Lord Byron and Some of his Contemporaries
        The Author’s Visit to Italy.
        
        
          
        
        
          
        
       
      
      
      
      
     
    
      
      
      LORD BYRON
      
      AND
      
      SOME OF HIS CONTEMPORARIES;
      
      WITH
      
      RECOLLECTIONS OF
      
      
      THE AUTHOR’S LIFE,
      
      AND OF HIS
      
      VISIT TO ITALY.
      
      
      
      BY LEIGH HUNT.
      
      
      “It is for slaves to lie, and for freemen to speak truth.
       “In the examples, which I here bring in, of what I have heard,
                            read, done, or said, I have forbid myself to dare to alter even the most light and
                            indifferent circumstances. My conscience does not falsify one tittle. What my ignorance
                            may do, I cannot say.”       Montaigne. 
                        
      
      
      
      
      
      LONDON:
      
      HENRY COLBURN, NEW BURLINGTON STREET.
      
      1828.
      
      
     
    
    
       THE AUTHOR’S VISIT TO ITALY, RESIDENCE THERE, AND RETURN TO
                            ENGLAND.
    
    
    
    
    The reader has seen what it was that induced me to take a voyage
                        to Italy. It was not very discreet to go many hundred miles by sea in winter-time with a
                        large family; but a voyage was thought cheaper than a journey by land. Even that, however,
                        was a mistake. It was by Shelley’s advice that
                        I acted: and, I believe, if he had recommended a balloon, I should have been inclined to
                        try it. “Put your music and your books on board a vessel,” (it was thus that
                            he wrote to us,) “and you will have no more trouble.” The sea was to
                        him a pastime; he fancied us bounding over the waters, the merrier for being tossed; and
                        thought that our will would carry us through any thing, as it ought to do, seeing that we
                        brought with us nothing but good things,—books, music, and sociality. It is true, he
                        looked to our coming in autumn, and not in winter; and so we should have done, but for the
                        delays ![]()
 of the captain. We engaged to embark in September, and did
                        not set off till November the 16th. 
    
     I have often thought that a sea-voyage, which is generally the dullest
                        thing in the world, both in the experiment and the description, might be turned to very
                        different account on paper, if the narrators, instead of imitating the dulness of their
                        predecessors, and recording that it was four o’clock p.m.
                        when they passed Cape St. Vincent, and that on such and such-a-day
                        they beheld a porpus or a Dutchman, would look into the interior of the floating-house they
                        inhabited, and tell us about the seamen and their modes of living; what adventures they
                        have had,—their characters and opinions,—how they eat, drink, and sleep,
                        &c.; what they do in fine weather, and how they endure the sharpness, the squalidness,
                        and inconceivable misery of bad. With a large family around me to occupy my mind, I did not
                        think of this till too late: but I am sure that this mode of treating the subject would be
                        interesting; and what I remember to such purpose, I will set down. 
    
    Our vessel was a small brig of a hundred and twenty tons burden, a
                            good tight sea-boat, nothing more. Its cargo consisted of sugar; but it took in
                        also a surreptitious stock of gunpowder, to the amount of fifty barrels, which was destined
                        for Greece. Of this intention we knew nothing, till the barrels were sent on board from a
                        place up the river; otherwise, so touchy a companion would have been objected to, my
                            wife, who was in a shattered state of health,
                        never ceasing to entertain apprehensions on account of it, except when the storms that came
                        upon us presented a more obvious peril. There were nine men to the crew, including the
                        mate. We numbered as many souls, though with smaller bodies, in the cabin, which we had
                        entirely to ourselves; as well we might, for it was small enough. On the afternoon of the
                        15th of November (1821), ![]()
 we took leave of some dear friends, who
                        accompanied us on board; and next morning were awakened by the motion of the vessel, making
                        its way through the shipping in the river. The new life in which we thus, as it were, found
                        ourselves enclosed, the clanking of iron, and the cheerly cries of the seamen, together
                        with the natural vivacity of the time of day, presented something animating to our
                        feelings; but while we thus moved off, not without encouragement, we felt that the friend
                        whom we were going to see was at a great distance, while others were very near, whose hands
                        it would be a long while before we should touch again, perhaps never. We hastened to get up
                        and busy ourselves; and great as well as small found a novel diversion in the spectacle
                        that presented itself from the deck, our vessel threading its way through the others with
                        gliding bulk. 
    
     The next day it blew strong from the South-east, and even in the river
                        (the navigation of which is not easy) we had a foretaste of the alarms and bad weather that
                        awaited us at sea. The pilot, whom we had taken in over-night, (and who was a jovial fellow
                        with a whistle like a blackbird, which, in spite of the dislike that sailors have to
                        whistling, he was always indulging,) thought it prudent to remain at anchor till two in the
                        afternoon; and at six, a vessel meeting us carried away the jib-boom, and broke in one of
                        the bulwarks. My wife, who had had a respite from the most alarming part of her illness,
                        and whom it was supposed that a sea-voyage, even in winter, might benefit, again
                        expectorated blood with the fright; and I began to regret that I had brought my family into
                        this trouble.—Even in the river we had a foretaste of the sea; and the curse of being
                        at sea to a landman is, that you know nothing of what is going forward, and can take no
                        active part in getting rid of your fears, or in “lending a hand.” The business
                        of these small ![]()
 vessels is not carried on with the orderliness and
                        tranquillity of greater ones, or of men-of-war. The crew are not very wise; the captain
                        does not know how to make them so; the storm roars; the vessel pitches and reels; the
                        captain, over your head, stamps and swears, and announces all sorts of catastrophes. Think
                        of a family hearing all this, and parents in alarm for their children! 
    
     On Monday, the 19th, we passed the Nore, and
                        proceeded down Channel amidst rains and squalls. We were now out at sea; and a rough taste
                        we had of it. I had been three times in the Channel before, once in hard weather; but I was
                        then a bachelor, and had only myself to think of. Let the reader picture to his imagination
                        the little back-parlour of one of the shops in Fleet-street, or the Strand, attached or let
                        into a great moving vehicle, and tumbling about the waves from side to side, now sending
                        all the things that are loose, this way, and now that. This will give him an idea of a
                        cabin at sea, such as we occupied. It had a table fastened down in the middle; places let
                        into the walls on each side, one over the other, to hold beds; a short, wide, sloping
                        window, carried off over a bulk, and looking out to sea; a bench, or locker, running under
                        the bulk from one side of the cabin to the other; and a little fireplace opposite, in which
                        it was impossible to keep a fire on account of the wind. The weather, at the same time, was
                        bitterly cold, as well as wet. On one side the fireplace was the door, and on the other a
                        door leading into a petty closet dignified with the title of the state-room. In this room
                        we put our servant, the captain sleeping in another closet outside. The births were
                        occupied by the children, and my wife and myself lay, as long as we could manage to do so,
                        on the floor. Such was the trim, with boisterous wet weather, cold days, and long evenings,
                        on which we set out on our sea-adventure. 
    
    
    
    
    
     At six o’clock in the evening of the 19th, we came to in the Downs,
                        in a line with Sandown Castle. The wind during the night increasing
                        to a gale, the vessel pitched and laboured considerably; and the whole of the next day it
                        blew a strong gale, with hard squalls from the westward. The day after, the weather
                        continuing bad, the captain thought proper to run for Ramsgate, and
                        took a pilot for that purpose. Captains of vessels are very unwilling to put into harbour,
                        on account of the payment they have to make, and the necessity of supporting the crew for
                        nothing while they remain. Many vessels are no doubt lost on this account; and a wonder is
                        naturally expressed, that men can persist in putting their lives into jeopardy in order to
                        save a few pounds. But when we come to know what a seaman’s life is, we see that
                        nothing but the strongest love of gain (whether accompanied or not by the love of spending)
                        could induce a man to take a voyage at all; and he is naturally anxious to save, what he
                        looks upon as the only tangible proof, that he is not the greatest fool in existence. His
                        life, he thinks, is in God’s keeping; but his money is in his own. To be sure, a
                        captain who has been to sea fifty times, and has got rich by it, will go again, storms or
                        vows to the contrary notwithstanding, because he does not know what to do with himself on
                        shore; but unless he had the hope of adding to his stock, he would blunder into some other
                        way of business, rather than go, as he would think, for nothing. Occupation is his real
                        necessity, as it is that of other money-getters; but the mode of it, without the visible
                        advantage, he would assuredly give up. I never met with a seaman (and I have put the
                        question to several) who did not own to me, that he hated his profession. One of them, a
                        brave and rough subject, told me, that there was not a “pickle” of a
                        midshipman, not absolutely a fool, who would not confess that he had rather eschew a second
                        voyage, if he had but the courage to make the avowal. 
    
    
    
    
    
     I know not what the Deal pilot, whom we took on
                        board in the Downs, thought upon this point; but if ever there was a bold fellow, it was
                        he; and yet he could eye a squall with a grave look. I speak not so much from what he had
                        to do on the present occasion, though it was a nice business to get us into
                            Ramsgate harbour: but he had the habit of courage in his face,
                        and was altogether one of the most interesting-looking persons I have seen. The
                            Deal boatmen are a well-known race; reverenced for their
                        matchless intrepidity, and the lives they have saved. Two of them came on board the day
                        before, giving opinions of the weather, which the captain was loth to take, and at the same
                        time insinuating some little contraband notions, which he took better. I thought how little
                        these notions injured the fine manly cast of their countenances, than which nothing could
                        be more self-possessed and even innocent. They seemed to understand the first principles of
                        the thing, without the necessity of enquiring into it; their useful and noble lives
                        standing them in stead of the pettier ties and sophisms of the interested. Our pilot was a
                        prince, even of his race, He was a tall man in a kind of frock-coat, thin but powerful,
                        with high features, and an expression of countenance fit for an Argonaut. When he took the
                        rudder in hand, and stood alone, guiding the vessel towards the harbour, the crew being all
                        busied at a distance from him, and the captain, as usual, at his direction, he happened to
                        put himself into an attitude the most graceful as well as commanding conceivable; and a new
                        squall coming up in the horizon, just as we were going to turn in, he gave it a look of
                        lofty sullenness, threat, as it were, for threat,—which was the most magnificent
                        aspect of resolution I ever beheld. Experience and valour assumed their rights, and put
                        themselves on a par with danger. In we turned, to the admiration of the spectators who had
                        come down to the pier, and to the satisfaction of all on board, except the poor captain,
                            ![]()
 who, though it was his own doing, seemed, while gallantly
                        congratulating the lady, to be eyeing, with sidelong pathos, the money that was departing
                        from him. 
    
     We stopped, for a change of weather, nearly three weeks at
                            Ramsgate, where we had visits from more than one London friend,
                        to whom I only wish we could give a tenth part of the consolation when they are in trouble,
                        which they afforded us. At Ramsgate I picked up Condorcet’s View of the Progress of Society, which I read with a
                        transport of gratitude to the author, though it had not entered so deeply into the matter
                        as I supposed. But the very power to persevere in hopes for mankind, at a time of life when
                        individuals are in the habit of reconciling their selfishness and fatigue by choosing to
                        think ill of them, is a great good in any man, and achieves a great good if it act only
                        upon one other person. A few such instances of perseverance would alter the world. For some
                        days we remained on board, as it was hoped that we should be able to set sail again.
                            Ramsgate harbour is very shallow; and though we lay in the
                        deepest part of it, the vessel took to a new and ludicrous species of dance, grinding and
                        thumping upon the chalky ground. The consequence was, that the metal pintles of the rudder
                        were all broken, and new ones obliged to be made; which the sailors told us was very lucky,
                        as it proved the rudder not to be in good condition, and it might have deserted us at sea.
                        We lay next a French vessel, smaller than our own, the crew of which became amusing
                        subjects of remark. They were always whistling, singing, and joking. The men shaved
                        themselves elaborately, and cultivated heroic whiskers; strutting up and down, when at
                        leisure, with their arms folded, and the air of naval officers. A woman or two, with
                        kerchiefs and little curls, completed the picture. They all seemed very merry and
                        good-humoured. At length, tired of waiting on board, we took a quiet lodging at the ![]()
 other end of the town, and were pleased to find ourselves sitting
                        still, and secure of a good rest at night. It is something, after being at sea, to find
                        oneself not running the fork in one’s eye at dinner, or suddenly sliding down the
                        floor to the other end of the room. My wife was in a very weak state; but the rest she took
                        was deep and tranquil, and I resumed my walks. Few of the principal bathing-places have any
                        thing worth looking at in the neighbourhood, and Ramsgate has less than most.
                            Pegwell Bay is eminent for shrimps. Close by is Sir William Garrow, and a little farther on is Sir William Curtis. The sea is a grand sight, but it
                        becomes tiresome and melancholy,—a great monotonous idea. I was destined to see it
                        grander, and dislike it more. 
    
     On Tuesday the 11th of December, we set forth again, in company with
                        nearly a hundred vessels, the white sails of which, as they shifted and presented
                        themselves in different quarters, made an agreeable spectacle, exhibiting a kind of noble
                        minuet. My wife was obliged to be carried down to the
                        pier in a sedan; and the taking leave, a second time, of a dear friend, rendered our new
                        departure a melancholy one. I would have stopped and waited for summertime, had not
                        circumstances rendered it advisable for us to persevere; and my wife herself fully agreed
                        with me, and even hoped for benefit, as well as a change of weather. Unfortunately, the
                        promise to that effect lasted us but a day. The winds recommenced the day following, and
                        there ensued such a continuity and vehemence of bad weather as rendered the winter of 1821
                        memorable in the shipping annals. It strewed the whole of the north-western coasts of
                        Europe with wrecks. The reader may remember that winter: it was the one in which
                            Mount Hecla burst out again into flame, and Dungeness
                            lighthouse was struck with lightning. The mole at
                            Genoa was dilapidated. Next year there were between ![]()
 14 and 15,000 sail less upon Lloyd’s books; which, valued at
                        an average at £1500, made a loss of two millions of money;—the least of all the
                        losses, considering the feelings of survivors. Fifteen hundred sail (colliers) were wrecked
                        on the single coast of Jutland. 
    
     Of this turmoil we were destined to have a sufficient experience; and I
                        will endeavour to give the reader a taste of it, as he sits comfortably in his arm-chair.
                        He has seen what sort of cabin we occupied. I will now speak of the crew and their mode of
                        living, and what sort of trouble we partook in common. He may encounter it himself
                        afterwards if he pleases, and it may do him good; but again I exhort him not to think of
                        taking a family with him. 
    
     Our captain, who was, also proprietor of the vessel, had been master of a
                        man-of-war, and was more refined in his manners than captains of small merchantmen are used
                        to be. He was a clever seaman, or he would not have occupied his former post; and I dare
                        say he conducted us well up and down Channel. The crew, when they were exhausted, accused
                        him of a wish of keeping us out at sea, to save charges,—perhaps unjustly; for he
                        became so alarmed himself, or was so little able to enter into the alarms of others, that
                        he would openly express his fears before my wife and children. He was a man of connexions
                        superior to his calling; and the consciousness of this, together with success in life, and
                        a good complexion and set of features which he had had in his time, rendered him, though he
                        was getting old, a bit of a coxcomb. When he undertook to be agreeable, he assumed a
                        cleaner dress, and a fidgetty sort of effeminacy, which contrasted very ludicrously with
                        his old clothes and his doleful roughness during a storm. While it was foul weather, he was
                        roaring and swearing at the men, like a proper captain of a brig, and then grumbling, and
                        saying, “Lord bless us and ![]()
 save us!” in the cabin. If a
                        glimpse of promise re-appeared, he put on a coat and aspect to correspond, was constantly
                        putting compliments to the lady, and telling stories of other fair passengers whom he had
                        conveyed charmingly to their destination. He wore powder; but this not being sufficient
                        always to conceal the colour of his hair, he told us it had turned grey when he was a
                        youth, from excessive fright in being left upon a rock. This confession made me conclude
                        that he was a brave man, in spite of his exclamations. I saw him among his kindred, and he
                        appeared to be an object of interest to some respectable maiden sisters, whom he treated
                        kindly, and for whom all the money, perhaps, that he scraped together, was intended. He was
                        chary of his “best biscuit,” but fond of children; and was inclined to take me
                        for a Jonah for not reading the Bible, while he made love to the maid-servant. Of such
                        incongruities are people made, from the Great Captain to the small! 
    
