[25] Hippe speaks of "zwei spanische Romanzen." Had he consulted the Spanish text or read Koehler's note more attentively, he would have seen that a single story runs through nos. 1291 and 1292 of the Romancero. [26] My attention was called to this variant by the kindness of Professor F. De Haan, and I was supplied with a first summary from the 1693 edition by the friendly aid of Professor G. T. Northup. [27] See Crane, Exempla of Jacques de Vitry, 1890, p. lxxxvi. [28] P. Paris, Manuscrits francois, 1840, iii. 1, and Foerster, Richars li Biaus, 1874, p. xxvii, date it from the fifteenth century; Suchier, Oeuvres poetiques de Philippe de Beaumanoir, 1884, p. lxxxiv, and Wilhelmi, p. 15, from the fourteenth century. [29] P. Paris, place cited, and Foerster, place cited, say the sixteenth century, but Wilhelmi, place cited, the fifteenth. [30] See Wilhelmi, p. 43. [31] Foulche-Delbosc, pp. 589, 590. [32] Work cited, pp. 587, 588. [33] Place cited. [34] My attention was first called to this story by the kindness of Professor A. C. L. Brown. [35] An edition with an almost identical title "Printed and sold by Larkin How, in Petticoat Lane," of which a copy is in the Harvard College library, does not contain our story. [36] My attention was called to this variant by the kindness of Professor Kittredge. [37] Miss Petersen's conclusion, Sources of the Nonne Prestes Tale, p. 109, note, is not altogether convincing, since the vogue of Valerius Maximus was so great that other authors than Holkot are likely to have quoted Cicero's stories from him. The book may yet be found in which the one follows the other "right in the nexte chapitre." [38] Given by Hippe, pp. 143 f. Wherever Hippe's summaries are adequate and careful, I shall refer the reader to his monograph for comparison. [39] This story has nothing in common with the mediaeval tale of the compact between two friends that the first to die shall appear to the other. See the writer's North-English Homily Collection, 1902, pp. 27-31. [40] Apparently beneficent spirits, whose nature is half fairy and half angel. See Servian V. below. [41] See chapter viii. and Sepp, pp. 678-680 for illustrations of the belief. [42] One can conceive of separate generation of a very simple story under similar conditions, but not, I think, that a series of events showing combination of themes or detailed correspondence would so arise. [43] Carnoy and Nicolaides, Traditions populaires de l'Asie Mineure, 1889, pp. 57-74. [44] See Baring-Gould's Curious Myths, 2nd ed. 1869, pp. 561 ff. for a popular account. The philosophical basis of the tale is discussed by Liebrecht, Zur Volkskunde, 1879, pp. 54 ff. (from Germania, xiii. 161 ff.), and by Hartland, Science of Fairy Tales, 1891, pp. 255-332, 337-347. [45] See Hippe, p. 148. [46] Or. und Occ. ii. 176. [47] Kinder- und Hausmaerchen, no. 28. See notes (ed. 1856), iii. 55, 56; also Koehler, Kleinere Schriften, i. 49, 54.