Page:The Folk-Lore Journal Volume 4 1886.djvu/329

Rh III.

If in the foregoing types we deem the heroine innocent and ill-used, still more strongly will our sympathies be excited in the same direction by the type on whose consideration we are now entering. I have ventured to call it the Joseph type; but the propriety of that designation is not, perhaps, beyond question. The Biblical story of Joseph and his Brethren does undoubtedly belong to this genus, and is by far its best-known example. It is not, however, the simplest; for, as in many of the variants cited under the two preceding types, other folk-tales have been pieced into it and become, in the memories of all who are familiar with it, an inextricable portion of its beauty and pathos. Unlike King Lear in this particular, it resembles it in being itself wrought into and forming part of a longer narrative. Whether the early Hebrew traditions underwent this fate at the hands of an artist as conscious as Geoffrey of Monmouth I do not now care to enquire. If the real character of the imbedded legends be recognized, this further question may be left to be debated by students of literature and theologians. Meantime, our familiarity with the story must be my justification for treating it as the type of this division of the subject. Divested of all episodes it runs thus:—The youngest of a band of brethren falls under the displeasure of his father and brothers on account of a dream, in which they have appeared to bow down and make obeisance to him. His father sends him to his brethren, and they, having first of all conspired to slay him, abandon that intention