[27] The great value of this MS., which is on parchment, and in perfect condition, is proved by a curious endorsement on the last page, dated 1336, to the effect that one Jordan Capella obtained on it a loan of fifteen ‘_livres tournois_,’ by no means an inconsiderable sum in those days. [28] The poem is written in tirades, or paragraphs of varying lengths, bound together by the same rhyme. At the end of each tirade there is a short line which, in the second portion of the poem, is, as a rule, literally repeated in the first line of the following tirade, while in the first part it only anticipates its rhyme. This difference is the chief metrical evidence against the one-author theory. [29] The degree of nobility between the Viscount and the simple Baron. [30] Grave doubts have recently been thrown on the authenticity of this poem. Into these I cannot enter here. But it seems strange that the bearing of the reality or fictitiousness of the ‘courts of love’ on the mooted point should have been entirely overlooked. Chaucer’s visit to France (1359) coincides with the time when amateur judges and juries deciding questions of gallantry were all the rage, and these might very well have suggested to him the symbolical machinery of the poem. But of course the intrinsic probability of Chaucer having written _a_ poem on the ‘Court of Love’ does not amount to much compared with the philological arguments of Mr. Skeat (see ‘Athenæum,’ November 4, 1876). At the same time it seems surprising that neither he nor Mr. Furnivall is apparently acquainted with the historical controversy on the point, in spite of Diez’s admirable work, and of the paper I wrote on the subject in a monthly periodical. If this is true of scholars, what can be expected of the general reader? At this rate the ‘courts of love’ may protract their spurious existence for another century or so—in England at least. [31] The reader interested in these matters may find some account of Andreas’ book in the pretty little edition of Chaucer for which Mr. Robert Bell is responsible (vol. iv. pp. 116 _et passim_). All the absurd stories of the Chaplain the ingenuous editor accepts as gospel truth. Queen Eleanor, Richard Cœur de Lion, and other worthies are named as the presidents of these amorous parliaments, of which the world knew nothing till hundreds of years after their deaths. Several of the _arrêts d’amour_ are quoted, and the power of the court is said to have extended even to the assessing of pecuniary damages and the inflicting of corporal punishment. This _naïveté_ is the more touching on Mr. Bell’s part, as, unlike Mr. Furnivall and Mr. Skeat, he is acquainted with Diez’s pamphlet. But his faith is proof against the most trenchant criticism. [32] Westphal, _Fragmente und Lehrsätze der griechischen Rhythmiker_, pp. 14, 101. [33] _Sat._ 1. i. 28. [34] _Ars Poet._ 99. [35] _Ars Poet._ 139. [36] _Epist._ 1. xiv. 7.