the editor of Sir Tristrem, which we had occasion to consider in our review of that volume.* Upon this hypothesis, it is curious to observe, that as the earliest French romances were written in England, so the earliest English romances were composed in Scotland. each We heartily wish Mr. Ellis had continued his dissertation on the materials of our metrical romance to a later period, as we have not seen a more clear and comprehensive view of the subject, so far as it goes. This desideratum is, however, in part supplied by the arrangement of his romances into classes, with the general preliminary remarks upon class. The appendix to the introduction contains an account of Petrus Alphonsus de clericali disciplina, by Mr. Douce, an industrious and ingenious antiquary; and, secondly, a translation by Mr. Ellis of the Breton lais of Marie, twelve in number, exhibiting much of that genius for romantic fiction, which has been always an attribute of the Celtic tribes. We would willingly extract one of them for our readers' amusement; but are obliged to hasten to the metrical romances, which are the principal object of the collection. The first class comprehends romances relating to King Arthur. These, as we have already seen, are probably the earliest in order, and although once most popular and nume. rous, are now become, in their metrical shape, exceedingly rare; because their very popularity rendered them the first objects of imitation to the prose authors, whose works superseded those of the minstrels. One romance of formidable length has been still preserved in MS., and forms the first article of Mr. Ellis's work. It is called Merlin and Arthur, and resumes the account of these worthies, from their birth to the marriage of Arthur, when the transcriber of one fragment resigned his task, after having copied 10,000 lines. This is a romance in the very best style of minstrelsy, so far as language, and even incident, are concerned. The marvellous birth of Merlin, surreptitiously begotten by a fiend upon a maiden, under the most extraordinary cir cumstances, is one of those feats of witchery which arrest the imagination. The mother is condemned to death by a rigid law of the British against such as infringed the rules of chastity. But Blaise, a holy hermit, by christening the * [In the Edinburgh Review, vol. iv.-The criticism referred to was written by Mr. Ellis.] child at the instant of its birth, baffles the hopes of the devil, who had expected, by means of engendering with a virgin, to create a semi-demon, who should be devoted to the powers of evil. "The good man then returned with his infernal proselyte, and restored him by means of the basket to the midwife; who, carrying him to the fire, and surveying his rough hide with horror and astonishment, could not refrain from reproaching him for his unreasonable choice of a mother who had never taken the usual means to have a child. 666 Alas,' she said, art thou Merlin? * Whence. * Time. *Raised suddenly-with a start. * Loathingly. I shall save her life for this. * Kill. Vol. i, p. 213, 214. We have no time to stop to trace the completion of this promise, nor the rest of Arthur's history, which Mr. Ellis has taken from a poetical account of his achieve. ments and death, occurring in the Museum. The downfall of the chivalry of the Round Table was completed by the death of Sir Lancelot, its most redoubted supporter. Mr Ellis transcribes from the Morte Arthur the following eulogium over that hero, which may be said to comprehend the cardinal virtues of a preux chevalier. "And now I dare say-that Sir Lancelot, ther thou lyest, thou were never matched of none earthly knight's hands. And thou were the curteist knight that ever bare shielde. And thou were the truest freende to thy lover that ever bestrode horse. And thou were the truest lover of a synful man, that ever loved woman. And thou were the kindest man that ever stroke with swerde. And thou were the goodliest person that ever came amonge prece (press) of knyghtes. And thou were the meekest man and the gentillest that ever eate in hal among ladies. And thou were the sternest knight to thy mortall foe that ever put spere in the rest!" -Vol. i, p. 386, 387. The next class comprehends what Mr. Ellis has ventured to call Saxon Romances; that is, romances referring to Saxon subjects, and claiming, perhaps, some foundation in the history of that people. Horn-Child, which bears the most decided marks of Saxon origin, is omitted, as already published by Mr. Ritson, in an entire state; but we could have wished Mr. Ellis had extended his criticism to that poem, or favoured us with some general remarks upon the romance of the Anglo-Saxons. Guy of Warwick, and Bevis of Hamptoun, occupy this station entirely. The first is a very long romance, and in general as dull as may be, with even more than the usual huge proportion of battles and tournaments. Yet it may be read with pleasure in Mr. Ellis's abridgement, though the original would have defied the patience of most antiquaries. The combat betwixt Guy and Colbrond the Danish champion, is told in a more animated strain, and in a different stanza. We suspect that this is the only part of the romance which has any claim to a Saxon origin, and that all the rest has been added by some minstrel after the crusades. Mr. Ellis seems disposed to identify the redoubted Sir Guy with Egils a Norwegian pirate, who assisted Athelstan at the battle of