Finally, a casual reference, in Anrich’s work on the Mysteries, to the _Naassene Document_, caused me to apply to Mr G. R. S. Mead, of whose knowledge of the mysterious border-land between Christianity and Paganism, and willingness to place that knowledge at the disposal of others, I had, for some years past, had pleasant experience. Mr Mead referred me to his own translation and analysis of the text in question, and there, to my satisfaction, I found, not only the final link that completed the chain of evolution from Pagan Mystery to Christian Ceremonial, but also proof of that wider significance I was beginning to apprehend. The problem involved was not one of Folk-lore, not even one of Literature, but of Comparative Religion in its widest sense. Thus, while I trust that my co-workers in the field of Arthurian research will accept these studies as a permanent contribution to the elucidation of the Grail problem, I would fain hope that those scholars who labour in a wider field, and to whose works I owe so much, may find in the results here set forth elements that may prove of real value in the study of the evolution of religious belief. J. L. W. Paris, _October_, 1919. CONTENTS CHAPTER I Introductory Nature of the Grail problem. Unsatisfactory character of results achieved. Objections to Christian Legendary origin; to Folk-lore origin. Elements in both theories sound. Solution to be sought in a direction which will do justice to both. Sir J. G. Frazer’s _Golden Bough_ indicates possible line of research. Sir W. Ridgeway’s criticism of _Vegetation_ theory examined. _Dramas and Dramatic Dances_. The Living and not the Dead King the factor of importance. Impossibility of proving human origin for Vegetation Deities. Not Death but Resurrection the essential centre of Ritual. _Muharram_ too late in date and lacks Resurrection feature. Relation between defunct heroes and special localities. Sanctity possibly antecedent to connection. _Mana_ not necessarily a case of relics. Self-acting weapons frequent in Medieval Romance. Sir J. G. Frazer’s theory holds good. Remarks on method and design of present Studies. CHAPTER II The Task of the Hero Essential to determine the original nature of the task imposed upon the hero. Versions examined. The Gawain forms—_Bleheris, Diû Crône_. Perceval versions—_Gerbert, prose Perceval, Chrétien de Troyes, Perlesvaus, Manessier, Peredur, Parzival_. Galahad—Queste. Result, primary task healing of Fisher King and removal of curse of Waste Land. The two inter-dependent. Illness of King entails misfortune on Land. Enquiry into nature of King’s disability. _Sone de Nansai_. For elucidation of problem necessary to bear in mind close connection between Land and Ruler. Importance of Waste Land _motif_ for criticism. CHAPTER III The Freeing of the Waters