     Our mate was a tall handsome young man, with a countenance of great
                        refinement for a seaman. He was of the humblest origin: yet a certain gentility was natural
                        in him, as he proved by a hundred little circumstances of attention to the women and
                        children, when consolation was wanted, though he did not do it ostentatiously or with
                        melancholy. If a child was afraid, he endeavoured to amuse him with stories. If the women
                        asked him anxiously how things were going on, he gave them a cheerful answer; and he
                        contrived to show by his manner that he did not do so in order to make a show of his
                        courage at their expense. He was attentive without officiousness, and cheerful with quiet.
                        The only fault I saw in him, was a tendency to lord it over a Genoese boy, an apprentice to
                        the captain, who seemed ashamed of being among ![]()
 the crew, and
                        perhaps gave himself airs. But a little tyranny will creep into the best natures, if not
                        informed enough, under the guise of a manly superiority; as may be seen so often in upper
                        boys at school. The little Genoese was handsome, and had the fine eyes of the Italians.
                        Seeing he was a foreigner, when we first went on board, we asked him whether he was not an
                        Italian, He said, no he was a Genoese. It is the Lombards, I believe, that are more
                        particularly understood to be Italians, when a distinction of this kind is made; but I
                        never heard it afterwards. He complained to me one day, that he wanted books and poetry; and said that the crew were a “brutta gente.” I afterwards met him in
                            Genoa, when he looked as gay as a lark, and was dressed like a
                        gentleman. His name was a piece of music,—Luigi Rivarola. There
                        was another foreigner on board, a Swede, as rough a subject and Northern, as the Genoese
                        was full of the “sweet South.” He had the reputation of being a capital seaman,
                        which enabled him to grumble to better advantage than the others. A coat of the
                        mate’s, hung up to dry, in a situation not perfectly legal, was not to be seen by him
                        without a comment. The fellow had an honest face withal, but brute and fishy, not unlike a
                        Triton’s in a picture. He gaped up at a squall, with his bony look, and the hair over
                        his eyes, as if he could dive out of it in case of necessity. Very different was a fat,
                        fair-skinned carpenter, with a querulous voice, who complained on all occasions, and in
                        private was very earnest with the passengers to ask the captain to put into port. And very
                        different again from him was a jovial strait-forward seaman, a genuine Jack Tar, with a
                        snub nose and an under lip thrust out, such as we see in caricatures. He rolled about with
                        the vessel, as if his feet had suckers; and he had an oath and a jest every ![]()
 morning for the bad weather. He said he would have been
                        “d—d” before he had come to sea this time, if he had known what sort of
                        weather it was to be; but it was not so bad for him, as for the gentlefolks with their
                        children. 
    
     The crew occupied a little cabin at the other end of the vessel, into
                        which they were tucked in their respective cribs, like so many herrings. The weather was so
                        bad, that a portion of them, sometimes all, were up at night, as well as the men on watch.
                        The business of the watch is to see that all is safe, and to look out for vessels ahead. He
                        is very apt to go to sleep, and is sometimes waked with a pail of water chucked over him.
                        The tendency to sleep is very natural, and the sleep in fine weather delicious. Shakspeare may well introduce a sailor boy sleeping on the
                        topmast, and enjoying a luxury that wakeful kings might envy. But there is no doubt that
                        the luxury of the watcher is often the destruction of the vessel. The captains themselves,
                        glad to get to rest, are careless. When we read of vessels run down at sea, we are sure to
                        find it owing to negligence. This was the case with regard to the steam-vessel, the Comet,
                        which excited so much interest the other day. A passenger, anxious and kept awake, is
                        surprised to see the eagerness with which every seaman, let the weather be what it may,
                        goes to bed. when it comes to his turn. Safety, if they can have it; but sleep at all
                        events. This seems to be their motto. If they are to be drowned, they would rather have the
                        two beds together, the watery and the worsted. Dry is too often a term inapplicable to the
                        latter. In our vessel, night after night, the wet penetrated into the seamen’s
                        births; and the poor fellows, their limbs stiff and aching with cold, and their hands
                        blistered with toil, had to get into beds as wretched as if a pail of water had been thrown
                        over them. 
    
    
    
    
    
     Such were the lives of our crew from the 12th till the 22nd of December,
                        during which time we were beaten up and down Channel, twice touching the Atlantic, and
                        driven back again like a hunted ox. One of the gales lasted, without intermission,
                        fifty-six hours; blowing all the while, as if it would “split its cheeks.” The
                        oldest seaman on board had never seen rougher weather in Europe. In some parts of the
                        world, both East and West, there is weather of sudden and more outrageous violence; but
                        none of the crew had experienced tempests of longer duration, nor more violent for the
                        climate. The worst of being at sea in weather like this, next to your inability to do any
                        thing, is the multitude of petty discomforts with which you are surrounded. You can retreat
                        into no comfort, great or small. Your feet are cold; you can take no exercise on account of
                        the motion of the vessel; and a fire will not keep in. You cannot sit in one posture. You
                        lie down, because you are sick; or if others are more sick, you must keep your legs as well
                        as you can, to help them. At meals, the plates and dishes slide away, now to this side, now
                        that; making you laugh, it is true; but you laugh more out of satire than merriment. Twenty
                        to one you are obliged to keep your beds, and chuck the cold meat to one another; or the
                        oldest and strongest does it for the rest, desperately remaining at table, and performing
                        all the slides, manœuvres, and sudden rushes, which the fantastic violence of the
                        cabin’s movements has taught him. Tea, (which, for the refreshment it affords in toil
                        and privation, may be called the traveller’s wine) is taken as desperately as may be,
                        provided you can get boiling water; the cook making his appearance, when he can, with his
                        feet asunder, clinging to the floor, and swaying to and fro with the kettle. (By the by, I
                        have not mentioned our cook; he was a Mulatto, a merry knave, constantly drunk. But the
                        habit of drinking, added to a quiet and sly habit of uttering his ![]()
                        words, had made it easy to him to pretend sobriety when he was most intoxicated; and I
                        believe he deceived the whole of the people on board, except ourselves. The captain took
                        him for a special good fellow, and felt particularly grateful for his refusals of a glass
                        of rum; the secret of which was, he could get at the rum whenever he liked, and was never
                        without a glass of it in his œsophagus. He stood behind you at meals, kneading the
                        floor with his feet, as the vessel rolled; drinking in all the jokes, or would-be jokes,
                        that were uttered; and laughing like a dumb goblin. The captain, who had eyes for nothing
                        but what was right before him, seldom noticed his merry devil; but if you caught his eye,
                        there he was, shaking his shoulders without a word, while his twinkling eyes seemed to run
                        over with rum and glee. This fellow, who swore horrid oaths in a tone of meekness, used to
                        add to my wife’s horrors by descending, drunk as he was, with a lighted candle into
                        the “Lazaret,” which was a hollow under the cabin, opening with a trapdoor, and
                        containing provisions and a portion of the gunpowder. The portion was small, but
                        sufficient, she thought, with the assistance of his candle, to blow its up. Fears for her
                        children occupied her mind from morning till night, when she sank into an uneasy sleep.
                        While she was going to sleep I read, and did not close my eyes till towards morning,
                        thinking (with a wife by my side, and seven children around me) what I should do in case of
                        the worst. My imagination, naturally tenacious, and exasperated by ill health, clung, not
                        to every relief, but to every shape of ill that I could fancy. I was tormented with the
                        consciousness of being unable to divide myself into as many pieces as I had persons
                        requiring assistance; and must not scruple to own that I suffered a constant dread, which
                        appeared to me very unbecoming a man of spirit. However, I expressed no sense of it to any
                        body. I did my best to do ![]()
 my duty and keep up the spirits of those
                        about me; and your nervousness being a great dealer in your joke fantastic, I succeeded
                        apparently with all, and certainly with the children. The most uncomfortable thing in the
                        vessel was the constant wet. Below it penetrated, and on deck you could not appear with dry
                        shoes but they were speedily drenched. Mops being constantly in use at sea, (for seamen are
                        very clean in that respect, and keep their vessel as nice as a pet infant,) the sense of
                        wet was always kept up, whether in wetting or drying; and the vessel, tumbling about,
                        looked like a wash-house in a fit. We had a goat on board, a present from a kind friend,
                        anxious that we should breakfast as at home. The storms frightened away its milk, and Lord
                        Byron’s dog afterwards bit off its ear. But the ducks had the worst of it. These were
                        truly a sight to make a man hypochondriacal. They were kept in miserable narrow coops, over
                        which the sea constantly breaking, the poor wretches were drenched and beaten to death.
                        Every morning, when I came upon deck, some more were killed, or had their legs and wings
                        broken. The captain grieved for the loss of his ducks, and once went so far as to add to
                        the number of his losses by putting one of them out of its misery; but nobody seemed to
                        pity them otherwise. This was not inhumanity, but want of thought. The idea of pitying
                        live-stock when they suffer, enters with as much difficulty into a head uneducated to that
                        purpose, as the idea of pitying a diminished piece of beef or a stolen pig. I took care not
                        to inform the children how much the creatures suffered. My family, with the exception of
                        the eldest boy, who was of an age to acquire experience, always remained below; and the
                        children, not aware of any danger, (for I took care to qualify what the captain said, and
                        they implicitly believed me) were as gay, as confinement and uneasy beds would allow them
                        to be. With the poor ducks I made them out-![]()
rageously merry one
                        night, by telling them to listen when the next sea broke over us, and they would hear
                            Mr. P., an acquaintance of theirs, laughing. The noise they made
                        with their quacking, when they gathered breath after the suffocation of the salt water, was
                        exactly like what I said: the children listened, and at every fresh agony there was a
                        shout. Being alarmed one night by the captain’s open expression of his apprehension,
                        I prepared the children for the worst that might happen, by telling them that the sea
                        sometimes broke into a cabin, and then there was a dip over head and ears for the
                        passengers, after which they laughed and made merry. The only time I expressed apprehension
                        to any body was to the mate, one night when we were wearing ship off the Scilly
                            rocks, and every body was in a state of anxiety. I asked him, in case of
                        the worst, to throw open the lid of the cabin-stairs, that the sea might pour in upon us as
                        fast as possible. He begged me not to have any sad thoughts, for he said I should give them
                        to him, and he had none at present. At the same time, he turned and severely rebuked the
                        carpenter, who was looking doleful at the helm, for putting notions into the heads of the
                        passengers. The captain was unfortunately out of hearing. 
    
     I did wrong, at that time, not to “feed better,” as the
                        phrase is. My temperance was a little ultra-theoretical and excessive; and the mate and I
                        were the only men on board who drank no spirits. Perhaps there were not many men out in
                        those dreadful nights in the Channel, who could say as much. The mate, as he afterwards let
                        me know, felt the charge upon him too great to venture upon an artificial state of courage;
                        and I feared that what courage was left me, might be bewildered. The consequence was, that
                        from previous illness and constant excitation, my fancy was sickened into a kind of
                        hypochondriacal investment ![]()
 and shaping of things about me. A little
                        more, and I might have imagined the fantastic shapes which the action of the sea is
                        constantly interweaving out of the foam at the vessel’s side, to be sea-snakes, or
                        more frightful hieroglyphics. The white clothes that hung up on pegs in the cabin, took, in
                        the gloomy light from above, an aspect like things of meaning; and the winds and rain
                        together, as they ran blind and howling along by the vessel’s side, when I was on
                        deck, appeared like frantic spirits of the air, chasing and shrieking after one another,
                        and tearing each other by the hair of their heads. “The grandeur of the
                        glooms” on the Atlantic was majestic indeed: the healthiest eye would have seen
                        them with awe. The sun rose in the morning, at once fiery and sicklied over; a livid gleam
                        played on the water, like the reflection of lead; then the storms would recommence; and
                        during partial clearings off, the clouds and fogs appeared standing in the sky, moulded
                        into gigantic shapes, like antediluvian wonders, or visitants from the zodiac; mammoths,
                        vaster than have yet been thought of; the first ungainly and stupendous ideas of bodies and
                        legs, looking out upon an unfinished world. These fancies were ennobling, from their
                        magnitude. The pain that was mixed with some of the others, I might have displaced by a
                        fillip of the blood. 
    
     Two days after we left Ramsgate, the wind blowing
                        violently from the south-west, we were under close-reefed topsails; but on its veering to
                        westward, the captain was induced to persevere, in hopes that by coming round to the
                        north-west, it would enable him to clear the Channel. The ship laboured very much, the sea
                        breaking over her; and the pump was constantly going. 
    
     The next day, the 14th, we shipped a great deal of water, the pump going
                        as before. The foretopsail and foresail were taken in, and the ![]()
                        storm staysail set; and the captain said we were “in the hands of God.” We now
                        wore ship to southward. 
    
     On the 15th, the weather was a little moderated, with fresh gales and
                        cloudy. The captain told us to-day how his hair turned white in a shipwreck; and the mate
                        entertained us with an account of the extraordinary escape of himself and some others from
                        an American pirate, who seized their vessel, plundered and made it a wreck, and confined
                        them under the hatches, in the hope of their going down with it. They escaped in a rag of a
                        boat, and were taken up by a Greek vessel, which treated them with the greatest humanity.
                        The pirate was afterwards taken, and hung at Malta, with five of his
                        men. This story, being tragical without being tempestuous, and terminating happily for our
                        friend, was very welcome, and occupied us agreeably. I tried to get up some ghost stories
                        of vessels, but could hear of nothing but the Flying
                            Dutchman: nor did I succeed better on another occasion. This dearth of
                        supernatural adventure is remarkable, considering the superstition of sailors. But their
                        wits are none of the liveliest to be acted upon; and then the sea blunts while it
                        mystifies; and the sailor’s imagination, driven in, like his body, to the vessel he
                        inhabits, admits only the petty wonders that come directly about him in the shape of
                        storm-announcing fishes and birds. His superstition is that of a blunted and not of an
                        awakened ignorance. Sailors had rather sleep than see visions. 
    
     On the 16th, the storm was alive again, with strong gales and heavy
                        squalls. We set the fore storm staysail anew, and at night the jollyboat was torn from the
                        stern. 
    
     The afternoon of the 17th brought us the gale that lasted fifty-six
                        hours, “one of the most tremendous,” the captain said, “that he had ![]()
 ever witnessed.” All the sails were taken in, except the
                        close-reefed topsail and one of the trysails. At night, the wind being at south-west, and
                        Scilly about fifty miles north by east, the trysail sheet was carried away, and the boom
                        and sail had a narrow escape. We were now continually wearing ship. The boom was unshipped,
                        as it was; and it was a melancholy sight to see it lying next morning, with the sail about
                        it, like a wounded servant who had been fighting. The morning was occupied in getting it to
                        rights. At night we had hard squalls with lightning. 
    
     We lay to under main-topsail until the next morning, the 19th, when at
                        ten o’clock we were enabled to set the reefed foresail, and the captain prepared to
                        run for Falmouth; but finding he could not get in till night, we
                        hauled to the wind, and at three in the afternoon wore ship to southwestward. It was then
                        blowing heavily; and the sea, breaking over the vessel, constantly took with it a part of
                        the bulwark. I believe we had long ceased to have a duck alive. The poor goat had contrived
                        to find itself a corner in the long-boat, and lay frightened and shivering under a piece of
                        canvass. I afterwards took it down in the cabin to share our lodging with us; but not
                        having a birth to give it, it passed but a sorry time, tied up and slipping about the
                        floor. At night we had lightning again, with hard gales, the wind being west and
                        north-west, and threatening to drive us on the French coast. It was a grand thing, through
                        the black and turbid atmosphere, to see the great fiery eye of the lighthouse at the Lizard
                        Point; it looked like a good genius with a ferocious aspect. Ancient mythology would have
                        made dragons of these noble structures,—dragons with giant glare, warning the seaman
                        off the coast. 
    
