CORRESPONDENCE.
From Ritual to Romance.
Sir,—Will you allow me to point out that Miss Hull, in her review of my book (Folk-Lore, xxxi. 163) overlooks the fact that I am dealing solely with the origin of the Grail itself, not with its connection with Arthurian tradition, a very different matter. Hence a discussion of the probable parallels between the latter and early Irish heroic legend lies entirely outside my field of enquiry.
I hoped I had made it sufficiently clear that any possible connection of the Grail with Mithraic ritual could only be secondary, and indirect, through the medium of the Attis mysteries; the different affiliation is, of course, with the latter, the most important and widespread form of the “Vegetation” Cult. The connection between the Mithraic religion and the worship of the Magna Mater is too well attested for dispute.
I knew, and had already criticized, Miss Murray’s supposed Egyptian identifications, pointing out that they were based on an inadequate knowledge of the Grail literature. The parallels in question are only found in the Grand Saint Graal, a late and composite text. The section in which they occur was shown by Professor Heinzel, many years ago, to be derived from the apocryphal “Acts” of St. Thaddaeus, which had no connection with the legend of Joseph of Arimathea. I think it quite possible that a “Conversion,” and a “Consecration,” legend (the latter based on traditions of the early Coptic Church) may have been utilized by the author of the romance in question, but to prove the latter point Miss Murray should have made enquiry as to
