i 6 
1883.] 53 : [Crane, 
Of much greater literary interest, although by no means so profound or 
original, is the Dialogus Oreaturarum of an otherwise unknown author, 
Nicolaus Pergamenus.* The form of this work closely resembles that of 
the Speculum Sapientiae ; there is the same apologetic prologue, and the 
same arbitrary treatment of the subject, but already the desire to interest 
has assumed prominence, and the fable proper is followed by a mass of 
sentences, anecdotes, &c. The work contains one hundred and twenty- 
two dialogues not divided into books. The work, as Greesse (p. 808) shows, 
cannot be earlier than the middle of the XIV century. The writer, as a 
glance at the list of authors cited will show, was familiar with the whole 
range of medieval literature, including the classic authors popular at that 
time.| He does not seem any more acquainted than Cyril with the great 
Oriental collections of fables as such, although separate fables from the 
Pantschatantra may have reached him through western channels, as Greesse 
States, p. 804. Instead of the half dozen fables in Cyril’s work which 
may be compared with those of other collections, Nicolaus Pergamenus 
offers a rich field for the student of comparative storiology, if we may coin 
& convenient word. The absorption of Oriental elements into literature 
from oral tradition had already begun, and from literature, as we shall see 
later on in this article, these elements were to return again to the people, and 
thus the process was to be repeated over and over again until we are no 
longer surprised at the marvelous diffusion of medieval stories.§ An English 
thereupon descends from the tree and is devoured); vii, 12 = fii, 4; 111,17 = ili, 11. 
His other references are incorrect, We have noticed the following: La Fontaine. 
14):10 as i, 18, 16 (slightly); Ui, 11 == 1.18; ix. 4=1i, 14 (ep, ili, 18). The edition of La 
Fontaine cited in this article is, Fables inédites des XIIe, XITTIe et XIV sidcles, 
et Fables de La Fontaine rapprochées de celles de tous les auteurs qui avoient, 
vant lui traité les memes sujets, précédées dune notice sur les Fabulistes, par A, 
LOR Robert, 2 vols., Paris, 1825. This edition will be hereafter cited as Robert, 
Fables inédites, or La Fontaine, 
* This work is reprinted in Vol. 148 of the Stuttgart Litt. Vereins, mentioned 
above, 
} The list given by Grasse, p. 281, needs careful revision, The following are 
Some of the most necessary corrections: Alfonsus (that is Petrus Alfonsi Dis- 
ciplina Olericalis), De Prudentia, 122, add 56; add Catholicon 90; add Nugis 
Phitosophorum, 23,115; add Martialis, 108 (instead of 109), 
wil hig may perhaps be noted here that La Fontaine’s well-knowh fable of La La- 
tere et le Pot au Laat is found in the Dialogus Cre ¢. 100. Max Muller (Chips., 
iv, 170) gives the old English translation of this version, and says: ‘In it, as far 
as I can find, the milkmaid appears for the first time on the stage,” &c, The 
version in Jacques de Vitry and Etienne de Bourbon, which will be mentioned 
later, must be both of them earlier, or as early, and it is probable that in this 
Case, As in so many others, Jacques de Vitry introduced the fable to Hurope. A 
Pleasant account of the fortunes of this fable may be tound in ZZistoire de deux 
Fables de La Fontaine, leur origines et leurs Pérégrinations, par A, Joly, Pa 
1877. The other fable is vii, 1, Les Animaux malades de la Peste. 
, 
@The tollowing corrections and additions to Greesse’s reterences, p. 304, will 
be of use tothe student, Keferences XX XI, XXXIV, and XLVI belong to XXX, 
XXXIV ana XLVII, respectively; add XLII, Pauli, 256; the references to 
XXXVI and XL ave incorrect ; of the various references given to XLVI (should 