    
    
    
    
     The captain could not get into Falmouth: so he
                        wore ship, and stood to the westward with fresh hopes, the wind having veered a little to
                        the north; but, after having run above fifty miles to the south and west, the wind veered
                        again in our teeth, and at two o’clock on the 20th, we were reduced to a close-reefed
                        main-topsail, which, being new, fortunately held, the wind blowing so hard that it could
                        not be taken in without the greatest risk of losing it. The sea was very heavy, and the
                        rage of the gale tremendous, accompanied with lightning. The children on these occasions
                        slept, unconscious of their danger. My wife slept too, from exhaustion. I remember, as I
                        lay awake that night, looking about to see what help I could get from imagination, to
                        furnish a moment’s respite from the anxieties that beset me, I cast my eyes on the
                        poor goat; and recollecting how she devoured some choice biscuit I gave her one day, I got
                        up, and going to the cupboard took out as much as I could find, and occupied myself in
                        seeing her eat. She munched the fine white biscuit out of my hand, with equal appetite and
                        comfort; and I thought of a saying of Sir Philip
                            Sidney’s, that we are never perfectly miserable when we can do a
                        good-natured action. 
    
     I will not dwell upon the thoughts that used to pass, through my mind
                        respecting my wife and children. Many times, especially when a little boy of mine used to
                        weep in a manner equally sorrowful and good-tempered, have I thought of Prospero and his infant Miranda in the boat,—“me and thy crying self;” and many
                        times of that similar divine fragment of Simonides, a
                        translation of which, if I remember, is to be found in the “Adventurer.” It seemed as if I had no right to bring
                        so many little creatures into such jeopardy, with peril to their lives and all future
                        enjoyment; but sorrow and trouble suggested other ![]()
 reflections
                        too:—consolations, which even to be consoled with is calamity. However, I will not
                        recall those feelings any more. Next to tragical thoughts like these, one of the modes of
                        tormenting oneself at sea, is to raise those pleasant pictures of contrast, dry and
                        firm-footed, which our friends are enjoying in their warm rooms and radiant security at
                        home. I used to think of them one after the other, or several of them together, reading,
                        chatting, and laughing, playing music, or complaining that they wanted a little movement
                        and must dance; then retiring to easy beds amidst happy families; and perhaps, as the wind
                        howled, thinking of us. Perhaps, too, they thought of us sometimes in the midst of their
                        merriment, and longed for us to share it with them. That they did so, is certain; but, on
                        the other hand, what would we not have given to be sure of the instant at which they were
                        making these reflections; and how impossible was it to attain to this, or to any other
                        dry-ground satisfaction! Sometimes I could not help smiling to think how Munden would have exclaimed, in the character of Croaker, “We shall all be blown up!” The
                        gunpowder I seldom thought of. I had other fish to fry: but it
                        seemed to give my feet a sting sometimes, as I remembered it in walking the deck. The
                        demand for dry land was considerable. That is the point with landsmen at
                        sea;—something unwet, unconfined, but, above all, firm, and that enables you to take
                        your own steps, physical and moral. Panurge has it
                        somewhere in Rabelais, but I have lost the passage. 
    
     But I must put an end to this unseasonable mirth.—“A large
                        vessel is coming right down upon us;—lights—lights!” This was the cry at
                        eleven o’clock at night, on the 21st December, the gale being tremendous, and the sea
                        to match. Lanthorns were handed up from the cabin, ![]()
 and, one after
                        the other, put out. The captain thought it was owing to the wind and the spray; but it was
                        the drunken steward, who jolted them out as he took them up the ladder. We furnished more,
                        and contrived to see them kept in; and the captain afterwards told me that we were the
                        salvation of his vessel. The ship, discerning us just in time, passed ahead, looking very
                        huge and terrible. Next morning, we saw her about two miles on our lee-bow, lying to under
                        trysails. It was an Indiaman. There was another vessel, a smaller, near us in the night. I
                        thought the Indiaman looked very comfortable, with its spacious and powerful body: but the
                        captain said we were better off a great deal in our own sea-boat; which turned out to be
                        too true, if this was the same Indiaman, as some thought it, which was lost the night
                        following off the coast of Devonshire. The crew said, that in one of
                        the pauses of the wind they heard a vessel go down. We were at that time very near land. At
                        tea-time the keel of our ship grated against something, perhaps a shoal. The captain
                        afterwards very properly made light of it; but at the time, being in the act of raising a
                        cup to his mouth, I remember. He turned prodigiously grave, and, getting up, went upon
                        deck. 
    
     Next day, time 22nd, we ran for Dartmouth, and
                        luckily succeeding this time, found ourselves, at 12 o’clock at noon, in the middle
                        of Dartmouth harbour.— 
“Magno telluris amore Egressi, optata potiuntur Troës arena.”  | 
                        “The Trojans, worn with toils, and spent with woes, Leap on the welcome land, and seek their wish’d repose.”  | 
                        Dryden had never been at sea, or he would not have
                        translated the passage in that meek manner. Virgil knew
                        better; and besides, he had ![]()
 the proper ancient hydrophobia to
                        endear his fancy to the dry ground. He says, that the Trojans had got an absolute affection for terra firma, and that they now
                        enjoyed what they had longed for. Virgil, it must be confessed, talks
                        very tenderly of the sea for an epic poet. Homer
                        grapples with it in a very different style. The Greek would hardly have recognized his old
                        acquaintance Micas in that pious and frightened
                        personage, who would be designated, I fear, by a modern sailor, a psalm-singing milksop.
                        But Homer, who was a traveller, is the only poet among the ancients,
                        who speaks of the sea in a modern spirit. He talks of brushing the waves merrily; and
                        likens them, when they are dark, to his Chian wine. But Hesiod, though he relates with a modest grandeur that he had once been to
                        sea, as far as from Aulis to Chalcis, is
                        shocked at the idea of any body’s venturing upon the water except when the air is
                        delicate and the water harmless. A spring voyage distresses him, and a winter he holds to
                        be senseless. Moschus plainly confesses, that the very
                        sight of the ocean makes him retreat into the woods; the only water he loves being a
                        fountain to listen to, as he lies on the grass. Virgil took a trip to
                            Athens, during which he may be supposed to have undergone all
                        the horrors which he holds to be no disgrace to his hero. Horace’s distress at his friend’s journey, and amazement at the
                        hardhearted rascal who could first venture to look upon the sea on ship-board, are well
                        known. A Hindoo could not have a greater dread of the ocean. Poor Ovid, on his way to the place of his exile, wonders how he can write a
                        line. These were delicate gentlemen at the court of Augustus; and the ancients, it may be said, had very small and bad vessels,
                        and no compass. But their moral courage appears to have been as poor in this matter as
                        their physical. Nothing could have given a Roman a more exalted idea ![]()
 of Cæsar’s courage, than his famous speech
                        to the pilot:—“You carry Cæsar and his
                        fortunes!” The poets, who take another road to glory, and think no part of humanity
                        alien from them, spoke out in a different manner. Their office being to feel with all, and
                        their nature disposing them to it, they seem to think themselves privileged to be bold or
                        timid, according to circumstances; and doubtless they are so, imagination being the moving
                        cause in both instances. They perceive also, that the boldest of men are timid under
                        circumstances in which they have no experience; and this helps the agreeable insolence of
                        their candour. Rochester said, that every man would
                        confess himself a coward, if he had but courage enough to do so;—a saying worthy of
                        an ingenious debauchee, and as false with respect to individuals, as it is perhaps true
                        with regard to the circumstances, under which any one may find himself. The same person who
                        shall turn pale in a storm at sea, shall know not what it is to fear the face of man; and
                        the most fearless of sailors shall turn pale (as I have seen them do) even in storms of an
                        unusual description. I was once in a scuffle with a party of fishermen on the Thames, when,
                        in the height of their brutal rage, they were checked and made civil by the mention of the
                        word law. Rochester talked like the shameless coward that he had made
                        himself; but even Sir Philip Sidney, the flower of
                        chivalry, who would have gone through any danger out of principle, (which, together with
                        the manly habits that keep a man brave, is the true courage,) does not scruple to speak,
                        with a certain dread, of ships and their strange lodgings. 
    
     “Certainly,” says he, in his “Arcadia,” (Book II.) “there is no danger
                        carries with it more horror, than that which grows in those floating kingdoms. For that
                        dwelling-place is unnatural to mankind; ![]()
 and then the terribleness
                        of the continual motion, the desolation of the far being from comfort, the eye and the ear
                        having ugly images ever before them, doth still vex the mind, even when it is best armed
                        against it.” 
    
    Ariosto, a soldier as well as poet, who had fought
                        bravely in the wars, candidly confesses that he is for taking no sea voyages, but is
                        content to explore the earth with Ptolemy, and travel in
                        a map. This, he thinks, is better than putting up prayers in a storm. (Satire 3. Chi vuol andar intorno,
                        &c.) But the most amusing piece of candour on this point is that of Berni, in his “Orlando Innamorato,” one of the models of the Don Juan style. Berni was a good fellow, for a rake; and bold enough, though a courtier, to
                        refuse aiding a wicked master in his iniquities. He was also, stout of body, and a great
                        admirer of stout achievements in others, which he dwells upon with a masculine relish. But
                        the sea he cannot abide. He probably got a taste of it in the
                            Adriatic, when he was at Venice. He is a
                        fine describer of a storm, and puts a hero of his at the top of one in a very elevated and
                        potent manner: (See the description of Rodomonte, at
                        the beginning of one of his cantos.) But in his own person, he disclaims all partnership
                        with such exaltations; and earnestly exhorts the reader, on the faith of his experience,
                        not to think of quitting dry land for an instant. 
“Se vi poteste un uomo immaginare, Il qual non sappia quel che sia paura; E se volete un bel modo trovare Da spaventar ogni anima sicura; Quando e fortuna, mettetel’ in mare. Se non lo teme, se non se ne cura, Colui per pazzo abbiate, e non ardito, Perch’ è diviso da la morte un dito.  | 
![]()
![]()
![]()
“È un’ orribil cosa il mar crocciato: È meglio udirlo, che farne la prova. Creda ciascun a chi dentro v’ è stato; E per provar, di terra non si mova.” Canto 64, st. 4.   | 
                        Reader, if you suppose that there can be, In nature, one that’s ignorant of fear And if you’d show the man, as prettily As possible, how people can feel queer,— When there ’s a tempest, clap him in the sea. If he ’s not frightened, if he doesn’t care, Count him a stupid idiot, and not brave, Thus with a straw betwixt him and the grave.  | 
![]()
A sea in torment is a dreadful thing: Much better lie and listen to, than try it. Trust one who knows its desperate pummelling; And while on terra firma, pray stick by it.  | 
                    
    
     Full of Signor Berni’s
                        experience, and having, in the shape of our children, seven more reasons than he had to
                        avail ourselves of it, we here bade adieu to our winter voyage, and resolved to put forth
                        again in a better season. It was a very expensive change of purpose, and cost us more
                        trouble than I can express; but I had no choice, seeing my wife was so ill. A few days afterwards, she was obliged to have forty
                        ounces of blood taken from her at once, to save her life. 
    
    Dartmouth is a pretty, forlorn place, deserted of its importance.
                            Chaucer’s “Schippman” was born there, and it still produces excellent seamen;
                        but, instead of its former dignity as a port, it looks like a petty town deserted of its
                        neighbourhood, and left to grow wild and solitary. The beautiful vegetation immediately
                        about it, added to the bare hills in the background, completes this look of forlornness,
                        and produces an ![]()
 effect like that of the grass growing in the
                        streets of a metropolis. The harbour is landlocked with hills, and wood, and a bit of an
                        old castle at the entrance; forming a combination very picturesque. Among the old families
                        remaining in that quarter, the Prideaux, relations of the ecclesiastical historian, live in this town; and going up a solitary street
                        on the hill-side, I saw on a door the name of Wolcot, a memorandum of a different sort.
                            Peter Pindar’s family, like the
                        divine’s, are from Cornwall. 
    
     We left Dartmouth, where no ships were in the
                        habit of sailing for Italy, and went to Plymouth; intending to set
                        off again with the beginning of spring, in a vessel bound for Genoa. But the mate of it,
                        who, I believe, grudged us the room we should deprive him of, contrived to tell my
                            wife a number of dismal stories, both of the ship
                        and its captain, who was an unlucky fellow that seemed marked by fortune. Misery had also
                        made him a Calvinist,—the most miserable of all ways of getting comfort; and this was
                        no additional recommendation. To say the truth, having a pique against my fears on the
                        former occasion, I was more bent on allowing myself to have none on the present; otherwise,
                        I should not have thought of putting forth again till the fine weather was complete. But
                        the reasons that prevailed before, had now become still more imperative; my wife being
                        confined to her bed, and undergoing repeated bleedings: so, till summer we waited.
                            Plymouth is a proper modern commercial town, unpicturesque in
                        itself, with an overgrown suburb, or dock, which has become a town distinct, and other
                        suburbs carrying other towns along the coast. But the country up the river is beautiful;
                        and Mount-Edgecumbe is at hand, with its enchanted island, like a
                        piece of old poetry by the side of new money-getting. Lord
                            Lyttleton, ![]()
 in some pretty verses, has introduced the
                        gods, with Neptune at their head, and the nymphs of land and sea, contesting for the
                        proprietorship of it;—a dispute which Jupiter settles by saying,
                        that he made Mount-Edgecumbe for them all. But the best compliment
                        paid it was by the Duke de Medina Sidonia, admiral of
                        the Spanish Armada, who, according to Fuller, marked
                        it out from the sea, as his territorial portion of the booty. “But,” says
                            Fuller, “he had catched a great cold, had he had no other
                            clothes to wear than those which were to be made of a skin of a bear not
                        killed.” In the neighbourhood is a seat of the Carews, the family of the
                            historian of Cornwall,
                        and kinsmen of the poet. Near it, on the other side
                        of the river, was the seat of the Killigrews; another family which
                        became celebrated in the annals of wit and poetry.* The tops of the two mansions looked at
                        one another over the trees. In the grounds of the former is a bowling-green, the scene of a
                        once fashionable amusement, now grown out of use; which is a pity. Fashion cannot too much
                        identify itself with what is healthy; nor has England been “merry England,”
                        since late hours and pallid faces came into vogue. But our sedentary thoughts, it is to be
                        hoped, will help to their own remedy, and in the end leave us better off than before. 
    
     The sea upon the whole had done me good, and I found myself able to write
                        again, though by driblets. We lived very quietly at Stonehouse,
                        opposite Mount-Edgecumbe, nursing our hopes for a new voyage, and
                        expecting one of a very different complexion in sailing towards an Italian summer. My wife
                        kept her bed almost the whole 
                        ![]()
 time, and lost a great deal of blood; but the repose, together with
                        the sea-air, was of service to her, and enabled her to receive benefit on resuming our
                        journey. Thus quietly we lived, and thus should have continued, agreeably to both of our
                        inclinations; but some friends of the Examiner heard of our being in the neighbourhood, and
                        the privatest of all public men (if I may be ranked among the number) found himself
                        complimented by his readers, face to face, and presented with a silver cup. I then had a
                        taste of the Plymouth hospitality, and found it friendly and cordial
                        to the last degree, as if the seaman’s atmosphere gave a new spirit to the love of
                        books and liberty. Nor, as the poet would say, was music wanting; nor fair faces, the crown
                        of welcome. Besides the landscapes in the neighbourhood, I had the pleasure of seeing some
                        beautiful ones in the painting-room of Mr. Rogers, a
                        very clever artist and intelligent man, who has travelled, and can think for himself. But
                        my great Examiner friend, who has since become a
                        personal one, was Mr. Hine, now master of an academy
                        near the Metropolis, and the most attentive and energetic person of his profession that I
                        ever met with. My principal visitors indeed at Plymouth consisted of
                        schoolmasters;—one of those signs of the times, which has not been so ill regarded
                        since the accession of a lettered and liberal minister to the government of this country,
                        as they were under the supercilious ignorance, and (to say the truth) well-founded alarm of
                        his footmanlike predecessors. 
    
