But the intelligent genius who shaped the Arthuriad has escaped this danger, and that not merely by the simple process which Dryden, with his placid irony, somewhere describes as "leaving scarce three of the characters alive." We have reached, and feel that we have reached, the conclusion of the whole matter when the Graal has been taken to Heaven, and Arthur has gone to Avalon. Nobody wants to hear anything of the doubtless excellent Duke and King Constantine. Sir Ector himself could not leave the stage with more grace than with his great discourse on his dead comrade and kinsman. Lancelot's only son has gone with the Graal. The end is not violent or factitious, it is necessary and inevitable. It were even less unwise to seek the grave of Arthur than to attempt to take up the story of the Arthurians after king and queen and Lancelot are gone each to his and her own place, after the Graal is attained, after the Round Table is dissolved. It is creditable to the intelligence and taste of the average mediaeval romance-writer that even he did not yield to his besetting sin in this particular instance. With the exception of _Ysaie le Triste_, which deals with the fortunes of a supposed son of Tristan and Yseult, and thus connects itself with the most outlying part of the legend--a part which, as has been shown, is only hinged on to it--I cannot remember a single romance which purports to deal with affairs subsequent to the battle in Lyonesse. The two latest that can be in any way regarded as Arthurian, _Arthur of Little Britain_ and _Cleriodus_, avowedly take up the story long subsequently, and only claim for their heroes the glory of distant descent from Arthur and his heroes. _Meliadus de Lyonnois_ ascends from Tristram, and endeavours to connect the matter of Britain with that of France. _Giron le Courtois_ deals with Palamedes and the earlier Arthurian story; while _Perceforest_, though based on the _Brut_, selects periods anterior to Arthur.[60] [Footnote 60: I have a much less direct acquaintance with the romances mentioned in this paragraph than with most of the works referred to in this book. I am obliged to speak of them at second-hand (chiefly from Dunlop and Mr Ward's invaluable _Catalogue of Romances_, vol. i. 1883; vol. ii. 1893). It is one of the results of the unlucky fancy of scholars for re-editing already accessible texts instead of devoting themselves to _anecdota_, that work of the first interest, like _Perceforest_, for instance, is left to black-letter, which, not to mention its costliness, is impossible to weak eyes; even where it is not left to manuscript, which is more impossible still.] [Sidenote: _Latin episodes._]