lity, on one point alone I shall venture an observation. Amongst
the many objections justly urged to the very indifferent character of
the "vagrant Childe" (whom, notwithstanding many hints to the contrary,
I still maintain to be a fictitious personage), it has been stated,
that, besides the anachronism, he is very _unknightly_, as the times of
the Knights were times of Love, Honour, and so forth.[6] Now it so
happens that the good old times, when "l'amour du bon vieux tems,
l'amour antique," flourished, were the most profligate of all possible
centuries. Those who have any doubts on this subject may consult
Sainte-Palaye, _passim_, and more particularly vol. ii. p. 69.[7] The
vows of chivalry were no better kept than any other vows whatsoever; and
the songs of the Troubadours were not more decent, and certainly were
much less refined, than those of Ovid. The "Cours d'Amour, parlemens
d'amour, ou de courtoisie et de gentilesse" had much more of love than
of courtesy or gentleness. See Rolland[8] on the same subject with
Sainte-Palaye.

Whatever other objection may be urged to that most unamiable personage
Childe Harold, he was so far perfectly knightly in his attributes--"No
waiter, but a knight templar."[9] By the by, I fear that Sir Tristrem
and Sir Lancelot were no better than they should be, although very
poetical personages and true knights, "sans peur," though not "sans
reproche." If the story of the institution of the "Garter" be not a
fable, the knights of that order have for several centuries borne the
badge of a Countess of Salisbury, of indifferent memory. So much for
chivalry. Burke need not have regretted that its days are over, though
Marie-Antoinette was quite as chaste as most of those in whose honour
lances were shivered, and knights unhorsed.[10]

Before the days of Bayard, and down to those of Sir Joseph Banks[11]
(the most chaste and celebrated of ancient and modern times) few
exceptions will be found to this statement; and I fear a little
investigation will teach us not to regret these monstrous mummeries of
the middle ages.

I now leave "Childe Harold" to live his day such as he is; it had been
more agreeable, and certainly more easy, to have drawn an amiable
character. It had been easy to varnish over his faults, to make him do
more and express less, but he never was intended as an example, further
than to show, that early perversion of mind and morals leads to satiety
of past pleasures and dis