The Life of Lord Byron
Chapter XLVI
CHAPTER XLVI.
Lord Byron appointed to the command of three thousand men to besiege
Lepanto.—The siege abandoned for a blockade.—Advanced guard ordered to
proceed.—Lord Byron’s first illness.—A
riot.—He is urged to leave Greece.—The expedition against Lepanto
abandoned.—Byron dejected.—A wild diplomatic scheme.
Three days after the conversation related in the preceding chapter,
Byron was officially placed in the command of about
three thousand men, destined for the attack on Lepanto; but the Suliotes remained refractory,
and refused to quit their quarters; his Lordship, however, employed an argument which proved
effectual. He told them that if they did not obey his commands, he would discharge them from
his service.
But the impediments were not to be surmounted; in less than a week it was
formally reported to Byron that Missolonghi could not
furnish the means of undertaking the siege of Lepanto, upon which his Lordship proposed that
Lepanto should be only blockaded by two thousand men. Before any actual step was, however,
taken, two spies came in with a report that the Albanians in garrison at Lepanto had seized the
citadel, and were determined to surrender it to his Lordship. Still the expedition lingered; at
last, on the 14th of February, six weeks after Byron’s arrival at
Missolonghi, it was determined that an advanced guard of three hundred soldiers, under the
command of Count Gamba, should march for Lepanto, and
that
Lord Byron, with the main body, should follow. The Suliotes were, however,
still exorbitant, calling for fresh contributions for themselves and their families. His
troubles were increasing, and every new rush of the angry tide rose nearer and nearer his
heart; still his fortitude enabled him to preserve an outward show of equanimity. But, on the
very day after the determination had been adopted, to send forward the advanced guard, his
constitution gave way.
He was sitting in Colonel
Stanhope’s room, talking jestingly, according to his wonted manner, with
Captain Parry, when his eyes and forehead
occasionally discovered that he was agitated by strong feelings. On a sudden he complained of a
weakness in one of his legs; he rose, but finding himself unable to walk, called for
assistance; he then fell into a violent nervous convulsion, and was placed upon a bed: while
the fit lasted, his face was hideously distorted; but in the course of a few minutes the
convulsion ceased, and he began to recover his senses: his speech returned, and he soon rose,
apparently well. During the struggle his strength was preternaturally augmented, and when it
was over, he behaved with his usual firmness. “I conceive,” says
Colonel Stanhope, “that this fit was occasioned by
over-excitement. The mind of Byron is like a volcano; it
is full of fire, wrath, and combustibles, and when this matter comes to be strongly
agitated, the explosion is dreadful. With respect to the causes which produced the excess
of feeling, they are beyond my reach, except one great cause, the provoking conduct of the
Suliotes.”
A few days after this distressing incident, a new occurrence arose, which
materially disturbed the tranquillity of Byron. A Suliote,
accompanied by the son, a little boy, of Marco Botzaris,
with another man, walked into the Seraglio, a kind of citadel, which had been used as a barrack
for the Suliotes, and out of
which they had been ejected with difficulty,
when it was required for the reception of stores and the establishment of a laboratory. The
sentinel ordered them back, but the Suliote advanced. The sergeant of the guard, a German,
pushed him back. The Suliote struck the sergeant; they closed and struggled. The Suliote drew
his pistol; the German wrenched it from him, and emptied the pan. At this moment a Swedish
adventurer, Captain Sass, seeing the quarrel, ordered the
Suliote to be taken to the guard-room. The Suliote would have departed, but the German still
held him. The Swede drew his sabre; the Suliote his other pistol. The Swede struck him with the
flat of his sword; the Suliote unsheathed his ataghan, and nearly cut off the left arm of his
antagonist, and then shot him through the head. The other Suliotes would not deliver up their
comrade, for he was celebrated among them for distinguished bravery. The workmen in the
laboratory refused to work: they required to be sent home to England, declaring, they had come
out to labour peaceably, and not to be exposed to assassination. These untoward occurrences
deeply vexed Byron, and there was no mind of sufficient energy with him to
control the increasing disorders. But, though convinced, as indeed he had been persuaded from
the beginning in his own mind, that he could not render any assistance to the cause beyond
mitigating the ferocious spirit in which the war was conducted, his pride and honour would not
allow him to quit Greece.
In a letter written soon after his first attack, he says, “I am a
good deal better, though of course weakly. The leeches took too much blood from my temples
the day after, and there was some difficulty in stopping it; but I have been up daily, and
out in boats or on horseback. To-day I have taken a warm bath, and live as temperately as
can well be, without any liquid but water, and without any animal food;” then ad-
verting to the turbulences of the Suliotes, he adds, “but I
still hope better things, and will stand by the cause as long as my health and
circumstances will permit me to be supposed useful.” Subsequently, when pressed to
leave the marshy and deleterious air of Missolonghi, he replied, still more forcibly,
“I cannot quit Greece while there is a chance of my being of (even supposed) utility.
