by page, the rest by 
number. Mav, indicates that the Fables to which it, is 
appended occur in Mavor's Spelling Book. As a specimen 
of what I might have infiicted on the reader I have treated 
The Wolf and Crane (Ro. I. viii. ) with some fulness, giving 


the editions I have used. This and the Index and Pedigree 
may supply the place of a bibliographical list. Many of the 
fables are discussed or referred to in the Introduction : for 
these see Index. 


Ro. I. Prologue. 

[' Romulus, son of Thybere,' was possibly a common noun 
at the beginning, representing the tradition that some Roman 
had translated the Fables from the Greek. As a matter of 
fact, the four books associated with the name of ' Romulus' 
are simply paraphrases of Phaedrus.] 

Ro. I., i. — Cock and Precious Stone. 

I. Bidpa^i, ed. Galland, iii. 157 ; Sadi, ed. Graf, 101. 
II. Phasd., iii. 12. III. Rufus, v. 6, 7 ; Ademar, i ; Marie de 
France, i ; Berachyah Hanakdan, Mishle Shu'alim (Heb.), 
4; Ysopet, I. I (Robert, i. 82); Hidoth Izopiti (Heb.) i; 
Galfred, i ; Wright, i. i ; Vincentius Bellovacensis, Specu- 
lum morale, 30; Boner, Edelsiein* i ; Bromyard, Summa 
Predicant, A. 26, 32. IV. Rabelais, i. prol. ; Luther, 
Fabeln, i ; Waldis, Esopus, i. i ; Kirchhof, Wendenmuth, vii. 
3 ; Lafontaine, i. 20 ; Lessing, Fabeln, ii. 9 ; Krilof , ii. 18 ; 
Robert, i. 81 ; Oesterley on Kirchhof; Steinschneider, Ysopet, 
361 ; De Gubernatis, Zool. Myth., ii. 291. V. Bacon, Essays 
xiii. ; L. I, C. I, J. 13. T. 44; Cald. 13 ; Cr. 10. Cf. W. 
C. Hazlitt. Eng. Proverbs, A barleycorn, &c. 

Ro. I., ii. — The Wolf and the Lamb. 
I. Dipi Jdtaka, supra V., p. 62-4; Kahghur, iv. 87; 
Schiefner (tr. Ralston) J'ibet. Tales, xxix. ; Bleek, Reineke 
Fuchs in Afrika, xxv. (in Madagascar). Cf. Tutinameh, 
ed. Rosen, i. 229. II. .<Esop. Halm, 274 ; Babrius, 89 ; 
Phffid., i. I. III. Bayeux Tapestry (e Comte), pi. iv. ; Ruf., 
i. I ; Adem., 3 ; Vine. Bell., spec, hist., 2, 3 ; doct., 4, 114 ; 

* Boner's collection received its title from this fable. Cf. Carlyle 
Miscell. ii. 280. 

Ro. I., i. — Ro. I., V. 231 

Galf., 2; Bromyard, A., 12, 45; Neckam, 10; Dial Great. , 
51 ; Odo de Cerington, 67 ; Marie, 2 ; Berachyah, 3 ; Ysop., 
I. 2, II. 10 (Rob., I. 58, 60) ; Izopiti (Heb.), 2; Gabrias, 
35 ; Wright, Latin Stones [Percy Soc), App. I., i. 2 ; Boner, 
5. IV. H. Sachs, i. 5, p. 485 ; Geller, Narrenschiff, 78 ; 
Luther, 2 ; Waldis, i. 2 ; Krilof, i. 13 ; Lafontaine, i. 10 ; 
Robert, ad. loc. ; Kirchhof, i. 57 (vii. 37) ; Oesterley, ad. 
loc. ; Kurz, ad. loc. V. Shakespeare, Henry IV., i. 8, L. 
3, C. 2, Mavor 6. J. 27, T. i. Cald., 2 ; Cr. 10. 

Ro. I., iii. — Rat and Frog. 

I. Anvari Suhaili tr. Eastwick, 133 (Benf. , i. 223 ); Talmud, 
Nedar, 41a (Bacher, Agada d. Amor., 42, Caster, Beitr., 
ix.) ; Wagener-Weber, No. 9 [Frog and Scorpion] ; Bidpai, 
3, p. 87. II. .iEsop. Halm, 298; Babrius-Gitlb. , 182; 
Phaed., Burm. App., 6; Dositheus, 6. III. Rufus, i. 3; 
Adem., 4; Vine. Bell., s. hist., iii. 2 ; doct., iv. 114; Galf., 
3; Wright, i. 3; Neckam, 6; Bromyard, P. 13, 37; Odo, 
19 ; Dial. Ct-eat. , 107 ; Scala celi, 73 ; Enxetnplos, 301 ; 
Marie, 3 ; Berachj'ah, 2 ; Ysop., I. 3, II. 6 (R. i. 259, 261) ; 
Izopiti, 3 ; Boner, 6 ; Hita, 397 ; Deschamps, poesies, 196. 

IV, Waldis, i. 3 ; Kurz, ad. loc. ; Kirchhof, Wendenmuth, 
vii. 71; Oesterley, ad. loc. ; Luther, 3; Lafontaine, iv. 11 ; 
Rob., ad. loc; Steinschneider, Ysopet, 360; M6ril, 180. 

V. L. 4, T. 53- 

Ro. L, iv. — Dog and Sheep. 

II. Phaed., i. 17. III. Ruf., i. 2 ; Adem., 5 ; Wright, i. 
4; Marie, 4; Berachyah, 7; Izopiti, 4; Bromyard, P. 2, 
3 ; Neckam, 15 ; Galf., 4 ; Boner, 7. IV. Luther, 4 ; Wald., 
i. 48 ; Oesterley on Rom., i. 4 ; Steinschneider, Ysopet, 360 ; 
M6ril, 158. V. C. 130, T. 68. 

Ro. I., v.— Dog and Shadow. 

I. Culladhanuggaha Jdtaka, supra III. pp. 58-60; Wag- 
ener-Weber, No. 4 ; Avadanas Julien, ii. 6, n ; Pantscha- 
tantra, iv. SandpUs. ; Loqman, 41 ; Sophos, 31 ; Tutinameh, 


ii. 4, 117, 265. II. iEsop. H., 233 ; Babr., 79 ; Democritus, 
fr. ed. Mull., 169; Syntipas, 26; Dositheus, 11 ; Phasd., i. 
4 ; Aphthon., 35. III. Gab., 28 ; Vine. Bell., /lisi., iii. 2 ; 
doci., iv. 115; Dial. Great., 100; Bromyard, A. 27, 14; 
Wright, i. s : Neck., 13 ; Marie, 5 ; Ysopet, i. 5, ii. 11 ; 
Galf., 5; Berach., 5; Izopiti, 5; Hita, 216. IV. Fischart, 
Gargantua, 36 ; Luther, 5 ; Lafontaine, vi. 17 ; cf. vii. 4 ; 
Robert, ad. loc. ; Wald., i. 4; Kirchhof, ii. 35 (vii. 129); 
Pauli, Schimpfund Ernst, 426; Oesterley, atf. loc; Steins., 
Ysopet, 362 ; Kurz, ad loc. ; Ogilby, 2 ; V. L. 6, C. 5, J. 24, 
T. 118; Mav. 4; Cr. 37. 

Ro. I., vi. — Lion's Share. 

I. Ausland, 1859, p. 927 (among Tuaregs in North Africa, 
Benf. i. 354). IL ^sop, H. 258 ; Phsed., i. 5; Babr., 67 ; 
Abstem., 186. IIL Ruf., i. 7 ; Adem., 9 ; Vine. Bell., hist.. 
3, 2 ; doct., 4, 116 ; Dial. Great., Marie, 11, 12 ; Berachyah, 
12, 52 ; Ysopet, L 6, II. 9 (Rob. i. 34, 36) ; Izop. (Heb.), 6 ; 
Bromy., M. 9,2; Neck., 9; Wright, i. 6, 7 ; Galf., 6; 
Boner, 8. IV. Luther, 6 ; Reineke, 5412-B6 ; Waldis, i. 5 ; 
Kirch., vii. 23 (24) ; Oesterley, ad. loc; 'Lessing, Fabeln, ii. 
26; Goethe, xl. 182; Goedeke, Mittelalier, 641; Steins., 
Ysop., 360; M^ril, 183. V. L. 7, C. 6, J. 97; Cald., 10. 
Cf. expr. " lion's share. " 

Ro. L, vii.— Thief and Sun. 

II. .^sop, H. 77 ; Phsed., i. 6 ; Babr., 24. III. Ruf., i. 
8 ; Adem., 10 ; Bromy., D. 12, 21 ; Scala, 115 ; Marie, 6 ; 
Berach., 76; Ysop., i. 7; ii. 16; Isop. 7; Gabr., 20; Galf., 
7 ; Neck., 17 ; Boner, 11. IV. Luther, 5 ; Waldis, iii. 61 ; 
Pauli, 498; Lafont., vi. 12; Oest. Steins, and Robert, ad 
loc ; Ghivizzani, i. p. 4 ; ii. P- 20 ; M6ril, 189. V. J., 103 
(marriage of sun). 

Ro. I. viii. — Wolf and Crane. 
I. The Orient : Jdvasakuna Jdtaka (Lion and Crane), 
supra I. pp. 55, 56 (V. Fausboll, Five Jdtakas, pp. 35-38) ; 

Ro. I., vi. — Ro. I., viii. 233 

Schiefner, Thibetan Tales (tr. Ralston), No. xxiii. The Un- 
grateful Lion (and Woodpecker) ; De la Loub^re, Royaunie 
de Siam, Amsterd. , 1691, ii. 20* {ap. Grimm, Reineke Fuchs, 
cclxxxi.) ; Wagener, Al^m. Bruss. Acad., 1854, No. xiv. ; 
Weber, Ind. Stud., iii. 350 ; Be7-eshith Rabba, c. 64, ad Jin. 
supra, pp. 117-118 (Lion for Wolf) (Wuensche, Bibl. rabb., 
i. 308); Bochart, Hieroz. I. xii. ; Dukes Isr. Ann., 1839, 
p. 244; Dr. Back, ap. Graetz, Monatsft., 1876, 197-204; 
I-ewysolm, Zool. d. Talm., 375; Hamburger, Realencycl. 
d. Tahn., s.v. Fabel ; Landsberger, Fabeln des Sophos, p. 
xxx. ; Graetz, Gesch. d. Juden. , iv,2 142 ; Steinschneider, 
Jahrb. ro?n. eng. Phil, neue Folge, i. 363. 

II. Classical Antiquity : Phasd. , i. 8, ed. Riese(Wolf) 
supra, p. 7 ; Babrius, ed. Rutherford, 94, ed. Gitlbauer, ib. 
(Heron) ; Gk. prose yEsop, ed. Coraes, 144, (ter, cf. p. 342), 
ed. Furia, 94, 102, ed. Halm, 276b, Schneider, 153 (H. 276, 
Heron for Crane), Knoell, 84 ; Aphthonius, 25 [cf. tradi- 
tion of crocodile and ichneumon, Herod., ii. 68 (Lang, 
Euterpe, 68); Aristot., Hist. Anim., ix. 6; .^lian, iii. 7, 
viii. 25] ; Gr. Proverb, e'/c \vkov ard/xaTos ; Suidas, ii. 248. 

III. Middle Ages: Bayeux Tapestry, Soc. Ant., pi. i. ; 
Bruce, pi. i. ; J. Comte, pi. vi. ; supra, Frontisp. (cf. Du 
M^ril, 142) : Figured on portico St. Ursin's Cathedral, 
Bourges (Du M^ril, 156) ; Gabrias (Ignatius, ed. Mueller) 
36; Rufus, i. 9 (Hervieux, p. 236); Romulus, i. 8, ed. 
Oesterley ; Ademar, 64 (Herv. , 144 Anon. Nilant, supra, p. 
8) ; Vienna Lat. MS., 305, 8 (Herv., 250) ; L. MS., 901, 7 
(H. 287) ; Berlin MS. Lat. 8vo 87. 8 (H. 306) ; Berne MS., 
4 (H. 382); Corp. Chr. Coll. Oxon., 7 (H. 367) ; Romulus 
of Nilant, 9 (Herv. 334) ; Romulus of Marie, 9 (Herv. 504, 
"LBG" of Mall); Fabulae rhythmicce, 9 (ap. Wright, 
Latin Stories, Percy Soc, App. i. 9, Herv. 441), Galfred, 
ed. W. Forster, 8 ( = Walter of England : "Anon. Neveleti," 
ap. Nevelet, A/vM. JEsop., p. 471, Herv. 388) ; Walterian, 8 
(Herv. 429) ; Neckam, ed. Du M^ril, i (Herv. 787, Rob. i. 

* Told of Sommonacodom and Tevitat = Sakyamuni and 


194) ; Odo de Cerington, 10 (ed. Herv. 602) ; John of Shep- 
pey, 6 (H. 757) ; Marie de France, ed. Roquefort, 7 ; Berach- 
yah ha-Nakdan Mishle Shualhn (Heb.), 8, p. 32, ed. Hand ; 
Ysopet, I. 8 (fr. Galfred ; Robert, Fables inidites, i. 195, with 
plate) ; Ysopet, II. (fr. Neckam ; Rob. ib. 196) ; Ysopet of 
Lyons, ed. Foerster, 8 (fr. Galfred) ; Ysopet of Clarges, ed. 
Duplessis, I (fr. Neckam) ; Hidotk Izopiti, 8 \ap. Steins., 
I.e.) ; Libra de los Gatos, ed. Guayangos, 2 (fr. Odo : Bibl. 
autores Espail. escritor. anter al Siglo, xv. p. 543) ; Vincent 
of Beauvais, Speculum historiale, iii. 2 ; doctritiale, iv. 116 ; 
Boner, Edelstein, 11 (Minne Zinger, 11) ; Reineke Fuchs, 
ed. Grimm, p. 346; Hugo v, Trimberg, Rentier, f. 14 
(M^ril) V. 1976, seq. (Kurz) ; Nicol. Pergam. Dialogus 
Great, no. 

IV. Modern Foreign— G(fr»z .■ Stainhowel, f. 29b; 
Luther, Fabeln, 9, p. 12, ed. Thiele, i888 ; H. Schoppfer, 
Vulpecula, iii. 11, ap. Del. poet, germ; Posthius, 126, ibid.; 
Kirchhof, Wendenmtith, vii. 42, ed. Oesterley (Stuttg. Litt. 
Ver. End. , 99) ; H. Sachs, IV. iii. 222 ; Er. Alberus, 29 ; 
Freitag, 15, Philathic ; Waldis, Esopus, ed. Kurz, i. 6; 
GoeCao., Reineke Fuchs, ap. lVerAe,x\. ij6. Fr. : Machault, 
Esope, i. 8 ; Mer d. Histoires, 1488, 5 ; Haudent, 1547, 117; 
Cognatus, 1567, Narrat. sylva, p. Gj; Corrozet, 1587, 6; 
Desprez, Theat. d. anim., 1620, 51; Lafontaine [Loup et 
Gicogne),\\\. 9, ed. Robert, No. 51, i. 193, ed. Regnier, t. i., 
p. 228 ; Benserade, 1676, 7 ; Faernus, 1697, 17 : Le Noble, 
1697, 8. Hal. : Tuppo Isopo, 8 ; Accio Zuccho, 1483, 8 ; 
Pavesio, Targa, 1576, 52 ; Guicciardini, Deiti, 1566, p. 47 ; 
Verdizotti, Favole, 1577, 54. Span. : Infante Henrique, 
Ysopo, i. 8. Dutch: Esopus, i. 8. Gatalan: Faules de 
Ysop, 1682, i. 8. Russ. : Krilof, vi. 12. Authorities : 
Grimm, Steinschneider, Robert, Kurz, Oesterley, Du M^ril, 

V. Modern English: Caxton, Esope i. 29*' (here vol. ii. 
p. 13), Reynart the Foxe, ed. Arber, 88 ; L'Estrange, 8 ; 
Croxall, 7 ; James, 3 ; Townsend-Valentine {Ckand. Class.), 
121 ; W. Crane, Baby's yEsop, p. 52. 

Ro. I., ix. — RO. I., xii. 235 

Ro. I., ix. — Two Bitches. 

I. Cf. Benf., i. 353. II. ^sop Camer., 191, 333; Just,, 
xliii, 4 ; Ph., i. 19. III. Ruf., i. 10 ; Marie, 8 ; Berach., 9 ; 
Ysop., I. 9; II. 27; Galf., 9; Neck., 28; Wright, i. 10; 
Izop, 9 (Sanbader in Alsop 2). IV. Luther, 10 ; Kirch,, 
vii. 42 (wrong ref.); Lafontaine, ii. 7; Robert, Steins., «</ 
loc. V. L. 323, C. 10. 

Ro. I., X. — Man and Serpent. 

I. Mahabharata, ap. Holtzmann, Ind. Sagen^, ii. 210 
(Liebr.); Pantschatantra, Dubois, 49, cf. Benf., i. 113-20; 
Tutinameh, No. 29. II. yEsop, 79 ; Phsed, , iv. 19 ; Babr. — 
Gitb.,215; Syntipas,25. III. Ruf., iv. i ; Adem., 11 (woman); 
Petr. Alf. ,7,4; Castoiement, 3 ; Gering Isl. Alvent. ; Vine. 
Bell., spec, mor., p. 885 ; Scala, 86 ; Bromyard, G., 4, 17 ; 
Ode, 33; Gabr. , 42; Dial. Creat., 24; Gesta Rom., 174; 
Ysop., I. 10; Izop., 10 ; Marie ap. Legrand Fabl,, iv. 193 
(not in Roquefort); Galf., 10; Enx., 246; Hita, 1322; 
Reinaert, ed. Grimm, 14 ; Boner, 13 ; Barelata Sermones, 
43. IV. Luther, Tischreden , 78 ; Charron, De la sagesce, 
i. I ; Wald., i. 7 ; Wendetiniuth, v. 121 ; Reismer, E?nblem, 
2, 22, 81; Lafont., vi. 13; Hagedorn, Fabeln, 44; Robert, 
Oesterley, ad loc. ; Liebrecht, /£i?/',.iii. 147. V. L. 9, J. 18, 
Og. 16, Cr. 27. 

Ro. I., xi. — Lion and Ass (Ass and Boar). 

II. Phsed., i. 29. III. Ruf., i. 13; Adem., 12; Marie, 
76; Ysop., I. 11; Izop., 11; Galf., II, IV. Luther, 12; 
Lafont., viii. 15 (Le rat et I' elephant); Wald., i. 8 [cf. 69); 
Wendenmuih, vii. 147 (wrong ref.) ; Robert, Steins., ad loc. 
V. Og. II, J. 132, T. 22. 

Ro. I., xii. — Town and Country Mouse. 

