leave thee, then shall we be
strangers to those good things which the Lord hath promised unto us.
Therefore will we abide with thee, wherever thou go."[1] In the Old
English :--

O whither shall we turn us, lordless men,
Mourning in heart, forsaken quite by God,
Wounded with sin, if we abandon thee?
We shall be odious in every land,
Hated of every folk, when sons of men,
Courageous warriors, in council sit,
And question which of them did best stand by
His lord in battle, when the hand and shield,
Worn out by broadswords on the battle-plain,
Suffered sore danger in the sport of war. (405-414.)

[Footnote 1: Bede, _Hist. Eccl._ IV. 2.]

There is in the Greek no trace of the Teutonic idea of loyalty to a
lord, which is the ruling motive of the Old English lines.

But did the poet read the legend in the Greek? The study of that
language had, it is true, been introduced into England in the seventh
century by Archbishop Theodore[1], but we can hardly assume that
this study was very general. Moreover, there are several important
variations between the poem and the _Acts of Andrew and Matthew_,
facts wanting in the Greek, which the poet could not possibly have
invented. For example, the poem states that Andrew was in Achaia when
he received the mission to Mermedonia. In the Greek we find no mention
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[=ae]l_ ("shaft of the devil"), and
in the homily also the same word (_str[=ae]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