     The Devonshire people, as far as I had experience
                        of them, were pleasant and good-humoured. Queen
                            Elizabeth said of their gentry, that they were “all born courtiers
                            with a becoming confidence.” I know not how that may be, though she had a
                        good specimen in Sir Walter ![]()
                        Raleigh, and a startling one in Stukeley.* But the private history of modern times might
                        exhibit instances of natives of Devonshire winning their way into
                        regard and power by the force of a well-constituted mixture of sweet and strong; and it is
                        curious, that the milder climate of that part of England should have produced more
                        painters, perhaps, of a superior kind, than any other two counties can show. Drake, Jewel,
                            Hooker, and old Fortescue, were also Devonshire-men; William
                            Browne, the most genuine of Spenser’s disciples; and Gay,
                        the enjoying and the goodhearted, the natural man in the midst of the sophisticate. 
    
     We left Plymouth on the 13th of May, 1822,
                        accompanied by some of our new friends who would see us on board; and set sail in a fresh
                        vessel, on our new summer voyage, a very different one from the last. Short acquaintances
                        sometimes cram as much into their intercourse, as to take the footing of long ones; and our
                        parting was not without pain. Another shadow was cast on the female countenances by the
                        observation of our boatman, who, though an old sailor who ought to have known better, bade
                        us remark how heavily laden our ship was, and how deep she lay in the water: so little can
                        ignorance afford to miss an opportunity of being important. Our new captain, and, I
                        believe, all his crew, were Welsh, with the exception of one sailor, an unfortunate
                        Scotchman, who seemed pitched among them to have his nationality put to the torture. Jokes
                        were unceasingly cracked on the length of his person, the oddity 
 * See his wild history in Fuller, p. 34, as above. “So confident was his
                                    ambition,” says the biographer, “that he blushed not to tell
                                        Queen Elizabeth, that he preferred
                                    rather to be sovereign of a mole-hill, than the highest subject to the greatest
                                    king in Christendom; adding, moreover, that he was assured he should be a
                                    prince before his death. ‘I hope,’ said Queen
                                        Elizabeth, ‘that I shall hear from you when you are stated
                                    in your principality.’—‘I will write unto you,’ quoth
                                        Stukeley.—‘In what
                                        language?’ said the Queen. He returned, ‘In the style of
                                        princes—To our Dear Sister.’”   | 
                        ![]()
 of his dialect, and the uncouth manner in which he stood at the
                        helm. It was a new thing to hear Welshmen cutting up the barbarism of the
                            “Modern Athens;” but they had the advantage of the
                        poor fellow in wit, and he took it with a sort of sulky patience, that showed he was not
                        destitute of one part of the wisdom of his countrymen. To have made a noise would have been
                        to bring down new shouts of laughter; so he pocketed the affronts as well as he might, and
                        I could not help fancying that his earnings lay in the same place more securely than most
                        of those about him. The captain was choleric and brusque, a
                        temperament which was none the better for an inclination to plethora; but his enthusiasm in
                        behalf of his brother tars, and the battles they had fought, was as robust as his frame;
                        and he surprised me with writing verses on the strength of it. Very good heart and impart verses they were too, and would have cut
                        as good a figure as any in one of the old magazines. While he read them, he rolled the
                        r’s in the most rugged style, and looked as if he could have run them down the
                        throats of the enemy. The objects of his eulogy he called “our gallant herroes.” 
    
     We took leave of Plymouth with a fine wind at
                        North-east; and next day, on the confines of the Channel, spoke the Two Sisters, of
                            Guernsey, from Rio Janeiro. On a long
                        voyage, ships lose their longitude; and our information enabled the vessel to enter the
                        Channel with security. Ships approaching and parting from one another, present a fine
                        spectacle, shifting in the light, and almost looking conscious of the grace of their
                        movements. Sickness here began to prevail again among us, with all but myself, who am never
                        sea-sick. I mention it in order to notice a pleasant piece of thanks which I received from
                        my eldest boy, who, having suffered dreadfully in the former voyage, was grateful for my
                        not having allowed him to eat butter in the ![]()
 interval. I know not
                        whether my paternity is leading me here into too trifling a matter; but I mention the
                        circumstance, because there may be intelligent children among my readers, with whom it may
                        turn to account. 
    
     We were now on the high Atlantic, with fresh health and hopes, and the
                        prospect of an easy voyage before us. Next night, the 15th, we saw, for the first time, two
                        grampuses, who interested us extremely with their unwieldy gambols. They were very
                        large,—in fact, a small kind of whale; but they played about the vessel like kittens,
                        dashing round, and even under it, as if in scorn of its progress. The swiftness of fish is
                        inconceivable. The smallest of them must be enormously strong: the largest are as gay as
                        the least. One of these grampuses fairly sprang out of the water, bolt upright. The same
                        day, we were becalmed in the Bay of Biscay;—a pleasant
                        surprise. A calm in the Bay of Biscay, after what we had read and
                        heard of it, sounded to us like repose in a boiling cauldron. But a calm, after all, is not
                        repose: it is a very unresting and unpleasant thing, the ship taking a great gawky motion
                        from side to side, as if playing the buffoon; and the sea heaving in huge oily-looking
                        fields, like a carpet lifted. Sometimes it looks striped into great ribbons; but the sense
                        of it is always more or less unpleasant, and to impatient seamen must be torture. 
    
     The next day we were still becalmed. A small shark played all day long
                        about the vessel, but was shy of the bait. The sea was swelling, and foul with putrid
                        substances, which made us think what it would be if a calm continued a month. Mr. Coleridge has touched upon that matter, with the hand
                        of a master, in his “Ancient
                        Mariner.” (Here are three words in one sentence beginning with M and ending with R; to the great horror of
                            Mr. Wordsworth, provided he does me the honour
                            ![]()
 of reading me. But the compliment to Mr.
                            Coleridge shall be the greater, since it is at my own expense.) During a
                        calm, the seamen, that they may not be idle, are employed in painting the vessel:—an
                        operation that does not look well amidst the surrounding aspect of sickness and faintness.
                        The favourite colours are black and yellow; I believe, because they are the least
                        expensive. They are certainly the most ugly. 
    
     On the 17th, we had a fine breeze at north-east. There is great enjoyment
                        in a beautiful day at sea. You quit all the discomforts of your situation for the comforts;
                        interchange congratulations with the seamen, who are all in good humour; seat yourself at
                        ease on the deck, enjoy the motion, the getting on, the healthiness of the air; watch idly
                        for new sights; read a little, or chat, or give way to a day-dream; then look up again, and
                        expatiate on the basking scene around you, with its ripples blue or green, and
                        gold,—what the old poet beautifully calls the innumberable smile of the waters. 
 “Ποντιων
                                            τε χυματων Ανηζιφμον
                                            γελασμα”  | 
 The appearance of another vessel sets conjecture alive:—it is “a
                        Dane,” “a Frenchman,” “a Portuguese,” and these words have a
                        new effect upon us, as if we became intimate with the country to which they belong. A more
                        striking effect of the same sort is produced by the sight of a piece of land;—it is
                            Flamborough Head, Ushant, Cape
                            Ortegal:—you see a part of another country, one perhaps on which you
                        have never set foot; and this is a great thing: it gives you an advantage: others have read
                        of Spain or Portugal; you have seen it, and are a grown man and a traveller, compared with
                        those little children of ![]()
 books. These novelties affect the dullest;
                        but to persons of any imagination and such as are ready for any pleasure or consolation
                        that nature offers them, they are like pieces of a new morning of life. The world seems
                        begun again, and our stock of knowledge recommencing on a new plan. 
    
     Then at night-time, there are those beautiful fires on the water, by the
                        vessel’s side, upon the nature of which people seem hardly yet agreed. Some take them
                        for animal decay, some for living animals, others for electricity. Perhaps all have to do
                        with it. In a fine blue sea, the foam caused by the vessel at night, seems full of stars:
                        the white ferment, with the golden sparkles in it, is beautiful beyond conception. You look
                        over, and devour it with your eyes, as you would so much ethereal syllabub. Finally, the
                        stars in the firmament issue forth, and the moon, always the more lovely the farther you
                        get south; or when there is no moon on the sea, the shadows at a little distance become
                        grander and more solemn, and you watch for some huge fish to lift himself in the middle of
                        them,—a darker mass, breathing and spouting water. 
    
     The fish appear very happy. Some are pursued indeed, and others pursue;
                        there is a world of death as well as life going on. The mackarel avoids the porpus, and the
                        porpus eschews the whale; there is the sword-fish, who runs a-muck; and the shark, the
                        cruel scavenger. These are startling commonplaces: but it is impossible, on reflection, to
                        separate the idea of happiness from that of health and activity. The fishes are not sick or
                        sophisticate; their blood is pure, their strength and agility prodigious; and a little
                        peril, for aught we know, may serve to keep them moving, and give a relish to their
                        vivacity. I looked upon the sea as a great tumbling wilderness, full of sport. To eat fish
                            ![]()
 at sea, however, hardly looked fair, though it was the fairest
                        of occasions: it seemed as if, not being an inhabitant, I had no right to the produce. I
                        did not know how the dolphins might take it. At nighttime, lying in a bed beneath the level
                        of the water, I fancied sometimes that a fellow looked at me as he went by with his great
                        sidelong eyes, gaping objection. It was strange, I thought, to find oneself moving onward
                        cheek by jowl with a porpus, or yawning in concert with a shark. 
    
     On the 21st, after another two days of calm, and one of rain, we passed
                            Cape Finisterre. There was a heavy swell and rolling. Being now
                        on the Atlantic, with not even any other name for the part of it that we sailed over to
                        interrupt the widest association of ideas, I thought of America, and Columbus, and the chivalrous squadrons that set out from
                            Lisbon, and the old Atlantis of Plato, formerly supposed to exist off the coast of Portugal.
                        It is curious, that the Portuguese have a tradition to this day, that there is an island
                        occasionally seen off the coast of Lisbon. The story of the
                            Atlantis looks like some old immemorial tradition of a country
                        that has really existed; nor is it difficult to suppose that there was formerly some great
                        tract of land, or even continent, occupying these now watery regions, when we consider the
                        fluctuation of things, and those changes of dry to moist, and of lofty to low, which are
                        always taking place all over the globe. Off the coast of Cornwall,
                        the mariner, it has been said, now rides over the old country of
                            Lyones, or whatever else it was called, if that name be
                        fabulous; and there are stories of doors and casements, and other evidences of occupation,
                        brought up from the bottom. These indeed have lately been denied, or reduced to nothing:
                        but old probabilities remain. In the Eastern seas, the gigantic work of creation is visibly
                        going on, by ![]()
 means of those little creatures, the coral worms; and
                        new lands will as assuredly be inhabited there after a lapse of centuries, as old ones have
                        vanished in the West. “So, in them all, raignes mutabilitie.”  | 
                    
    
     22. Fine breeze to-day from the N.E. A great shark went by. One longs to
                        give the fellow a great dig in the mouth. Yet he is only going “on his
                        vocation.” Without him, as without the vultures on land, something would be amiss. It
                        is only moral pain and inequality which it is desirable to alter,—that which the mind
                        of man has an invincible tendency to alter. 
    
     To-day the seas reminded me of the “marmora
                                pelagi,” of Catullus. They
                        looked, at a little distance, like blue water petrified. You might have supposed, that by
                        some sudden catastrophe, the great ocean had been turned into stone; and the mighty
                        animals, whose remains we find in it, fixed there for ever. A shoal of porpuses broke up
                        the fancy. Waves might be classed, as clouds have been; and more determination given to
                        pictures of them. We ought to have waves and wavelets, billows, fluctuosities, &c., a
                        marble sea, a sea weltering. The sea varies its look at the immediate side of the vessel,
                        according as the progress is swift or slow. Sometimes it is a crisp and rapid flight,
                        hissing; sometimes an interweaving of the foam in snake-like characters; sometimes a heavy
                        weltering, shouldering the ship on this side and that. In what is called “the trough
                        of the sea,” which is a common state to be in during violent weather, the vessel
                        literally appears stuck and labouring in a trough, the sea looking on either side like a
                        hill of yeast. This was the gentlest sight we used to have in the Channel; very different
                        from our summer amenities. 
    
    
    
    
    
     A fine breeze all night, with many porpuses. Porpuses are supposed to
                        portend a change of weather, of some sort, bad or good: they are not prognosticators of bad
                        alone. At night there was a “young May moon,” skimming between the dark clouds,
                        like a slender boat of silver. I was upon deck, and found the watcher fast asleep. A vessel
                        might have tipped us all into the water, for any thing that he knew, or perhaps cared.
                        There ought to be watchers on board ship, exclusively for that office. It is not to be
                        expected that sailors, who have been up and at work all day, should not sleep at night,
                        especially out in the air. It is as natural to these children of the sea, as to infants
                        carried out of doors. The sleeper, in the present instance, had a pail thrown over him one
                        night, which only put him in a rage, and perhaps made him sleep out of spite next time. He
                        was a strong, hearty Welsh lad, healthy and good-looking, in whose veins life coursed it so
                        happily, that, in order to put him on a par with less fortunate constitutions, fate seemed
                        to have brought about a state of warfare between him and the captain, who thought it
                        absolutely necessary to be always giving him the rope’s end. Poor
                            John used to dance and roar with the sting of it, and take care to
                        deserve it better next time. He was unquestionably “very aggravating,” as the
                        saying is; but, on the other hand, the rope was not a little provoking. 
    
     23. A strong breeze from the N. and N. E., with clouds and rain. The foam
                        by the vessel’s side was full of those sparkles I have mentioned, like stars in
                        clouds of froth. On the 24th, the breeze increased, but the sky was fairer, and the moon
                        gave a light. We drank the health of a friend in England, whose birthday it was; being
                        great observers of that part of religion. The 25th brought us beautiful weather, with a
                        wind right from the north, so that we ran down the remainder of the ![]()
                        coast of Portugal in high style. Just as we desired it too, it changed to N. W., so as to
                        enable us to turn the Strait of Gibraltar merrily. Cape
                            St. Vincent, (where the battle took place,) just before you come to
                            Gibraltar, is a beautiful lone promontory jutting out upon the
                        sea, and crowned with a convent: it presented itself to my eyes the first thing when I came
                        upon deck in the morning,—clear, solitary, blind-looking; feeling, as it were, the
                        sea air and the solitude for ever, like something between stone and spirit. It reminded me
                        of a couplet, written not long before) of —“Ghastly castle, that eternally Holds its blind visage out to the lone sea.”  | 
 Such things are beheld in one’s day-dreams, and we almost start to find them
                        real. Between the Cape and Gibraltar were some fishermen, ten or
                        twelve in a boat, fishing with a singular dancing motion of the line. These were the first
                        “Southrons” we had seen in their own domain; and they interested us
                        accordingly. One mall took off his cap. In return for this politeness, the sailors joked
                        them in bad Portuguese, and shouted with laughter at the odd sound of their language when
                        they replied. A seaman, within his ship and his limited horizon, thinks he contains the
                        whole circle of knowledge. Whatever gives him a hint of any thing else, he looks upon as
                        absurdity; and is the first to laugh at his own ignorance, without knowing it, in another
                        shape. That a Portuguese should not be able to speak English, appears to him the most
                        ludicrous thing in the world; while, on his part, he affects to think it a condescension to
                        speak a few rascally words of Portuguese, though he is in reality very proud of them. The
                        more ignorance and inability, the more pride and intolerance. A servant-maid whom we took
                        with us to Italy, could not “abide” the disagreeable sound of ![]()
 Tuscan; and professed to change the word grazie into grochy, because it was prettier. 
    
