Chapter 7 - Page 2

myself
ignorant of any early and popular, or "primitive" literature, in
which human virtues, and the human conscience, do not play their
part. Those who object to Tennyson's handling of the great Arthurian
cycle, on the ground that he is too refined and too moral, must
either never have read or must long have forgotten even Malory's
romance. Thus we read, in a recent novel, that Lancelot was an homme
aux bonnes fortunes, whereas Lancelot was the most loyal of lovers.

Among other critics, Mr Harrison has objected that the Arthurian
world of Tennyson "is not quite an ideal world. Therein lies the
difficulty. The scene, though not of course historic, has certain
historic suggestions and characters." It is not apparent who the
historic characters are, for the real Arthur is but a historic
phantasm. "But then, in the midst of so much realism, the knights,
from Arthur downwards, talk and act in ways with which we are
familiar in modern ethical and psychological novels, but which are as
impossible in real mediaeval knights as a Bengal tiger or a Polar
bear would be in a drawing-room." I confess to little acquaintance
with modern ethical novels; but real mediaeval knights, and still
more the knights of mediaeval romance, were capable of very ethical
actions. To halt an army for the protection and comfort of a
laundress was a highly ethical action. Perhaps Sir Redvers Buller
would do it: Bruce did. Mr Harrison accuses the ladies of the
Idylls of soul-bewildering casuistry, like that of women in
Middlemarch or Helbeck of Bannisdale. Now I am not reminded by
Guinevere, and Elaine, and Enid, of ladies in these ethical novels.
But the women of the mediaeval Cours d'Amour (the originals from whom
the old romancers drew) were nothing if not casuists. "Spiritual
delicacy" (as they understood it) was their delight.

Mr Harrison even argues that Malory's men lived hot-blooded lives in
fierce times, "before an idea had arisen in the world of 'reverencing
conscience,' 'leading sweet lives,'" and so on. But he admits that
they had "fantastic ideals of 'honour' and 'love.'" As to
"fantastic," that is a matter of opinion, but to have ideals and to
live in accordance with them is to "reverence conscience", which the
heroes of the romances are said by Mr Harrison never to have had an
idea of doing. They are denied even "amiable words and courtliness."
Need one say that courtliness is the dominant note of mediaeval
knights, in history as in romance? With discourtesy Froissart would
"head the count of crimes." After a battle, he says, Scots knights
and English would thank each other for a good fight, "not like the
Germans." "And now, I dare say," said Malory's Sir Ector, "thou, Sir
Lancelot, wast the curtiest