is not known what is the nature of its meat and its fish.' It is
very well to say that these assertions 'we may fairly ascribe to the
poetic fancy of a Christian priest of the thirteenth century.'
Certainly we may; the last of Taliesin's assertions more especially;
though one must remark at the same time that the Welshman shows much
more fire and imagination than the Anglo-Saxon. But Taliesin adds,
after his: 'I was in Canaan when Absalom was slain,' 'I WAS IN THE
HALL OF DON BEFORE GWYDION WAS BORN;' he adds, after: 'I was chief
overseer at the building of the tower of Nimrod,' 'I HAVE BEEN THREE
TIMES RESIDENT IN THE CASTLE OF ARIANROD;' he adds, after: 'I was at
the cross with Mary Magdalene,' 'I OBTAINED MY INSPIRATION FROM THE
CAULDRON OF CERIDWEN.' And finally, after the mediaeval touch of the
visit to the buttery in the land of the Trinity, he goes off at
score: 'I have been instructed in the whole system of the universe;
I shall be till the day of judgment on the face of the earth. I have
been in an uneasy chair above Caer Sidin, and the whirling round
without motion between three elements. Is it not the wonder of the
world that cannot be discovered?' And so he ends the poem. But here
is the Celtic, the essential part of the poem: it is here that the
'formative pressure' has been really in operation; and here surely is
paganism and mythology enough, which the Christian priest of the
thirteenth century can have had nothing to do with. It is
unscientific, no doubt, to interpret this part as Edward Davies and
Mr. Herbert do; but it is unscientific also to get rid of it as Mr.
Nash does. Wales and the Welsh genius are not to be known without
this part; and the true critic is he who can best disengage its real
significance.

I say, then, what we want is to KNOW the Celt and his genius; not to
exalt him or to abase him, but to know him. And for this a