     All this corner of the Peninsula is rich in ancient and modern interest.
                        There is Cape St. Vincent, just mentioned;
                            Trafalgar, more illustrious; Cadiz, the
                        city of Geryon; Gibraltar, and
                        the other pillar of Hercules; Atlantis, Plato’s Island, which he puts hereabouts; and the
                            Fortunate Islands, Elysian Fields, or
                            Gardens of the Hesperides, which, under different appellations,
                        and often confounded with one another, lay in this part of the Atlantic, according to
                            Pliny. Here, also, if we are to take Dante’s word for it, Ulysses found a grave, not unworthy of his life in the “Odyssey.” Milton ought to have come this way from Italy, instead of twice going
                        through France: he would have found himself in a world of poetry, the unaccustomed grandeur
                        of the sea keeping it in its original freshness, unspoilt by the commonplaces that beset us
                        on shore: and his descriptions would have been still finer for it. It is observable, that
                            Milton does not deal much in descriptions of the ocean, a very
                        epic part of poetry. He has been at Homer and Apollonius, more than at sea. In one instance, he is content
                        with giving us an ancient phrase in one half of his line, and a translation of it in the
                        other: 
 “On the clear hyaline,—the glassy sea.”   | 
 The best describer of the sea, among our English poets, is Spenser, who was conversant with the Irish Channel. Shakspeare, for an inland poet, is wonderful; but his
                        astonishing sympathy with every thing, animate and inanimate, made him lord of the
                        universe, without stirring from his seat. Nature brought her shows to him like a servant,
                        and drew back for his eye the curtains of time and place. Milton and
                            Dante speak of the ocean as of a great plain.
                            Shakspeare talks as if he had ridden upon it, and felt its
                        unceasing motion. ![]()
                        “The still-vext
                                    Bermoothes.”  | 
 What a presence is there in that epithet He draws a rocky
                        island with its waters about it, as if he had lived there all his life; and he was the
                        first among our dramatists to paint a sailor,—as he was to lead the way in those
                        national caricatures of Frenchmen, Scotchmen, and Irishmen. 
 says Prospero,— “Weak masters though ye be, I have be-dimmed The noon-tide sun, called forth the mutinous winds, And ’twixt the green sea and the azur’d vault Set roaring war.”  | 
 He could not have said it better, had he been buffeted with all the blinding and
                        shrieking of a Channel storm. As to Spenser, see his comparisons of
                        “billows in the Irish sounds;” his “World of waters, wide and deep,”  | 
 in the first book,—much better than “the ocean floor” (suol marino) of Dante; and all the sea-pictures, both fair and stormy, in
                        the wonderful twelfth canto of Book the Second, with its fabulous ichthyology, part of
                        which I must quote here for the pleasure of poetical readers: for the seas ought not to be
                        traversed without once adverting to these other shapes of their terrors— “All dreadfull pourtraicts of deformitie; Spring-headed hydras, and sea-shouldering whales; Great whirle-pooles which all fishes make to flee; Bright scolopendras, armed with silver scales; Mighty monoceros with immeasured tayles.*  | 
                         * This is the smisurato of the Italians. In
                                the “Orlando Innamorato,”
                                somebody comes riding on a smisurato cavallone, an immeasurable horse.   | 
                        ![]()
                        “The dreadfull fish that hath deserved the name Of Death, and like him looks in dreadfull hew; The griesly wasserman, that makes his game The flying ships with swiftness to pursew; The horrible sea-satyre, that doth shew His fearefull face in time of greatest storm; Huge ziffius, whom mariners eschew No less than rocks, as travellers informe;  | 
                    
    
     (How he loads his verses with a weight of apprehension, as if it was all
                        real!) 
And greedy rosmarines, with visages deforme.  | 
![]()
“All these, and thousand thousands many more, And more deformed monsters, thousand-fold, With dreadfull noise and hollow rumbling rore Came rushing, in the fomy waves enroll’d, Which seemed to fly, for feare them to behold. No wonder if these did the knight appall; For all that here on earth we dreadfull hold, Be but as bugs to fearen babes withall, Compared to the creatures in the sea’s entr’all.”  | 
                    
    
     Five dreadfulls in the course of three stanzas,
                        and not one too many, any more than if a believing child were talking to us. 
    
    Gibraltar has a noble look, tall, hard, and independent. But you do
                        not wish to live there:—it is a fortress, and an insulated rock, and this is but a
                        prison. The inhabitants feed luxuriously, with the help of their fruits and smugglers. 
    
     The first sight of Africa is an achievement. Voyagers in our situation
                        are obliged to be content with a mere sight of it; but that is much. They have seen another
                        quarter of the globe. “Africa!” They look at it, and repeat the word, till the
                        whole burning and savage territory, with its black inhabitants and its lions, seems put
                        into their possession. Ceuta
                        ![]()
 and Tangier bring the old Moorish times
                        before you; “Ape’s Hill,” which is pointed out,
                        sounds fantastic and remote, “a wilderness of monkies;” and as all shores, on
                        which you do not clearly distinguish objects, have a solemn and romantic look, you get rid
                        of the petty effect of those vagabond Barbary States that occupy the coast, and think at
                        once of Africa, the country of deserts and wild beasts, the “dry-nurse of
                            lions;” as Horace, with a vigour beyond
                        himself, calls it. 
    
     At Gibraltar you first have a convincing proof of
                        the rarity of the southern atmosphere, in the near look of the Straits, which seem but a
                        few miles across, though they are thirteen. 
    
     But what a crowd of thoughts face one on entering the Mediterranean!
                        Grand as the sensation is, in passing through the classical and romantic memories of the
                        sea off the western coast of the Peninsula, it is little compared with this. Countless
                        generations of the human race, from three quarters of the world, with all the religions,
                        and the mythologies, and the genius, and the wonderful deeds, good and bad, that have
                        occupied almost the whole attention of mankind, look you in the face from the galleries of
                        that ocean-floor, rising one above another, till the tops are lost in heaven. The water at
                        your feet is the same water that bathes the shores of Europe, of Africa, and of
                        Asia,—of Italy and Greece, and the Holy Land, and the lands of chivalry and romance,
                        and pastoral Sicily, and the Pyramids, and old
                            Crete, and the Arabian city of Al Cairo,
                        glittering in the magic lustre of the Thousand and
                            One Nights. This soft air in your face, comes from the grove of
                                “Daphne by Orontes;”
                        these lucid waters, that part from before you like oil, are the same from which
                            Venus arose, pressing them out of her hair. In that quarter
                            Vulcan fell— 
“Dropt from the zenith like a falling star:”  | 
                        ![]()
 and there is Circe’s
                        Island, and Calypso’s, and the promontory of
                            Plato, and Ulysses wandering, and Cymon and
                            Miltiades fighting, and Regulus crossing the sea to Carthage, and “Damasco and Morocco, and
                                        Trebisond; And whom Biserta sent from Afric shore, By Fontarabia.”  | 
 The mind hardly separates truth from fiction in thinking of all these things, nor does
                        it wish to do so. Fiction is Truth in another shape, and gives as close embraces. You may
                        shut a door upon a ruby, and render it of no colour; but the colour shall not be the less
                        enchanting for that, when the sun, the poet of the world, touches it with his golden pen.
                        What we glow at and shed tears over, is as real as love and pity. 
    
     At night the moon arose in a perfection of serenity, and restored the
                        scene to the present moment. I could not help thinking, however, of Anacreon (poets are of all moments), and fancying some
                        connexion with moonlight in the very sound of that beautiful verse in which he speaks of
                        the vernal softness of the waves:— 
 I write the verse in English characters, that every reader may taste it. All our Greek beauties why should schools engross?  | 
 I used to feel grateful to Fielding and
                            Smollett, when a boy, for writing their Greek in
                        English. It is like catching a bit of a beautiful song, though one does not know the words. 
    
    
    
    
    
     27. Almost a calm. We proceeded at no greater rate than a mile an hour. I
                        kept repeating to myself the word Mediterranean; not the word in prose, but the word in
                        verse, as it stands at the beginning of the line: 
“And the sea Mediterranean.”  | 
 We saw the mountains about Malaga, topped with snow.
                            Velez Malaga is probably the place at which Cervantes landed on his return from captivity at
                            Algiers. (See Don
                            Quixote, Vol. ii. p. 208. Sharpe’s
                        edition.) I had the pleasure of reading the passage, while crossing the line betwixt the
                        two cities. It is something to sail by the very names of Granada and
                            Andalusia. There was a fine sunset over the hills of
                            Granada. I imagined it lighting up the
                            Alhambra. The clouds were like great wings of gold and yellow
                        and rose-colour, with a smaller minute sprinkle in one spot, like a shower of glowing
                        stones from a volcano. You see very faint imitations of such lustre in England. A heavy dew
                        succeeded; and a contrary wind at south-east, but very mild. At night, the reflection of
                        the moon on the water was like silver snakes. 
    
     We had contrary winds for several days in succession, but nothing to
                        signify after our winter. On the 28th we saw a fire at night on the coast of
                            Granada, and similar lights on the hills. The former was perhaps
                        made by smugglers, the latter in burning charcoal or heath. A gull came to us next day,
                        hanging in the air, like the dove in the picture, a few yards distance from the trysail,
                        and occasionally dipping in the water for fish. It had a small head, and long beak, like a
                        snipe’s; wings tipped with black. It reminded us of Mr.
                            Coleridge’s poem; which my eldest boy, in the teeth of his
                        father’s rhymes, has the impu-![]()
dence to think (now, as he did
                        then) the finest poem in the world. We may say of the “Ancient Mariner,” what is only to be said of the
                        very finest poems, that it is equally calculated to please the imaginations of the most
                        childlike boy and the profoundest man; extremes, which meet in those superhuman places; and
                        superhuman, in a sense exquisitely human, as well as visionary. I believe Mr.
                            Coleridge’s young admirer would have been as much terrified at
                        shooting this albatross, as the one the poet speaks of; not to mention that he could not be
                        quite sure it was a different one. 
    
     30. Passed Cape de Gata. My wife was very ill, but gladly observed that illness itself
                        was not illness, compared to what she experienced in the winter voyage. She never
                        complained, summer or winter. It is very distressing not to be able to give perfect comfort
                        to patients of this generous description. The Mediterranean Sea, after the Channel, was
                        like a bason of gold fish; but when the winds are contrary, the waves of it have a short
                        uneasy motion, that fidget the vessel, and make one long for the nobler billows of the
                        Atlantic. The wind too was singularly unpleasant,—moist and feverish. It continued
                        contrary for several days, but became more agreeable, and sunk almost into a calm on the 3d
                        of June. It is difficult for people on shore, in spite of their geographical knowledge, not
                        to suppose that the view is very extensive at sea. Intermediate objects being out of the
                        way, and the fancy taking wing like the dove of Noah, they imagine the
                        “ocean-floor,” as the poets call it, stretching in an interminable level all
                        round, or bounded by an enormous horizon; whereas, the range of vision is limited to a
                        circumference of about fourteen miles, and the uninterrupted concave of the horizon all
                        round, completes the look of enclosure and limitation. A man on the top of a moderate hill,
                        may see four or five times as far as from the ![]()
 mainmast of a
                        man-of-war. In the thin atmosphere of the south, the horizon appears to be still more
                        circumscribed. You seem to have but a few miles around you, and can hardly help fancying
                        that the sea is on a miniature scale, proportioned to its delicacy of behaviour. 
    
     On the day above-mentioned, we saw the land between Cape St.
                            Martin and Alicant. The coast hereabouts is all of
                        the same rude and grey character. From this night to the next it was almost a calm, when a
                        more favourable wind sprang up at east-south-east. The books with which I chiefly amused
                        myself in the Mediterranean, were “Don
                            Quixote,” (for reasons which will be obvious to the reader,)
                            “Ariosto” and “Berni,” (for similar reasons, their heroes having to
                        do with the coasts of France and Africa,) and Bayle’s admirable “Essay on Comets,” which I picked up at Plymouth.
                        It is the book that put an end to the superstition about comets. It is full of amusement,
                        like all his dialectics; and holds together a perfect chain-armour of logic, the handler of
                        which may also cut his fingers with it at every turn, almost every link containing a double
                        edge. A generation succeeds quietly to the good done it by such works, and its
                        benefactor’s name is sunk in the washy, churchwarden pretensions of those whom he has
                        enriched. As to what seems defective in Bayle on the score of natural
                        piety, the reader may supply that. A benevolent work, tending to do away real dishonour to
                        things supernatural, will be no hindrance to any benevolent addition which others can bring
                        it; nor would Bayle, with his good-natured face, and the scholarly
                        simplicity of his life, have found fault with it. But he was a soldier, after his fashion,
                        with the qualities, both positive and negative, fit to keep him one; and some things must
                        be dispensed with, in such a case, on the side of what is desirable, for the sake of the
                        part ![]()
 that is taken in the overthrow of what is detestable, Him whom
                        inquisitors hate, angels may love. 
    
     All day, on the 5th, we were off the island of
                            Yvica. The wind was contrary again till evening.
                            Yvica was about ten miles off, when nearest. It has a barren look,
                        with its rock in front. Spain was in sight; before and beyond, Cape St.
                            Martin. The high land of Spain above the clouds had a look really
                        mountainous. After having the sea to ourselves for a long while, we saw a vessel in our own
                        situation, beating to wind and tide. Sympathy is sometimes cruel as well as kind. One likes
                        to have a companion in misfortune. At night fell a calm. 
    
     6th. It was a grand thing this evening, to see on one side of us the
                        sunset, and on the other night already on the sea.
                                “Ruit oceano nox.” It is not true that there
                        is no twilight in the south, but it is very brief; and before the day is finished on one
                        side, night is on the other. You turn, and behold it unexpectedly,—a black shade that
                        fills one end of the horizon, and seems at once brooding and coming on. One sight like
                        this, to a Hesiod or a Thales, is sufficient to fill poetry for ever with those images of
                        brooding, and of raven wings, and the birth of Chaos, which are associated with the
                        mythological idea of night. To-day we hailed a ship bound for Nice,
                        which would not tell us the country she came from. Questions put by one vessel to another
                        are frequently refused an answer, for reasons of knavery or supposed policy. It was curious
                        to hear our rough and informal captain speaking through his trumpet with all the precision
                        and loud gravity of a preacher. There is a formula in use on these occasions, that has an
                        old and scriptural effect. A ship descried, appears to the sailors like a friend visiting
                        them in prison. All hands are interested: all eyes turn to the same quarter; the business
                            ![]()
 of the vessel is suspended; and such as have licence to do so,
                        crowd on the gangway; the captain, with an air of dignity, having his trumpet brought him.
                        You think that “What cheer, ho!” is to follow, or “Well, my lads, who are
                        you; and where are you going?” Not so: the captain applies his mouth with a pomp of
                        preparation, and you are startled with the following primitive shouts, all uttered in a
                        high formal tone, with due intervals between, as if a Calvinistic Stentor were questioning
                        a man from the land of Goshen. “What is your name?” “Whence come you?” “Whither are you bound?”  | 
 After the question “What is your name?” all ears are bent to listen. The
                        answer comes, high and remote, nothing perhaps being distinguished of it but the vowels.
                        The “Sall-of-Hym,” you must translate into the Sally of
                            Plymouth. “Whence come you?” All ears bent again.
                        “Myr” or “Mau,” is Smyrria or Malta.
                        “Whither are you bound?” All ears again. No answer. “D—d if
                        he’ll tell,” cries the captain, laying down at once his trumpet and his
                        scripture. 
    