I. Bidpai- Wolff, i. 124. II. .^sop, 297; Horace, Sat., 
ii. 6, 77 ; Phaed., App. Burm., iv. 9 ; Babr., 108 ; Aphthon., 


26. III. Ruf., ii. 1; Adem., 13; Marie, 9; Berach., 10; 
Ysop. , I. 12; Isop., 12; Galf., 12; Dial. Great., 113; 
Renard le Contrefait (Rob. i. 48) ; Odo, 15; Wright, i. 11 ; 
Gatos, II. IV. Luther, 13; Fischart, Flohatz, 1920, 4668; 
H. Sachs, 2, 4, 27 ; Wald., i. 9; Kirch., i. 62 ; Lafont., i. 
9 ; Robert and Oesterley, ad. loc. ; Goedeke, Mii. , 635. V. 
L. II, C. 35, J. 29. T. 26, Pope. 

Ro. I., xiii. — Eagle and Fox (Rom. ii. 8). 

I. Benf. , i. 170 ; Jacobs, Bidpai, Dg ; Liebrecht JERP, 
iii. 15s (in W. Afr.); Vartan, 3; Sophos, ed. Landsberger, 
24. II. Archilochus, ap. Furia, p. ccxiv.,5^^. i. ; Aristoph., 
Aves, 652 ; ^sop, 5 ; Babr.-Gitl., 177 ; Phaed., i. 28 ; Synti- 
pas, 24. III. Rom. ii. 8 ;* Ruf., ii. 2; Adem., 14; Marie, 
10 ; Berach., 11 ; Ysop., I. 13, II. 22 ; Izop., 15 ; Galf., 13 ; 
Bromyard, N., 4,4; Wright, i. 12; Neck., 23. IV. H. 
Sachs, ii. 4, 95 ; Waldis, i. 59 ; Oest. on Rom. Kurz. V. 
L. 72, C. 13, T. 13 ; Cald., 16. 

Ro. I., xiv.— Eagle and Raven. 

I. Benf., Pants., i. 241. II. ^sop., 415 ; Phaed., ii. 16, 
cf. Av., ii. III. Ruf., ii. 5 ; Marie, 13 : Berach., 20 ; Galf., 
14; Ysop., I. 14; Isop., 16; Odo, 44; Wright, i. 13. IV. 
Waldis, i. 10; Kirchhof, Wendenmuth, vii. 173; Robert, 
Oest. , and Steins. , ad. loc. ; De Gubernatis, ii. 197, 369. 
V. C. 134. 

Ro. I., XV.— Raven and Fox (and Cheese). 

I. Jamhu Jdkata, supra, VII. pp. 65-6 ; 'Jami Beharistan 
(Vienna, 1778), p. 20 ; Vartan, 17 ; Joh. de Capua, i. 4. 
II. ^sop., 204; Horace, Sat., ii. 5, 56; Epp., i. 17, 20; 
Phaed., i. 13 ; Apuleius Flor., 23 ; Babr., 77 ; Aphthon., 29 ; 
Tzetz., Ghil., 10, 352. III. Gab., 25; Ruf., ii. 7; Adem., 

* Inserted here in Stainhowel to make up twenty fables in first 
book ; this puts the numeration out by one henceforth in Bk. i. 

Ro. I., xiii. — Ro. I., xviii. 237 

15 ; Bayeux, pi. iv., xvii, ; cf. Alf., ix. ; Vine. Bell., hist., 3, 
3; doct., 4, 117; Marie, 14 (51); Berach. , 13; Galf. , 15; 
Neck., 27 ; Dial. Great., 61 ; Scala, 6 ; Ysopet, I. 15, II. 
26; Izop., 17; Rein. Fucks, Grimm, 358; Lucanor (W. 
York), 25 ; Cyril, Spec, sap., i. 13 ; Hita, Can/ares, 1411. 
IV. Luther, 14; Farce de Pathelin, 31; Waldis, i. 11; 
Kirch., vii. 30 ; Lafont., i, 2 ; Lessing, ii. 15 ; Krilof, i. i ; 
Rob., Oest., Steins., ad. loc. ; De Gubernatis, ii. 251.* V. L. 
13, C. 9; Cald., I ; Cr., 17; Hazlitt, Prov., 383, ' The fox 
praiseth the meat out of the crow's mouth ; ' Thackeray, 
Newcomes, i. 

Ro. I., xvi. — Lion Sick (and Ass). 
II. Phsed. , i. 21. III. Rufus, ii. 8 ; Ademar, 16; Vine. 
Bell., hist. 3, 3, doct. 4, 117 ; Marie, 15 ; Berach., i ; Ysop. , 
I. 16; Jzop., 18; Galf, 16; Dial. Great., no; Bromy. , H. 
4. 8 ; s. 5, 3 ; Wright, i, 15. IV. Alciati, emblemata, 153; 
Wald. , i. 12; Kirch. , vii. 27; Lafont., iii. 14; Rob., Oest., 
Steins. V. C. 6, T. 31. 

Ro. I., xvii. — Ass AND Lap-dog. 
I. Benf , Pants., i. no; Avadanas, ii. 73; Weber, Ind. 
Stud., iii. 352. II. ^sop. , 331; Phasd. App. Burm. , 10; 
Babr. ; 129. III. Rufus, ii. 10; Ademar, 17; Vine. Bell., 
hist. 3, 3; doct. 4, 117; Marie, 16; Berach., 14; Ysop., I. 
16, II. 4 ; Izop., 14; Galf, 17; Neck., 5; Gesta Rom., 79; 
Wright, i. 13; Holkot, 167; Boner, 10. IV. Lafont., iv. 
5 ; Rob., Oest., Steins., Goedeke, Mitt.,6\Z ; Liebr., JERP, 
iii. 146. V. L. 15, C. 124, J. 56, T. 119; Hazlitt, 'An ass 
was never cut out for a lapdog.' 

Ro. L, xviii, — Lion and Mouse. 
I. Cf. Benf. Pants., i. 324 seq. ; Sophos, 25 ; Raju, Ind. 
Fab., p. 119, II. .^Esop., 256; Phasdrus App. Burm., 4; 

* ' The fox (the spring aurora) takes the cheese (the moon) from 
the crow (the winter night) by making it sing ' ! 


Babr., 107 ; Julian, Epist., 8. III. Ruf., ii. 11 ; Adem., 18 ; 
Vine. Bell., hist. 3, 3 ; diet. 4, 120 ; Marie, 17 ; Berach., 15 ; 
Ysop., I. 18, II. 38; Galf., 18; Dial. Great., 24; Bromy., 
i. 5, 4; Wright, I, 17; Neck., 41. IV. Clement Marot ; 
Wald., i. 14; Kirch., vii. 20; Lafont., ii. 11; Rob., Oest., 
Steins.; Du M^ril, 210 ; De Gub., ii. 63, 78. V. L. 303, C. 
31, J. 31, T. 32; Cr., 14; Hazlitt, Prov., 'A lion may be 
beholden to a mouse.' 

Ro. I., xix. — The sick Mylan and Mother. 

II. ^sop, 208; Phasd. App. Burm. i ; Babr., 78. III. 
Marie, 87; Ysop., I. 24; Isop.,zo; Galf., 19. IV. Pauli, 
288; Wald., i. 15; Oest. , Steins. V. Cf. prov., The Devil 
was sick, ike. 

Ro. L, XX.— Swallow and other Birds. 

I. Pants., i. app. 5 (Benf. ii. 139, i. 249). II. j^sop., 
416; A. Gellius, ii. 29; Phaed., App. Burm. 7; Babr., 88; 
Avian, 21 ; Dio Chrysost. Orat., 12, 72. III. Adem., 20; 
Galf., 20; Marie, 18; Berach., i6; Ysop., I. 25, II. 27; 
Bayeux, pi. x.-xii. ; Dial. Great., 119; Bromy., C, 11, 
20 ; Neck. , 18 ; Lucanor (W. York), 26 ; Wright, i. 18. IV. 
Wald., i. 16; Kirch., vii. 114; Lafont., i. 8 ; Rob., Oest., 
Benf. V. Painter, Palace of Pleasure, ed. Jacobs, i. 86-7 ; 
L. 18, C. 157, T. 27. 


Ro. II. Proem. 

[Merely an introduction to first Fable, tracing it back to 

Ro. II., i.— Frogs desiring King, 

I. Gf. Benf., i. 384. II. ^sop, 76; Phasd., i, 2; Ser- 
vius on Virg. Georg., i. 378; Val. Max., ii. 2; Babr.-Gitl., 
167, 232. III. Ruf., iii. 7 ; Adem. , 21 ; Marie, 26 ; Berach. , 

Ro. I., xix. — Ro. II., V. 239 

24; Ysop., I. 19; Reinaert, ed. Grimm, 2305-29; Galf., 21; 
Odo, 2; Wright, ii. i; Dial. Great., 118; Neckam, De 
Naturis, 348, 387. IV. Luther, ed. Altenb. , iii. 669 ; Frei- 
dank, 141, 23 seq. ; H. Sachs, 2, 4, 104 ; Wald., i. 17 ; Kirch., 
vii. 157; Lafontaine, iii. 4; Lessing, ii. 13; Rob., Oest. 
V. L. 19, C. 3, J. 116, T. 56 ; Cald., 6 ; Cr. 12. 

Ro. II., ii. — Doves, Kite, and Hawk, 

il. Phaed., i. 31. III. Ruf., iii. 8; Adem., 22; Marie, 
27; Berach., 44; Vine. Bell., mor., 1236; Wright, ii. 2; 
stories, 52; Bromy., A., 14, 6 ; Odo, 2 ; Galf., 22 ; Boner, 
26, IV. Wald., i. 18; Kirch., vii. 146; Oest. V. L. 20, 
C. 16. 

Ro. II., iii. — Thief and Dog. 

I, Cf. Benf., i. 608. II. ^sop., 62 ; Phasd., i. 23 ; Babr., 
42. III. Ruf., iii. 9; Adem., 23 ; Galf., 23 ; Vine. Bell., hist. 
2, 4, doct. 4, 115; Marie, 28; Berach., 43; Ysop., I. 22; 
Wright, ii. 3; Bromyard, J., 13, 35; Boner, 27. IV. H. 
Sachs, 4, 3, 235 ; Waldis, i. 19 ; Kirchhof, vii. no ; Oest. 
V. L. 21, C. 107, J. 120, T. 139. 

Ro. II., iv. — Sow AND Wolf. 

II. Phasd., App. Jan. i. 18 ; ^sop. Cor., 266. III. Ruf., 
iv. 4; Adem., 54; Marie, 29; Berach., 40; Wright, ii. 41 ; 
Ysop., I. 20; Galf., 24. IV. Wald., i. 20; Kirch,, vii. 174; 
Oest. V. L. 22. 

Ro. II., V. — Mountain in Labour. 

II. Lucian, Vera Hist.; Athen. , xiv. i; Horace, Ars 
poet., 139; Phasd., iv. 23 (v. 10). III. Ruf., iv. 14; Galf., 
25; Vine. Bell., hist. 3, 4, doct. 4, 118; cf. Marie, 29; 
Ysop. , I. 23, II. 34; Neck., 35. IV. Erasmus, Adag., i. 9, 
14; Rabelais, iii. 24; Lafont. , v. 10; Boileau, art poit., iii. 
274; De Gubern., ii. 60. V. Og, 8; L. 23, C. 26, J. 9, 
T. HI. 


Ro. II., vi. — Wolf and Lamb (and Goat), 

II. Phged., iii. 15. III. Marie, 44 ; Wright, ii. 6 ; Boner, 
30 ; Galf. , 26 ; Oest. on Rom. , ii. 6. 

Ro. II., vii. — Dog and Master. 

II. Phasd., iv. 39. III. Ruf. , v. i; Adem., 62; Ysop., 
I. 27; Galf., 27; Bromy. , S. , 5, 3. IV. H. Sachs, 2, 4, 
io5 ; Kirch. , i. 60 (vii. 75) ; Oest. V. L. 25. 

Ro. II., viii. — Hares and Frogs (Rom., ii. 9), 

I. Rodiger, Chrest. syr., xxiv. § 7. II. Jisop. , 237; 
Phcedrus, App. Burm.,'2; Babrius, 25 ; Aphthon., 23. III. 
Ruf., i. 4 ; Vine. Bell. , hist. , 3, 4 ; doct., 4, 118 ; Marie, 30 ; 
Berach., 38; Ysop., I. 38,11. 33; Galf., 28; Neck., 34; 
Gabr. , 10. IV. H. Sachs, i. 490 ; Wald., i. 23 ; Kirch., vii. 
158; Lafont. , ii. 16; Rob., Oest. V. L. 27, C. 30, J. 70, 
T. 66. 

Ro. II., ix. — Wolf and Kid. 

I. Sophos, 26. II. .(Esop., Cam., 206; Phaed., App. 
Burm., 27, 32. III. Rufus, i. 5; Ademar, 61 ; Marie, 90; 
Berach., 21; Galf., 29; Ysop., I. 29, II. 40; Reiti. Fuchs, 
346; Neck. ,42; Boner, 33. IV. Wald. ,i. 24; Kirch., vii. 
40 ; Lafont., iv. 5 ; Grimm, K. M. , 5 ; Rob., Oest., Grimm. 
V. Og. 72, L. 74, C 119, J. 8 ; Mav., 5. 

Ro. II., X. — Good Man and Serpent. 

I. Patits., iii. 5 (Benf. , ii. 244, i. 359); cf. XX. supra, 
pp. 92-4; Bleek, RF in Afr., 5-6. II. .lEsop. , 96; Phasd., 
App. Burm., 33 ; Gabr. 45 (not extant in Babrius) ; Babr.- 
Gitl., 160. III. Rufus, i. 12; Ademar, 65; Marie, 63; 
Berach., 22; Ysop., I. 39; Dial. Great., 108; Galf., 30; 
Gesta Rom., 141; Enx., 134; Bromy., B. , 4, 15; Mapes, 
De Nu£is, ii. 6. IV, H. Sachs, 2, 4, 42 b. ; Wald., i. 16 ; 

RO. II., vi. — Ro. II., XV. 241 

Lafont. , X. 12; Kirch., vii. 91 ; Morlini, Nov., 50; Grimm., 
K.M., 105 ; deutsche Sagen, i. 220 ; Woyciki, Poln. Mdhr., 
105; Gering Islensk j^vent., 59; Rob., Oest. ; Loeseleur 
essai, 47; Du M^ril, 160 n. ; Liebr. ZV, 29. V. Og. 25, 
L. 30, J. 18. 

Ro. II., xi. — Hart, Sheep, and Wolf. 

II. Ph.. i. 16. IV. Rufus, i. 13; Ysop., I. 31, II. 14; 
cf. Marie, 4; Galf., 31. IV. Luther, iv. p. 271; Wald., i. 
25; Kirch., vii. 38 ; Oest. 

Ro. II. xii.— Bald Man and Fly. 

I. Makasa Jdtaka, supra VI. p. 64; cf. Benf., i. 293. 
II. Ph., iv. 31. III. Rufus, i. 14 ; Ademar, 66; Galf., 32; 
Neck., 19 ; Boner, 36. IV. Morlini, 21 ; Straparola, xiii. 4 ; 
Waldis, ii. 99 — Kurz, M^ril, De Gub., ii. 222. V. Clouston, 
Pop. Tales, i. 55-7. 

Ro. II., xiii. — Fox AND Stork. 

I. Cf. Bidpai-Wolff, ii. 21. II. '9\\x1., symp. quesst., I. v. ; 
iEsop., 34; Phced., i. 26. Ill, Rufus, ii. 3; Ademar, 63; 
Ysop. I. 33; Galf., 33. IV. Kirch., vii. 29; Waldis, i. 27; 
Lafont.. i. 18; Rob., Oest. V. L. 31, C. 12, ]. 146, 
T. 126 ; Cald., 11 ; Cr., 19 {F. and Crane). 

Ro, II., xiv. — Wolf and Skull (Fox and Mask). 

I. Cf Bidpai-Wolff, i. 22. II. Mso^)., 47; Phaed., i. 7 ; 
Babr.-Gitl., 291. III. Rufus, iii. 6; Ysop., I. 60; Galf., 
34. IV. Erasmus, Adag,,i, 95; Waldis, i. 28; Kirchhof, 
vii. 51; Lafontaine, iv. 14; Lessing, ii. 14; Rob., Oest. ; 
Kurz. V. L. 32, C. 77, J. 137; Cr., 28. [Fox and Mask.] 

Ro. II., XV. — Jay and Peacock. 

I. Nacca Jdtaka, supra XI. pp. 70-1 ; Bidpai, Card., iii. 
323; Tutin., ii. 146. II. .iEsop., 200; Plaut., Aid., 2, i; 
VOL. I. Q 


Hot., Efp., i. 3, 18 ; Ph., i. 3 ; Babr., 72 ; Niceph., Basil., 5 ; 
Theon Soph., Prag., 3; cf. Av., 15. III. Rufus, ii. 4; 
Ademar, 26; Vine. Bell., h. 3, 4, d. 4, 119; Marie, 58; 
Berach., 27 (Raven); Dial. Great., 54; Odo. ,37; Neck., 
12; Renard le contref. , 129; Bromy. , A., 12, 35; Scala, 
80 Tj; Hita, p. 275; Trimberg, 1768 seq. J.V. Kirch., vii. 
52 ; Lafontaine, iv. 9 ; Waldis, i. 29 ; Lessing, ii. 6 ; Rob. , 
Oest. ; M6ril, 186; De Gub., ii. 246; Crane, Ital. F.T. 
353 ; M. Fuchs, Die Krdhe die sich m. fremd. Fed. sich 
sckmiickt, 1886. V. L. 33, C. 4, J. 7, T. 72 [Daw]. Cald., 
4; Cr., 32, Chapbook 7 (Pigeons) ; Thackeray, Newcomes, 
\. ; cf. e,xpr, ' borrowed plumes,' and Prov. , 'If every bird 
takes back its own feathers you'd be naked.' 

Ro. II., xvi. — MULK AND Fl.Y. 

I. Loqman, 13. II. Ph., iii. 6; .^Esop, 235 ; Babr., 84. 

III. Gab., 29; Galf. , 36; Marie ap Legrand, iv. 317; 
Boner, 40. IV. Wald. , iii. 84 ; Lafont. , vii. 9 ; Kurz. 

Ro. II., xvii. — Ant and Fly. 

II. Ph., iv. 24. III. Adem., 27 ; Vine. Bell., d. 4, 119; 
Marie, 86; Ysop., I. 36; Galf., 37; Brom., M., 8, 30. 

IV, H. Sachs, ii. 4, 74; Kirch., vi. 275; Wald. i. 30; 
Lafont. , iv. 3 ; Rob. , Oest. V. L. 34, C. 27, T. 72. 

Ro. II., xviii.— Wolf, Fox, and Ape. 
II. Ph., i. 10. III. Adem., 28 ; Galf., 38 ; Marie, 89. 

Ro. II. xix. — Man and Weasel. 

II. Ph., i. 22; cf. ^sop., 100; Babr., 33. III. Ruf., 
ii. 9 ; Adem., 29 ; Galf., 39 ; Boner, 45 ; Brom., A., 12, 15. 
IV. Kirch., vii. 92, cf. 93; Oest. V. C. 169. 

Ro. II,, XX.— Ox AND Frog. 

