but of judgment; neither did he want that in difcerning the beauties and faults of other poets; but only indulged himself in the luxury of writing; and perhaps knew it was a fault, but hoped the reader would not find it. For this reason, though he must always be thought a great poet, he is no longer efteemed a good writer: and for ten impreffions, which his works have had in fo many fucceffive years, yet at prefent a hundred books are scarcely purchased once a twelvemonth : for, as my last lord Rochester said, though somewhat profanely, Not being of God, he could not stand. Chaucer followed nature every where; but was never fo bold to go beyond her: and there is a great difference of being Poeta and nimis Poeta, if we believe Catullus, as much as betwixt a modeft behaviour and affectation. The verfe of Chaucer, I confefs, is not harmonious to us; but it is like the eloquence of one whom Tacitus commends, it was "auribus iftius tem66 poris accommodata:" they who lived with him, and fome time after him, thought it mufical; and it continues fo even in our judgment, if compared with the numbers of Lidgate and Gower, his contemporaries: there is the rude fweetnefs of a Scotch tune in it, which is natural and pleafing, though not perfect. It is true, I cannot go fo far as he who published the last edition of him; for he would make us believe the fault is in our ears, and that there were really ten fyllables in a verfe where we find but nine: but this opinion is not worth confuting; it is fo grofs and obvious an error, that common sense (which is a rule in every thing but matters of faith and : : and revelation) must convince the reader, that equality of numbers in every verfe, which we call Heroic, was either not known, or not always practifed in Chaucer's age. It were an eafy matter to produce fome thousands of his verses, which are lame for want of half a foot, and fometimes a whole one, and which no pronunciation can make otherwife. We can only fay, that he lived in the infancy of our poetry, and that nothing is brought to perfection at the firft. We must be children before we grow men. There was an Ennius, and in procefs of time a Lucilius, and a Lucretius, before Virgil and Horace; even after Chaucer there was a Spenfer, a Harrington, a Fairfax, before Waller and Denham were in being and our numbers were in their nonage till these laft appeared. I need fay little of his parentage, life, and fortunes they are to be found at large in all the editions of his works. He was employed abroad, and favoured by Edward the Third, Richard the Second, and Henry the Fourth, and was poet, as I fuppofe, to all three of them. In Richard's time, I doubt, he was a little dipt in the rehellion of the commons; and being brother-in-law to John of Graunt, it was no wonder if he followed the fortunes of that family; and was well with Henry the Fourth when he had depofed his predeceffor. Neither is it to be admired, that Henry, who was a wife as well as a valiant prince, who claimed by fucceffion, and was fenfible that his title was not found, but was rightfully in Mortimer, who had married the heir of York; it was not to be admired, I say, if that great politician fhould be pleafed to have the greatest greatest wit of those times in his interefts, and to be the trumpet of his praifes. Auguftus had given him the example, by the advice of Mecenas, who recommended Virgil and Horace to him; whofe praises helped to make him popular while he was alive, and after his death have made him precious to pofterity. As for the religion of our poet, he feems to have fome little bias towards the opinions of Wickliff, after John of Gaunt his patron; fomewhat of which appears in the tale of Piers Plowman yet I cannot blame him for inveighing fo fharply against the vices of the clergy in his age: their pride, their ambition, their pomp, their avarice, their worldly interest, deserved the lashes which he gave them, both in that, and in most of his Canterbury tales: neither has his contemporary Boccace spared them. Yet both those poets lived in much esteem with good and holy men in orders for the fcandal which is given by particular priefts, reflects not on the facred function. Chaucer's Monk, his Chanon, and his Fryer, took not from the character of his Good Parfon. A fatyrical poet is the check of the laymen, on bad priests. We are only to take care, that we involve not the innocent with the guilty in the fame condemnation. The good cannot be too much honoured, nor the bad too coarfely used for the corruption of the best becomes the worst. When a clergyman is whipped, his gown is first taken off, by which the dignity of his order is secured : if he be wrongfully accufed, he has his action of flander; and it is at the poet's peril, if he tranfgrefs the law. But they will tell us, that all kind of satire, though never fo fo well deferved by particular priests, yet brings the whole order into contempt. Is then the peerage of England any thing difhonoured, when a peer suffers for his treafon? If he be libeled, or any way defamed, he has his "Scandalum Magnatum" to punish the offender. They, who use this kind of argument, seem to be confcious to themfelves of fomewhat which has deferved the poet's lash, and are lefs concerned for their public capacity, than for their private; at least there is pride at the bottom of their reafoning. If the faults of men in orders are only to be judged among themselves, they are all in fome fort parties: for, fince they fay the honour of their order is concerned in every member of it, how can we be fure, that they will be impartial judges? How far I may be allowed to speak my opinion in this cafe, I know not: but I am fure a difpute of this nature caused mischief in abundance betwixt a king of England and an archbishop of Canterbury; one standing up for the Laws of his land, and the other for the honour (as he called it) of God's Church; which ended in the murther of the prelate, and in the whipping of his majefty from poft to pillar for his penance. The learned and ingenious Dr. Drake has faved me the labour of inquiring into the esteem and reverence which the priests have had of old; and I would rather extend than diminish any part of it: yet I must needs fay, that when a priest provokes me without any occafion given him, I have no reason, unless it be the charity of a Chriftian, to forgive him. * Prior læfit" is juftification fufficient in the Civil Law." If I anfwer him in his own language, felf-defence, I am sure, must be allowed me; and if I carry it farther, even to a sharp recrimination, fomewhat may be indulged to human frailty. Yet my refentment has not wrought fo far, but that I have followed Chaucer in his character of a holy man, and have enlarged on that fubject with fome pleasure, referving to myself the right, if I fhall think fit hereafter, to describe another fort of priests, fuch as are more easily to be found than the good parfon; fuch as have given the last blow to Christianity in this age, by a practice so contrary to their doctrine. But this will keep cold till another time. In the mean while, I take up Chaucer where I left him. He must have been a man of a most wonderful comprehenfive nature, because, as it has been truly obferved of him, he has taken into the compass of his Canterbury tales the various manners and humours (as we now call them) of the whole English nation, in his age. Not a fingle character has escaped him. All his pilgrims are feverally diftinguished from each other; and not only in their inclinations, but in their very phyfiognomies and perfons. Baptifta Porta could not have described their natures better, than by the marks which the poet gives them. The matter and manner of their tales, and of their telling, are so fuited to their different educations, humours, and callings, that each of them would be improper in any other mouth. Even the grave and serious characters are distinguished by their feveral forts of gravity: their difcourfes are fuch as belong to their age, their calling, and their breeding; |