     7th. Saw the Colombrettes, and the land about
                            Torfosa. Here commences the classical ground of Italian romance.
                        It was on this part of the west of Spain, that the Paynim chivalry used to land, to go
                        against Charlemagne. Here Orlando played the tricks that got him the title of Furioso; and from the
                        port of Barcelona, Angelica and
                            Medoro took ship for her dominion of
                            Cathay. I confess I looked at these shores with a human
                        interest, and could not help fancying that the keel of our vessel was crossing a real line,
                        over which knights and lovers had passed. And so they have, both real and fabulous; the
                        former not less romantic, the latter scarcely less real; to thousands, indeed, much more
                        so; ![]()
 for who knows of hundreds of real men and women, that have
                        crossed these waters, and suffered actual passion on those shores and hills? and who knows
                        not Orlando and all the hard blows he gave, and the
                        harder blow than all given him by two happy lovers; and the lovers themselves, the
                        representatives of all the young love that ever was? I had a grudge of my own against
                            Angelica, looking upon myself as jilted by those
                        fine eyes which the painter has given her in the English picture; for I took her for a more
                        sentimental person; but I excused her, seeing her beset and tormented by all those very
                        meritorious knights, who thought they earned a right to her by hacking and hewing; and I
                        more than pardoned her, when I found that Medoro,
                        besides being young and handsome, was a friend and a devoted follower. But what of that?
                        They were both young and handsome; and love, at that time of life, goes upon no other
                        merits, taking all the rest upon trust in the generosity of its wealth, and as willing to
                        bestow a throne as a ribbon, to show the all-sufficiency of its contentment. Fair speed
                        your sails over the lucid waters, ye lovers, on a lover-like sea! Fair speed them, yet
                        never land; for where the poet has left you, there ought ye, as ye are, to be living for
                        ever—for ever gliding about a summer-sea, touching at its flowery islands, and
                        reposing beneath its moon. 
    
     The blueness of the water about these parts was excessive, especially in
                        the shade next the vessel’s side. The gloss of the sunshine was there taken off, and
                        the colour was exactly that of the bottles sold in the shops with gold stoppers. In the
                        shadows caused by the more transparent medium of the sails, an exquisite radiance was
                        thrown up, like light struck out of a great precious stone. These colours, contrasted with
                        the yellow of the horizon at sunset, formed one of those spectacles of beauty, which it is
                        difficult to believe not intended to delight many more spec-![]()
tators
                        than can witness them with human eyes. Earth and sea are full of gorgeous pictures, which
                        seem made for a nobler and certainly a more numerous admiration, than is found among
                        ourselves. Individuals may roam the loveliest country for a summer’s day, and hardly
                        meet a person bound on the same enjoyment as themselves. Does human nature flatter itself
                        that all this beauty was made for its dull and absent eyes, gone elsewhere to poke about
                        for pence? Or, if so, is there not to be discerned in it a new and religious reason for
                        being more alive to the wholesome riches of nature, and less to those carking cares and
                        unneighbourly emulations of cities? 
    
     8th. Calm till evening, when a fairer wind arose, which continued all
                        night. There was a divine sunset over the mouth of the Ebro,—majestic, dark-embattled
                        clouds, with an intense sun venting itself above and below like a Shekinah, and the rest of
                        the heaven covered with large flights of little burnished and white clouds. It was what is
                        called in England a mackarel sky,—an appellation which may serve to show how much
                        inferior it is to a sky of the same mottled description in the south. All colours in the
                        north are comparatively cold and fishy. You have only to see a red cap under a
                        Mediterranean sun, to be convinced that our painters will never emulate those of Italy as
                        our poets have done. They are birds of a different clime, and are modified accordingly.
                        They do not live upon the same lustrous food, and will never show it in their plumage.
                        Poetry is the internal part, or sentiment, of what is material; and therefore, our thoughts
                        being driven inwards, and rendered imaginative by these very defects of climate which
                        discolour to us the external world, we have had among us some of the greatest poets that
                        ever existed. It is observable, that the greatest poets of Italy came from
                            Tuscany, where there is a great deal of inclemency in the
                        seasons. The ![]()
 painters were from Venice,
                            Rome, and other quarters; some of which, though more northern,
                        are more genially situated. The hills about Florence made Petrarch and Dante well
                        acquainted with winter; and they were also travellers, and unfortunate. These are mighty
                        helps to reflection. Titian and Raphael had nothing to do but to paint under a blue sky
                        half the day, and play with their mistress’s locks all the rest of it. Let a painter
                        in cloudy and bill-broking England do this, if he can. 
    
     9th. Completely fair wind at south-west. Saw
                            Montserrat. The sun, reflected on the water from the lee
                        studding-sail, was like shot silk. At half-past seven in the evening, night was risen in
                        the east, while the sun was setting opposite. “Black night has come up
                        already,” said the captain. A fair breeze all night and all next day, took us on at
                        the rate of about five miles an hour, very refreshing after the calms and foul winds. We
                        passed the Gulf of Lyons still more pleasantly than we did the
                            Bay of Biscay, for in the latter there was a calm. In both of
                        these places, a little rough handling is generally looked for. A hawk settled on the
                        main-yard, and peered about the birdless main. 
    
     11. Light airs not quite fair, till noon, when they returned and were
                        somewhat stronger. (I am thus particular in my daily notices, both to complete the
                        reader’s sense of the truth of my narrative, and to give him the benefit of them in
                        case he goes the same road.) The land about Toulon was now visible,
                        and then the Hieres Islands, a French paradise of oranges and sweet
                        airs— 
“Cheer’d with the grateful smell, old Ocean
                                    smiles.”—  | 
 The perfume exhaling from these, and other flowery coasts is no fable, as every one
                        knows who has passed Gibraltar and the coast of
                            Genoa. M. le Franc de
                            Pompignan, in some verses of the commonest French ![]()
                        manufacture, tells us, with respect to the Hieres Islands, that
                            Vertumnus, Pomona, Zephyr, &c. “reign
                        there always,” and that the place is “the asylum of their loves, and the throne
                        of their empire.” Very private and public! “Vertumne, Pomone, Zéphyre
                                     Avec Flore y règnent toujours; C’est l’asyle lie leurs amours, Et le trone de leur empire.”  | 
                    
    
     It was the coast of Provence we were now looking
                        upon, the land of the Troubadours. It seemed but a short cut over to Tripoli, where
                            Geoffrey Rudel went to look upon his mistress
                        and die. But our attention was called off by a less romantic spectacle, a sight unpleasant
                        to an Englishman,—the union flag of
                            Genoa and Sardinia hoisted on a boat. An
                        independent flag of any kind is something; a good old battered and conquered one is much;
                        but this bit of the Holy Alliance livery, patched up among his brother servants, by poor
                            Lord Castlereagh, and making its bow in the very
                        seas where Andrew Doria feasted an Emperor and
                        refused a sovereignty, was a baulk, of a very melancholy kind of burlesque. The Sardinian
                        was returning with empty wine casks from the French coast; a cargo, which, at the hour of
                        the day when we saw it, probably bore the liveliest possible resemblance to the heads whom
                        he served. The wind fell in the evening, and there was a dead calm all night. At eleven
                        o’clock, a grampus was heard breathing very hard, but we could not see it on account
                        of the mists, the only ones we had experienced in the Mediterranean. These sounds of great
                        fish in the night-time are very imposing, the creature displacing a world of water about
                        it, as it dips and rises at intervals on its billowy path. 
    
    
    
    
    
     12th. During the night we must have crossed the path which Bonaparte took to Antibes from
                            Elba. We went over it as unconsciously as he now travels round
                        with the globe in his long sleep. Talking with the captain to-day, I learnt that his
                        kindred and he monopolize the whole employment of his owner, and that his father served in
                        it thirty-three years out of fifty. There is always something respectable in continuity and
                        duration, where it is maintained by no ignoble means. If this family should continue to be
                        masters and conductors of vessels for two or three generations more, especially in the same
                        interest, they will have a sort of moral pedigree to show, far beyond those of many proud
                        families, who do nothing at all because their ancestors did something a hundred years back.
                        I will here set down a memorandum, with regard to vessels, which may be useful. The one we
                        sailed in was marked A. I. in the shipping list: that is to say, it stood in the first
                        class of the first rank of sea-worthy vessels; and it is in vessels of this class that
                        people are always anxious to sail. In the present instance, the ship was worthy of the rank
                        it bore: so was the one we buffeted the Channel in; or it would not have held out. But this
                        mark of prime worthiness, A. I., a vessel is allowed to retain only ten years; the
                        consequence of which is, that many ships are built to last only that time; and goods and
                        lives are often entrusted to a weak vessel, instead of one which, though twice as old, is
                        in twice as good condition. The best way is to get a friend who knows something of the
                        matter, to make inquiries; and the seaworthiness of the captain himself, his standing with
                        his employers, &c. might as well be added to the list. 
    
     13th. The Alps! It was the first time I had
                        seen mountains. They had a fine sulky look, up aloft in the sky,—cold, lofty, and
                        distant. I ![]()
 used to think that mountains would impress me but
                        little; that by the same process of imagination reversed, by which a brook can be fancied a
                        mighty river, with forests instead of verdure on its banks, a mountain could be made a
                        mole-hill, over which we step. But one look convinced me to the contrary. I found I could
                        elevate, better than I could pull down, and I was glad of it. It was not that the sight of
                        the Alps was necessary to convince me of “the being of a God,” as it is said to
                        have done Mr. Moore, or to put me upon any
                        reflections respecting infinity and first causes, of which I have had enough in my time;
                        but I seemed to meet for the first time a grand poetical thought in a material
                        shape,—to see a piece of one’s book-wonders realized,—something very
                        earthly, yet standing between earth and heaven, like a piece of the antediluvian world
                        looking out of the coldness of ages. I remember reading in a Review a passage from some
                        book of travels, which spoke of the author’s standing on the sea-shore, and being led
                        by the silence, and the abstraction, and the novel grandeur of the objects around him, to
                        think of the earth, not in its geographical divisions, but as a planet in connexion with
                        other planets, and rolling in the immensity of space. With these thoughts I have been
                        familiar, as I suppose every one has been who knows what solitude is, and has an
                        imagination, and perhaps not the best health. But we grow used to the mightiest aspects of
                        thought, as we do to the immortal visages of the moon and stars: and therefore the first
                        sight of the Alps, though much less things than any of these, and a toy, as I thought, for
                        imagination to recreate itself with after their company, startles us like the disproof of a
                        doubt, or the verification of an early dream,—a ghost, as it were, made visible by
                        daylight, and giving us an enormous sense of its presence and materiality. 
    
    
    
    
    
     In the course of the day, we saw the table-land about
                            Monaco. It brought to my mind the ludicrous distress of the
                        petty prince of that place, when on his return from interchanging congratulations with his
                        new masters—the legitimates, he suddenly met his old master, Napoleon, on his return from Elba. Or
                        did he meet him when going to Elba? I forget which; but the
                        distresses and confusion of the Prince were at all events as certain, as the superiority
                        and amusement of the great man. In either case, this was the natural division of things,
                        and the circumstances would have been the same. A large grampus went by, heaping the water
                        into clouds of foam. Another time, we saw a shark with his fin above water, which, I
                        believe, is his constant way of going. The Alps were now fully and closely seen, and a
                        glorious sunset took place. There was the greatest grandeur and the loveliest beauty. Among
                        others was a small string of clouds, like rubies with facets, a very dark tinge being put
                        here and there, as if by a painter, to set off the rest. Red is certainly the colour of
                        beauty, and ruby the most beautiful of reds. It was in no commonplace spirit that Marlowe, in his list of precious stones, called them
                        “beauteous rubies,” but with exquisite gusto — 
“Bags of fiery opals, sapphires, amethysts, Jacinths, hard topas, grass-green emeralds, Beauteous rubies, sparkling diamonds,” &c.  | 
 They come upon you, among the rest, like the women of gems. All these colours we had
                        about us in our Mediterranean sunsets; and as if fortune would add to them by a freak of
                        fancy, a little shoal of fish, sparkling as silver, leaped out of the water this afternoon,
                        like a sprinkle of shillings. They were the anchovies, or Sardinias, that we eat. They ![]()
 give a burlesque title to the sovereign of these seas, whom the
                        Tuscans call “King of the Sardinias.” 
    
     We were now sailing up the angle of the Gulf of
                            Genoa, its shore looking as Italian as possible, with groves and
                        white villages. The names too were alluring,—Oneglia,
                            Albenga, Savoria; the last, the birthplace of a sprightly poet,
                            (Frugoni,) whose works I was acquainted with.
                        The breeze was the strongest we had had yet, and not quite fair, but we made good head
                        against it; the queen-like city of Genoa, crowned with white
                        palaces, sat at the end of the Gulf, as if to receive us in state; and at two
                        o’clock, the waters being as blue as the sky, and all hearts rejoicing, we entered
                        our Italian harbour, and heard Italian words. 
    
     Luckily for us, these first words were Tuscan. A pilot-boat came out.
                        Somebody asked a question which we did not hear, and the captain replied to it.
                                “Va bene,” said the pilot
                        in a fine open voice, and turned the head of the boat with a tranquil dignity.
                            “Va bene,” thought I, indeed. “All goes
                        well” truly. The words are delicious, and the omen good. My family have arrived so
                        far in safety; we have but a little more voyage to make, a few steps to measure back in
                        this calm Mediterranean; the weather is glorious; Italy looks like what we expected; in a
                        day or two we shall hear of our friends: health and peace are before us, pleasure to others
                        and profit to ourselves; and it is hard if we do not enjoy again, before long, the society
                        of all our friends, both abroad and at home. In a day or two we received a letter from
                            Mr. Shelley, saying that winds and waves, he
                        hoped, would never part us more. 
    
     I intended to put below, in a note, what remarks I had made in another
                        publication, respecting the city of Genoa; but they have been
                        re-published in the compilation noticed in this work, purporting to ![]()
                        be an account of the “Life and Times of Lord
                            Byron.” It is a compliment a little on the side of the free order of
                        things, but such as I have never been inclined to complain of, especially where the
                        compiler, as in the present instance, is polite in his petty larceny, and helps himself to
                        your property in the style of Du Val. 
    
     In the harbour of Genoa, we lay next a fine
                        American vessel, the captain of which, I thought, played the great man in a style beyond
                        any thing I had seen in our English merchantmen. On the other side of us, was an
                        Englishman, as fragile as the other was stout-built. Yet the captain, who was a strange
                        fish, with a dialect more uncouth than any of us had heard, talked of its weathering the
                        last winter capitally, and professed not to care any thing for a gale of wind, which he
                        called a “gal o’ wined.” We here met with our winter vessel, looking as
                        gay and summery as you please, and having an awning stretched over the deck, under which
                        the captain politely invited us to dine. I went, and had the pleasure of meeting our friend
                        the mate, and a good-natured countryman, residing at Genoa, who
                        talked much of a French priest whom he knew, and whom he called “the prate.”
                        Our former companions, in completing their voyage, had had a bad time of it in the gulf of
                            Lyons, during which the ship was completely under water, the
                        cook-house and bulwarks, &c. were carried away, and the men were obliged to be taken
                        aft into the cabin two nights together. We had reason to bless ourselves that my wife was
                        not there; for this would infallibly have put an end to her. 
    