I, Bidpai Card. , iii. 323 ; II. .^sop. , 84 ; Ph. , i. 24 ; Babr. , 
28 ; Hon, Sat., ii. 3, 314 ; Mart., x. 79 ; Theon. Soph., 3 ; 

Ro. II., xvi. — Ro. III., iii. 243 

Aphthon., 31. III. Adem. , 33; Marie, 65; Ysop., I. 39; 
Dial. Great., 42; Galf. ,40; Renard le contr. , 129; Vine. 
Bell., h. 3, 5, d. 4, 119; Hita, 275. IV. Luther, vi. 208; 
Sat. minip., 109; Wald., i. 31 ; Kirch., vii. 53 [cf. ii. 137) ; 
Lafont., i. 3 ; Rob., Kurz. V. C. 11, J. 34, T. 38 ; Cald., 
19 ; Cr., 18 ; Carlyle, Mise, ii. 283 (/r. Boner). Thackeray, 
Newcomes, i. 

Ro. III., i. — Lion and Shepherd (Androclus). 

I. Cf. Benf. , i. 211; Hiouen Tsiang ed. Julian, i. 181. 
II. Appian, ySgypt, 5; A. Gellius, v. 14, 10; Phasd., App. 
Burm., 15; Seneca, De Bene/., ii. 19. III. Ruf., iii. i; 
Adem., 35 ; Galf., 41 ; Vine. Bell., mor., 1554 ; Ysop., I. 40 ; 
Dial. Great., in; Neck., 20; John Sarisb. , v. 17; Enx., 
115; Gesta Rom., 104; Brom., P., 2, 32. IV. Kirch., i. 
203 ; Oest. V. Painter, Pal. Pleas, ed. Jacobs, i. 89-90 
(Androifus) ; W. Day, Sandford and Merton (Androcks) ; 
Warton, i. , clxvij. 

Ro. III., ii. — Lion and Horse. 

II. .iEsop., 334; Phaed. , App. Dressier, viii. 3; Babr. , 
122. III. P. Alf., V. ; Ruf., iii. 2; Ysop., I. 41, II. 23; 
Rom. du Renard, ap. Rob. ; Galf. , 42 ; Neck. , 24 ; Rein. 
Fuchs, 423, 429 ; Baldo, 27 ; Hita, 288 ; Boner, 50 {cf. Ex. 
V. i). IV. H. Sachs, 4, 3, 224; C. Nov. ant., 91 ; Wald., 
i. 32; Kirch., vii., 43 {cf. iv. 138); Lafont., v. 8; Goethe, 
xl. 128; Rob., Oest. ; Kurz, Schmidt Beitr., 181; M6ril, 
195, 257. V. Og. 64, T. 81. Campbell Tales, W. Highl, 
iii. 99. 

Ro. III., iii. — Ass and Horse. 
I. Synt., 29; Soph., 32. II. .(Esop., 328; Plut., De 
Sanit., 25; Phaed., App. Burm., 17; Babr. Gitl., 220; 
Gabr., 37; Absteni., 45. III. Ruf., iii. 8; Adem., 37; 
Galf., 43 ; Vine. Bell., k. 3, 5,4/. 4, 120; Scala, 186; Brom., 
J., 4, 4. IV. H. Sachs, 4, 3,203; Wald., i. 33: Kirch., 
vii. 54 {cf. 56) ; Oest. V. L. 63, T. 146, Cr. 55. 


Ro. III., iv. — Bat, Birds, and Beasts. 

I. Avaddnas, Julien, i. 154. II. Ph., App. Burm., 18; 
Varro Agaiho ; Non, Marcell, i. 32; Pandects, xxi., title 
De evict. III. Adem., 38 ; Galf., 44 ; Vine. Bell., d. 4, 121, 
h. 35; Scala, 73; Marie, 31; Broin.,A., 15, 31; Wright, 
ii. 10. IV. Wald., i. 34; Kurz, M^ril, 177. V. L. 40, J. 
124, T. 48, Cr. 43. 

Ro. III., V. — Nightingale and Hawk. 

II. Ph., App. Burm., ig. III. Ruf., iii. 4; Adem., 39; 
Galf., 45 ; Vine. Bell., h. 3, 5, d. 4, 114 ; Marie, 57 ; Scala, 
73; Odo, Wright, ii. 11; Bromy., N., 4, i. IV. Wald., 
iii. 18. V. L. 343. 

Ro. III., vi. — Fox and Wolf, 

I. Tutinameh, ii. 125. II. Ph., App. Burm., 20. III. 
Ruf., iii. s; Adem., 40; Galf., 46; Grimm, R. F., 354; 
Boner, 55; Brom., J., 6, 29. IV. Wald., i. 35. V. L. 

Ro. III., vii. — Hart and Hunter. 

I. Syntip. , 15; Soph., 17; Loqman, 2. II. ^sop, 128; 
Ph.,i. 12; Babr.,43. III. Ruf., iii. 10; Adem., 41; Vine. 
Bell., h. 3, 4, d. 4, 116; Scala, 76; Marie, 32; Beraoh. , 
74; Ysopet, I. 44, II. 32. ; Neck., 33 ; Wright, ii. 12 ; Galf., 
47; Bromy., D., 9, 20. IV. Wald., i. 36 ; Lafont., vi. 9; 
Rob., Kurz. V. Og., 28 ; Cald., 8. 

Ro. III., viii. — Juno, Venus, and other Women. 

II. Ph., App. Jan. i. 10. III. Rufus, iii. ir ; Marie, 
103 ; Berachyah, 86. IV. Waldis, iv. 92 ; Kurz. [The 
"glose of the sayd Esope" continues as follows: — "Cum 
interrogaret [Venus] patientem et taciturnam domesti- 
cam suam gallinam quanto posset satiari cibo? ilia dixit. 
Quodcunque accipero habundat mihi . et e contra scalpo. 

Ko. III., iv. — Ro. III., ix. 245 

Venus contra huic galline dicitur coram ipsis dixisse? Ne 
scalpas . do modium tritici . et gallina sic ait ueneri. Si hor- 
reum mihi patefacias . tamen scalpam. Vbi risisse dicitur 
iuno dictum veneris a gallina . per quse agnouerunt dii femi- 
nis fieri similia. Sic deinde iuppiter coepit multa addere et 
dicere. Femina nulla . se importuno negabit. Deinde et 
uenus cum marte . inde et cum uulcano . et ut potuerunt 
cetere multe. Sic et hodie plures famine dedicerunt maritis 

Ro. III., ix. — Knight and [Ephesian] Widow. 

I. Kin-ku-k' e-kwan (Chinese looi Nights), cf. Asiat. 
Joum., 1843; Forty Viziers, ed Gibb, 11; Pants., Benf., 
ii. 303 (i. 436) ; Talmud, Aboda sara, i (?) II. Petr. Arb. 
Satyr, cc. iii, 112 (figured in Bardon, Coutitmes des anciens, 
1772, pi. xii.) ; Phasd. , App., 15. III. Y^€^\qx,V\\., Sages, 
clvii-clxiii. ; Dolopathos prose, p. 22 ; Barbazan-M^on ; 
Scvyn Sages, ed. Weber, 12 ; Diocletianus, 49 ; Boner, 57 ; 
(Heb.) Tosafoth on Kidd, 80 ; Joseph Sebara {ap. Sulzbach, 
Dichter Kldnge, 78) ; Berachyah, 80. 

IV, Fr. : Brantome, Dames gal. sdpt. , disc. iv. ; P. Brisson, 
L' Ephisienne ; Lafont. , ad fi7t (Rob. ii. 42^ se^.); St. Evre- 
mond, CEuvres mhldes, 1678 ; Fatouville, Arlequin Gra- 
prignan, 1682 (com^die) ; Houdar de la Motte, Matrom 
d'Ephhe, 1702 (com.); Freselier, 1714 (op. com.); Voltaire, 
Zadig, J747 ; Retif de la Bretonne, Contemporaines ; A. de 
Musset, La covpe et les Itvres, 1832 || Ital. : Cento nov. ant., 
56; Sercambi, 16; Campeggi ; E. Manfredi, Rime, 1760; 
Carleromaco, // ricciardetto, 1738 || Span.: Erasto, 1538 || 
Germ. : Syben meystcrn, 1473 ; Kirch. ; Gellert, holzerne 
Johannes; Lessing, Matrone von Ephesus (frag. 8 scenes); 
Wieland, Hann u. Gulpenleh (Werke, xxii. 270-84) ; Mu- 
sceus in Volksmdrch, 1782 ; W. Heinse, Enkopp, 1773 ; 
Chamisso, Ged., 1832, pp. 208-14; ^. Grimm, K.M., 38 — 
E. Grisebach, Die treulose Wittwe, 4te Ausg., 1883; 
Steinschneider, Heb. Bibl., xiii. 78. 

V. J. Rolland (Scotch), i'^ww 5(7_c^^^, 1576; G. Chapman, 
Widow's Teares ; B. Harris, Matrona Ephesia, 1665 (fr. 


Eng., of W. Charleton) ; Jeremy Taylor, Holy Dying, c. v. ; 
Og. ; C. Johnson, The Ephesian Widow, 1730 (farce) ; O. 
Goldsmith, Citizen of World, xviii. ; Bickerstaff, The 
Ephesian Matron, 1769; Gallon, South Africa, p. 53;* 
Clouston, Pop, Tales, i. 29-35. 

Ro. III., X. — Young Man and Whore. 
II. Ph., App. Jan., i. 28. III. Ruf., iv. i ; Galf., 49. 

Ro. III., xi. — Father and Bad Son. 

II. Ph., App. Jan., i. 11. III. Ruf., iv. 15; Galf., 50; 
Ysop., I. 4, 5. IV, Wald., iv. 85. 

Ro. III., xii. — Serpent and File, 

I. Synt., 6; Soph., 5; Loqman, 28 (cat). II. ^sop. 
146; Phaed., iv. 8, III. Ruf., iv. 8; Adem., 42; Galf., 
51 ; Marie, 83; Ysop., I. 48, II. 15; Neck., 16; Galf., 52. 
IV. Wald., i, 37 ; Lafont., v. 16, Rob., M6r. V, Og., 27; 
C, 43, J. 91, T, 70, Cr, 17, 

Ro. III., xiii. — Wolves and Sheep. 

II. ^sop. 268; Plut., Demosih., 33; Ph., App. Dressier, 
vii. 21 ; Babr., 93 ; Aphthon., 21 ; Theon, 2; Ibidor, orig. ., 
!■ 39> 7- III- Ruf.. iv. 9; Adem., 43; Galf., 52; Ysop., 
I. 49, II. s; Galf., 53; Neck., 4; Dial. Great., 8; Holkot, 
55; Brom., F. , i. 18; Enx., 354; Boner, 93; Book of 
Leinster, f. 382. IV. Wald., i. 38 [cf. i. 26) ; Kirch., vii. 39; 
Pauli, 447; Lafont., iii. 13 — Rob., Oest. V, L, 186, C. 
33. J- 62. 

Ro. III., xiv. — Man and Wood (Trees). 

I. Talm. Sanh., 39*; Ber. Rab., § 5; Jellinek, Beth, 
Ham., ii. 25 ; Job. de Capua, c. 16; Raju, Indian Fables, 

* "After one of the flashes the fourth sav.^ge was struck dead. 
. . . His widow howled all night ; and was engaged to be mairie J 
again the succeeding day." 

Ro. III., ix. — Ro. III., xvi. 247 

p. 47. II. .(Esop., 123; Ph., App. Burm., 5; Babr. , 2. 
III. Ruf., iv. 10; Adem., 44; Vine. Bell., h. 3, 20, d. 4, 
116; Marie, 23; Berach., 42; Ysop., I. 50; Galf. , 53; 
Wright, ii. 16. IV. Wald., i. 39 {cf. iii. 77) ; Kirch., i. 23, 
vii. 103 ; Lafont., xii. 16 ; Rob., Oest. ; Blumenthal, R. Afeir, 
p. 106. V. Og., 36: C. 33, J. 58, T. 143, Cr. 25. 

Ro. III., XV. — Wolf and Dog. 

I. Soph., 46. II.'.(Esop., 321; Ph., iii. 7; Babr., 100; 
Avian, 37 (Lion). III. Ruf., iv. 7 ; Adem., 45 ; Galf., 54 ; 
Vine. Bell., h. 3, 6, d. 3, 313; Marie, 34; Berach., 61 
(Lion); Ysop., I. 51, II. 37; Enxemplos, 176; Brom., M., 
8, 32 ; Neck., 39. IV. Wald., i. 56 [cf. ii. 18) ; Pauli, 433 ; 
Morhni, Nov. 13; Lafont., i. 5— Rob., Oest. V. L, 68, 
C. 19. 

Ro. III., xvi. — Belly and Members. 

I. Egyptian '(z/. Acad. Inscr., 1883, p. 5 [supra, p. 82); 
Mahabharata, xiv. 688 (Weber, Ind. Stud. , iii. 369) ; Up- 
anishads : Burnouf, Snr le Yagna, notes, p. elxxii. seq. ; 
Schocher Tob (Heb. ) on Ps. , 39 ; i Cor. xii. 11-27 \ Pant- 
schatantra, ii. 360 (Benf., i. § 116) ; Avadanas, i. 152, ii. 100 ; 
Loqman, 32; Syntipas, 35. II. Plut., Coriol. 6; Agis ; 
.iEsop., 197; Max Tyr., 5; Ph., App. Dressier, viii. 4; 
Livy, i. 30, 3, ii. 32 ; Quintil. , v. 11 ; Seneca, ad Helviam, 
12; Dio Chrys, 2,7; Dio. Halie. , vi. 76. III. Ruf., 
iv. II ; Adem., 46 ; Galf., 55 ; Vine. Bell., mor, 1504, h. 3, 
7, d. \, 122; Marie, 35; Ysop., I. 52, II. 36; Neck., 37; 
Wright, ii. 17 ; Joh. Sarisb. , ii. 6, 24 ; Abr. ibn Ezra, Ker. 
Chem., iv. 143 (Geiger, /. D., 33-5) ; Keller, Erzdhl., 589 ; 
Migne, Mystires, s. v. Membres. IV. Rabelais, iii. 3 ; Pauli, 
399; Wald., i. 40; Kirch., v. 122; Lafont., iii. 2; Cinq 
Sens, 1545 ; AUione, Commedie, 15-54 ; Miranda, Conios, 69 ; 
Rob., Oest. ; Prato ap. Archiv. por. trad, pop,, iv. 25-40, 
V. North, Bidpai, ed. Jacobs, 64 ; North, Plut., ed. Skeat, 
6; Shakspeare, Coriol., i. 2; L. 50, C. 37, J, 64, T. 80; 
Pope, Essay, ix. 


Ro. III., xvii. — Ape and Fox. 

II. Phsed., App. Burm., 12. III. Ruf., iv. 12; Adem., 
46 ; Galf., 56 ; Vine. Bell., /i. 3, 7, d. 4, 115; Marie, 36 ; 
Berach., 79 ; Scala, 19 ; Wright, ii. 19. IV. Wald., i. 81. 
V. L. 116, C, 123. 

Ro. III., xviii. — Merchant and Ass. 

II, Ph., iv. I. III. Ruf., iv. 5, 13; Adem., 47; Galf., 
57 ; Vine. Bell., h. 3, 7, d. 4, 118 ; Scala, 53. 

Ro. III., xix. — Hart in Ox Stall. 

II. .(Esop, Gall. can. aug. (Rob.), 42; Ph., ii. 8. III. 
Ruf., iv. 6, 16 ; Adem., 48 ; Ysop., I. 55 ; Galf., 58 ; Brom., 
I. 3, 5 ; W. Mapes, De Nugis. IV. Wald., i. 62 ; Kirch., 
vii. 106; Lafont., iv. 21; Rob., Oest. ; Liebr., V. K., 53. 
V. Og., 37. L. 53. C. 18, Cr. 44. 

Ro. III., XX. — Lion Sick. 

I. Rig Veda, x. 28, 4 (De Gub. ) ; Benf., i. 382 ; L6qman. 
6. II. Phsed., vi. 13. III. Ruf., v. 2; Adem, 49; cf. 
Gesta, 283 (Fridolin) ; Marie, 37; Isop. (Heb.), 13. IV. 
Wald., i. 43; Steiuschneider, Ysopet, 364; Ghivizzani, ii. 
186; De Gubern., ii. 78. 

Ro. IV., i. — Fox AND Grapes. 

I. Leitner, Darbistan, iii. No. 23 {F. and pomegranates) ; 
cf. Benf., i. 323. II. .^Esop. , 33; Phaed., iv. 3; Babr. , 19; 
Abstem., 141. III. Ps. Abelard, Epist. iv. ; Rufus, v. 3; 
Vine. Bell., h. 3, 7, d. 4, 123; Amis et Amiles, 571. IV. 
Bebel, /at. 10; Waldis, iii. 73; Lafontaine, iii. 11; Sat. 
minip., 105 ; Krilof, vi. 17 ; Rob. ; M^ril, 141-2 ; Lieb. ZV. 
103. V. L. 129, C. 12, J. i. T. 136 ; Cr. , 9 ; Mavor, 1 ; 
Hazlitt, Prov. 146. 

Ro. III., xvii. — Ro. IV., viii. 249 

Ro. IV., ii. — Weasel (Cat), and Rats. 

I. Cf. Benf., i. 225; Sophos, 39; Vartan, 15. II. Ph., 
iv. 2. IV. Waldis, i. 67; Lafont., iii. 18; Rob., Kurz. 
V. [variants have cat]. L. 115, C. 88. 

Ro. IV., iii. — Wolf, Shepherd, and Hunter. 

I. Cf. Benf. i. § 71, II. Ph., App. Burm., 23; ^sop, 
35; Babr. , 50; Max Tyr., 33. III. Ademar, 50; Marie, 
42; Berach., 75; Neck., 22; Wright, ii. 21; Brom., C. , 6, 
13. IV, M(5ril, 193. V. L. 104 (Fo.\), C. 89 (F.), Chap- 
book, II (Fox). 

Ro. IV., iv. — Peacock and Juno. 

II. Phaed., iii. 18; cf. yEsop., 18 (Camel); Babr.-Gitl., 
145; Avian, 8 (vii.). III. Rufus, v. 4; Marie, 43; Ysop. , 
II. 39. IV. Kirch., iv. 274; Lafont., ii. 17; Rob. V. L. 
80, C. 21, T. 97 ; Cr. , 33. 

Ro. IV., V. — Panther and Villains. 
II. Ph. iii. 2. III. Rufus, v. 5. 

Ro. IV., vi. — Butchers and Wethers. 

I. Synt., 13; Loqm., i. II. Ph., App. Dressier, viii. 5; 
Babrius, 44; Aphth., 16; Av., 18. III. Gab., 30; Marie, 
45 ; Neck. , 30 ; Boner, 84 ; Wright, ii. 23. IV. M^r. , 200, 

Ro. IV., vii. — Falconer and Birds. 

