The Life of Lord Byron
Chapter VIII
CHAPTER VIII.
First acquaintance with Byron.—Embark
together.—The voyage.
It was at Gibraltar that I first fell in with Lord
Byron. I had arrived there in the packet from England, in indifferent health, on
my way to Sicily. I had then no intention of travelling. I only went a trip, intending to
return home after spending a few weeks in Malta, Sicily, and Sardinia; having, before my
departure, entered into the Society of Lincoln’s Inn, with the design of studying the
law.
At this time, my friend, the late Colonel
Wright, of the artillery, was secretary to the Governor; and during the short
stay of the packet at the Rock, he invited me to the hospitalities of his house, and among
other civilities gave me admission to the garrison library.
The day, I well remember, was exceedingly sultry. The air was sickly; and if
the wind was not a sirocco, it was a withering levanter—oppressive to the functions of
life, and to an invalid denying all exercise. Instead of rambling over the fortifications, I
was, in consequence, constrained to spend the hottest part of the day in the library; and,
while sitting there, a young man came in and seated himself opposite to me at the table where I
was reading. Something in his appearance attracted my attention. His dress indicated a Londoner
of some fashion, partly by its neatness and
simplicity, with just so much
of a peculiarity of style as served to show, that although he belonged to the order of
metropolitan beaux, he was not altogether a common one.
I thought his face not unknown to me; I began to conjecture where I could have
seen him; and, after an unobserved scrutiny, to speculate both as to his character and
vocation. His physiognomy was prepossessing and intelligent, but ever and anon his brows
lowered and gathered; a habit, as I then thought, with a degree of affectation in it, probably
first assumed for picturesque effect and energetic expression; but which I afterwards
discovered was undoubtedly the occasional scowl of some unpleasant reminiscence: it was
certainly disagreeable—forbidding—but still the general cast of his features was
impressed with elegance and character.
At dinner, a large party assembled at Colonel
Wright’s; among others the Countess of
Westmorland, with Tom Sheridan and his
beautiful wife; and it happened that
Sheridan, in relating the local news of the morning, mentioned that
Lord Byron and Mr.
Hobhouse had come in from Spain, and were to proceed up the Mediterranean in the
packet. He was not acquainted with either.
Hobhouse had, a short time before I left London,
published certain translations and poems
rather respectable in their way, and I had seen the work, so that his name was not altogether
strange to me. Byron’s was familiar—the Edinburgh Review had made it so, and still more the
satire of English Bards and Scotch Reviewers, but
I was not conscious of having seen the persons of either.
On the following evening I embarked early, and soon after the two travellers
came on board; in one of whom I recognised the visitor to the library, and he proved to be
Lord Byron. In the little bustle and process of
embarking their luggage, his Lordship affected,
as it seemed to me, more
aristocracy than befitted his years, or the occasion; and I then thought of his singular scowl,
and suspected him of pride and irascibility. The impression that evening was not agreeable, but
it was interesting; and that forehead mark, the frown, was calculated to awaken curiosity, and
beget conjectures.
Hobhouse, with more of the commoner, made himself one of
the passengers at once; but Byron held himself aloof, and
sat on the rail, leaning on the mizzen shrouds, inhaling, as it were, poetical sympathy, from
the gloomy Rock, then dark and stern in the twilight. There was in all about him that evening
much waywardness; he spoke petulantly to Fletcher, his
valet; and was evidently ill at ease with himself, and fretful towards others. I thought he
would turn out an unsatisfactory shipmate; yet there was something redeeming in the tones of
his voice, when, some time after he had indulged his sullen meditation, he again addressed
Fletcher; so that, instead of finding him ill-natured, I was soon
convinced he was only capricious.
Our passage to Sardinia was tardy, owing to calms; but, in other respects,
pleasant. About the third day Byron relented from his rapt
mood, as if he felt it was out of place, and became playful, and disposed to contribute his
fair proportion to the general endeavour to wile away the tediousness of the dull voyage. Among
other expedients for that purpose, we had recourse to shooting at bottles.
Byron, I think, supplied the pistols, and was the best shot, but not
very pre-eminently so. In the calms, the jolly-boat was several times lowered; and, on one of
those occasions, his Lordship, with the captain, caught a turtle—I rather think
two—we likewise hooked a shark, part of which was dressed for breakfast, and tasted,
without relish; your shark is but a cannibal dainty.
As we approached the gulf, or bay, of Cagliari, in
Sardinia, a strong north wind came from the shore, and we had a whole disagreeable day of
tacking, but next morning, it was Sunday, we found ourselves at anchor near the mole, where we
landed. Byron, with the captain, rode out some distance into
the country, while I walked with Mr. Hobhouse about the
town: we left our cards for the consul, and Mr. Hill, the
ambassador, who invited us to dinner. In the evening we landed again, to avail ourselves of the
invitation; and, on this occasion, Byron and his Pylades dressed themselves as aides-de-camp—a circumstance which, at the
time, did not tend to improve my estimation of the solidity of the character of either. But
such is the force of habit: it appeared a less exceptionable affectation in the young peer than
in the commoner.
