LETTER I.

The ages, we call barbarous, present us with many a subject of curious

speculation. What, for instance, is more remarkable than the _Gothic_

CHIVALRY? or than the spirit of ROMANCE, which took its rise from that

singular institution?

Nothing in human nature, my dear friend, is without its reasons. The

modes and fashions of different times may appear, at first sight,

fantastic and unaccountable. But they, who look nearly into them,

discover some latent cause of their production.

“Nature once known, no prodigies remain,”

as sings our philosophical bard; but to come at this knowledge, is the

difficulty. Sometimes a close attention to the workings of the human

mind is sufficient to lead us to it: sometimes more than that, the

diligent observation of what passes without us, is necessary.

This last I take to be the case here. The prodigies we are now

contemplating, had their origin in the barbarous ages. Why then, says

the fastidious modern, look any further for the reason? Why not resolve

them at once into the usual caprice and absurdity of barbarians?

This, you see, is a short and commodious philosophy. Yet barbarians

have their _own_, such as it is, if they are not enlightened by our

reason. Shall we then condemn them unheard, or will it not be fair to

let them have the telling of their own story?

Would we know from what causes the institution of _Chivalry_ was

derived? The time of its birth, the situation of the barbarians amongst

whom it arose, must be considered: their wants, designs, and policies,

must be explored: we must inquire when, and where, and how, it came to

pass that the Western world became familiarized to this _prodigy_,

which we now start at.

Another thing is full as remarkable, and concerns us more nearly. The

spirit of Chivalry was a fire which soon spent itself: but that of

_Romance_, which was kindled at it, burnt long, and continued its light

and heat even to the politer ages.

The greatest geniuses of our own and foreign countries, such as ARIOSTO

and TASSO in _Italy_, and SPENSER and MILTON in _England_, were seduced

by these barbarities of their forefathers; were even charmed by the

_Gothic_ Romances. Was this caprice and absurdity in them? Or, may

there not be something in the _Gothic_ Romance peculiarly suited to

the views of a genius, and to the ends of poetry? And may not the

philosophic moderns have gone too far in their perpetual ridicule and

contempt of it?

To form a judgment in the case, the rise, progress, and genius of

_Gothic_ Chivalry must be explained.

The circumstances in the _Gothic_ fictions and manners, which are

proper to the ends of poetry (if any such there be) must be pointed

out.

Reasons, for the decline and rejection of the _Gothic_ taste in later

times, must be given.

You have in these particulars both the Subject and the PLAN of the

following Letters.

The works of Richard Hurd, volume 4 (of 8) · 第 199 / 243 题