II. Ph., App. Dressier, viii. 6. III. Odo ; Wright, ii. 
24 ; Gatos, 4 ; Lucanor, 13. 

Ro. IV., viii. [King of Apes]. 

II. Ph., App. Burm., 24. III. Ademar, 51 ; Marie, 66; 
Berach., 78 ; Ysop., II. 30; Vine. Bell., h. 3, 7, d. 4, 121, 


tn. 1044 ; Wright, ii. 25; stories, 60; Odo ; Bromyard, A., 
15, 21 ; Gatos, 28. IV. H. Sachs, 2, 4, 85 ; Pauli, 381 ; 
Waldis, iv. 75 ; Oest. ; M^ril, 201. 

Ro. IV., ix. — Horse, Hunter, and St.\g. 

II. Arist., Rhet., ii. 20; VlyxX., Arat., 38; .(Esop., 175; 
Phaed., iv. 4; Hor., Epp., i. 10, 34; Gabr., 3 (not in 
Babr.); Niceph. Basil., Myth., 2; Konon, Diegmata, 42. 
III. Ysop., I. 43, II. 25; Galf., 46 ; Neck., 26; Reineke, 3, 8; 
Baldo, 26 ; Boner, 56. IV. Waldis, i. 45 ; Kirchhof, vii. 
128; Sat. minip., 225; Leo Allat. , 107; Doni, 2, i; 
Lafont. , iv. 13 ; Goethe, xl. 172 ; Rob. , Oest. ; Kurz, M6r. , 
197. V. North Bidpai, ed. Jacobs, p. 65 ; C. 34, J. 86, T. 
137 ; Cald., 12 ; Cr., 20. 

Ro. IV., X, — Ass AND Lion. 

II. .^sop.,259; cf. Ph.,i. II. III. Marie, 67; Berach., 
65; Ysop., II. 8; Vine. Bell, h. 3, 8, d. 4, 123; Wright, 
ii. 26; Neck., 8. IV. Morhni, Nov,, 4; Lafont., ii. 19; 
Rob. ; M^ril, 182. V. L. 7, C. 72. 

Ro. IV., xi. — Hawk and other Birds, 

II. Ph., App. Dress., viii. 7. IV. Waldis, i. 79 ; Kirch., 
vii. 117. 

Ro. IV., xii. — Fox and Lion [Ntilla Vestigia.\ 

I. Pants., iii. 14 (Benf. , ii. 264, i. 382); Syntipas, 38; 
Loqman, 38; Sadi, 16; Vartan, 3; Tutinameh (Rosen), ii, 
125 ; Bleek, RF. Afr., xxv. II. Plato, Alcib.,\. 503 ; Plut., 
De Virt., 329; .lEsop. , 246; Ph., App. Burm., 30; Babr., 
103; Hor., Ep. I., i. 73; Aphthon., 8. III. Ademar, 59; 
Marie, 58; Berachyah, 29; Vine. Bell., Doct., 4, 123; 
Dial. Great., 44, no. IV. Fischart, Garg.,'^6; Waldis, i. 
43; Kirch., vii. 25; Lafontaine, vi. 14; Rob, (cf. ii. 548); 
Oest. V. Og. 38, T. 40 ; Chapbook, i. 

Ro. IV., ix. — Ro. IV., xviii. 251 

Ro. IV., xiii. — Ass AND Wolf [Rom. iv. 15]. 

II. Plut., de fratr. amic, 19; ^sop., 16; Babr.-Gitl., 
226; Ph., App. Dressier, viii. 9 ; Dositheus, 13; Gab. , 42. 
III. Neckam, 21. IV. Du Meril, 192. 

Ro. IV., xiv. — Hedgehog and Kids, 
II. Ph., App, Dressier, viii. 10. 

Ro. IV., XV. — Man and Lion (Statue). 

I. Loqman, 7 ; Sophos, 58. II. Plut., Apopth. Laced., 
69; Scol. Eurip. Kor., 103 ; Aphth., 38 ; Ph., App. Burm., 
p. 20; Gabr., i. (not in Babr.) ; Avian, 24. III. Ademar, 
52; Marie, 69; Berach., 56; Wright, ii. 28. IV. Kirch., 
i. 80; Lafont., iii. 10; Rob., Oest. V. Spectator, No. 11; 
L. 100, J. 84 ; Cr. , 30 (Lion and Statue). 

Ro. IV., xvi. — Camel and Flea. 

I. Synt., 47, II. ^sop., 235; Phaed. App. Burm., 31 ; 
Babr., 84. III. Ademar, 60; Marie, 70; Berachyah, 73; 
Wright, ii. 29. IV. M^ril, 205. 

Ro. IV., xvii. — Ant and Grasshopper. 

I. Cf. Prov. vi. 6 ; Sophos, 35. II. .^sop. 401 ; Dosith., 
17 ; Ph. App. Burm., 28 ; Aphthon., 31 ; Babr., 136 ; Avian, 
34; 'Si-aXsxzxvas, De gub. Dei, iv. 43. III. Adem., 56; Vine. 
Bell., h., 3, 8, d., 4, 122 ; Marie, 29 [cf. 86) ; Berach., 40; 
Ysopet, II. 28; Dial. Great., 13; Neckam, 29; Gab., 41; 
Boner, 42 ; Cyril, i. 4. IV. H. Sachs, i. 4, 977 ; Krilof, 
ii. 12; Pitr6 Fiabe, 280; Lafont., i. i ; Rob., M^ril, 199; 
De Gub., ii. 222. V. L. 217, C. 121, J. 12, T. 14. 

Ro. IV., xviii. — Pilgrim and Swokd. 

II. Ph. App. Dress., v. ii. 


Ro. IV., xix. — Sheep and Crow. 

II. Ph. App. Burm. , 29. III. Ademar, 55; Marie, 20; 
Berach., 18; Wright, ii. 31. IV. Wald.,i. 65. V. L. 77. 

Ro, IV., XX. — Tree and Reed [Not in Rom.]. 

I. Mahabharata, xii. 4198 — Weber, Ind. Studien, iii. ; 
Talm. Taanith, -zo^. II. ^sop., 125 (cf. F., 59); Babrius, 
64 {cf. 36); Avian, 19 [cf. 16). III. Boner, 83; Berach., 
27, 54. IV. Florian, i. 15; Wald., i. 100 {cf. 82) ; Kirch., 
■vii- 58, 59; Pauli, 174; Krilof, i. 2 ; cf. Lafontaine, i. 22 — 
Rob. ; Kurz. V. C. 50. J. 92, T. 51 (Oak) ; Cr.. 34. 


[In Stainhowel these are known as " Fabulce E.\trava- 
gantes" : the majority of them find parallels in Marie or 
Berachyah or the LBG Fables contained in Oesterley's 
Appendix to Romulus. All these we have seen reason to 
connect with the ^sop of Alfred, which may therefore be 
regarded as the source of the collection. The only MS. 
known to contain them is the Breslau one of the Disciplina 
Clericalis, the only discussion of them that by Robert, I. 

Ex. v., i. — Mule, Fox and Wolf. 

I. Petr. Alfonsus, 5,4; cf. Benf., § i3i. II. ^sop.,334; 
Babr., 122; Aphthon., 9. III. Gabr., 37; Bromy., F., 7, 
2; Renard, 7521; Reineke (Grimm), Ixxv., cclxxii., 423 
(Caxton, ed. Arber, 61) ; Castoie7nent, 71 ; Gab., 38 ; Enx., 
128; Baldo, 27. IV. H. Sachs, 2, 4, 34; Kirch., iv. 138 
{cf. vii. 43) ; Lafontaine, xii. 17 {cf. vi. 7) ; Kuhn Mark. 
Sagen ' Der dumme Wulf — Schmidt Beitr., 181; Rob., 
Oest. V. Dunlop. Lieb., 214. 

Ro. IV., xix. — Ex. v., V. 253 

Ex. v., ii. — Boar and Wolf. 
III. Berach., 105: Marie, 78; Rom. App., 63; Came- 

Ex. v., iii.— Fox and Cock. 

I. Benf., i. 610 ; Katha-Sarit-Sagara, ed. Tawney, ii. 685 ; 
Vartan, 12, 13 ; Bleek, Rein. Fuchs in Africa, 23 ; Harris, 
Nights with Remus, x.wii. (Brer Wolf says grace). II. 
Piiasdr. Burm. App. , 13. III. Adem.,30; Marie, 51 ; Rom. 
App., 45 ; Brom., A., 11,9 ; J., 13, 28 ; Baldo, 23 ; Lucanor 
(York), 31; Sermond, Op., ii. 1075; Alcuin, Op., ii. 238; 
Barbazan, iii. 55. IV. Coilho, Cont. port., p. 15 ; Du M^ril, 
138, 253 ; De Gub., ii. 137, Tawney. V. Chaucer, Nonne 
Prestes Tale, Campbell, W. Highl, Tales, 63 (iii. 93). 

Ex. v., iv. — Dragon and Hart. 

I. Benf., i. 113-120; Tutinameh, 129; Temple, Wide- 
awake Stories, 116; Harris Nights, xlvi. ; Weber, Vier 
yahre in Afrika (among Basutos). II. .^Esop., 97; Ph., 
iv. 18; Babrius, 4; Syntip., 25; Abstem., 136. III. Gab., 
44; Marie ap. Legrand, iv. 193 (not in Roquefort); Ysop. , 
I. 10 ; Gesta Rom. , 178 ; Dial. Great. , 24 ; Reineke, Grimm. , 
cliii. 14; Scala ccli, 86; Bromy. ,G. , 4, 17; Enx. 246. IV. 
Waldis, iv. 99 ; Luther, Tisch. , 78 b. ; Kirchhof, v. 121 ; 
Charron de la sagesse, i. i ; Lafontaine, iv. 13 ; Hahn, gr. 
Mdhr, 87 ; Grundvig, ii. 124 ; Maassebiich (Jew-Germ.), 144 ; 
Gonzenbach, j^c. ,yl/a/^7'. — Rob. ,Oest., Schmidt, 118; Temple, 
324, 408 ; Rev. trad. pop. , i. 30 ; Arch. slav. phil. , 1876, p. 
279 ; R. Kohler in Gonzenbach, p. 247 ; Carnoy, Gontes 
d'Animaux, pp. viii.-ix. V. Og., 16; Clouston, Pap. 
Tales, i. 262-5. 

Ex. v., V. — Fox AND Cat. 

I. Cf. Benf., i. 312. II. Gr. prov. (Leutsch. i. 147, Ion) ; 
Ps, Homer ap. Zenob. , v. 68, III. Rom., App. 20; Camerar, 


202 ; Marie, 98 ; Berachyah, 94 ; I?om. du Renard, f. 99 ; 
Gatos, 40; Brom., S. 3, 15; Joh. Gers. Par. sup. magnif., 
iv. 4. IV. H. Sachs, ii. 4, 77 ; Waldis, ii. 21 ; Lafont. , ix. 
14; Grimm, KM, 75; Hahn GAM, 91. V. Og., 57; L. 
394, C. 60, T. 29 ; Cr. , 47. 

Ex. v., vi.— Hegoat and Wolf. 

II. .(Esop., 13s; Babr. , 96; Avian, 26. III. Marie, 49 ; 
Rom., ^//., 43 ; Baldo, 22. IV. Kirch., vii. 118. — Oest. 

Ex. v., vii. — Wolf and Ass. 

III. Marie, 62 ; Rom. App., 50 ; Reineke Fuchs., Grimm, 
424; Camerar, 203. IV. Grimm, KM, 132. 

Ex., V. viii. — Serpent and Labourer. 

I. Benf., i. 359. II. Berach. , 22 ; Marie, 63. IV. Gritsch. 
Quadragesimale, 1484, 37, 76; Roman du Renard (Rob.). 
V. Chaucer, Tale of Melibceus. 

Ex. v., ix, — Fox, Wolf and Lion. 

I. Mesne vi, i. 100, p. 263. II. .<Esop.,255. III. Marie, 
59; Berach., 85; Vine. Bell., m., 3, 3, 11; Reineke, 
Grimm., 425; Reinardus, 2, 311; Grimm, Lai. Ged. d. 
Mittelalters, 200; Wright, 58; Odo ; Brom., A., 11, 8; 
cf. D. 12, 26, E. 8, 25. IV. Wald. , iii. 91 ; Pauli, 494 ; 
Lafont., viii. 3; Goethe, 40, 175. — Oest. 

Ex. v., X. — Penitent Wolf. 

I. Butting goats from Bidpai {cf. Jacobs, D. 7».). III. 
Reineke, Grimm, 429. IV. Camerar, 371; cf. Wald., ii. 
73 ; V^o\{,Deutsch. Hausm., 419 ; Hahn, GAM, 93 ; Leger, 
Conies slaves, 18 (Litde Russ. fr. Rutchenko). V. Hazlitt, 
Prov. Hear news, &c. 

Ex. v., vi. — Ex. v., xvii. 255 

Ex. v., xi. — Dog in Manger. 

II. Lucian Tim., i. 14 ; dfl-afS., 30 ; iEsop., 228 ; Abstem. 
ap. Nevelet., 604. IV. Kirch., vii. 130; Wald., i. 64; 
Bartol. a Saxo-ferrato Tract, quest, inter virg. Mariam 
et Diabolum Hanov. , 1611, 3. — Oest. V. C. 127, J. 79, T. 
46, Cr. 18, Mav. 4, R. C. Jebb, Bentley, 52, 62. 

Ex. v., xii. — Wolf and Hungry Dog. 
IV. Cf. Grimm., KM., iii. 80. 

Ex. v., xiii. — Father and Three Sons. 

II. Seneca, Controv. exc, 6, 3. III. Gesta Rom., go; 
Renard le Contrefait ; Judgment de Salotnon. — Rob. 

Ex. v., xiv. — Wolf and Fox. 

III. Rom. App., 52; Reineke, Grimm., 427. 

Ex. v., XV. — Dog, Wolf and Wether. 
III. Baldo, 21 {cf. contra. Wolf in sheep's clothing). 

Ex. v., xvi. — Man, Lion and Son. 

I. Kolle, /^/rzVflw nat. lit.. No. g; Bleek, RF. in Afr., 
23 ; Harris, Nights with Remus, vii. (Lion hunts for man). 
III. Berach., 106; Dial. Great., 86. IV. Pauli, 20 (cf. 
18) ; Sellers mil d. Warheyt, zpb. ; Geiler Narrenschiff, 70 ; 
Grimm, KM., 72; cf. 48. — Oest. 

Ex. v., xvii.— Knight and Servant. 
III. Rom. App., 59. IV. Waldis, iii. 29. 



[Selected by Stainhowel from the hundred Latin prose ver- 
sions of Greek fables, translated by Ranutio d'Arezzo, 
and published in 1476. All are in the Greek prose 
^sop, most in Babrius, either in the vulgate or in 
Gitlbauer's edition.] 

Re. i. — Eagle and Raven. 
I, Benf. , i. 602 ; Somadeva, 70, ed. Tawney, ii. 41. II. 
iEsop, 8; Babr.-Gitl. , 186; Aphthon., 19; Aristoph. ,^wj, 
652. III. Gab., I. IV. Rim., 2; Dorp., 374; Wald., i. 
63; Lafont., ii. 16. — Kurz, Tawney. 

Re. ii. — Eagle and Weasel. 
I. Cf. Panfs., ii. 170. II. ^sop, 7 ; Cf. Aristoph., Pax, 
126, and Scholiast, ad loc. IV. Rim., 3; Dorp., 375; 
Lafont., ii. 8 ; Wald., ii. 26. — Kurz, Rutherford. 

Re. iii. — Fox and Goat. 

I. Cf. Benf., i. 320. II. Ph., iv. 9; .lEsop, 45; Babr.- 
Gitl., 174. III. Alf., 24; Renart, 7383, seq. ; Barbazon- 
Meon, iv. 175. IV. Rim., 5; Dorp., 377; Wald., iii. 27; 
Lafont., iii. 5 ; Goethe, xl. 195. 

Re. iv. — Cat and Chicken. 

II. .(Esop, 14; Babr., 17. IV. Rim., 7; Dorp., 379; 
Wald., i. 61.— Kurz. 

Re. v.— Fox and Bush. 
II. .iEsop, 32; Babr.-Gitl., 187. III. Gabr., 4, 6. IV. 
Rim., 10; Dorp. 382; Wald., iii. 42. — Kurz. 

Re. vi. — Man and Wooden God. 
I. Benf.,/'i?«i'j., i. 478; Sophos, 52; Vartan,4i; cf. Is., 
xl. ; looi Tag (Xailun), 5. II. /Esop., 66; Babr., 119. 

Re. i. — Re. xiii. 257 

IV. Rim., 15; Dorp. ,387; Kirch. , i. 104 ; BnsWe, Pen iam., 
4 (Liebr., i. 63) ; Gesammt, 2, 525 ; Wald., iii. 45 ; Lafont., 
iv. 8.— Oest. 

Re. vii. — Fisher. 
II. Herod., i. 141 ; iEsop, 39 ; Babr., 9 ; Ennius (Vahlen), 
p. 151 ; Aristaen., ep. i. 27. III. Gab., 16. IV. Rim., 18 ; 
Dorp. 390; Wald., iii. 49 ; Lafont., x. 11. — Kurz, Ruther- 
ford. V. Hazlitt, Prov., 142. 

Re. viii. — Cat and Rat. 
II. ^sop., 16; Ph., iii. 2; Babr.-Gitl., 226. III. Gabr., 
42. IV. Rim., 21; Dorp., 393; Wald., iii. 57 (c/. i. 67); 
Lafont., iii. 18. — Kurz. 

Re. ix. — Labourer and Pyelarge. 
n. ^sop., 100; Babr., 13. III. Gab., 13. IV. Rim., 
43; Dorp, 415; Kirch. , vii. , 92 ; f/I 93 — Oest. 

Re. X. — Shepherd Boy (Wolf !) 
II. ^sop. ,166; Babr.-Gitl., 199. IV. Rim., 53; Dorp., 
425; Kirch., vii. 136; Goedeke, Deutsche Dicht., i. 286^. — 
Oest. V. L. 74, C. 15s, J. 40, T. 90, Cald., 7, Mav., 3. 
Cf. expr. " to cry wolf." 

Re. xi. — Ant and Dove. 
II. .(Esop. , 296. IV. Rim. , 68 ; Dorp. , 440 ; Lafont. , ii. 
12; Wald., i. 70. — Rob., Oest. V. L. 203, C. 133, J. 156, 
T. 156. 

Re. xii. — Bee and Jupiter. 
II. ^sop., 287; Babr.-Gitl., 175. IV. Rim., 70; Dorp., 
442 ; Wald., iii. 69. — Kurz. 

Re. xiii. — Carpenter. 

I. Cf. II. Kings, vi, 4-8. IL ^sop., 308; Babr.-Gitl., 
276; Gr. Prov. (Leutsch., ii. 197). IV. Rim., 74; Dorp., 
446; Kirch., vii. 15, 16; Rabel., iv. prol. ; Lafont., v. i — 
Rob., Oest. 

YOL. I. B 


Re. xiv.— Young Thief and Mother. 