Brunnanburgh. The Egils-saga, which contains an account of that chief's adventures, affords no countenance to this conjecture, which we incline to consider as fanciful. Bevis of Hamptoun resembles Guy of Warwick, but is of a far ruder and apparently more ancient manufacture. There is a harshness and barbarous tinge about this poem, which bespeaks its being composed in a very rude state of society, or for the amusement of the lower ranks; two points which it is sometimes very difficult to distinguish. Notwithstanding their demerits, Guy of Warwick, and Bevis of Hamptoun, equalled, or excelled in popularity, almost all the romances of the middle ages. The next is entitled an Anglo-Norman Romance, and contains the adventures of no less a person than Richard Cœur de Lion. It has for many reasons, great claims on our attention. In the first place, it tends to show the pro gress from metrical history to metrical romance; for, in its more ancient and simple state, as a fragment still exists in the Auchinleck Manuscript, it appears to have contained little more than an historical detail, not much exaggerated, of the actual transactions of Richard in the Holy Land. But the inventions of succeeding minstrels have grafted upon the original narrative a number of extraordinary and supernatural events of the wildest and most romantic kind, in order to render it more astonishing or interesting to their hearers. There is, in particular, a minute account of a marriage betwixt Henry II and an unknown Princess, by whom he had three children, namely, Richard, John, and a daughter unknown to our genealogists, called Topyas. This queen of England being a fiend, or something very little better, was unable to be present at any of the sacraments; and being once compelled to remain till the elevation of the host took place, she made an elopement through the roof of the chapel, carrying with her Topyas and John. The latter fell from the air, and broke his thigh bone; the mother escaped with the former, and was never more seen. The legend thus engrafted upon the English history, is taken from an event said to have happened to Count Fulk of Anjou, often alluded to by our Scottish historians as a proof, that, by one side of the house, the kings of England were descended from the devil. Perhaps, however, the minstrel hinted a satire at Eleanor of Guienne, who was, in fact, a sort of devil incarnate. Of this fiendish parentage, according to the romance, came that "King y-christened of most renown, The feat by which he gained this well-known appellation is supposed to have happened during his confinement in the Austrian dominions, where he slew the Emperor's son by a box on the ear. The Emperor having scruples to accomblish his revenge, by dipping his hands in the royal blood of his prisoner, contented himself with introducing into Richard's company a hungry lion, under the conviction that he was guiltless of all consequences which might ensue from their meeting. Richard, who had armed his hand with a few ells of handkerchiefs, the gift of a loving princess, plunged it down the throat of the monster, tore out his heart, devoured it before the face of the Emperor, and thus acquired an ample title to the name by which he is known in history. Amid this wild farrago, there occurs a minute incident of truth, which has escaped our historians. It seems pretty clear that Richard, while travelling in disguise through Austria, amused himself with dressing his own dinner, with some assistance from Sir Foulk Doyley and Sir Thomas Multon (the ancestors of the Dacres of Dacre). While these three warriors were busied in roasting a goose, they were teazed by an intrusive female minstrel, whom they rudely dismissed, without allowing her to share their good cheer. In consequence, she betrayed them to the Duke of Austria. This strange anecdote is alluded to by Petrus d'Elrilo, a writer of the twelfth century, and by Otho de Saint Blaise, who maintains, that Richard himself turned the spit, forgetful that he wore a ring which announced the rank of the wearer to be far superior to his occupation. So strangely are truth and falsehood woven together in this curious performance. But this romance is also valuable, as a curious example of the change for the worse which the religious wars introduced into the European character. In the earlier romances, the heroes are no doubt sufficiently savage; they shed much blood in battle, and are determined enemies to giants and wizards. But the cause of these military exertions is generally one with which we can sympathize; the deliverance of a fair lady, the righting of a wrong done to the helpless, or the supporting the tottering throne of a monarch. A certain generosity is also mingled in their valour; and they are generally as ready to forgive and spare the vanquished, as to quell the vaunting and resisting enemy. But the crusader discarded from his bosom all that was amiable and mild in the spirit of chivalry. He fought for the cause of God against unchristian heathen hounds, and had neither authority nor inclination to forgive their wrongs to Heaven, as he might have pardoned those offered to himself. This romance contains a lively detail of the bloody cruelties practised by the champions of Palestine upon an enemy. The following extraordinary specimen of what crusaders were supposed capable of performing, although totally fabulous, shows the idea which the minstrels conceived of such a cha |