of Achaia, nor is the name "Mermedonia" given at all. After the
conversion of the Mermedonians, the poet says that Andrew appointed
a bishop over them, whose name was Platan. Again the Greek is silent.
There is, however, an Old English homily[1] of unknown authorship and
uncertain date, which contains these three facts, (though the name
of the bishop is not given). Still another remarkable coincidence has
been pointed out by Zupitza.[2] In line 1189 of the _Andreas_, Satan
is addressed as _d[=e]ofles str[=æ]l_ ("shaft of the devil"), and
in the homily also the same word (_str[=æ]l_) is found. But in
the corresponding passage of the Greek we find [Greek: O Belia
echthrotate] ("O most hateful Belial"). From this correspondence
between the poem and the homily, Zupitza argues the existence of a
Latin translation of the Greek, from which both the _Andreas_ and the
homily were made, assuming that the ignorant Latinist confused [Greek:
Belia] (Belial) with [Greek: Belos] ("arrow," "shaft,"), translating
it by _telum_ or _sagitta_. It is hardly probable that both the poet
and the homilest should have made the same mistake.

[Footnote 1: Bright, _Anglo-Saxon Reader_, pp. 113-128.]

[Footnote 2: _Zeitschrift für Deutsches Altertum_, XXX. 175.]

The homily could not have been drawn from the poem, nor the poem from
the homily, for in each we find facts and phrases of the Greek not
contained in the other. For example, both in the Greek and in the
homily, the flood which sweeps away the Mermedonians proceeds from the
mouth of an alabaster image standing upon a pillar, while in the poem
it springs forth from the base of the pillar itself. On the other
hand, most of the dialogue between Andrew and the Lord on shipboard,
as well as other important incidents, are wanting in the homily.