Note 45.1 — SUPPLEMENTARY LIST OF WORKS REFERRED TO

Baring-Gould, Curious Myths, 301. The whole essay on Saint George ought to be read as an important contribution to the subject; though the sun-myth, by which the author explains the legend, is now as thoroughly exploded as Dr. Heylin’s identification, which he combats, of the saint with the Arian bishop of Alexandria. Mr. Budge, however, says: “The Coptic text shows us clearly that the dragon which George fought and overcame was none other than the impious Dadianus, and it proves, if further proof is needed, that George the martyr and George, the opponent of Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, were two distinct persons; the fact being that Athanasius the Bishop has been confused with Athanasius the sorcerer, whom George the martyr overcame.” Budge, Saint George, xxxi. Mr. Baring-Gould, moreover, is certainly wrong in saying: “Hospinian, relating the sufferings of the martyr, affirms distinctly that his constancy was the occasion of the creation of the legend by Voragine.” Any affirmation by Hospinian on the subject would, of course, be of very little value; but all he says is that the saint’s fortitude and unshaken constancy gave occasion to the story, as it is to be read in Jacob à Voragine and Peter de Natalibus. His own interpretation is that the tale is a form under which the ancients figured the redemption of the human race. Thus, George is Christ, the Dragon is the Devil, the citizens of Silea (sic) are an image of the whole human race, a prey to the Devil, from whom the only power that can deliver them is Christ, for which we owe Him everlasting thanks and worship, etc., etc. De Festis Christianorum, sub die 23rd April. Some countenance is given to the theory of misunderstanding by a Russian song which enumerates the conquests of a fiery dragon among the saint’s trials during his prolonged martyrdom. Ralston, Songs, 232. I do not know whether this occurs elsewhere.