II. ^sop., 351; Babr.-GitL, 247; Boethius De discip. 
schol. III. Vine. Bell. , »z., 3, 2, 7 ; Gesta Rom. , ed. Graesse, 
ii. p. 186; £nxemp., 2j^; Brom., A., 3, 19. IV. Rim. ,90; 
Dorp., 462; Pauli, 19; Wald., iii. 19; Kirch., vii. 183. — 
Oest. V. Conceyts and Jests, 26; C. 119, J. loi, T. 10. 

Re. XV. — Flea and Man. 

II. ^sop., 425; Babr.-Gitl, 283. IV. Rim., 97; Dorp., 
469 ; Wald. , iii. 82. V. L. 139, C. 190. 

Re. xvi. — Man with two Wives. 

I. Benf. Pants. , i. 602, ii. 552 ; Avaddnas, ii. 138 ; Diod. 
Sic, xxxiii. , 10 ; Talm., Baba Kama, 60b. II. Mso'p., 56; 
Phasd. , ii. 2 ; Babr. , 22. IV. Rim. , 100 ; Dorp. , 472 ; Kirch. , 
vii. 67; H. Sachs, 2, 4, 214; Wald., iii. 83 ; Lafont., i. 17. 
— Rob., Oest., Roth., Heid. Jahrb., i860, p. 52; Liebr. , 
ZV., 120. V. L. 141, C. i7,|J. 179, Cald., 16, Clouston, 
Pop. Tales, i. 16. 

Re. xvii. — Labourer and Children. 

II. ^sop.,98; Babr.-Gitl., 230. III. Dial. Great., 13. 
IV. Kirch. , i. 172 ; Lafont. , v. 9. 


[The original consists of forty-two fables : of these some 
are parallels to Phsfidrine fables, and are accordingly in- 
cluded in the preceding books. Cf. Ro., i. 20, iii. 15, iv. 4, 
6, 15, 17, 20; Ex., V. 6.] 

Av. i.— Nurse and Wolf. 

I. Alf. Disc. Cler., 24. II. Av., i; ^sop., 275; Babr., 
16; Apththon., 39. III. Marie, 49; Wright, 77; Reineke, 

Re. xiv. — Av. iv. 259 

Grimm., 330; Novus Avianus, Du M6ril, 262, 268; Scala, 
IT, Brom., A., 21, 26; S., 10, 3. IV. H. Sachs, 2, 4, 33; 
Pauli, 90 {cf. 81); Eulenspiegel , 96; Gesammt., 69; Wald., 
i. 86; Lafont., iv. 16; Rob., Oest. ; Goed. Mittel., 626. 
V. Cf. Chaucer, Freres Tale, 6957. 

Av. ii. — Tortoise and Birds. 

I. Kacchapa Jdtaka, supra, IV., p. 81-2; Wagener- 
Weber, No. 5 {Ind. Stud., iii. 339) ; Somadeva, ed. Tawney, 
ii. 685. II. Av. 2; ^sop., 419; Babr., 115. Cf. yEHan, 
vii. 17 (^schylus' death). III. Gab., 53; Bayeux Tap., 
pi. vi. (see frontispiece) ; Joh. Saxish. , Polycrat. , p. 4 ; Boner, 
64. IV. Wald., i. 87; Mer., 139. V. tioxiti, Bidpai, p. 
259 ; Gosson, School of Abuse, ed. Arber, p. 43. 

Av. iii. — Two Crabs. 

II. Aristopb. /'a:t?., 1083; Schol on Athen., 695 ; Apolod., 
ix. 50; Av. , 3; Babr., 109; .^Esop. , 187; Petronius Sat., 

,42.— Ellis. III. Boner, 65. IV. Wald., i. 88; Lafont., 
xii. ID. 

Av. iv.— Ass IN Lion's Skin. 

I. Siha-Cama-Jdtaka, supra, II., pp. 57-8; Pants., iv. 
7, v. 7 (Benf. , ii. 309, 339, i. 462, 494); Somadeva, ii. 65; 
Tutinameh, Rosen, ii. 149,218; Hitopadesa, iii. 4; Weber, 
Ind. Stud., iii. 338; Bleek, RF in Afr., 79 (Hare). IL 
iEsop., 333; Plato, Cratyl., 411a.; Lucian, Piscat., 32; 
Pseudol., 3; Drapet., 13; Babr.-Gitl. , 218; Avian, 5; 
Tzetzes, 9, 321; M. Tatius, Progym., f. 8. III. Berach., 
47 ; Keineke, Grimm. , 354 ; Dial. Creat., 108 ; Holkot, fuor. , 
35; Ms.'pes, Poerns, p. 36; Odo. ,35; Gates, zz; Brom., P., 
12, 16, R. 5, 5 ; Boner, 66. IV. H. Sachs, i. 5, 587; Eras- 
mus, Adag, ' Asinus ap. Cumam ' ; Geiler, Narrenschiff, zf^b ; 
Wald., i. 90; Kirch., i. 165; Lafont., v. 21 — Rob., Oest. ; 
M6ril, 140; Liebr. , VK., iig ; De Gub. , i, 378. — Tawney. 
V. Og. 70, L. 224, C. 42, J. 157, T. 109, Cald. 2, Cr. 49 ; 
R. C. Jebb, Bentley, p. 73. Thackeray, Newcomes, i. 


Av. V. — Frog and Fox. 

II. Av., 6; ^sop., 78; Babr., 120. III. Boner, 68; 
Albertus, 49. IV. H. Sachs, i. 4, 981 ; Fischart, Frosch- 
gosch ; Wald., i. 91. V. C. 43, T. 4. 

Av. vi. — Two Dogs."! 
II. Av., 7; .(Esop., 224 (Nevel, 214); Babr., 104. III. 
Boner, 69 ; Berach., 31. IV. Wald., i. 92, ii. 98. 

Av. vii. — Camel and Jupiter. 

I. Mahabharata, xii. 4175 (Weber, IS., iii. 355) ; Talm. 
Sa7ihed., 106b ; Rodiger, direst, syr., xxiv. § 5; Benf., 
Pants., i. 20'2- H. Av.,8; .^Esop., 184; Babr.-Gitl., 282; 
Gab., 34; Syntip. ,59; Aphthon.,15. IV. 'BusMq, Penfam., 
ed. Lieb. , ii. 166; Erasmus, Chil., iii. 5, 8; Wald., i. 93. 
V. L. 78. C. 45. J- 49. T. 96. 

Av. viii. — Two Fellows and Bear. 

II. Av., 9; Babr., 140 ; /Esop., 311 ; ^ Ph., v. 2. III. 
Dial. Great., 108; Abstem., 209; Aiov. Av., M^ril, 271; 
Brom. , A. , 21, 20. IV. H. Sachs, 2, 4, 86 ; Luther, Tischr. ; 
Fischart, Garg., 36; Lafont., v. 20; Pauli, 422; Kirch., i. 
87; Rob., Oest. V. L. 227, C. 46, J. 52, T. 120. 

Av. ix. — Two Pots. 
I. Ecclesiasticus,yi\\\.'2.\ Benf., i. 346; Pants., ii., str. 13, 
14, Dukes Bhim. § 530. II. Av., 11 ; .(Esop., 422 ; Babr.- 
Gitl., 184. III. Berach., 33; Brom., A., 14,38. IV. Kirch., 
vii. 117a; Alciati, emblem, 166; Wald., i. 96; Lafont., v. 
2— Rob., Oest. V. L. 229, C. 48, J. 125, T. 124. 

Av. X. — Lion and Bull. 
I. Rodiger, Chryst. syr., § 8. II. Av., 13 [Goat] ; ^Esop., 
396; Babr., 91. IIL Boner, 78. IV. Wald., i, 85; De 
Gub., i, 378. 

Av. V. — Av. xvi. 261 

Av. xi. — Ape and Son. 

II. Av,i4; Babr., 56; .(Esop., 364. III. Rom., App., 
36 ; Marie, 74 ; Berach. , 50 ; Boner, 79. 

Av. xii. — Ckane and Peacock. 

II. ^sop., 397(Nevel) ; Av.,15; Babr., 65. III. Boner, 
81 ; Berach., 41. V. C. 49, T. 69. 

Av. xiii. — Hunter and Tiger. 

I. Kolle, Afric. nat. lit., 9; Baldo, 28. II. Av. , 17; 
.(Esop. , 403; Babr., i. III. Gabr. , 34; Boner, 3. IV. 
Wald., ii. 2 ; Kirch., vii. 97; Grimm, KM., 72. — Oest. 

Av. xiv. — Four Oxen and Lion. 

I. Loqman, i. II. Av. , 18; yEsop. , 394; Babr., 44; 
figured Helbig, Untersuch. , 93 (Crusius, Leipz. Stud. ,ii. 248). 
III. Boner, 84 ; Berach., 51. IV. Morlini, 12 ; H. Sachs, iv. 
3, 229; Wald., ii. I. — Kurz. V. C. 52, J. 187, T. 3. 

Av. XV.— Bush and Bramble. 

I. Shemoth Rabba ap. Dukes' Blumenlese, § 505. II. 
Av., 19; .(Esop., 125; Babr., 64. III. Berach., 54; Nov. 
.^w. , ed. M^ril, 275 ; Boner, 86. IV. Waldis, ii. 3 ; Kirch., 
vii. 59 ; Florian, i. 15 — Oest. V. L. 237, C. 83. 

Av. xvi. — Fisher and Little Fish. 

I. Cf. Benf., i. 427. II. Av. , 20; .(Esop. , 28, cf. 231; 
Babr., 6. III. Berachyah, 55; Dial. Great., 48; Ysopet- 
Avionnet, 12. IV. Waldis, i. 83; Kirchhof, vii. 119; 
Lafont., V. 3 — Rob., Oest. V. L. 216, C. 71, J. 72; Cr., 
54 ; cf. prov,, A bird in hand, &c. 


Av. xvii. — Phcebus, Avaricious and Envious. 

I. Benf. , Pants., i. 498, 304; looi, Tag., 9, 84; Wide- 
awake stories, 215, cf. 409. II. Av. , 22. III. Berachyah, 
107; Joh. Sarisb. , Polycrat., 7, 24; Holkot. , 29; Ysopet- 
Avionnet, 13 ; M6on, Fabliaux, i. 91 ; Boner, 83 ; Scala, 
106 b. ; Enxemp., 146; Bromy., J., 6, 19. IV. H. Sachs, 
I, 489 ; Pauli, 647 ; Waldis, ii. 5 ; Chamisso, Abdullah — 
Oest. , Rob., Temple, G. Paris, Lit. franf., § 76; Liebr, 
Germ., ii. 245, ZV. 117. V. Gower, Conf. Afiiant, II. ii. ; 
L. 238, C. 135, T. 122. 

Av. xviii.— Thief and Weeping Child. 

I. Cf. Pants., iii. 3 and plls. (Benf., i. 357). II. Avian, 
25 ; cf. Philogelos, 33. III. Ysopet-Avionnet, 14. IV. 
Waldis, ii. 9 ; Kirch., vii. 132. V. C. Merry Tales, 91. 

Av. xix.— Lion and Goat. 

II. Av.,26; ^sop., 270. III. Boner, 90. IV. Waldis, 
i. 78; Kirch., vii. 118. V. L. 210, J. 126. 

Av. XX. — Crow and Pitcher. 

I. Talm. Ab. sara, 30'; Synt., 8; Sophos, 8. II. Av., 
27; Dositheus, 8; JEsop., 357; ./Elian, hist, nat., ii. 48; 
Plut., Terrestriana ; Syntip., 8. III. Cf. Rom., Oest, iv. 
13; Ysop. -Avion., 15 ; Berach., 88. IV. Si7>tplicissimus, ■2, 
12; Waldis, ii. 7; Kirch., vii. 121 [cf. 29) — Oest. V. L. 
239. C. 53, J. 47, T. 62 ; Cr. 38. 

Av. xxi. — Villein and Young Bull. 

II. Av., 28. IV. Waldis, ii. 10. 

Av. xxii. — Man and Satyr. 

II. Av., 29; .(Esop., 64; Babr.-GitL, 183. III. Boner, 
91 ; Berach., 58. IV. H. Sachs, ii. 4, 48 ; Waldis, ii. 11 ; 
Lafont., V. 7. V. L. 243, C. 55, T. 113 ; Cr. 42. 

Av. xvii. — Al. i. 263 

Av. xxiii. — Ox AND Rat. 
II. Av. , 31 ; Babr. , 112 ; .^sop. , 299. IV. Wald., ii. 13. 

Av. xxiv. — Goose with Golden Eggs. 

I. Suvannahamsa Jdtaka, supra VIII. p. 67 ; Pants., 3, 5 
(Benf. , i. 361) ; Wagener-Weber, No. 4 ; Sophos, 61 ; Loq- 
man, 12. II. Avian, 33; Babiius, 123; yEsop. , 343. IV. 
Waldis, ii. 15 {cf. iii. 32) ; Pauli, 53 ; Lafont. , v. 13 — Oest. 

V. L. 247 (Hen), C. 57, J. no; Cr., 22; Clouston, Pop. 
Tales, i. 123, seq. 

Av, XXV. — Ape and Two Children. 

II. Av. , 35; ^sop. , 366 (Nevel) ; Babr., 35; Oppian, 
Cyneg, \\. 60^. III. Ysop.-Av. (Rob. ii. 514); Berachyah, 
67, 104. IV. Waldis, ii. 16— Kurz. V. L. 248, C. 186. 

Av. xxvi. — Wind and Pot. 
II. Av., 41; .(Esop., 381; Babr.-Gitl., 165. 

Av. xxvii. — Wolf and Lamb. 
II. Av., 42 [Kid]; yEsop., 273; Babr-Gitl., 132. III. 
Boner, 30. IV, Waldis, i. 49. 


[From the Disciplina Clericalis of Moses Sephardi, a 
Spanisii Jew, christened Petrus Alphonsus, 1106.] 

Alf, i. — A. Trial of Friendship, B. Egypt and 

A. — I. Cardonne Mil. asiat., i. 78 ; Jellinek, Beth Ham., 

VI. xiv. 10. II. Polyan. Stratig., i. 40, I. III. Alf. ii. 8 ; 
Mart. Polon. Serm. ; Ex., 9, C. ; Scala cell, 11 b. ; Dial. 

* As the remaining Tales are of a different ^f«r,f to the Fable 
proper, I have not attempted any thoroughness in the parallels, 
though the Disciplina Clericalis would well repay complete inves- 


Great., 56; Lucanor, 48 (York, 36); Castoiement (M6on, 
ii. 39; Legr., ii. 379); Gesta, 129; Boner, app., 6. IV. 
H. Sachs, 107 ; 2, 2, 39 ; Goedeke, Every Man, 1-7 ; Radloff, 
i. 191 ; Gering, Islensk yEventyri, 50. 

B. — I. looi Nights (Hagen, 9, i ; Caussin de Percival, g, 
I, 55) ; Scott, Tales, 253 ; Hammer, Rosenol, 2, 262 ; Kolle, 
Afric. nat. lit., p. 122. III. Alf., iii. 2-14; Scala, 11; 
Dial. Great., 56; Brom. , A., 21, 11; Gesta, 171; Liber 
opium, 2, 20, 2; Enxempl. , 92; Castoiem. (M^on), 2. 52 
(Legr., 2, 385); Altris u. Profilias (ed. Grimm, 1846) 
IV. Bocc. , X. 8; Hardi, Gesippe ; Cecat. nouv. nouv.,v. 
28 ; Chevreau, Gesippe et Tite, 1658 ; H. Sachs, i. 2, 181 
iii. 2, 4 ; Der mann der seine frau nicht kennt, 1781 ; Ger. 
Islensk ^ventyri, 51 — Schmidt, Beitr. iii, on Alf., p, 
98. V. Lydgate, Tale of Two Merchaunts ; R. Edwards 
Tragedy, 1582 ; G. Griffin, Gesippus, a Tragedy, 1841 — 
Warton, I., clxxxvii. 

Alf. ii. — Money Trusted. 
I. Sindibad, 25; Syntipas, 22; Cardonne, m^l., i. 61; 
looi Nacht, BresL, 386 (Loiseleur, 652) ; Scott, Tales, 207 
— 'Loistleu.r essai, 119. III. Alf., 16, i-io; Castoiem. (M6on, 
ii. 107; Legr., ii. 403); Gesta, 118; Brom., R., 6, i; 
Enxempl., 92. IV. Bocc, viii. 10; C. nov. ant., 74; 
Gering, 69 — Schmidt, Beitr., 91-95 — Oest. V. Jack of 
Dover, 14. 

Alf. iii. — Lye of Oil. 
III. Alf., 17, 1-12 ; Vine. Bell., m., i. i, 26; Enx., 334; 
Castoiem. (M. Legr., iii. 62), ii. 113; Gesta, 246 (Grasse, ii. 
151). IV. Pauli ; Gering, Isl. Aiv., 70— Oest. 

Alf. iv. — Money Recovered. 
I. D'Herbelot (suppl. Galland), 225 b. III. Alf., 18; 
Vine. Bell., m., i, i, 27; Scala, 21 b. ; Enxetnp., 311. IV. 
Timoneda, Patrafias, 6 ; Cinthio, i. 9 ; Doni, Marini, c. 80 ; 
Pauli, 115; Kirch., vii. 13; Ger. ,71. V. Merry Tales and 
Answers, 16; Pasquil's Jests, p. 17; Old Hobson, 20. 

AL. ii. — Al. viii. 265 

Alf. v. — Dream-bread. 
I. Sindibad-namek , 35, p. 175 ; Hammer, Rosenol, No. 
180, ii. 303 ; Mesnevi, 2, 288 ; Toldoth Jesu, ed. 1705, p. 
51 ; Benf. , Pants., i. 493. III. Alf,, 20, 1-8 ; Cast., p. 127 ; 
Vine. Bell., m., 1, i, 26; Brom., E. , 8, 14; Gesta, 106; 
Scala, 73 b. ; Enxcmpl. , 27 ; Boner, 74. IV. Cinthio, i. 
3; Gering, 72; Pitre Fiabi, 173. V. Dunlop-Liebr. , 280; 
Clouston, Pop. Tales, ii. 86-95.'; Crane, Ital. Folk Tales, 
154. 356. 

Alf. vi. — Labourer and Nightingale. 

I. Benf., Pants., i. 381; Vartan, 13; Sivichot hanefesh 
(Heb.),42b. ; Barlaam, iv. 29 ; Loiseleur, p. 171. III. Alf., 
23, 1-6; Cast.; cf. Schm. , p. 150; Dial. Creat., 100; 
Scala, 7 b. ; Wright, p. 170; Legenda aurea, c. 175; E71X- 
emp., 53; Legrand, iii. 113; Gesta, 167; Mysttre du roi 
Advents, ap. Parf. , hist, du theat. frang., 2, 475; Marie, 
i. 314, ii. 324 ; Du M^ril, 144 ; Hist. Litt. de la France, 
xxiii. 76. IV. Kirch. , iv. 34 ; H. Sachs, i. 4, 428 ; L.uther, 
Tischr. ,612; Wieland, Vogelgesang {V^erkQ, 18, 315) ; Gen, 
Isl. yEv., 75; Uhland ap. Germ., iii. 140. V. Lydgate, 
Chorle and Bird ; Way, Lay of Little Bird, ap. Swan 
Gesta, 2, 507-13 ; Ca.xton, Golden Legend, 392 b. ; Dunlop- 
Lieb. , p. 484, n. 84. 