There is a stake worth millions such as I am, and while I can stand at all I must stand by
the cause. While I say this, I am aware of the difficulties, and dissensions, and defects
of the Greeks themselves; but allowance must be made for them by all reasonable
people.”
After this attack of epilepsy Lord Byron
because disinclined to pursue his scheme against Lepanto. Indeed, it may be said that in his
circumstances it was impracticable; for although the Suliotes repented of their
insubordination, they yet had an objection to the service, and said “they would not fight
against stone walls.” All thought of the expedition was in consequence abandoned, and the
destinies of poor Byron were hastening to their consummation. He began to
complain!
In speaking to Parry one day of the
Greek Committee in London, he said, “I have been grossly ill-treated by the Committee.
In Italy Mr. Blaquiere, their agent, informed me
that every requisite supply would be forwarded with all despatch. I was disposed to come to
Greece, but I hastened my departure in consequence of earnest solicitations. No time was to
be lost, I was told, and Mr. Blaquiere, instead of waiting on me at
his return from Greece, left a paltry note, which gave me no information whatever. If ever
I meet with him, I shall not fail to mention my surprise at his conduct; but it has been
all of a piece. I wish the acting Committee had had some of the trouble which has fallen on
me since my arrival here: they would have been more prompt in their proceedings, and would
have known
better what the country stood in need of. They would not
have delayed the supplies a day nor have sent out German officers, poor fellows, to starve
at Missolonghi, but for my assistance. I am a plain man, and cannot comprehend the use of
printing-presses to a people who do not read. Here the Committee have sent supplies of
maps. I suppose that I may teach the young mountaineers geography. Here are bugle-horns
without bugle-men, and it is a chance if we can find anybody in Greece to blow them. Books
are sent to people who want guns; they ask for swords, and the Committee give them the
lever of a printing-press.
“My future intentions,” continued his Lordship, “as to Greece, may be
explained in a few words. I will remain here until she is secure against the Turks, or till
she has fallen under their power. All my income shall be spent in her service; but, unless
driven by some great necessity, I will not touch a farthing of the sum intended for my
sister’s children. Whatever I can accomplish with my income, and my personal
exertions, shall be cheerfully done. When Greece is secure against external enemies, I will
leave the Greeks to settle their government as they like. One service more, and an eminent
service it will be, I think I may perform for them. You, Parry, shall have a schooner built for me, or I will buy a vessel; the
Greeks shall invest me with the character of their ambassador, or agent: I will go to the
United States, and procure that free and enlightened government to set the example of
recognising the federation of Greece as an independent state. This done, England must
follow the example, and then the fate of Greece will be permanently fixed, and she will
enter into all her rights as a member of the great commonwealth of Christian Europe.”
This intention will, to all who have ever looked at the effects of fortune on
individuals, sufficiently show that Byron’s part in
the world was nearly done. Had
he lived, and recovered health, it might
have proved that he was then only in another lunation: his first was when he passed from poesy
to heroism. But as it was, it has only served to show that his mind had suffered by the
decadency of his circumstances, and how much the idea of self-exaltation weakly entered into
all his plans. The business was secondary to the style in which it should be performed.
Building a vessel! why think of the conveyance at all? as if the means of going to America were
so scarce that there might be difficulty in finding them. But his mind was passing from him.
The intention was unsound—a fantasy—a dream of bravery in old age—begotten of
the erroneous supposition that the cabinets of Christendom would remain unconcerned spectators
of the triumph of the Greeks, or even of any very long procrastination of their struggle.
Leigh Hunt,
Lord Byron and Some of his Contemporaries (London: Henry Colburn, 1828)
An article was
written in “The Westminster
Review” (Medwin says
by Mr. Hobhouse) to show that the Conversations were altogether unworthy of
credit. There are doubtless many inaccuracies in the latter; but the spirit remains
undoubted; and the author of the criticism was only vexed, that such was the fact. He
assumes, that Lord Byron could not have made this or that statement to
Captain Medwin, because the statement was erroneous or untrue; but
an anonymous author has no right to be believed in preference to one who speaks in his own
name: there is nothing to show that Mr. Hobhouse might not have been
as mistaken about a date or an epigram as Mr. Medwin; and when we find
him giving us his own version of a fact, and Mr. Medwin asserting that
Lord Byron gave him another, the only impression left upon the
mind of any body who knew his Lordship is, that the fault most probably lay in the loose
corners of the noble Poet’s vivacity. Such is the impression made upon the author of
an unpublished Letter to Mr.
Hobhouse, which has been shown me in print; and he had a right to it. The
reviewer, to my knowledge, is mistaken upon some points, as well as the person he reviews.
The assumption, that nobody can know any thing about Lord Byron but
two or three persons who were conversant with him for a certain space of time, and whom he
spoke of with as little ceremony, and would hardly treat with more confidence than he did a
hundred others, is ludicrous; and can only end, as the criticism has done, in doing no good
either to him or them. . . .