     On the 28th of June, we set sail for Leghorn. The
                        weather was still as fine as possible, and our concluding trip as agreeable; with the
                        exception of a storm of thunder and lightning one night, which was the completest I ever
                        saw. Our newspaper friend, “the oldest man living,” ![]()
                        ought to have been there to see it. The lightning fell in all parts of the sea, like
                        pillars; or like great melted fires, suddenly dropt from a giant torch. Now it pierced the
                        sea, like rods; now fell like enormous flakes or tongues, suddenly swallowed up. At one
                        time, it seemed to confine itself to a dark corner of the ocean, making formidable shows of
                        gigantic and flashing lances, (for it was the most perpendicular lightning I ever saw):
                        then it dashed broadly at the whole sea, as if it would sweep us away in flame; and then
                        came in random portions about the vessel, treading the waves hither and thither, like the
                        legs of fiery spirits descending in wrath. I then had a specimen (and confess I was not
                        sorry to see it) of the fear which could enter even into the hearts of our “gallant
                        heroes,” when thrown into an unusual situation. The captain, almost the only man
                        unmoved, or apparently so, (and I really believe he was as fearless on all occasions, as
                        his native valour, to say nothing of his brandy and water, could make him) was so
                        exasperated with the unequivocal alarm depicted in the faces of some of his crew, that
                        be-dashed his hand contemptuously at the poor fellow at the helm, and called him a coward.
                        For our parts, having no fear of thunder and lightning, and not being fully aware perhaps
                        of the danger to which vessels are exposed on these occasions, particularly if like our
                        Channel friend they carry gunpowder (as most of them do, more or less) we were quite at our
                        ease, compared with our inexperienced friends about us, who had never witnessed any thing
                        of the like before, even in books. Besides, we thought it impossible for the Mediterranean
                        to play us any serious trick,—that sunny and lucid basin, which we had beheld only in
                        its contrast with a northern and a winter sea. Little did we think, that in so short a
                        space of time, and somewhere about this very spot, a catastrophe would take ![]()
 place, that should put an end to all sweet thoughts both of the
                        Mediterranean and the South. 
    
     Our residence at Pisa and
                            Genoa has been already described, I must therefore request the
                        reader to indulge me in a dramatic license, and allow us to grow three years older in the
                        course of as many lines. By this time he will suppose us leaving
                            Genoa for Florence. We were obliged to
                        travel in the height of an Italian summer; which did no good to any of us. The children,
                        living temperately, and not having yet got any cares on their shoulders, which temperance
                        could not remove, soon recovered. It was otherwise with the rest; but there is a habit in
                        being ill, as in every thing else; and we disposed ourselves to go through our task of
                        endurance, as cheerfully as might be. 
    
     In Genoa you heard nothing in the streets but the
                        talk of money. I hailed it is a good omen in Florence, that the two
                        first words which caught my ears, were Flowers and Women (Fiori and Donne). The
                        night of our arrival we put up at an hotel in a very public street, and were kept awake (as
                        agreeably as fever would let us be) by songs and guitars. It was one of the pleasantest
                        pieces of the south we had experienced: and, for the moment, we lived in the Italy of
                        books. One performer, to a jovial accompaniment, sang a song about somebody’s fair
                        wife (bianca moglie), which set the street in roars of laughter. From
                        the hotel we went into a lodging in the street of Beautiful Women—Via delle
                            Belle Donne—a name which it is a sort of tune to pronounce. We there
                        heard one night a concert in the street; and looking out, saw music-stands, books, &c.
                        in regular order, and amateurs performing as in a room. Opposite our lodging was an
                        inscription on a house pur-![]()
porting that it was the Hospital of the
                        Monks of Vallombrosa. Wherever you turned was music or a graceful
                        memory. From the Via delle Belle Donne we went to live in the
                            Piazza Santa Croce, next to the church of that name containing
                        the ashes of Michael Angelo. 
    
     On the other side of it was the monastery, in which Pope Sixtus V. went stooping as if in decrepitude;
                        “looking,” as he said afterwards, “for the keys of St.
                            Peter.” We lodged in the house of a Greek, who came from the island of
                            Andros, and was called Dionysius; a name,
                        which has existed there perhaps ever since the god who bore it. Our host was a proper
                        Bacchanalian, always drunk, and spoke faster than I ever heard. He had a “fair
                            Andrian” for his mother, old and ugly, whose name was
                            Bella. 
    
     The church of Santa Croce would disappoint you as
                        much inside as out, if the presence of the remains of Great Men did not always cast a
                        mingled shadow of the awful and beautiful over one’s thought. Any large space also,
                        devoted to the purposes of religion, though the religion be false, disposes the mind to the
                        loftiest of speculations. The vaulted sky out of doors appears small, compared with the
                        opening into immensity represented by that very enclosure,—that larger dwelling than
                        common, entered by a little door; and we take off our hats, not so much out of earthly
                        respect, as with the feeling that there should be nothing between our heads and the air of
                        the next world. 
    
     Agreeably to our old rustic propensities, we did not stop long in the
                        city. We left Santa Croce to live at Maiano,
                        a village on the slope of one of the Fiesolan hills, about two miles off. I passed there a
                        very disconsolate time; yet the greatest comfort I experienced in Italy was from living in
                        that neighbourhood, and thinking, as I went about, of Boccaccio. Boccaccio’s father had a house at
                            Maiano, sup-![]()
posed to have been situate at
                        the Fiesolan extremity of the hamlet. That divine writer (whose sentiment outweighed his
                        levity a hundred fold, as a fine face is oftener serious than it is merry) was so fond of
                        the place, that he has not only laid the two scenes of the Decameron on each side of it, with the valley his
                        company resorted to in the middle, but has made the two little streams that embrace
                            Maiano, the Affrico and the
                            Mensola, the hero and heroine of his Nimphale Fiesolano. A lover and his
                        vestal mistress are changed into them, after the fashion of Ovid. The scene of another of his works is on the banks of the
                            Mugnone, a river a little distant: and the Decameron is full of the neighbouring villages. Out of the windows of one side
                        of our house, we saw the turret of the Villa Gherardi, to which his
                        “joyous company” resorted in the first instance;—a house belonging to the
                            Macchiavelli was nearer, a little to the left;
                        and further to the left, among the blue hills, was the white village of
                            Settignano, where Michael
                            Angelo was born. The house is still remaining in possession of the family.
                        From our windows on the other side we saw, close to us, the Fiesole
                        of antiquity and of Milton, the site of the
                        Boccaccio-house before-mentioned still closer, the Valley of Ladies
                        at our feet; and we looked over towards the quarter of the Mugnone
                        and of a house of Dante, and in the distance beheld the
                        mountains of Pistoia. Lastly, from the terrace in front,
                            Florence lay clear and cathedralled before us, with the scene of
                            Redi’s Bacchus
                        rising on the other side of it, and the Villa of Arcetri,
                        illustrious for Galileo. 
    
     But I stuck to my Boccaccio
                        haunts, as to an old home. I lived with the divine human being, with his friends of the
                        Falcon and the Basil, and my own not unworthy melancholy; and went about the flowering
                        lanes and hills, solitary indeed, and sick to the heart, but not unsus-![]()
tained. In looking back to such periods of one’s existence,
                        one is surprised to find how much they surpass many occasions of mirth, and what a rich
                        tone of colour their very darkness assumes, as in some fine old painting. My almost daily
                        walk was to Fiesole, through a path skirted with wild myrtle and
                        cyclamen; and I stopped at the cloister of the Doccia, and sat on
                        the pretty melancholy platform behind it, reading, or looking through the pines down to
                            Florence. In the Valley of Ladies, I
                        found some English trees (trees not vine and olive) and even a meadow; and these, while I
                        made them furnish me with a bit of my old home in the north, did no injury to the memory of
                        Boccaccio, who is of all countries, and finds his home wherever we do ourselves, in love,
                        in the grave, in a desert island. 
    
     But I had other friends too not far off, English, and of the right sort.
                        My friend, Mr. Brown, occupied for a time the little
                        convent of St. Baldassare, near Maiano, where
                        he represented the body corporate of the former possessors with all the joviality of a
                        comfortable natural piety. The closet in his study, where the church treasures had most
                        likely been kept, was filled with the humanities of modern literature, not less Christian
                        for being a little sceptical: and we had a zest in fancying that we discoursed of love and
                        wine in the apartments of the Lady Abbess. I remember I had the pleasure of telling an
                        Italian gentleman there the joke attributed to the Reverend Mr.
                            Sydney Smith, about sitting next a man at table, who had “a
                        seven-parson power;” and he understood it, and rolled with laughter, crying
                            out—“Oh, ma bello! ma bellissimo!” There, too, I
                        had the pleasure of dining in company with an English beauty, (Mrs.
                        W.) who appeared to be such as Boccaccio
                        might have admired, capable both of mirth and gravity; and she had a child with her that
                        reflected her graces. The appearance of one of ![]()
 these young English
                        mothers among Italian women, is like domesticity among the passions. It is a pity when you
                        return to England, that the generality of faces do not keep up the charm. You are then too
                        apt to think, that an Italian beauty among English women would look like poetry among the
                        sullens. 
    
     My friend B. removed to Florence; and together
                        with the books and newspapers, made me a city visitor. I there became acquainted with
                            Mr. Landor, to whose talents I had made the
                                amende honorable the year before; and
                        with Mr. Kirkup, an English artist, who is poor
                        enough, I fear, neither in purse nor accomplishment, to cultivate his profession as he
                        ought; and so beloved by his friends, that they must get at a distance from him before they
                        can tell him of it. And yet I know not why they should; for a man of a more cordial
                        generosity, with greater delicacy in showing it, I have never met with: and such men
                        deserve the compliment of openness. They know how to receive it. To the list of my
                        acquaintances, I had the honour of adding Lord Dillon,
                        who in the midst of an exuberance of temperament more than national, conceals a depth of
                        understanding, and a genuine humanity of knowledge, to which proper justice is not done in
                        consequence. The vegetation and the unstable ground divert suspicion from the ore beneath
                        it. I remember his saying something one evening about a very ill-used description of
                        persons in the London streets, for which Shakspeare
                        might have taken him by the hand; though the proposition came in so startling a shape, that
                        the company were obliged to be shocked in self-defence. The gallant Viscount is not the
                        better for being a Lord. I never knew, or read of a clever man, that was. It makes the most
                        natural men artificial, and perplexes them with contradictory ambitions. A proper Lord,
                        being constituted of nothing, judiciously consents to remain so, ![]()
                        and avoids trenching upon realities. I must also take leave to doubt, whether Roscommon will not remain the greatest poet among the
                        Dillons, notwithstanding the minaccie of
                            Ezzelino. But his Lordship is not the less worthy of a race of
                        intelligent men and noble adventurers. He is a cavalier of the old school of the
                            Meadowses and Newcastles, with something of
                        the O’Neal superadded; and instead of wasting his words upon
                        tyrants or Mr. Pitt, ought to have been eternally at
                        the head of his brigade, charging on his war-horse, and meditating romantic stories. 
    
    Mr. Landor, who has long been known to scholars as a
                        Latin poet beyond the elegance of centos, and has lately shown himself one of our most
                        powerful writers of prose, is a man of a vehement nature, with great delicacy of
                        imagination. He is like a stormy mountain pine, that should produce lilies. After indulging
                        the partialities of his friendships and enmities, and trampling on kings and ministers, he
                        shall cool himself, like a Spartan worshipping a moon-beam, in the patient meekness of
                            Lady Jane Grey. I used to think he did wrong in
                        choosing to write Latin verse instead of English. The opinions he has expressed on that
                        subject, in the eloquent treatise appended to his Latin poems, will, I am sure, hardly find
                        a single person to agree with them. But as an individual, working out his own case, I think
                        he was right in giving way to the inspiration of his scholarship. Independent, learned, and
                        leisurely, with a temperament, perhaps, rather than a mind, poetical, he walked among the
                        fields of antiquity, till he beheld the forms of poetry with the eyes of their inhabitants;
                        and it is agreeable, as a variety, among the crowds of ordinary scholars, especially such
                        as affect to think the great modern poets little ones because they are not ancient, to have
                        one who can really fancy and feel with Ovid and Catullus, as well as read them. ![]()
                        Mr. Landor has the veneration for all poetry, ancient or modern, that
                        belongs to a scholar who is himself a poet. He loves Chaucer and Spenser, as well as
                            Homer. That he deserves the title, the reader will
                        be convinced on opening his book of “Idyls,” where the first thing he encounters will be the charming duel
                        between Cupid and Pan, full of fancy and archness, with a deeper emotion at the end. His
                        “Lyrics,” with the exception of a pretty vision about
                            Ceres and her poppies, (which is in the spirit of an Idyl,) do not
                        appear to me so good: but upon the whole though it is a point on which I am bound to speak
                        with diffidence, he seems to me by far the best Latin poet we possess, after Milton; more in good taste than the incorrectness and
                        diffuseness of Cowley; and not to be lowered by a
                        comparison with the mimic elegancies of Addison.
                            Vincent Bourne, I conceive to be a genuine hand;
                        but I know him only in a piece or two. 
    
    Mr. Landor was educated at
                            Rugby, and became afterwards the friend and favourite pupil of
                            Dr. Parr. With a library, the smallness of which
                        surprised me, and which he must furnish out, when he writes on English subjects, by the
                        help of a rich memory,—he lives, among his paintings and hospitalities, in a style of
                        unostentatious elegance, very becoming a scholar that can afford it. The exile, in which he
                        chooses to continue at present, is as different from that of his friend Ovid, as his Tristia would have been, had he thought proper to write any. Augustus would certainly have found no whining in him, much
                        less any worship. He has some fine children, with whom he plays like a real schoolboy,
                        being, in truth, as ready to complain of an undue knock, as he is to laugh, shout, and
                        scramble; and his wife (I really do not know whether I ought to take these liberties, but
                        the nature of the book into which I have been beguiled must excuse me, and ladies must take
                        the consequence ![]()
 of being agreeable),—his wife would have made
                            Ovid’s loneliness quite another thing, with her face radiant
                        with good-humour. Mr. Landor’s conversation is lively and
                        unaffected, as full of scholarship or otherwise as you may desire, and dashed now and then
                        with a little superfluous will and vehemence, when he speaks of his likings and dislikes.
                        His laugh is in peals, and climbing: he seems to fetch every fresh one from a higher story.
                        Speaking of the Latin poets of antiquity, I was struck with an observation of his; that
                            Ovid was the best-natured of them all. Horace’s perfection that way he doubted. He said, that
                            Ovid had a greater range of pleasurable ideas, and was prepared to
                        do justice to every thing that came in his way. Ovid was fond of
                        noticing his rivals in wit and genius, and has recorded the names of a great number of his
                        friends; whereas Horace seems to confine his eulogies to such as were
                        rich or in fashion, and well received at court. 
    
     When the “Liberal” was put an end to, I had contributed some articles to a new work set
                        up by my brother, called the “Literary
                            Examiner.” Being too ill at Florence to continue
                        these, I did what I could, and had recourse to the lightest and easiest translation I could
                        think of, which was that of Redi’s “Bacco in Toscana.” I believe it fell
                        dead-born from the press: Like the wines it recorded, it would not keep. Indeed it was not
                        very likely that the English public should take much interest in liquors not their own, and
                        enthusiastic allusions to times and places with which they had no sympathy. Animal spirits
                        also require to be read by animal spirits, or at least by a melancholy so tempered as to
                        consider them rather as desirable than fantastic:—perhaps my own relish of the
                        original was not sprightly enough at the time to do it justice; and, at all events, it is
                        requisite that what a man does say in his vivacity should not be doubly spoilt in the
                        conveyance. ![]()
                        Bell’s Edition of Shakspeare, is said to have been the worst edition ever put forth of a
                        British author. Perhaps the translation of the “Bacchus in Tuscany” was the worst ever printed. It
                        was mystified with upwards of fifty mistakes. 
    