Alf. vii. — Crookback. 
I. Fz'yJraOT, tr. Burton, p. 108* (proverb). III. Alf., viii. 2 ; 
Cast., 75; Enxem., 13; Legr., ii. 376; Gesta, 157; Boner, 
76. IV. C. nov. ant. , 50 ; Pauli, 285 ; Gering, 60. 

Alf. viii. — Disciple and Sheep. 
III. Alf., iii. 3 ; Gering, 66 ; C. nov. ant., 31 ; Enx., 85. 

IV. Don Quix., i. 20 ; Pitr^, Fiabi, 138 ; Grimm, KM., 86. 

V. Crane, Ital. F.T., 156, 356. 

* " Expect thirty-two villanies from the limping, 
And eighty from the one-eyed man, 
But when the hunchback comes, 
Say, ' Lord defend us.' " 


Alf. ix. — Wolf, Labourer, Fox and Cheese. 

I. Cf. Benf., i. 349; Blumenthal, R. Meir, 165 ; Vartan, 
17. III. Alf., 24. IV. Gering, hi. .iS.v., 76. 

Alf. X. — Husband, Wife, and Mother-in-Law. 
III. Alf., 12; Gesia. IV. Gering, 64. 

Alf, xi. — The Bawd. 

I. Si?idibad-nameh, 11; Syntipas, 11; Mishle Sandebar ' 
(Heb. ) ed. Cassel, 98-104; Scott, Tales, p. 100; Habicht, 
15, 117 ; Tutinameh, p. 24 ; Vrihat Katha, ap. Quart. 
Orient. Mag. , 1824, ii. 102 ; Somadeva, ed. 1829, p. 56 ; 
Loiseleur, 106-7. HI- Alf., 141-8 ; Vine. Bell., m. 3, 9, 5; 
Scala, 87; Gesta, 28; Wright, 13 (p. 16, cf. p. 218); 
Enxe^n. , 234 ; Castoiem. , 292 ; Adolphus, ap. Wright, 178. 
IV. Bocc. , V. 8 ; H. Sachs, 4, 3, 28 ; Schmidt, Beitr., 106-8 ; 
Keller, VII. Sages, cxlv. ; Gering, 67 ; Oest. V. English 
Fabliau, Dame Siris ap. Wright, Anecd. Lit., 1-13. 

Alf. xii. — Blind Man and Wife. 
III. Cf. Schm. ,43; Keller, VII. Sages, caS.. ; Gering, 63. 

Alf. xiii. — Tailor, King, and Servant. 

III. Alf., 21. [In Stainhowel, this is preceded by two 
others, Alf., 10, 6; 11, x = Gesta, 122, 123.] IV. Pitr^ 
Fiabi, 186 ; Kirch., i. 243; Gering, 73. V. Crane, 357. 


[From the Faceticz of Poggio Bracciolini, first printed 
about 1470.] 

Po. i. — A TOO Holy Gift. 

IV. Peg., i; Lessing Werke, 1827, xviii. 9; Bebelius, 
fac, ed. 1660, p. 279 ; Diet, d anecd. , i. 192. [Preceded in 

Stainhowel by Pog. 10.] 

Al. ix. — Po. viii. 267 

Po. ii. — Hypocrite. 

IV. Pog. , 6 ; Bebelius, 282 ; Montaigne, ii. 3 ; Moyen de 
Parvenir, ii. 121 ; B. Rousseau, Epigr. 

Po. iii. — Disappointed (Omitted). 
IV. Pog., 45 ; Kirch., i. 339 ; Cent. nouv. nouv., 80. 

Po. iv. — Hunting does not pay. 

IV. Pog., 2 : Rim., 18; Morlini, jj ; NugcB Docta, 56; 
Straparola, xiii. i ; Geiler, Narrenschiff, 148^ ; Kirch., i. 425. 
— Oest. in Hannover, Tagespost, Feb. 7, 14, 1867. V. Merry 
Tales and Answers, 52 ; Pasquils, 62. 

Po. V. — Monstrosities. 
IV. Pog., 31-4 ; Licetus, De Monstris. 

Po. vi. — Buried Dog. 

III. Brom., D., 7, 13; Meon, iii. 70. IV. Pog., 36; 
Pauli, 72 ; Malespini, 59 ; C. nouv. nouv., 96 ; Guccelette, 
iv. 22 ; Brenta, Arcadia, 525 ; Conv. Serm,, i. 154 ; Diet, 
d'anecd., ii. 451 ; Gil Bias, v. r. V. Dunlop-Liebr., 297. 

Po. vii. — Fox, Cock, and Dog (Rom. iv. 18). 

I. Kukkuta Jdtaka, supra, Y>.YV., pp. 75-7. II. Msop., 
225. III. Marie, 52; Brom., 7, 8; Grimm, EF., cxxii. ; 
Reinhartus, ii. 1175. IV. Pog., 79; H. Sachs, ii. 4, 75; 
Luther, Tischr. ; Kirch., iii. 128 ; Lafont. , xii. 15 ; Goethe, 
xl. 14. — Oest. [Inserted here by Stainhowel from his Rom. 
iv. 18 to end the book. What follows is from Machault's 
and Caxton's additions]. 

Po, viii. — Women Disputing. 

IV. Pog., 78. 


Po. ix. — Debtor. 
IV. Pog., 164. 

Po. X. — Genoese. 

IV. Pog. , 202 ; Guicciard, 175 ; Democr. ridens, p. 66 ; 
Roger Bontemps, p. 40 ; Past, agriables, 209. 

Po. xi. — PiLLMAKER. Po. xii. — WlDOW, 
[Neither in Poggio.] 

Caxton. — Worldly and Unworldly Priest. 

[Added by Caxton to clear out, as it were, the bad taste 
of the Poggiana from our mouth ; probably a true anecdote 
of his time,] 


[Including a reversed Index to the chief collections collated in 
the Synopsis of Parallels. Such items are preceded by cf., and 
the books of the Romulus and the Extravagantes are indicated 
by the Roman numerals i.-v. Titles in italics refer to fables 
mentioned. A few addenda and corrisjenda are also given. 
See Democritus, Fox, Cat, and Dog, Misprints, Romulus of 
Nilant, Theognis.] 

Abraham ibn Ezra, 174, cf. 
iii. 16. 

Abstemius, 8o«, Y-jon. 

Accursius, lyw. 

Adelard, 175. 

Ademar, xx. 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 
139, 182, \iyi, 215, cf. i. 1, 
3, 4, 6-8, 10-13, 15-18, 20, 
ii. 1-4, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13, 15, 
17-20, iii. I, 2-7, 12-20, iv. 
3, 8, 12, 15-17, 19, v. 3, see 
' Anonymus Nilanti.' 

Adrian IV., 184. 

/Elian, 62, cf. i. 8, Av. 2, 20. 

/Eschylus, 26, 127. 

.(Esop, legendary life of, xiv. 
XX. 4, 217 ; who wrote, xvi. 
36 ; an authentic fable of, 
27 ; why his name connected 
with Fable, 30, 211 ; himself 
a Fable ? 37 ; Herodotus' 
account of, 37; life, epoch, 
master, birthplace of, 38 ; 

a barbarian slave, 41, 211; 

name im-Greek, 41, 148; 

similar in sound to Kasyapa, 

.^sop, Greek. See Greek 

prose ^sop (and so for 

other languages). 
"yEsopus ad Rufum." See 

African origin of fable, theory 

of, 92. 
African Fables (Bleek, Kolle, 

&c. ), cf. i. 2, 6, ii. 10, iv. 12, 

V, 3, 4, 16, Av. 4, 13, Al. lb. 
Agur, proverbs of, Indian 

origin of, 132-4. 
Alcseus, 28. 
Alexis, 100. 

Alexandria Library, 34, 212. 
Alfonso, Fables of, xiv. i54«, 

198-200, 217, cf. i. 9, iii. 2, 

V. I, Re. 3, Av. I, Al. 



Alfred, Kin^, Fables attri- 
buted to, i6o, 162, 165. 

Alfred of England, xvi., xx. : 
source of Marie de France, 
163, 167 ; identified, 167 ; 
helped by Berachyah Nak- 
dan, 177, 216 ; date of, 168 ; 
mentioned, 171, 177, 179, 
186, i9S'2, 216, 217. See 
Appendix, LBG, Marie, 
Romulus of Marie. 

Allegory, 148, 204, 217^, 220. 

Alsop, 192;/. 

Ambition, symbols of, 97 
and «. 

Anacharsis the Scythian, 143, 

Amiroclus (iii. i), 11, 52, 140, 

Angevin Empire, xvii. 180, 

Animism, 46 and n, 206, 207. 
Anonymity of Folk-lore, 30 ; 

/Esop's Fables exception, 30. 
' Anonymous Neveleti.' See 

Galfred, Walter. 
'Anonymous Nilanti,' xx. 5. 

See Ademar. 
Ania Jdtaka, 66. 
Ape and Fox, 13, 26, 140^. 
Apes, Fables about, 126, 140 ; 

etymology, 148;?. 
Aph'thonius, 73, cf. i. 5, 12, ii. 

8, 20, iii. 13, iv. 6, 12, 15, 

17, V. I, Re. I, Av. I, 7, 17. 
Appendices to Phasdrus, xx. 

"13, i4«, 139, cf. i. 3, 12, 

17-20, ii. 4, 8-10, iii. 1-6, 

8-11, 13, 14, 16, 17, iv. 3, 

6-8, II- 19. 
Appendix to Romulus, cf. v. 2, 

3, 5, 6, 7, 14, 17. See LBG, 

Romulus of Marie. 
Arabian Nights, cf. Re. 6, Av. 

17, Al. I, 2. 
Arabic .^Esop, larger recension 

of, xvi. 156-8; Paris MS., 

contents of, 221-4. 
Arabic numerals, i28«. 
Arabic translations, 166-7. 
Archilochus, 26, 29^, 140^, cf 

i. 13. 
Aristophanes, 28, 30 and n, 

123;?, 198, cf. i. 13, Re. I, 2, 

Av. 3. 
Aristotle, 27, 128, 212, cf i. 8, 

iv. 9. 
Armenian Fable, xvi. 156^, 

177 and n, \Z\n. See Ere- 

mia, Vartan. 
Ashton, J, 193. 
Ass' Heart, 94, 95, 88, ioi«, 

166, 169. 
Ass and Lapdog, (i. 17) 6, ix, 

Ass and Suckling Pig, 70, 

139. 153- 
Ass arid Watchdog, 50. 
Ass itt Lion's Skin (Av, 4), 28, 

52; Indian, 58-60, 106, 126, 

129, 142, 153, 182^. 
Assyrian Fable, 41, 206, 207, 

Athoan Codex of Babrius, 20. 
" Avadanas," 84, 88, ioi«, cf. 

i. 5, 19, iii. 4, 16, Re. 16. 
Avaricious a?id Envious (Av. 

17), 50, 126, 153. 
Avian, xiv. , xx. ; date, 16 and 

n, 214; mentioned, 49^, 50, 

52, 6i, 159, iGgn, 186, 215 ; 

Indian elements of, 125-8, 

153, 214 ; interpolated in 

Romulus, 185^ ; in Bayeux 

Tapestry, 185 ; cf. \. 20, iii. 

15, iv, 4, 6, 15, 17, 20, V. 6, 

Av. 1-27. 

Babrius, xx. 18-24 ; ^ Ro- 
man, 19^, 21, 214; date, 
22 ; source of Gk. prose 
yEsop, 23, 24; Gitlbauer's 



edition of, 23; his source, 
22, 214 ; compared with 
Phasdrus, 34, 36 ; morals in, 
156 and n ; source of Synti- 
pas, Syriac, Armenian, and 
Loqman, 156^ ; mentioned, 
51;?, 94, 104. 114, 122, 128, 
147, 214, 216, 219, cf. i. 2, 2 
(Gitlbauer), 5-8, 10 (G.), 12, 
13 (G.), 15, 17-20, ii. I (G.), 
3,8, 10 (G.), 14 (G.), IS. 16, 
19, 20, iii. 2, 3 (G.), 7, 13- 

15. iv. I, 3, 4 (G.), 6, 9 
(Gabrias), i3(G.),i5(Gabr.) 

16, 17, 20, V. I, 4, 6, Re, I 
(G.), 3 (G.), 4-7, 8 (G.), 9. 
10 (G.), 12-15 (all G.), 16, 
i7(G.), Av. 1-3, 4 (G.), 5. 
6, 7 (G.), 8, 9 (G.), 10-16, 
22 (G.), 23-25, 26 (G.), 27 
(G.). ^d-f Gabrias, Ignatius. 

Bachier, W. , 11 1, 120^^. 
Back, Dr., iion, 113. 
Bacon, F. , 170 and n, cf. i. i. 
Bacon, R. , 167, 168, 177. 
Balaam, 154^. 
Bald Man and Fly (ii. 12), 52 ; 

Indian, 64, 65, 139, 153. 
Baldo (Latin verse trans, of 

Bidpai), cf. iii. 2, iv. 9, v. i, 

3, 6, 15. 
Banyan- Deer J dtaka, 113. 
" Barlaam and Josaphat," 

Bat, Birds, and Beasts (iii. 4), 

140, 153. 
Baviru Jdtaka, "jjn. 
Bayeux Tapestry, 181-3, 215, 

cf. i. 2, 8, 15, 20, Av. 2 

Beast-Anecdote, 103, 207. 
Beast-Satire, 159,205,206,208, 
Beast-Tale, 159, 205, 206, 208. 
Belly and Members (iii. 16), 6 ; 

Egyptian, Indian, Chinese, 

Persian, Roman, Jewish, in 

New Test., 82-8, 117, 161, 


Benares, 146 and 7t. 

Benedictus le Puncteur, 176 
and n, 177. See Berachyah. 

Benfey, T., xv. 46, 51, 52, 60 
and n, jon, jzti, 73, 95, 98, 
126, 152^, i84«, 209, 219; 
views on Indian origin, 102- 
4; cf. plls. pass., and see 

Bennet, C., ig6n. 

Bentley, xvii., 18 and n, 218 ; 
Jebb's Life of, 28, i92«. 

Berachyah ha-Nakdan, xvi., 
XX., 123??, 168-78, 180, 216 ; 
an English Jew, 175-6 ; 
assists Alfred, 177 ; cf. i. 
1-9, 12-18, 20, ii. 1-4, 8-10, 
15, iii. 7-9, 14, 15, 17. iv. 3. 
8, 10, 12, 15-17, 19, 20, v. 
2, 5, 8, 9, 16, Av. 4, 6, 9, 
II, 12, 14-17, 20, 22, 25. 
See Benedictus. 

Bharhut, stupa of, Jatakas 
figured on, 75, 79. 

Bibliography, 187 and n, 20in, 

Bickell, 132;?. 

Bidpai, xx. 25, 41;^, 50-54, 
104, 153, 216, 218 ; parallels 
from, 90-101 ; date of, 103 ; 
late, 107 ; Jataka elements 
in origin of, 146 ; c/". i. i, 3 
5, 9, 10, 12-14, 15 (Capua), 
17, 18, 20, ii. I, 3, 10, 12, 
13-15, 29, iii. I, 2 (Baldo), g, 
14 (Capua), 16, 20, iv. 1-3, 
9 (Baldo), 12, V. I, 3-5, 6 
(Baldo), 8, 10, 15 (Baldo), 
Re. 1-3, 6, 16, Av. 4, 7, 9, 
16-18, 24, Al, 5, 6, 9. See 
Baldo, Benfey, Pantscha- 

Bird Caged, 115. 

Bird and Waves, 113, 130. 

Bird with Two Heads, 84, 88. 



Blades, W., xi. 

Bleek, i37«. 6Ve African Fable. 

Blind Doe, i/^gn. 

Boccaccio, 229, cf. Al. i. 2, 11. 

Blumenthal, A., i20«, cf, iii. 

14, Al. 9. 
Boethius, cf. Re. 14. 
Boner, 185, 230^, cf i. 1-4, 6-8, 

10, ii. 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 16, 19, 
20, iii. 2, 6, 13, iv. 6, 9, 17, 
20, Av. 2-4, 6, 10-15, i7> 
19, 22, 27. See Carlyle. 

Borrowing Theory, 44-6, 97, 
202, 209. 

Boy and Thief (Av. 18), 126, 

Bozon, N., 185. 

Brahniadatta in Benares, 55, 
69 ; significance of, 147. 

Brahman, Tiger and Jackal, 
50, cf V. 4. 

Brer Rabbit identified with 
Buddha, ii3«, 136 ; his foot, 

Brandt, S., 218. 
British Museum, xiv. i()in ; 

Burneian MS. at, 5. 
Bromyard, 185, cf. i. i, 3-7, 

10, 13, 16, 18, 20, ii. 2, 3, 7, 

10, 15, 17, 19, iii. I, 4-7, 13, 

15, 19, iv. 3, 8, V. 3-5, 9, 
Re. 14, Av. I, 4, 8, 9, 17, 
Al. i3, 5. 

Buddha, 53 and n, 58, 61, 69, 
79, 113, 129, 147, 212, 213, 
233« ; identified with Brer 
Rabbit, ii3«, 137; his foot, 


Buddhism, influence of, on 
negroes, 136 ; on Necpytha- 
goreanism, Essenes, Chris- 
tianity, 138. 

Bullokar, W. , 191. 

Burmann, 12, 13, 14%. 

Burneian MS. of " Romulus," 
S. i83«. 

Burton, Sir R. F., 92, iS4«., 

267 and n. 
Butting Goats, 52, cf. v. 10. 

Cainozoic stratum of Bidpai, 
51, 104, 157. 

Caldecott, R., 196, 229. 

Camel and Jupiter (Av. 7) ; 
Indian, 81 aud n, iii, 126, 
142, 153- 

Camel-bird (ostrich), 204. 

Campbell, "Tales, W. High- 
lands," cf iii. 2, v. 3. 

Carlyle, 230^, cf ii. 20. 

Calf and Ox, 70. 

Cat and Chicken (Re. 4), 63. 

Cat and Pan-ot, 28n, 

Cat and Weasel, ii6n. 

Catalan ^sop, 18772, cf i. 8. 

Caxton, W., xi.-xiii., xx. 4, 9 
andn. 13, 15, 16, 25, 38, 47 
and n, 51, 67, 71, 152^, 158, 
186, 187-92, 1S9, 190, 217, 
cf i. 8, v. I, Al. 6, p. 268. 

Ceylon, 54 ; home of Indian 
Fable, 144, 145, 213. 

Chaff, straw, and wheat, 115. 

Chain of tradition, strength 
of, 97. 

Chapbook, 193, cf ii. 15, iv, 
3, 12. 

Charlemagne, 215. 