John Galt,
“Pot versus Kettle” in Fraser’s Magazine
Vol. 2
No. 11 (December 1830)
“Dear Sir;—Amongst the
agreeable things which you say of me in your life of Lord Byron, you conjecture that I
‘condemned’
Childe Harold
previously to its publication. There is not the slightest foundation for this
supposition—nor is it true as you state, ‘that I was the only person
who had seen the poem in manuscript, as I was with Lord
Byron whilst he was writing it.’ I had left
Lord Byron before he had finished the two cantos, and,
excepting a few fragments, I had never seen them until they were printed. My own
persuasion is, that the story told in Dallas’s Recollections of some
person, name unknown, having dissuaded Lord Byron from
publishing Childe Harold, is a
mere fabrication, for it is at complete variance with all Lord
Byron himself told me on the subject. At any rate, I was not that
person; if I had been, it is not very likely that the poem which I had endeavoured
to stifle in its birth, should, in its complete, or, as Lord
Byron says, in its ‘concluded state,’ be dedicated to
me. I must, therefore, request you will take the earliest opportunity of relieving
me from this imputation, which, so far as a man can be written down by any other
author than himself, cannot fail to produce a very prejudicial effect, and to give
me more uneasiness than I think it can be your wish to inflict on any man who has
never given you provocation or excuse for injustice. . . .
John Galt,
“Pot versus Kettle” in Fraser’s Magazine
Vol. 2
No. 11 (December 1830)
I am glad to find my college
stories administered relief to your nerves, when we were together in the Malta
packet some one and twenty years ago; and I am not sorry that my wearing a red
coat at Cagliari, and cutting my finger in the quarries of Pentelicus, should
have furnished materials for your present volume; but to repay me for having
supplied these timely episodes, as well as for your copious extracts from my
travels in Albania, and also for inserting my note about Madame Guiccioli without my leave, you must
positively cancel the passage respecting Childe Harold
in page 161 of your little volume. . . .
John Galt,
“Pot versus Kettle” in Fraser’s Magazine
Vol. 2
No. 11 (December 1830)
I wonder that even common policy did not induce you to be
more cautious in making statements which might be so easily disproved, and
which have, indeed, been already incontrovertibly refuted. The very
conversation, which you have judiciously selected from Medwin, as one of those parts of his trumpery book to the truth of which you
can speak, I know to be a lie; for I never went the tour of the lake of Geneva
with Lord Byron. . . .
John Galt,
“Pot versus Kettle” in Fraser’s Magazine
Vol. 2
No. 11 (December 1830)
You tell me that your wish has
been to give only an outline of his intellectual character. I am at a loss to
understand how your gossip about him and me, and the silly anecdotes you have
copied from very discreditable authorities, can be said to be fairly comprised
in such an outline. But your plan ought certainly to have compelled you to make
yourself thoroughly acquainted with his poetry, and to quote him just as he
wrote. Nevertheless, you have misrepresented him at least nine times in the ten
stanzas of that poem which you call the last, and which was not the last, he
ever wrote. Oh, for shame! stick to your acknowledged fictions—there you
are safe—you may deal with Leddy
Grippy and Laurie Todd as
you please, but not with those who have really lived, or who are still
alive. . . .
[John Wilson et. al.],
“Noctes Ambrosianae XVII” in Blackwood’s Edinburgh Magazine
Vol. 16
No. 94 (November 1824)
And there was another funny thing o’ his, till a queer looking lad, one
Mr. Skeffington, that wrote a tragedy, that was called
“The Mysterious Bride,” the whilk
thing made the Times newspaper for once witty—for it
said no more o’t, than just “Last night a play called The Mysterious
Bride, by the Honorable Mr. Skeffington, was performed at Drury Lane.
The piece was damned.” Weel, ye see it happened that there was a masquerade some nights after,
and Mr. Cam Hobhouse gaed till’t in the disguise
o’ a Spanish nun, that had been ravished by the French army— . . .
Edward Blaquiere (1779-1832)
After serving in the Royal Navy he published
Letters from the
Mediterranean, 2 vols (1813); with John Bowring he founded the London Greek
Committee in 1823.
Markos Botsaris [Μαρκος Βοτσαρις] (1790-1823)
Greek leader in the War of Independence who died heroically at the Battle of Karpenisi.
He was the brother of Kostas (Constantine) Botzaries.
Pietro Gamba (1801-1827)
The brother of Teresa Guiccioli and member of Carbonieri. He followed Byron to Greece and
left a memoir of his experiences.
William Parry (1773-1859)
Military engineer at Missolonghi; he was author of
The Last Days of
Lord Byron (1825).
Lieutenant Sass (d. 1824)
Finnish soldier who served in the Swedish and Swiss armies before taking up arms against
the Turks, originally with a German troop; he was murdered by the Suliotes at
Missolonghi.
Leicester Fitzgerald Charles Stanhope, fifth earl of Harrington (1784-1862)
The third son of the third earl; in 1823 he traveled to Greece as the Commissioner of the
London Greek Committee; there he served with Byron, whom he criticizes in
Greece in 1823 and 1824 (1824). He inherited the earldom from his brother in
1851.