but though I much admire the genius of Chaucer as displayed in this performance, I could not place my version at the disposal of the editor, as I deemed the subject somewhat too indelicate for pure taste to be offered to the world at this time of day. Mr. Horne has much hurt this publication by not abstaining from the Reve’s Tale. This, after making all allowance for the rude manners of Chaucer’s age, is intolerable; and by indispensably softening down the incidents, he has killed the spirit of that humour, gross and farcical, that pervades the original. When the work was first mentioned to me, I protested as strongly as possible against admitting any coarseness and indelicacy, so that my conscience is clear of countenancing aught of that kind. So great is my admiration of Chaucer’s genius, and so profound my reverence for him. . . for spreading the light of Literature through his native land, that, notwithstanding the defects and faults in this publication, I am glad of it, as a means for making many acquainted with the original, who would otherwise be ignorant of everything about him but his name.”

Wordsworth’s objection to the Manciple’s Tale from Ovid’s Metamorphoses was an afterthought. He had begun by offering his version of it for publication in this volume. His objection to Horne’s treatment of the Reve’s Tale was reasonable enough. The original tale was the sixth novel in the ninth day of the Decameron, and probably was taken by Chaucer from a Fabliau by Jean de Boves, “De Gombert et des Deux Clercs.” The same story has been imitated in the “Cent Nouvelles Nouvelles,” and in the “Berceau” of La Fontaine. Horne’s removal from the tale of everything that would offend a modern reader was designed to enable thousands to find pleasure in an old farcical piece that would otherwise be left unread.

Chaucer’s “Rime of Sir Thopas” was a playful jest on the long-winded story-telling of the old romances, and had specially in mind Thomas Chestre’s version of Launfal from Marie of France, and the same rhymer’s romance of “Ly Beaus Disconus,” who was Gingelein, a son of Gawain, called by his mother, for his beauty, only Beaufis (handsome son); but when he offered himself in that name to be knighted by King Arthur, he was knighted and named by him Li Beaus Disconus (the fair unknown). This is the method of the tediousness, in which it showed itself akin to many a rhyming tale.

“And for love of his fair vis His mother clepéd him Beaufis, And none other name; And himselvé was full nis, He ne axéd nought y-wis What he hight at his dame.

“As it befel upon a day, To 

 Prev. P 8/113 next