صفحة 4 من 274

Aesop may have been a fiction like Uncle Remus: he was also, like

Uncle Remus, a fact. It is a fact that slaves in the old world

could be worshipped like Aesop, or loved like Uncle Remus. It is

odd to note that both the great slaves told their best stories

about beasts and birds.

But whatever be fairly due to Aesop, the human tradition called

Fables is not due to him. This had gone on long before any

sarcastic freedman from Phrygia had or had not been flung off a

precipice; this has remained long after. It is to our advantage,

indeed, to realise the distinction; because it makes Aesop more

obviously effective than any other fabulist. Grimm's Tales,

glorious as they are, were collected by two German students. And

if we find it hard to be certain of a German student, at least we

know more about him than We know about a Phrygian slave. The

truth is, of course, that Aesop's Fables are not Aesop's fables,

any more than Grimm's Fairy Tales were ever Grimm's fairy tales.

But the fable and the fairy tale are things utterly distinct.

There are many elements of difference; but the plainest is plain

enough. There can be no good fable with human beings in it. There

can be no good fairy tale without them.