“Judas”

Description

Judas is sent on an errand by Jesus. As he does so, he is cheated (by his sister!) of thirty pieces of silver. He therefore betrays Jesus to get his money back.

Notes

The betrayal of Jesus by Judas is told in Matt. 26:14-16, 47f.; Mark 14:10-11, 43f.; Luke 22:3-6, 47f.; compare also John 13:2, 27, 18:2f. The story of the thirty pieces of silver is found only in Matt. 26:15 and the sequel in 27:3-10 (it is based on Zech. 11:12-13). The notion of Judas as treasurer and thief occurs only in John 12:4-6, (13:29)

Even though this piece exists only in the Trinity College manuscript, it should not be assumed that Child's transcription is authoritative. The text in volume 1 was printed without reference to the manuscript (which had been temporarily lost). As a result it contains many orthographic innaccuracies (e.g. concerning u/v, i/j, and the use of th rather than the runic thorn |> -- as well as seven conjectural emendations replacing s with h). It also omitted the duplicated lines at lines 8, 25, 30. Also, the manuscript was written without stanza divisions and with (at best) imperfect word divisions, all of which are editorial. In addition, the script is sometimes unclear. And finally, the copyist may not have been perfectly familiar with the dialect of the original.

Child later printed a corrected version, giving the readings of the manuscript verbatim (as read by Skeat). However, modern ballad scholars have almost always followed at least one of the imperfections of Child's original text (omitting duplicated lines, modifying the thorns, exchanging u and v, using Child's h instead of s, etc.)

Scholars should keep in mind that even Child's corrected text, so badly reproduced by later scholars, is open to reinterpretation. Kenneth Sisam, in _Fourteenth Century Verse and Prose_, prints a text which differs in hundreds of particulars from Child's original version. It shows several differences even from Child and Skeat's manuscript collation:

* five places where the editors break words differently,

* two major variants (in line 6 Sisam reads "cunesman" for "tunesman"; in line 16, "top" for "cop")

* Sisam also notes that in line 22 omits "Crist" was originally written by the scribe but then marked for erasure. This MAY indicate comparison of two texts of the ballad.

* Sisam also considers line 27 to be intact ; Child implies it is defective.

Sisam's notes are twice as long as the ballad itself; they are well worth consulting.

Niles claims that his informant ("Mayberry Thomas," of Tennessee) had seen this piece in broadsheets, but there is no evidence of this, and many scholars hold that Niles made up his text 16A based on the old British text. - RBW

Historical references

• April 6, 30 C.E. - most likely date for the arrest of Jesus (the crucifixion took place the following day)

Cross references

• cf. "Judas and Jesus" (listed by Niles as a version of this ballad)
• cf. "Oh, Judy, My Judy" (listed by Niles as a version of this ballad)

References

1. Child 23, "Judas" (1 text)
2. Leach, pp. ,108-109 "Judas" ( text)
3. Friedman, p. 56, "Judas" (1 text plus interlinear modern English translation)
4. OBB 97, "Judas" (1 text)
5. Niles 16, "Judas" (3 texts, 2 tunes, of which only the first could possibly be this ballad, and even it looks suspicious)
6. ADDITIONAL: Kenneth Sisam, editor, Fourteenth Century Verse & Prose (1925), pp. 168-169, "Judas" (with notes on pp. 256-258). This is now considered the best transcription of the original manuscript, replacing Skeat's transcription quoted by Child.
7. Brown/Robbins, _Index of Middle English Verse_, #1649
8. DT 23, JUDAS
9. Roud #3964
10. BI, C023