Chaucer, 185 and n, cf v. 3, 
8, Av. I. 

Chenmitzer, I92«. 

Cheyne, Prof, 132^, I33«. 

Chicken a?id Fox, 170. 

Chinese ./Esop, 219^. 

Chinese Fable. See Avadanas, 

Choliambics, 21, 22, 23, 214. 

Christianity, influence of Bud- 
dhism on, 138 ; sensual chas- 
tity of mediaeval, 200. 

Church, visible, doctrine of, 
founded on fable, 87. 



Classical scholars neglect lite- 
rary history, 34«, 

Clodd, E. , 137^. 

Clouston, W. C, 126, cf. ii. 
12, iii. 9, V. 4, Av. 24, Al. 5. 

Cobet, izin, i5o«. 

Cod and Bat, 115. 

Colombo, Bishop of, 64, io6n. 

Comet Fables, 159. See Fa- 
iulce exiravagantes. 

Comte, J., i82;z, cf. i. 2, 8. 
See Bayeux Tapestry. 

Conceited Jackal, 73, -j-jn, iii, 

Conventions of fable, 208, 209. 

Coraes, 17^, i9«, 24^. 

Cosquin, 210. 

Countryman and Snake (i. 10). 
28 ; Indian, 81, 128, 139, 143, 

Countryman, Son and Snake 

(ii. 20) ; Indian, 92-4, 139, 

153, 166. 
Crabs, Two (Av. 3), 28. 
Crane and Peacock (Av. 12), 

71, 127, (Crow by mistake) 

Crane, T. Y.,cf. ii. 15, Al. 5, 

Crane, W. , bad " morals" of, 

i49« ; designs of, 196, 229. 
Crocodile, fable about, pro- 
bably Indian, 140, 153. 
Crow and Fox (i. 15), 2972, 52 ; 

Indian, 65, 139, 153, 182. 
Crow and Pitcher (Av. 20), 

114, 127, 153, 209. 
Croxall, S. , 193, 195, 229. 
Crusins. O. , xv. 21, 122, 219, 

cf. Av. 14. 
Culladhaiiuggaha Jdtaka, 59- 

Culture beyond Fable, 208. 
Cunningham, Sir A,, 7i«, 

7372, -jj. 
Cyprian Fable, I27«. 
VOL. I. 

Cyril, 21577, cf. i. 15, iv. 17. 
Cyrus, Fable of, 26, 88. See 
Piper tur?ied Fisherman. 

"Daniel Deronda," quoted 

Dates, importance of, 47 ; of 

Gk. Fable, 47. See iEsop, 

Babrius, Berachyah, Marie. 
De Gubernatis, 4577 ; specimen 

of his theory, 23777, cf. plls. 

Delphian Oracle, 38, 39. 
Demetrius Phalereus, xx. 33- 

6, 123, 124, 13977, 143, 203, 

212, 214. 
Democritus, 28, 129 (Theognis 

by mistake). 
Derenbourg, J., 15477. 
Derivates of Phasdrus, xv. , xx. ; 

of Ademar and Romulus, 

1577, 178-9. 
Devadatta, 56, 23377. 
D'Herbelot, 41, cf. Al. 4. 
Dimitrief, 19277. 
Diogenes Laertius, 28. 
Dipi Jdtaka, 62. 
Dispute of Senses, 84, 8677. 
Dog and Shadow (i. 5), 6, ,28, 

51 ; Indian, 58-60, loi, 129, 

153. 165. 
Dog 777 Manger {y. 11), i86«, 

19277, 19477, 209. 
Dogs and Hide, Indian, 72, 

139, 142, 153. 
" Don Qui.xote," cf. Al. 8. 
Dragon and Hart (v. 4), 52, 

Dramatis personas of Fables 

changed, 142. 
Dressier, xx. , 13, 1477. 
Droll, 202, 206. 
Dukes, L. , 96, II077, 114, cf. 

i. 8, Av. 9, 15. 
Du M6ril, xv. , XX., i, 16477, 

^65, 17777, 219, cf. \)\\s.pass. 



Duplessis, XX. 

Dutch .i^sop, XX. 179, 187, 
217, 229. 

Eagle and Fox (i. 13), 28, 30^. 
Eagle and Raven (i. 14), 51, 

61, 139, 153. 
Eagle and Tortoise (Av. 2), 

Indian, 61, 126, 127, 153, 

182, 183. 
Eagle and Weasel, 62. 
Eagle hoist with own Petard, 

26, 127, and n. 
Eberhard, 155^. 
Ebert, 21 5«. 
Egyptian Fable, 42, 82, 88, 

" Ecclesiasticus," 13472, cf. 

Av. 9. 
"Eliot, George," 31, 33;?, 

wjn, i49«. 
Ellis, R., \yi, 16, 64^, I25». 
England, home of Fable, xvii., 

178-85 ; nidus of Romance, 

xvii. 181. 
English words in Marie, 162-4. 
Ennius, 88;z, cf. Re. 7. 
Ephesian Widoiv (iii. 9), 13, 

52, 140, 153, 183,^. 
Erasmus, cf. ii. 15, Av. 4. 
Eremia, xx. ; Fables of, 177 

and n. 
Erythrsean Sea, 6i«, 127, 144. 
Escuiial, 200«. 
Essenes, 138. 
European .(Esop, 186, 187. 

Fable, of .(Esop, 27 ; oldest, 
82 ; definition of, 204 ; dif- 
ferentia of, 206 ; future of, 
220 ; morality of, 2o8«. 

Fabliau, 200; an English, cf. 
Al. II. 

FabHaux (Barbazon, Le grand, 
Meon), cf. iii. 9, v. 3, Av. 
17. Al. 6. 

Fabricius, 19^. 

Fabulce extravagantes, xx. 43, 

159, 186 and n, 195, 252. 
Fabulcs rhythmiccB, xx. 178. 
Facetiae, 200-2, cf. Po. 1-12. 
Fairy Tale, 190, 206. See 

Folk Tale. 
Fallacy of Priest of Neptune, 

Farmer and Moneylender, 50. 
Fausboll, XV. 55 and n, 59, 61, 

62, 65, 66, 67, 69, 71, 72, 

73. 75- 

Fedde, 17^. 

Feer, L., 146, 147^. 

Fir and Bramble (Av. 15), 
114, 126, 153. 

Fly un Chariot-wheel, 170 
and n. 

Folk-etymology, mythology re- 
garded as, 25. 

Folk-lore, Gk. Fable part of, 
40 ; theories of resemblances 
in, 44 ; terminology of, 206. 
See Borrowing Theory. 

Folk-tales, 194 and n, cf. ii. 9, 
10, 15, iii. 2, 9, V. I, 4, 5, 7, 
10, 12, 16, Av. 13, \j, Al. 
1-13. See Campbell, Crane, 
Gering, Grimm, Temple. 

Fox and Cat (v. 5), 52, i86«. 

Fox, Cat and Dog. 139, mis- 
take for Fox, Cock and Dog. 

Fox and Ape, 13, 42. 

Fox and Crabs, 497/. 

Fox, Cock and Dog (Po. 7), 

75. 139, 153- 
Fox and Crow (i. 15), 28^, 52 ; 

Indian, 65, 139, 153, 182. 
Fox and Fishes, 113, 130, 170. 
Fox and Goat (Re. 3), 52, 6o?i, 

Fox and Grapes (iv. i), 52, 

140, 153, l82«. 
Fox and Hedgehog, 28. 
Fox, Hedgehog, and Ticks, 



^sop's Fable, 27, 30, 74^, 

/i'ox and Lion, 26, iii. 
Fox and Stork (ii. 13), 46, 140, 

Fox and Wolf (iii. 6), 28«, 

140, 153- 

Fox as Singer, 11 5-6. 

Freeman, Prof., i83«. 

French, yEsop, xx. 187, see 
Machault ; language used 
by mediceval English Jews, 
176 ; scholarship, i, 14. 

FriJhner, xx. 

Frogs desiring King (ii. i), 6, 

Fuchs, 165 and n, cf. ii. 15. 
Furia, 1772, 19;/, 2gn, 79. 

Gabrias.xx. 18, 2I«, 24«, cf. 
i. 2, 5, 7, 8, 10, 15, ii. 10, 

16, iii. 3, iv. 6, 9, 13, 15, 17, 
V. 1, 4, Re. 1, 5, 7-9, Av. 2, 13. 

Gaidoz, H., 131, 135 and n. 

Galfred, 178 and n. See 
Walter of England ; cf. i. 
1-20, ii. 1-20, iii. 1-17. 

Gatha, 57, 58, 59, 60, 62, 63, 
64, 66, 67, 69, 71, 72, 73, 75, 
78, 149, 213, 214. 

Gay, J., 197. 

Gellert in Midrash, 113 ; Bud- 
dhistic, 113, 130. 

Gerard, xx. 179. 

Gering, 199^, cf. i. 10, ii. 10, 
Al. 1-13. 

German yEsop, xx. 174, 186, 
187 ; scholarship, 3, 14, 161 
and n. See Stainhowel. 

" Gesta Romanorum," cf. i. 

17, ii. 10, iii. I, 20, V. 4, 13, 
Re. 14. 

Ghivizzani, xx. i87«. 
"Gil Blas,"f/. Po. 6. 
Gitlbauer, 23, 25, 132. See 

Glinka, i92«. 

Glossary, xix. 

Goat and Compasses, \j6n. 

Goethe, cf. i. 6, 8, iv. 9. See 
" Reynard the Fox." 

Goncharof, 192//. 

Goodman and Serpent (i. 10), 
52; Indian, 81 and 71, 139, 
153. See Countryman. 

Goodman, Son and Serpent 
(ii. 10), 52 ; Indian, 92, 106, 
139. 153- '&e.& Country man. 

Goose ivith Golden Eggs (Av. 
24), 52; Indian, 67, 126, 129, 

153. ^97^, i99«- 

Gottheil, R. , xix. 15772, 22i«, 

Gow, J., xix. 

Gower, 18472, 185, cf. Av. 17. 

Graesse, 21672. 

Graetz, H., ir8, 13272, 133. 

Gi'asshoppers, 2672. 

Greek Fables, source of Latin, 
17 ; ancient enumerated, 
26-28 ; part of folk-lore, 
29, 30 ; Indian elements of, 
15272. 5^e Demetrius, Nico- 

Greek prose .^Esop, xx. 17 ; 
editions of, 1772 ; derived from 
Babrius, 24 : differences 
from Phaedrus, 166, 169 ; 
translated by L'Estrange, 
191 ; by Townsend, 195 ; cf. 
i- 2. 3. 5- 10, 12, 13, 15, 17- 
20, ii. I, 3, 4, 8-10, 13, 15, 
16, 19, iii. 2, 3, 7, 12-15, 19, 
iv. 3, 4, 9, 10, 12, 13, 16, 17, 
V. I, 4, 6, 9, II, Re. 1-17, 
Av. 1-20, 22-26. 

Grimm, 3172, 44, 45, 190, 
" Kindermarchen," cf. ii. 
9, 10, iii. 9, v. 5, 12, 16, Av. 
13, Al. 8. 

Grisebach, cf. iii. 9. 

Grote, 3372. 

Gruppe, 209, 210. 



Hahn, i94«, 202, cf. V. 4, 5, 

Halm, 17, 77, 126-7, 170. See 

Gk. prose ^sop. 
Hamburger, iion, iign, ii2«, 

ii6«, f/". i. 8. 
Hardy, 54;?, 72. 
//are and Elephant, 6on. 
Hare and Hound, 28. 
Harris, 137, cf. v. 3, 4, 16. 
Hare in African Folk-lore, 

Hare with many Friends, 197. 
Hartung, 121. 
Hazlitt, W. C. , 32, 194. See 

Proverbs, English. 
Head and Tail of Serpent, 

Heart, seat of sense, 94, 95^, 

126 and n. 
Hebraisms in Greek .(Esop, 18. 
Hecat^us, 79^2. 
Henrique, Infante, xx. 187. 
Herodotus, 26, 37, 38, 88«, cf. 

Re. 7. 
Heron and Eel, 28. 
Hervieux, L. , xv. , xx. ; re- 
searches on Phaedrus, 1-3, 

c,n, i8i«, 219, cf. i. 8, pass. 

Hesiod, 26. 
Hesychius, 121. 
Heusinger, ijn. 
Heydenreich, E. , 5;?, 14. 
Hiouen Tsiang, 72, cf. iii. i. 
Hipporus in Ceylon, 144. 
" Hitopadesa," i32«, 133. 
Holkot, 185, cf. i. 17, 
Horace, 99, loi, 207, cf. i. 12, 

15. "• 5. IS. iv. 12. 
Horse and Ass, iii. 3, 11. 
Horse, Hu?iter and Stag 
• (iv. 9). 

Howell, J., i6o«. 
Hunter and Lion, 126, 153. 
Hunter, Sir W., 152«. 

" hus " in Marie, i62«. 
Huschke, \()n. 

Iadmon, .(Esop's master, 38. 

lambies in Ademar, 10, 11. 

Ibycus, 28. 

Iceland, 164, 199. 

Ignatius, tetrastichs of, from 
Babrius, 24, i36«. See 

Illustrations, xiii., xix. , 182, 
195, cf. i. 8 (III.), iii. 9, 
Av. 14. 

Indra, 59, 113. 

India Office MS., xx. 156, 
157 and n, 178. 

Indian Fable, 45, 48, 209 ; ex- 
aggerations of, 66, 67 ; in 
Latin Fable, 139 ; Table of, 

Initial letters first used in 

Caxton's " Esope," xiii. 
Interpolations, 35, 48, 80, 151, 

183 and n. 
Ion, 28. 
Islam intermediary between 

Greece and India, 152. 
Italian .(5isop, xx. 187, 217, 

" Itiahasa Kisyapa," xx. 147, 


" Izopiti," XX., cf. i. 1-17, 19, 
iii. 20. 

Jack and Beanstalk, 29. 

Jacobs, J., XV., xvi., 46«, 5i«, 
6i, 104, 113/?, iS2«, i6o«, 
\b()n, ijon, 2o6n, i75«, 
200;?, 219 and n, cf. i. 13, 
20, iii. I, 16, V. 10, Av. 2. 

" Jalkut," 95, 114. 

Jambukhadaka Jataka, 68, cf. 

Jannelli, x.x. 23. 
Jatakas, xvi., xx. 53-79, 89, 
103, 104, 129, 174, 184 ; 



source of, xvi. 145-7, 215 ; 

cf. i. 2, 5, 8, 15, ii. 12, IS, 

Av. 2, 4, 24. 
Jdvasakuna Jdtaka, 55-6. 
Jay in Peacock' s Feathers (ii. 

'15), 6, 52, 114,124, 153, 165. 
Jebb, R. C, Q&n, yyi, 192^, 

cf. V. II, Av. 4. 
Jest-books, Elizabethan, 32. 
Jests associated with a name, 

3T-2, 214 ; obscene, 200-3. 
Jewish evidence, 95 ; fable, 

earliest, 117-9; from India, 

116, 117, 119, 204^2. See 

Midrash, Talmud. 
Joaz, Fable of, 88. 
Jochanan ben Saccai, 120, 

122, 123, 144, 214. 
Joseph's plan, 39?/. 
Joshua ben Chananyah, 117 

and 71, 118, 119. 
Jotham's fable, 26;?, 39, 41, 

Juno, Vemis and Hen (iii. 8), 


Julian the Apostate, 128, cf. i. 

Kdka Jdtaka, 72. 

Karma Jdtaka, 184. 

Kasyapa, 146-8, 213 and n. 
See Kybises. 

Keller, O., 102. 

Kirchhof, cf. i. 1-3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 
12, 14-16, 18, 20, ii. 1-4, 7- 
II, 13, 15, 17, 19, 20, iii. I- 

3. 9. 13. 14. 16, 19, iv. 4, 9, 
II, 12, 15, 20, v. I, 4, 6, II, 
Re. 6, 9, 10, 13, 14, 17, Av. 

4, 8, 9, 13, 15, 16, 18-20, 
Al. 4, 6, 13, Po. 3, 4, 7. 

Knoell, i7«, 18. 
Kohler, R., i6o«, cf, v. 4. 
Kolle, 49, cf. v. 16, Av. 13. 
Krilof, 192 and n, cf. i. i, 2, 
8, 15, iv. 17, 20. 

"Kubsis." 5ff Kybises. 

Kuhn, 44. 

Kurz, i87«. See Waldis. 

Kybises, .xvi., xx. ; /Esop of 
Libyan Fable, 121 ; in Tal- 
mud, 122, 123, 124, 125, 
128, 136, 138, 142, 144, 149, 
150, 203, 214. See Kasyapa. 

Lafontaine, I, 218, cf i. I- 
3, 5, 7-12, 15-18, 20, ii. I, 
5, 8-10, 13-17, 20, iii. 7, 9, 
12-16, 19, iv. I, 2, 4, 9, 10, 
12, 15, 17, 20, V. I, 4, 5, 9, 
Re. 1-3, 6-8, II, 13, 16, 17, 
Av. I, 3, 4, 8, 9, 16, 22, 24, 
Po. 7. 

" Lais" of Marie, 160 and «, 

Landsberger, J., .x.x. '41, 70??, 
747;, now, III, 113, 114, 

149'^ 155- 

Lang, A., poem by, ix. , x. ; 
referred to, xix. 44, 45, 46«, 
113W, 141, (/. i. 8 (IL ). 

Latin, canine, 8, 13 ; accent 
in choliambics, 21 ; Fable, 
Indian elements in, 153. 

Lauth, 91 and n. 

"LBG" Fables, xx. 161, 163, 

Lean Fox, iii. 

Leopard and Fox , 126, 153. 

Lessing, an yEsop scholar, 
25«, ^^^n, 218, cf. i. i, 6, 
15, ii. I, 14, 15, iii. 9, Po. I. 

L'Estrange, 191 ; source of 
Russian Fable (?) 192, 193 ; 
mentioned, 218, 229, 

Libyan Fable, xvi. 121, 124, 
125, 127, 209^? ; true mean- 
ing of, 128 and n. 

Liebrecht, 80, 81, 100/?, cf. i. 
10, 17, iv. I, Av. 4, 17, Al. 
5, 6, Po. 6. 

Lightfoot, Bp., i38«. 



Lion and Ass (iv. lo), 74. 
Lion and Crane. See Wolf 

and Crane. 
Lion and Man (iv. 15), 21 and 

n, 149/2. 
Lion arid Mouse, 6, 11, 52; in 

India and Egypt, 90-2, 139, 

142, 153. 
Lion and Oxen (Av. 17), 77^, 

lis, 126, 153. 
Lion reanimated, 113. 
LioTi's share (i. 6), 6, 74^, 166 ; 

two versions, 166, 169, i82«. 
Lion's Traces, 170. 
Livy, 88, cf. iii. 16. 
Longperier, 135. 
Loqman, xx. 41, 48, 50, 154, 

155 ; doublet of Balaam, 

i54«, 216 ; cf. iii. 16, iv. 6, 

12, 15, Av. 14, 24. See 

Losaka Jdtaka, io6n. 
Loth, 156. 

