incl.) were retold in these pages.]

[Footnote 6: line 186b. This line is apparently imperfect, metrically,
for the second hemistich seems to be wanting. As the sense is complete,
without emendation, I have not followed the various scholars who would
insert after "Adam's bride" some such clause as, "Whom God named Eve."]

[Footnote 7: ll. 221-224a. The text here is corrupt and scholars differ
widely in their conjectural emendations and interpretations. Since none
of their versions is satisfactory or convincing, I venture upon an
independent reading. _Hebeleac_, of course, is the Scriptural Havilah
(Gen. 2.11); _Fison_ is obviously Pison, and _Geon_, 230b inf., is
Gihon.]

[Footnote 8: ll. 226, 227a. I construe _the best_ with _gold and gems_,
rather than with _sons of men_, because of Gen. 2.12.]

[Footnote 9: ll. 235-851. After line 234 there is a break in the MS.
Sievers has shown that the following 617 lines, called _Genesis B_, were
written and interpolated later, by a different hand, and have Old Saxon
affiliations. _Genesis B_ describes the Fall of Man and also gives a new
version of the revolt and overthrow of Satan. _Genesis A_ begins again,
at line 852, with the conversation between Adam and Eve and Jehovah
(Gen. 3.8 ff.).]

[Footnote 10: line 872. I follow the divisions of the MS. This line
begins with the tenth large decorative initial, the others having
occurred at ll. 1, 82, 135, 246, 389, 442, 547, 684, and 821. Where the
editors so widely disagree as to the proper subdivisions of the poem, it
seems safer to follow the original initializing (but not the marginal