What then was the source of this earliest English version? Was it derived from Wace, or does it rest on one of the Latin versions? Wace’s poem consists of three parts (cf. Gierth, Engl. Stud. vii, p. 6): (1) the institution of the feast of the Conception of Mary, (2) her birth, rearing and marriage, (3) her death and burial. For the first part his source seems to have been the _Miraculum de conceptione sanctae Mariae_; for the second part, the _Evangelium de nativitate Sanctae Mariae_. About these two works, which he has followed almost word for word, Wace grouped a number of minor anecdotes and commentary notes from Anselm, Eadmer, and other of the church writers of the 11th and 12th centuries. For part (3) Wace seems certainly to have used the Latin version of the story, designated by Tischendorf as _Transitus Mariae_, #B#. The English version has in common with Wace’s poem some traits that in the other versions are wanting. For instance, only in these two versions is it related that Mary cared for and instructed the maidens in the temple. (Engl. vv. 60 ff.) Another feature in common is contained in the speech of Christ to his mother shortly before her death, in which he promises her, _La porte d’aidier auras A trestous ceus que tu vorras_ (Wace, p. 71, vv. 6, 7), which the English poet seems to have expanded into a number of verses, in which is promised pardon to every sinner who will betake himself to Mary. On the other hand, in several instances the English agrees more closely with the Latin, where Wace has considerably abridged, and in these instances the French cannot have been the original of the English poem. A Latin original seems much more probable. The first two-thirds of the English poem corresponds almost exactly with the Tischendorf Latin #B# version. On the other hand, the introduction of Thomas in the last one-third of the poem is a feature of the Latin #A# version, but is foreign to #B#. In other respects the English poem corresponds more closely to a third Latin version from which Tischendorf quotes variants, the _Codex Laurentius_. The English has in common with the _Legenda Aurea_ the peculiar trait of making no mention of the miraculous transit of John from Ephesus. Again, some traits in Latin #B# do not appear in the English version, and, on the other hand, the English version contains a few traits not to be found in any of the other versions spoken of.