Had we parted at Cagliari, it is probable that I should have retained a much
more favourable recollection of Mr. Hobhouse than of
Lord Byron; for he was a cheerful companion, full of odd
and droll stories, which he told extremely well; he was also good-humoured and
intelligent—altogether an advantageous specimen of a well-educated English gentleman.
Moreover, I was at the time afflicted with a nervous dejection, which the occasional
exhilaration produced by his anecdotes and college tales often materially dissipated, though,
for the most part, they were more after the manner and matter of Swift than of Addison.
Byron was, during the passage, in delicate health, and upon
an abstemious regimen. He rarely tasted wine, nor more than half a glass, mingled with water,
when he did. He ate little; no animal food, but only bread and vegetables. He reminded me of
the ghoul that picked rice with a needle; for it was manifest, that he had not acquired his
knowledge of the world by always dining so sparely. If my remembrance is not treacherous, he
only spent one evening in the cabin with us—the evening before we came to anchor at
Cagliari; for, when the lights were placed, he made him-
self a man forbid,
took his station on the railing between the pegs on which the sheets are belayed and the
shrouds, and there, for hours, sat in silence, enamoured, it may be, of the moon. All these
peculiarities, with his caprices, and something inexplicable in the cast of his metaphysics,
while they served to awaken interest, contributed little to conciliate esteem. He was often
strangely rapt—it may have been from his genius; and, had its grandeur and darkness been
then divulged, susceptible of explanation; but, at the time, it threw, as it were, around him
the sackcloth of penitence. Sitting amid the shrouds and rattlins, in the tranquillity of the
moonlight, churming an inarticulate melody, he seemed almost apparitional, suggesting dim
reminiscences of him who shot the albatross. He was as a mystery in a winding-sheet, crowned
with a halo.
The influence of the incomprehensible phantasma which hovered about Lord Byron has been more or less felt by all who ever approached
him. That he sometimes came out of the cloud, and was familiar and earthly, is true; but his
dwelling was amid the murk and the mist, and the home of his spirit in the abysm of the storm,
and the hiding-places of guilt. He was, at the time of which I am speaking, scarcely
two-and-twenty, and could claim no higher praise than having written a clever worldly-minded
satire; and yet it was impossible, even then, to reflect on the bias of his mind, as it was
revealed by the casualties of conversation, without experiencing a presentiment, that he was
destined to execute some singular and ominous purpose. The description he has given of
Manfred in his youth was of himself.
My spirit walk’d not with the souls of men,
Nor look’d upon the earth with human eyes;
The thirst of their ambition was not mine;
The aim of their existence was not mine.
My joys, my griefs, my passions, and my powers,
Made me a stranger. Though I wore the form,
|
I had no sympathy with breathing flesh.
My joy was in the wilderness—to breathe
The difficult air of the iced mountain’s top.
Where the birds dare not build, nor insect’s wing
Flit o’er the herbless granite; or to plunge
Into the torrent, and to roll along
On the swift whirl of the new-breaking wave
Of river, stream, or ocean, in their flow—
In these my early strength exulted; or
To follow through the night the moving moon,
The stars, and their development; or catch
The dazzling lightnings till my eyes grew dim;
Or to look listening on the scatter’d leaves,
While autumn winds were at their evening song;—
These were my pastimes—and to be alone.
For if the beings, of whom I was one—
Hating to be so—cross’d me in my path,
I felt myself degraded back to them,
And was all clay again.
|
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— . . .
Joseph Addison (1672-1719)
English politician and man of letters, with his friend Richard Steele he edited
The Spectator (1711-12). He was the author of the tragedy
Cato (1713).
William Fletcher (1831 fl.)
Byron's valet, the son of a Newstead tenant; he continued in service to the end of the
poet's life, after which he was pensioned by the family. He married Anne Rood, formerly
maid to Augusta Leigh, and was living in London in 1831.
William Noel- Hill, third baron Berwick (1773-1842)
English diplomat and book-collector; he was envoy to Sardinia from 1807 to 1824 and
minister at Naples before he succeeded to the title in 1832.
John Cam Hobhouse, baron Broughton (1786-1869)
Founder of the Cambridge Whig Club; traveled with Byron in the orient, radical MP for
Westminster (1820); Byron's executor; after a long career in politics published
Some Account of a Long Life (1865) later augmented as
Recollections of a Long Life, 6 vols (1909-1911).
Caroline Henrietta Sheridan [née Callander] (1779-1851)
Novelist, the second daughter of Colonel James Callander; in 1805 she married Tom
Sheridan, son of the playwright; the poet Caroline Norton was their daughter.
Thomas Sheridan (1775-1817)
Actor, son of Richard Brinsley Sheridan and Elizabeth Linley; he was manager of Drury
Lane when it burned in 1808; he died of consumption, the disease that killed his
mother.
Jonathan Swift (1667-1745)
Dean of St Patrick's, Scriblerian satirist, and author of
Battle of the
Books with
Tale of a Tub (1704),
Drapier
Letters (1724),
Gulliver's Travels (1726), and
A Modest Proposal (1729).
Colonel Wright (1808 fl.)
Not identified; he was secretary to Hew Dalrymple when governor of Gibraltar and a friend
of John Galt.