On p. 72, again, it is said that, in F 1273, Chaucer rimes the pt. t. _broght-e_ with _nought_, i.e. he uses the incorrect form _broght_. This charge, for once, is quite true, and it is as well to say at once, that Chaucer's rimes are not _quite_ immaculate; but his sins of this description are not, after all, very numerous, and not by any means so numerous as Prof. Lounsbury, for the purpose of his argument, would have us believe. The only right method is to make out a fair list, without straining to make it much worse than it should be. s. 48. In his Studies, vol. i. pp. 402-5, Prof. Lounsbury makes another attack upon the unfortunate poet's rimes. Many of his instances are wrong; so much so, that four of Chaucer's supposed errors and two of Gower's are admitted to be no errors in vol. iii. 453. It would have been well if all the rest of the charges had been withdrawn at the same time. I here draw attention to them accordingly. 'In Parl. Foules, 121, the preterite _broughte_ rymes with the pp. _wrought_.' Answer; the rimes are: _broght-e_, _y-wroght-e_, _thoght-e_; the form _y-wroghte_ occurs in the phrase 'with lettres large y-wroghte,' where _y-wroghte_ is treated as a plural adjective; and there is no error at all. 'In Troilus, i. 463, the pp. _fled_ rymes with the preterite _bredde_.' As before, the phrase is: 'Alle othere dredes weren from him _fledde_.' Here _fledde_ is treated as a plural adjective, and there is no error at all. One would have thought that Chaucer knew something of the language of his time. 'In Troilus, ii. 1079, the pp. _excused_ [rimes] with the preterite _accusede_.' But the preterite of _accusen_ was _accused_; the addition of the full suffix _-ede_ is rare, and chiefly confined to monosyllabic roots. 'In Troil. iv. 1422, the pp. _sprad_ [rimes] with the preterite _hadde_' The line ends, 'with herte and eres _spradde_'; where _spradde_ is treated as a plural adjective. No error. 'In Troil. v. 1758, the preterite _mette_ [rimes] with the pp. _whet_.' It is the same story; the phrase is 'hir speres weren _whette_.' No error. 'In the Legend, 786, the preterite _heryede_ rymes with the pp. _beryed_.' As the usual preterite was _heryed_ (_h['e]r-y-ed-e_ being too cumbrous and almost unpronounceable), there is no error. 'In the Legend, 2384, the pp. _served_ [rimes] with the preterite _deservede_' But the preterite was _deserved_. The full ending _-ede_ was seldom added to roots of more than one syllable, least of all when the verb happened to be of French origin. By ignoring the habits of the language of Chaucer's time, such objections might have been largely multiplied; it is surprising to find that so few have been noted. 'In the Knightes Tale, A 2343, the preterite _signifyede_ rymes with the pp. _cried_.' However, the preterite was _signifyed_.