grave and serious characters are
distinguished by their several sorts of gravity. Their discourses are
such as belong to their age, their calling, and their breeding,--such as
are becoming of them, and of them only. Some of his persons are vicious,
and some virtuous; some are unlearned, or, as Chaucer calls them, lewd,
and some are learned. Even the ribaldry of the low characters is
different. The reeve, the miller, and the cook are several men, and
distinguished from each other as much as the mincing lady prioress, and
the broad-speaking, gap-toothed wife of Bath. We have our forefathers,
and great grand-dames all before us, as they were in Chaucer's days.
Their general characters are still remaining in mankind, and even in
England, though they are called by other names than those of monks and
friars, and canons, and lady abesses, and nuns: for mankind is ever the
same, and nothing lost out of nature, though everything is altered."
There were two classes of readers who exclaimed against the attempt to
renovate the original,--those who held that it was too bad to be
reproduced, and those who considered it too excellent to be remodelled
without being spoiled. "I find," writes Dryden, "some people are
offended that I have turned these tales into modern English, because
they think them unworthy of my pains, and look on Chaucer as a dry,
old-fashioned wit, not worth reviving. I have often heard the late Earl
of Leicester say that Mr. Cowley himself was of that opinion, who having
read him over at my lord's request, declared he had no taste of him.
Being shocked perhaps with his old style, he never examined into the
depth of his good sense. Chaucer, I confess, is a rough diamond, and
must first be polished ere he shines. But there are other judges who
think I ought not to have translated him into English out of a quite
contrary notion. They suppose there is a certain veneration due to his
old language, and that it is little less than profanation and sacrilege
to alter it. They are further of opinion that somewhat of his good sense
will suffer in the transfusion, and much of the beauty of his thoughts
will infallibly be lost, which appear with more grace in their old
habit. Of this opinion was the Earl of Leicester, who valued Chaucer as
much as Mr. Cowley despised him." Dryden replied that his version was
only intended for those to whom the original was unintelligible, and
while allowing that the original was superior to the c