they are not an epic； but a series of heroic idyllia of the same
genre as the heroic idyllia of Theocritus。 He wrote long after the
natural age of national epic； the age of Homer。 He saw the later
literary epic rise in the Argonautica of Apollonius Rhodius； a poem
with many beauties； if rather an archaistic and elaborate revival as
a whole。 The time for long narrative poems； Theocritus appears to
have thought； was past； and he only ventured on the heroic idyllia of
Heracles； and certain adventures of the Argonauts。 Tennyson； too；
from the first believed that his pieces ought to be short。
Therefore； though he had a conception of his work as a whole； a
conception long mused on； and sketched in various lights； he produced
no epic； only a series of epic idyllia。 He had a spiritual
conception； 〃an allegory in the distance；〃 an allegory not to be
insisted upon； though its presence was to be felt。 No longer； as in
youth； did Tennyson intend Merlin to symbolise 〃the sceptical
understanding〃 （as if one were to 〃break into blank the gospel of〃
Herr Kant）； or poor Guinevere to stand for the Blessed Reformation；
or the Table Round for Liberal Institutions。 Mercifully Tennyson
never actually allegorised Arthur in that fashion。 Later he thought
of a musical masque of Arthur； and sketched a scenario。 Finally
Tennyson dropped both the allegory of Liberal principles and the
musical masque in favour of the series of heroic idylls。 There was
only a 〃parabolic drift〃 in the intention。 〃There is no single fact
or incident in the Idylls； however seemingly mystical； which cannot
be explained without any mystery or allegory whatever。 The Idylls
ought to be read （and the right readers never dream of doing anything
else） as romantic poems； just like Browning's Childe Roland； in which
the wrong readers （the members of the Browning Society） sought for
mystic mountains and marvels。 Yet Tennyson had his own
interpretation； 〃a dream of man coming into practical life and ruined
by one sin。〃 That was his 〃interpretation；〃 or 〃allegory in the
distance。〃
People may be heard objecting to the suggestion of any spiritual
interpretation of the Arthur legends； and even to the existence of
elementary morality among the Arthurian knights and ladies。 There
seems to be a notion that 〃bold bawdry and open manslaughter；〃 as
Roger Ascham said； are the staple of Tennyson's sources； whether in
the mediaeval French； the Welsh； or in Malory's compilation； chiefly
from French sources。 Tennyson is accused of 〃Bowdlerising〃 these；
and of introducing gentleness； courtesy； and conscience into a
literature where such qualities were unknown。 I must confess 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 knight that ever bare shield； 。 。 。 and
thou wast the meekest man and the gentlest that ever ate in hall
among ladies。〃 Observe Sir Lancelot in the difficult pass where the
Lily Maid offers her love： 〃Jesu defend me； for then I rewarded your
father and your brother full evil for their great goodness。 。 。 。
But because； fair damsel； that ye love me as ye say ye do； I will；
for your good will and kindness； show you some goodness； 。 。 。 and
always while I live to be your true knight。〃 Here are 〃amiable words
and courtesy。〃 I cannot agree with Mr Harrison that Malory's book is
merely 〃a fierce lusty epic。〃 That was not the opinion of its
printer and publisher； Caxton。 He produced it as an example of 〃the
gentle and virtuous deeds that some knights used in these days； 。 。 。
noble and renowned acts of humanity； gentleness； and chivalry。 For
herein may be seen noble chivalry； courtesy； humanity； friendliness；
love； cowardice； murder； hate； virtue； and sin。 Do after the good
and leave the evil。〃
In reaction against the bold…faced heroines and sensual amours of
some of the old French romances； an ideal of exaggerated asceticism；
of stainless chastity； notoriously pervades the portion of Malory's
work which deals with the Holy Grail。 Lancelot is distraught when he
finds that； by dint of enchantment； he has been made false to
Guinevere （Book XI。 chap。 viii。） After his dreaming vision of the
Holy Grail； with the reproachful Voice； Sir Lancelot said； 〃My sin
and my wickedness have brought me great dishonour； 。 。 。 and now I
see and understand that my old sin hindereth and shameth me。〃 He was
human； the Lancelot of Malory； and 〃fell to his old love again；〃 with
a heavy heart； and with long penance at the end。 How such good
knights can be deemed conscienceless and void of courtesy one knows
not； except by a survival of the Puritanism of Ascham。 But Tennyson
found in the book what is in the bookhonour； conscience； courtesy；
and the hero …
〃Whose honour rooted in dishonour stood；
And faith unfaithful kept him falsely true。〃
Malory's book； which was Tennyson's chief source； ends by being the
tragedy of the conscience of Lancelot。 Arthur is dead； or 〃In Avalon
he groweth old。〃 The Queen and Lancelot might sing； as Lennox
reports that Queen Mary did after Darnley's murder …
〃Weel is me
For I am free。〃
〃Why took they not their pastime？〃 Because conscience forbade； and
Guinevere sends her lover far from her； and both die in religion。
Thus Malory's 〃fierce lusty epic〃 is neither so lusty nor so fierce
but that it gives Tennyson his keynote： the sin that breaks the fair
companionship； and is bitterly repented。
〃The knights are almost too polite to kill each other；〃 the critic
urges。 In Malory they are sometimes quite too polite to kill each
other。 Sir Darras has a blood…feud against Sir Tristram； and Sir
Tristram is in his dungeon。 Sir Darras said； 〃Wit ye well that Sir
Darras shall never destroy such a noble knight as thou art in prison；
howbeit that thou hast slain three of my sons； whereby I was greatly
aggrieved。 But now shalt thou go and thy fellows。 。 。 。 All that ye
did；〃 said Sir Darras； 〃was by force of knighthood； and that was the
cause I would not put you to death〃 （Book IX。 chap。 xl。）
Tennyson is accused of 〃emasculating the fierce lusty epic into a
moral lesson； as if it were to be performed in a drawing…room by an
academy of young ladies〃presided over； I daresay； by 〃Anglican
clergymen。〃 I know not how any one who has read the Morte d'Arthur
can blame Tennyson in the matter。 Let Malory and his sources be
blamed； if to be moral is to be culpable。 A few passages apart；
there is no coarseness in Malory； that there are conscience；
courtesy； 〃sweet lives；〃 〃keeping down the base in man；〃 〃amiable
words；〃 and all that Tennyson gives； and； in Mr Harrison's theory；
gives without authority in the romance； my quotations from Malory
demonstrate。 They are chosen at a casual opening of his book。 That
there 〃had not arisen in the world〃 〃the idea of reverencing
conscience〃 before the close of the fifteenth century A。D。 is an
extraordinary statement for a critic of history to offer。
Mr Harrison makes his protest because 〃in the conspiracy of silence
into which Tennyson's just fame has hypnotised the critics； it is
bare honesty to admit defects。〃 I think I am not hypnotised； and I
do not regard the Idylls as the crown of Tennyson's work。 But it is
not his 〃defect〃 to have introduced generosity； gentleness；
conscience； and chastity where no such things occur in his sources。
Take Sir Darras： his position is that of Priam when he meets
Achilles； who slew his sons； except that Priam comes as a suppliant；
Sir Darras has Tristram in his hands； and may s