Lucanor, cf. i. 15, 20. 
Lucian, 29, cf. ii. 5. 
Luther, i, 15, 203^, cf. i. 1-12, 

15, ii. I, 2, 20, v. 4, Av. 8, 

Al. 6, Po. 7. 
Lydgate, 185, cf. Al. i, 6. 
Lytton, Lord, 199. 

MACHAULT, J. , XX. 4. 9, 186, 

229, 267. 
Macrobius, 16. 
Mahabharata, 80 ; parallels 

from, 81, 82, 104, 153, cf. i. 

10, iii. 16, iv. 20, Av. 7. 
Mahaffy, Prof., 92. 
Mahosadha Jdtaka, io6n, 130, 

Makasa Jdtaka, 64 and n. 
Mall, E. , XV. 160 and n, 161- 

164, 219. 
Man and Idol, 52, 169 and n. 
Man and Pit, 169 and n. 

Alan and Serpent. See Country- 

Man and Tiger, 50, iii, 120 

and n. 
Man, Lion, and Serpent, 184. 
Maniuith TtvoWivesi^^. 16), 

III, 139, 140, 153. 
Mapes,W. ,i85,(/iii. 19, Av. 4. 
Marcus Aurelius, 22. 
Marie de France, xv. xx. 158, 

159-167, 179, 217, 219, cf. 

j. 1-20, ii. i-ii, 15-18, 20, 

iii. 4, 5, 7, 8, 12, 14, 15, 16, 

17, 20, iv. 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 

15, 16, 17, 19, v. 23-9, Av. 

I, II, Al. 6. 
Martial, 31, cf. ii. 20. 
Maspero, 82 and n. 
Mavor, 194 and 71, 229. 
Meir, Ralsbi, xx. iii, 112, 120 

and n, 122, xiyi. 
Menander, 33, 35. 
Menas, M., discovers Babrius, 

20, 22. 
Mercury and Statue Seller, 


Alercury and Two Women, 

140-1, 153. See Three 

M6ril. See Du M6ril. 
Mesnevi, 49, cf. v. 9, Al. 5. 
Mesozoic stratum of Bidpai, 

54^2, 89, 104. 
Metempsychosis, 89. 
" Midrash Rabba," 70, 72, 

85«, 96, iii«, 115. 
Middle English derivate of 

Marie, 163 ; translations of, 

Migne, 88«, i99«. 
Migration of illustrations, 76^. 
Milesian Fable, 127^, 203, 212, 

Miller, Joe, 32 and n, 33 and 

n, 214. 
" Mishle Kobsim," 120, 121. 



" Mishle Kubsis," X22, 136. 

" Mislile Shu'alim," 120, 122, 
123, 139^, 168, 217. 

Misprints in Caxton, x. , xi. ; in 
Talmud, 121 ; in Introduc- 
tion, p. 127, Crow (Crane) ; 
131, in (on); 143, Phcedrus 
(Phsedrus) ; 148, Af(rwroj 
(AtacoTTos) ; 164, athcle 
jathele) ; ig2n, Russial 
(Russian); 196/2, iun (inn). 

Mistranslation, 74, 162, 163. 

Morality of Fable, 2o8n. 

Morals of Fable, their origin, 
xvi. 148-50,, 204;?, 214. 

Morris, R., 58, 62, 66, 67, 72, 
73- 75. 78, 113. 174. 2i8«. 

Mountain in Labour (ii. 5), 


Mouse-Maiden, 11, 28 ; Indian, 
98-101, 139, 142, 153, 162, 
166, 169. See Vixen-AIaiden. 

Mouse and Frog (i. 3), in, 

139. 153- 
Mouse and Ox (Av. 23), 114, 

126, 153. 
MiiUer, C. F., 24. 
Miiller, L. 5, 14. 
Miiller, M., 14, 44. 
Mule s Pedigree, 170. 
Munchausen, ^on. 
Alunika Jdtaka, 69, 115. 
Musset, A. de, cf. iii. 9. 

Nacca Jdtaka, 71 and n. 
" Nakdan," 168, 175. 
Neckam, 179 and n, 185, rf. i. 
2-9, 13, 15, 17, 18, 20, ii. I, 

5, 8, 9, 12, iii. I, 7, 12, 13, 
15, 16, iv. 3, 6, 9, 10, 13, 

Neubauer, A., 174, 176. 
Nevelet, zSn, 27. 218. 
Nicholas of Pergamus, 2i6n, 
cf. {Dial. Creat.) i. 2, 3, 5, 

6, 10, 12, 15, 16, 18, 20, ii. 

I, 10, 15, 20, ni. I, 13, IV. 
12, 17, V. 4, Av. 4, 8, Al. 
I a. 

Nicostratus, source of Babrius, 
XX. 22, 24, 36, 122, 123, 124, 

Nightingale and Hazvk, earliest 
table, 26 and n. 

"Nights with Uncle Remus," 
T^n, 137. 

Nilant, xx. 5, 218. See Ro- 
mulus of Nilant. 

Norman love of Fable, 181. 

North Wind and Sun, 28. 

Nutt, A,, xix. 

Oak and Reeds [vi. 20), Indian, 
81, III, 126, 142, 153; from 
Avian not Phaedrus, i83«. 

Obscene Jest, 200-3. 

Odo of Sherington, 185, cf, i. 
3, 8, 12, ii. I, 2, 15, iii. 5, iv. 
7, 8, V. 9, Av. 4. 

Oesterley, xv. , xviii. , xx. , m, 
5, 9«, II, ijin, i86n, iSyn, 
zign, 229. See plls. pass. 

Ogilby, 191, 229. 

Old Testament, Indian ele- 
ments in, 134 ; foreign 
elements, 134;^ ; cf. iv. 17, 
Re. 6, 13. 

Ophir, 106.^, 131, 160. 

"Oriental LXX.,"44, 150, 152. 

Original Fables, 143 and n. 

Origins, interest of, 15. 

Ovid, 21. 

Ox and Heifer, in, 126, 153. 

Oxen and Pig, in, 129. 

PALiEOZOic stratum of Bidpai, 
54, 60, 104. 

Papyrus, age of, 92. 

" Pantschatantra," Benfey's in- 
troduction to, 46, 6o«. See 

Pandects, cf. iii. 4. 



Panther, fable about, Indian, 

Parable, 204 and n. 

Parallels, xviii. 27 ; of Indian 
and Greek fable, 46, 48 ; 
Synopsis of, 229-68. 

Pans, G., 3«, 5^, 14, 83, 151, 
i8o«, cf. Av. 17. 

Paris, Matthew, i84;z. 

Paris MS. of Arabic ^sop, xx. 
157, 221-4. 

Parodies, 197. 

Partington, Mrs., Indian, 72. 

Partridge, Monkey, and Ele- 
phant, 170. 

Paul, St., Fable of, 86, 88, cf. 
iii. 16. 

Paul], cf. i. 4, 7, 19, iii. 15, v. 
16, Av. 8, 17, 24, Al. 3, 4, 7, 
Po. 6. 

Peacock and Nightingale, 71. 

Peacock, fables about, Indian, 
71, 139, 140, 153. 

Pedigree of Caxton's .lEsop, 
xviii. XX. , 230. 

"Pentamerone,"^. Re. 6, Av. 7. 

Perotti, XX. 13. 

Phaedrus, literary source of, 
xvi. 16, 35, 212 ; is our 
.^sop, I, 158; derivates of, 
XX. 6 ; M. Hervieux on, 2, 
3 ; missing fables of, 6 ; one 
restored, 13 ; date and birth- 
place, ijn; "jests of," 31 
and w ; parallel with Babrius, 
35, 36 ; Indian elements of, 
139-141, 153; mentioned, 
71, 74, 80, io8/?, 124, 139^ ; 
cf. i. 1-20, ii. 1-20, iii. 1-20, 
iv. 1-19, V. 4, Av. 8. See 
Appendices to Phaedrus. 

Phalaris, i8;z, 19272. 

Pictorial .^sops, 195-6. 

Pig and Whistle, igbn. 

Piper turjicd Fisher (Re. 7), 
26, 88. See Cyrus. 

Pithoean Codex of Phasdrus, 

Planudes, xiv. 18, igw. 
Plato, 26«, 28, cf. iv. 12, Av. 

Plautus, cf. ii. 15. 
Pliny, 145. 
Plocanus, 144-5. 
Plutarch, 29, 39, cf. ii. 13, iii. 

3, 16, iv. 9, 13, 15, Av. 20. 
Poggio Bracciolini, xiv. 4, 32, 

139;?, 200-1,217,1^. Po. i-io. 
Political use of Fable, 39, 40, 

184, 192^, 2l8«. 
Polynesian Fable, 206, 207. 
Pope, cf. i. 12, iii. 16. 
Pots, Two (Av. 9), 52 ; Indian, 

96-7, 111, 134^2, 149;^, 153. 
Prato on Belly a?id Members, 

Zi,n, cf. iii. 16. 
Priaulx, O. , 144^. 
Proverbs of Agur, Indian, 


Proverbs related to Fable, 108 
and n, 205 and 71 ; Arabic, 
205 ; Greek, cf. i. 8, Re. 13 ; 
Indian, cf Al. 7 ; Enghsh, 
cf i. I, 6, 15, 17-19, ii. IS, 
V. 10, Re. 7, 10, Av. 16. 

Pythagoreanism, 138, 147M. 

Quatrains of thought, an In- 
dian literary artifice, 133 
and n. 

Queen's Library, copy of Cax- 
ton at, xiv. 

Rabelais, cf i. i, ii. 5, iii. 

Raju, R. , 49 and n, cf. i. 18, 

iii. 14. 
Ralston, 64, 192^. 
Rankine, Prof., 196^. 
Ranutio d' Arezzo, xx. 25, i86i 

See Remicius. 
Rawlinson, 41. 



Regnier, i8gn, c/. \. S (IV.). 
Remicius.xx. 25, 125, 159,203. 

See Ranutio, c/. Re. 1-17. 
" Reineke Fuchs," 171 and n. 
Reynard the Fox, 159, 171 and 
n, cf. i. 6, 8, 10, 12, 15, ii. i, 

15, 20, iii. 6, V. 1, 4, 5, 7-10, 

13, 14, Re. 6, Po. 7. 
Rhode, E. , 2037?. 
Rhodopis, 37, 141. 
Rhys-Davids, T. , 56, 57, 65, 69, 

jon, 71, 113, 130, 146, 147, 

215 ; views on Indian fable, 

Richard I., 176, 179, 184 and 

n, 216. 
Richard III., xi. 
Riese, A., ii«, 12, 143^. 
Rig Veda, 132-3, cf. iii. 20. 
Robert, xx. i, 187, 219, 229, 

252. See plls. pass. 
Rodiger, i57«, cf. ii. 8, Av. 7, 

Rokini Jdtaka, 54. 
Roman Fable, 88. 
Romance, England, the nidus 

of, xvii. 181. 
Romulus, XX. 4, 5, 125, 139, 

169, 186, 198, cf. i. i~2o, ii. 

1-20, iii. 1-20, iv. 1-19, Po. 7. 
Romulus of Marie, 161. See 

Appendix to Romuhis. 
Romulus of Nilant, 5^, 161, 

178 ; Collation (accidentally 

omitted from Synopsis), 

Rom. Nil. 1-17=1. 1-9, 12- 

18, 20: i8-24=ii. 1-6, 8: 

2S-37=iii- I. 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 

10, 13-17, 20: 38-45 = iv. 3, 

4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 17, 19. 
Roth, X2.2n. 
" Rufus," 5, i83«, cf. i. 1-4, 

6-18, ii. 1-5, 7-15, 19,, iii. 

1-3. 5-8, 10-20, iv. I, 4, 5. 
Russian Fable, source of, 192. 

See Krilof. 

Rutherford, W. G. , 13^, 23 
and /I, 2gn, 41, 105-6, io8«, 
i2in, I22n, i^on. 

Ryland, H., xix. 

Sachs, Hans, cf. i. 2, 8, 12, 
13, ii. I, 3, 7, 8, 10, 17, iii. 
2, 3, iv. 8, 17, V. 1-5, Re. 
16, Av. I. 4, 5, 8, 14, 17, 22, 
Al. I, 6, II, Po. 7. 

Sakuna Jdtaka, Jjn. 

Sakyamuni, 53, 212. See Bud- 

Salisbury, John of, 184, 185, 
cf. iii. I, 16, Av. 2. 

Salmon, Lamb mistaken for, 

Samos, home of .lEsop, 38. 
Sanjivata Jdtaka, 114. 
Sausages the Pig, 69. 
Schakama Jdtaka, 57-8. 
Schechter, S. , xix. 
Schiefner, 64, cf. i. 8 (I.). 
Schmidt, V., 154;^, i99«, cf. 

Al. i.-i3. 
Schneider, 17^, 19^. 
Scorpion and Camel, 114. 
Seneca, cf. v. 13. 
" Sepande" clue in Marie, 163. 
Serpent and Ass, 28. 
Serpent and Crab, 28. 
Serpent and Eagle, 28. 
Shah's justice, i3i«. 
Shakespeare, 87^, ii4«, cf. i. 

2, iii. 16. 
Sheep and Cow (iv. 19), 13. 
Sheep and Dog, 27. 
Shepherd and Wolf, 114. 
Sheppey, John of, xx. 185, cf. 

i. 8(111.). 
Simon bar Kappara, i22«. 
Simonides, 28 and n. 
Smdibad, cf. Al. 2, 5, 11. 
Smith, Sydney, 32, -jin. 
Socrates, 30, 129. 
I Solomon's judgment, probably 


Indian, 130-4 ; at Pompeii, 

Solon, 28, 39, cf. ii. proem. 
Somadeva, cf. v. 3, Re. i, 

Av. 2. 
Sophocles, 28. 
Sophos, 49, 155, 156, (/■ i. 5. 

13, 18, iii. 3. 12, 15, iv. 2, 

15, 17, Re. 6, Av. 20, 24. 
Sorg, 229. 

Sow and Lord, 126, 153. 
Spanish ^sop, 187 and n, 

217, 229. 
Spelling book ^sop, 194 and 

n, 218. .Se(?_Mavor. 
Stainhowel, Asop of, xx. 4, 

25, 67, 139^, 182, 185, 186, 

187-^, 198, 217, 229, 236«, 
. 252, 256, cf. Al. 13, Po. I, 7. 
Steinschneider, Dr., 169^, 170, 

174 and n. See " Izopiti." 
Stephanus, ijn. 
Stesichorus, 27, 28. 
Stevenson, R. L. , I97«. 
Story of the Past, 67, 146. 
Story of the Present, 57, 70^. 
Strattis, 28, 100, 129. 
Strong, Stronger, Strongest, 

Survivals, i5«, 23, 46. 
Susa Jdtaka, 112 and n. 
Suvannahamsa Jdtaka, 67. 
Suvaxmakakkata Jdtaka, 67. 
Swallow and Birds (i. 20), 

77«, 126, 153, i82«, 183;?. 
Sybaritic Fables, 127, 203, 

212, 217. 
Syntipas. xx, 155, 216, cf. i. 

5, 10, iii. 3, 12, 16, iv. 12, 

16, V. 4, Av. 20, Al. 2, II. 
Syriac ^sop, 154, 155. See 


Talmud, xx. 74, 8i« ; gives 
clue, no, 120 ; fables from, 
iii-S, 141, 142. 151. 214- 

Tar-Baby, 11 3«, 136, 
Temple, Capt., 48 and «,, 

126, cf. V. 4, Av. 17. 
Temple, Sir W., 18. 
"Tendency," 205, 207. 
Tenniel, J. 195. 
Tettira Jdtaka, 170. 
Thackeray, 229, cf. ii. 15, 20, 

Av. 4. 
Theognis, 28, 129 (mistake for 

Theon, 121, cf. ii. 15. 
Three Wishes, 141, 167, 
Tibet, 64. See Schiefner. 
Tiger, fable about, 126. 
Tiger, Stag, and Crocodile, epn. 
Tongue and Members, 85, 88, 

Topes, Buddhist, 53. See 

Tortoise and Birds (Av. 2), 

52, 61, 153. 
Tozvn and Country Motise (i. 

12), 6, 7. 
Townsend, G. F,, 195, 229. 
Trench, Q.oi,n. 
Tuppo, XX. 187, 229. 
Tutinameh, 49, cf. i. 2, 5, 10, 

ii. 15, iii. 6, iv. 2, Al. 11. 
Tychon, 33^. 
Tylor, E. B., is«, 44, 45. 
Tyrant, 39, 211. 
Tyrwhitt, 19 and n. 

" Uncle Remus," 113^, 136. 
" Universally human," 202, 

206, 209. 
Upanishads, 83, cf, iii. 16. 
Upham, 54«. 

Vaca Jdtaka, 174. 

Vartan, 156, cf i. 13, 15, iv. 2, 

12, Al. 6. 
Vesali, Council of, 79. 
Vincent of Beauvais, 5«, cf. i. 

ii 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 10, 17, 18, 



ii. 2, 5, 8, 15, 20, iii.'i, 3, 
14-18, iv. I, 8, 12, 17, Re. 

Viper and File {^m. 12), igyn, 
Virocana Jdtaka, 73. 
Vixen-Maiden, 11, 139, 142, 

143, 153. S&eMouse-Maiden. 
Voltaire, cf. iii. 9. 

Wagener, 28«, loi and n, 
129, 219^. 

Waldis, i87«, 218, cf. i. 1-3, 
5-10, 12-16, 18-20, ii. 1-4, 
8-17, 20, iii. 2-8, 11-17, 19, 
20, iv. I, 2, 8, 9, II, 12, 19, 
20, V. 4, 5, 10, II, 17, Re. 
1-8, II, 12, 14-16, Av. 1-7, 
9, 10, 13-25, 27. 

Walrus and Carpenter, ^on. 

Walter of England, xx. 178 and 
n, 179, 215. See Galfred. 

Weasel, Transformed, 28. See 

Webtr, 64^, 80, 95, 102, I52«. 

Welcker, 37. 

Welldon, J. E. C, 27. 

William Longsword, i68«. 

Wisseburg MS. of ' ' Rufus," 5. 

Wolf and Animals, 172-3. 

Wolf and Crane (i. 8), Latin, 
7-9 ; Indian, 54-7 ; Hebrew, 
117-8 ; on Bayeux Tapestry, 
182; mentioned, 106, iii, 
117, 129, 139, 142, 207, 213, 

Wolf, Fox and Dove, 170. 

Wolf and Ho2inds, 115. 

Wolf and Kid, 6. 

Wolf and La7nb(\. 2), 6, Indian, 
62-3, 139, 153; Thibetan, 
64 ; on Bayeux Tapestry, 
182 ; in Caxton, 183. 

Wolf at Well, 115. 

Wolfenbiittel MS. of " Rufus," 

Woodcuts, xiii. 183. See 

Wright, XX. 164. 
Wiinsche, A., iii«. 
Wustenfeld, i68;z. 

Xenophon, 27. 

YSOPET, x.K. 158, 180, 181. 

ZOndel, 41. 










The fables of Aesop