LEGENDS OF THE PATRIARCHS AND PROPHETS. LEGENDS OF THE PATRIARCHS AND PROPHETS AND OTHER OLD TESTAMENT CHARACTERS FROM VARIOUS SOURCES BY THE REV. S. BARING-GOULD, M.A. _Author of “Curious Myths of the Middle Ages,” “The Origin and Development of Religious Belief,” “In Exitu Israel,” etc._ [Publisher's Logo] NEW YORK: AMERICAN BOOK EXCHANGE, 764 BROADWAY. 1881. PREFACE. An incredible number of legends exists connected with the personages whose history is given in the Old Testament. The collection now presented to the public must by no means be considered as exhaustive. The compiler has been obliged to limit himself as to the number, it being quite impossible to insert all. He trusts that few of peculiar interest have been omitted. The Mussulman traditions are nearly all derived from the Talmudic writers, just as the history of Christ in the Koran is taken from the Apocryphal Gospels. The Koran follows the “Sepher Hajaschar” (Book of the Just) far more closely than the canonical Scriptures; and the “Sepher Hajaschar” is a storehouse of the Rabbinic tradition on the subject of the Patriarchs from Adam to Joshua. The Jewish traditions are of various value. Some can be traced to their origin without fail. One class is derived from Persia, as, for instance, those of Asmodeus, the name of the demon being taken, along with his story, from Iranian sources. Another class springs from the Cabbalists, who, by permutation of the letters of a name, formed the nuclei, so to speak, from which legends spread. Another class, again, is due to the Rabbinic commentators, who, unable to allow for poetical periphrasis, insisted on literal interpretations, and then coined fables to explain them. Thus the saying of David, “_Thou hast heard me from among the horns of the unicorns_,” which signified that David was assisted by God in trouble, was taken quite literally by the Rabbis, and a story was invented to explain it. Another class, again, is no doubt due to the exaggeration of Oriental imagery, just as that previously mentioned is due to the deficiency of the poetic fancy in certain Rabbis. Thus, imagination and defect of imagination, each contributed to add to the store. But when we have swept all these classes aside, there remains a residuum, small, no doubt, of genuine tradition. To this class, if I am not mistaken, belong the account of Lamech and his wives, and the story of the sacrifice of Isaac. In the latter instance, the type comes out far clearer in the Talmudic tradition that in the canonical Scriptures; and this can hardly have been the result of Jewish interpolation, knowing, as they did, that Christians pointed triumphantly to this type. * * * * *