     At Maiano, I wrote the articles which appeared in
                        the “Examiner,” under the title of the
                            “Wishing Cap.” It was a very
                        genuine title. When I put on my cap, and pitched myself in imagination into the thick of
                            Covent-Garden, the pleasure I received was so vivid,—I
                        turned the corner of a street so much in the ordinary course of things, and was so tangibly
                        present to the pavement, the shop-windows, the people, and a thousand agreeable
                        recollections which looked me naturally in the face, that sometimes when I walk there now,
                        the impression seems hardly more real. I used to feel as if I actually pitched my soul
                        there, and that spiritual eyes might have seen it shot over from
                            Tuscany into York-street, like a rocket. It is much pleasanter,
                        however, on waking up, to find soul and body together in one’s favourite
                        neighbourhood: yes, even than among thy olives and vines, Boccaccio! I not only missed “the town” in Italy; I missed my
                        old trees,—oaks and elms. Tuscany, in point of wood, is
                        nothing but an olive-ground and vineyard. I saw there, how it was, that some persons when
                        they return from Italy say it has no wood, and some a great deal. The fact is, that many
                        parts of it, Tuscany included, has no wood to speak of; and it wants larger trees interspersed with the smaller ones, in the
                        manner of our hedge-row elms. A tree of a reasonable height is a Godsend. The olives are
                        low and hazy-looking, like dry sallows. You have plenty of those; but to an Englishman,
                        looking from a height, they appear little better than brushwood. Then there are no meadows,
                        no proper green lanes (at least, I saw none), no paths leading over field and style, no
                        hay-fields in June, ![]()
 nothing of that luxurious combination of green
                        and russet, of grass, wild flowers, and woods, over which a lover of Nature can stroll for
                        hours with a foot as fresh as the stag’s; unvexed with chalk, dust, and an eternal
                        public path; and able to lie down, if he will, and sleep in clover. In short, (saving a
                        little more settled weather,) we have the best part of Italy in books, be it what it may;
                        and this we can enjoy in England. Give me Tuscany in
                            Middlesex or Berkshire, and the
                            Valley of Ladies between Harrow and
                            Jack Straw’s Castle. The proud names and flinty ruins
                        above the Mensola may keep their distance.
                            Boccaccio shall build a bower for us, out of his books, of all
                        that we choose to import; and we will have daisies and fresh meadows besides. An Italian
                        may prefer his own country after the same fashion; and he is right. I knew a young
                        Englishwoman, who, having grown up in Tuscany, thought the landscapes of her native country
                        insipid, and could not imagine how people could live without walks in vineyards. To me
                        Italy has a certain hard taste in the mouth. Its mountains are too bare, its outlines too
                        sharp, its lanes too stony, its voices too loud, its long summer too dusty. I longed to
                        bathe myself in the grassy balm of my native fields. But I was ill, uncomfortable, in a
                        perpetual fever; and critics, if they are candid, should give us a list of the infirmities,
                        under which they sit down to estimate what they differ with. What returns of sick and
                        wounded we should have at the head of some of our periodicals! 
    
     Before I left Italy, I had the pleasure of frightening the Tuscan
                        government by proposing to set up a compilation from the English Magazines. They are rarely
                        seen in that quarter, though our countrymen are numerous. In the year 1825, two hundred
                        English families were said to be resident in Florence. In
                            Rome, visitors, though not families, were more numerous; and the
                        publication, for little cost, might have been ![]()
 sent all over Italy.
                        The plan was to select none but the very best articles, and follow them with an original
                        one commenting upon their beauties, and making the English in Italy well acquainted with
                        our living authors. But the Tuscan authorities were fairly struck with consternation.
                        “You must submit the publication to a censorship.”—“Be it
                        so.”—“But you must let them see every sheet, before it goes to press, in
                        order that there may be no religion or politics.”—“Very well:—to
                        please the reverend censors, I will have no religion: politics also are out of the
                        question.”—“Ay, but politics may creep in.”—“They shall
                        not.”—“Ah, but they may creep in, without your being aware; and then what
                        is to be done?”—“Why, if neither the editor nor the censors are aware, I
                        do not see that any very vivid impression need be apprehended with regard to the
                        public.”—“That appears very plausible; but how if the censors do not
                        understand English?”—“There indeed you have me. All I can say is, that
                        the English understand the censors, and I see we must drop our intended
                        work.”—This was the substance of a discourse I had with the bookseller, after
                        communication with the authorities. The prospectus had been drawn out; the bookseller had
                        rubbed his hands at it, thinking of the money which the Byrons and Walter Scotts of England were
                        preparing for him; but he was obliged to give in. “Ah,” said he to me in his
                        broken English, as he sat in winter-time with cold feet and an irritable face, pretending
                        to keep himself warm by tantalizing the tip of his fingers over a little basin of
                        charcoal,—“Ah, you are veree happee in England; you can get so much money as
                        you please.” 
    
     It was a joyful day that enabled us to return to England. I will quote a
                        letter which a friend has preserved, giving an account of the first part of our journey;
                        for these things are best told while the impression is most lively.  *  *  *  * *  *  * 
    
    
    
    
    
     “I had a proper Bacchanalian parting with
                                Florence. A stranger and I cracked a bottle together in high
                            style. He ran against me with a flask of wine in his hand, and divided it gloriously
                            between us. It was impossible to be angry with his good-humoured face; so we
                            complimented one another on our joviality, and parted on the most flourishing terms. In
                            the evening I cracked another flask, with equal abstinence of inside. Mr. Kirkup (whom you have heard me speak of) made me a
                            present of a vine stick. He came to Maiano, with Mr. Brown, to take leave of us; so we christened the
                            stick, as they do a seventy-four, and he stood rod-father.
                    
    
     “We set off next morning at six o’clock. I took leave of
                                Maiano with a dry eye, Boccaccio and the Valley of Ladies
                            notwithstanding. But the grave face of Brown (who had stayed all
                            night, and was to continue doing us good after we had gone, by seeing to our goods and
                            chattels,) was not so easily to be parted with. I was obliged to gulp down a sensation
                            in the throat, such as men cannot very well afford to confess “in these
                            degenerate days,” especially to a lady. So I beg you will have a respect for it,
                            and know it for what it is. Old Lear and Achilles made nothing of owning to it. But before we get
                            on, I must make you acquainted with our mode of travelling.
                    
    
     “We go not by post, but by Vettura; that is
                            to say, by easy stages of thirty or forty miles a day, in a travelling carriage, the
                            box of which is turned into a chaise, with a calash over it. It is drawn by three
                            horses, occasionally assisted by mules. We pay about eighty-two guineas English, for
                            which sum ten of us (counting as six, because of the number of children,) are taken to
                            Calais; have a breakfast and dinner every day on the road; are provided with five beds
                            at night, each containing two persons; and are to rest four days during the ![]()
 journey, without farther expense, in whatever portions and
                            places we think fit. Our breakfast consists of coffee, bread, fruit, milk, and eggs;
                            plenty of each: the dinner of the four indispensable Italian dishes, something roast,
                            something boiled, something fried, and what they call an umido, which is a hash, or something of that sort; together
                            with vegetables, wine, and fruit. Care must be taken that the Vetturino does not crib
                            from this allowance by degrees, otherwise the dishes grow fewer and smaller; meat
                            disappears on a religious principle, it being magro day, on which “nothing is to be had;” and the
                            vegetables adhering to their friend the meat in his adversity, disappear likewise. The
                            reason of this is, that the Vetturino has a conflicting interest
                            within him. It is his interest to please you in hope of other custom; and it his
                            interest to make the most of the sum of money, which his master allows him for
                            expenses. Withstand, however, any change at first, and good behaviour may be reckoned
                            upon. We have as pleasant a little Tuscan to drive us, as I ever met with. He began
                            very handsomely; but finding us willing to make the best of any little deficiency, he
                            could not resist the temptation of giving up the remoter interest for the nearer one.
                            We found our profusion diminish accordingly; and at Turin, after cunningly asking us,
                            whether we cared to have an inn not of the very highest description, he has brought us
                            to one of which it can only be said that it is not of the very lowest. The landlord
                            showed us into sordid rooms on a second story. I found it necessary to be base and make
                            a noise; upon which little Gigi looked frightened, and the
                            landlord looked slavish and bowed us into his best. We shall have no more of this. Our
                            rogue has an excellent temper, and is as honest a rogue, I will undertake to say, as
                            ever puzzled a formalist. He makes us laugh with his resemblance to Mr. Lamb; whose countenance, a little jovialized, he
                            engrafts upon an ![]()
 active little body and pair of legs, walking
                            about in his jack-boots as if they were pumps. But he must have some object in life, to
                            carry him so many times over the Alps:—this of necessity is money. You may guess
                            that we could have dispensed with some of the fried and roasted; but to do this, would
                            be to subject ourselves to other diminutions. Our bargain is reckoned a good one. The
                            coachmaster says, (believe him who will,) that he could not have afforded it, had he
                            not been sure at this time of the year, that somebody would take his coach back again;
                            so many persons come to winter in Italy.
                    
    
     “Well, now that you have all the prolegomena, right and tight,
                            we will set off again. We were told to look for a barren road from
                                Florence to Bologna, but were most
                            agreeably disappointed. The vines and olives disappeared, which was a relief to us.
                            Instead of these, and the comparatively petty ascents about
                                Florence, we had proper swelling
                                Apennines, valley and mountain, with fine sloping meadows of
                            green, interspersed with wood. We stopped to refresh ourselves at noon at an inn called
                                Le Maschere, where there is a very elegant prospect, a
                            mixture of nature with garden ground; and slept at Covigliaio,
                            where three tall buxom damsels waited upon us, who romped during supper with the
                            men-servants. One of them had a nicer voice than the others, upon the strength of which
                            she stepped about with a jaunty air in a hat and feathers, and made the aimable. A Greek came in with a long beard; which he poked
                            into all the rooms by way of investigation; as he could speak no language but his own.
                            I asked one of the girls why she looked so frightened; upon which she shrugged her
                            shoulders and said, “Oh Dio!” as if Blue
                                Beard had come to put her in his seraglio.
                    
    
     “Our vile inn knocked us up; so I would not write any more
                            yesterday. Little Gigi came up yesterday evening with a grave
                            face, to ![]()
 tell us that he was not aware till that moment of its
                            being part of his duty, by the agreement, to pay expenses during our days of stopping.
                            He had not looked into the agreement till then! The rogue! So we lectured him, and
                            forgave him for his good temper: and he is to be very honest and expensive in future.
                            This episode of the postilion has put me out of the order of my narration.
                    
    
     “To resume then. Next morning the 11th, we set off at five, and
                            passed a volcanic part of the Apennines, where a flame issues
                            from the ground. We thought we saw it. The place is called Pietra
                                Mala. Here we enter upon the Pope’s territories, as if his
                            Holiness kept the keys of a very different place from what he pretends. We refreshed at
                                Poggioli, in sight of a church upon a hill, called the
                                Monte dei Formicoli. They say all the ants in the
                            neighbourhood come into the church on a certain day, in the middle of the service, and
                            make a point of dying during the mass; but the postilion said, that for his part he did
                            not believe it. Travelling makes people sceptical. The same evening we got to
                                Bologna, where we finished for the present with mountains,
                            The best streets in Bologna are furnished with arcades, very
                            sensible things, which we are surprised to miss in any city in a hot country. They are
                            to be found, more or less, as you travel northwards. The houses are all kept in
                            good-looking order, owing, I believe, to a passion the Bolognese have for a gorgeous
                            anniversary, against which every thing animate and inanimate puts on its best. I could
                            not learn what it was. Besides tapestry and flowers, they bring out their pictures to
                            hang in front of the houses. Many cities in Italy disappoint the eye of the traveller.
                            The stucco and plaister outside the houses gets worn, and, together with the open
                            windows, gives them a squalid and deserted appearance. But the ![]()
                            name is always something. If Bologna were nothing of a city, it would still be a fine
                            sound and a sentiment; a thing recorded in art, in poetry, in stories of all sorts. We
                            passed next day over a flat country, and dined at Modena, which
                            is neither so good-looking a city, nor so well sounding a recollection as
                                Bologna: but it is still Modena, the
                            native place of Tassoni. I went to the cathedral
                            to get sight of the Secchia which is hung up there, but found the
                            doors shut; and as ugly a pile of building as a bad cathedral could make. The lions
                            before the doors, look as if some giant’s children had made them in sport,
                            wretchedly sculptured, and gaping as if in agony at their bad legs. It was a
                            disappointment to me not to see the Bucket. The Secchia Rapita is my oldest Italian acquaintance,
                            and I reckoned upon saying to the hero of it ‘Ah, ha! There you are!’ There
                            is something provoking and yet something fine too, in flitting in this manner from city
                            to city. You are vexed at not being able to stop and see pictures, &c.; but you
                            have a sort of royal taste of great pleasures in passing. The best thing one can do to
                            get at the interior of any thing in this hurry, is to watch the countenances of the
                            people. I thought the looks of the Bolognese and Modenese singularly answered to their
                            character in books. What is more singular, is the extraordinary difference, and
                            nationality of aspect, in the people of two cities at so little distance from one
                            another. The Bolognese have a broad steady look, not without geniality and richness.
                            You can imagine them to give birth to painters. The Modenese are crusty looking and
                            carking, with a dry twinkle at you, and a narrow mouth. They are critics and satirists,
                            on the face of them. For my part, I never took very kindly to
                                Tassoni, for all my young acquaintance with him; and in the
                            war which he has celebrated, I am now, whatever I was before, decidedly for the
                            Bolognese.” 
    
    
    
    
    
     On the 12th of September, after dining at Modena,
                        we slept at Reggio, where Ariosto was born. His father was captain of the citadel. Boiardo, the poet’s precursor, was born at
                            Scandiano, not far off. I ran, before the gates were shut, to
                        get a look at the citadel, and was much the better for not missing it. Poets leave a
                        greater charm than any men upon places they have rendered famous, because they sympathize
                        more than any other men with localities, and identify themselves with the least beauty of
                        art or nature,—a turret, an old tree. The river Ilissus at
                            Athens is found to be a sorry brook; but it runs talking for
                        ever of Plato and Sophocles. 
    
     At Parma, I tore my hair mentally, (much the
                        pleasantest way,) at not being able to see the Correggios.
                            Piacenza pleased one to be in it, on account of the name. But a
                        list of places in Italy is always like a succession of musical chords.
                            Parma, Piacenza,
                            Voghera, Tortona,
                            Felizana,—sounds like these make a road-book a music-book.
                        At Asti, a pretty place with a “west-end,” full of fine
                        houses, I went to look at the Alfieri palace, and
                        tried to remember the poet with pleasure: but I could not like him. To me, his austerity is
                        only real in the unpleasantest part of it. The rest is affected. The human heart is a tough
                        business in his hands; and he thumps and turns it about in his short, violent, and pounding
                        manner, as if it were an iron on a blacksmith’s anvil. He loved liberty like a
                        tyrant, and the Pretender’s widow like a lord. 
    
     The first sight of the Po, and the mulberry-trees, and meadows, and the
                        Alps, was at once classical, and Italian, and northern; and made us feel that we were
                        taking a great new step nearer home. Poirino, a pretty little place,
                        with a name full of pear-trees, presented us with a sight like a passage in Boccaccio. This was a set of Dominican friars with the
                        chief at their head, issuing out of two coaches, and proceeding along the cor-![]()
ridor of the inn to dinner, each holding a bottle of wine in his
                        hand, with the exception of the abbot, who held two. The wine was doubtless their own, that
                        upon the road not being sufficiently orthodox. 
    
    Turin is a noble city, like a set of Regent
                            Streets, made twice as tall. We found here the most military-looking
                        officers we remember to have seen, fine, tall, handsome fellows, whom the weather had
                        beaten but not conquered, very gentlemanly, and combining the officer and soldier as
                        completely as could be wished. They had served under Bonaparte. When I saw them, I could understand how it was that the
                        threatened Piedmontese revolution was more dreaded by the legitimates than any other
                        movement in Italy. It was betrayed by the heir-apparent, who is said to be as different a
                        looking person, as the reader might suppose. The royal aspect in the Sardinias is eminent
                        among the raffish of the earth. 
    
     At Turin was the finest dancer I ever saw, a girl
                        of the name of De’ Martini. M. Laurent should invite her over. She appeared to me to
                        unite the agility of the French school, with all that you would expect from the Italian.
                        Italian dancers are in general as indifferent, as the French are celebrated: but the French
                        have no mind with their bodies: they are busts in barbers’ shops, stuck upon legs in
                        a fit. You wonder how any lower extremities so lively can leave such an absence of all
                        expression in the upper. Now De’ Martini is a dancer all over,
                        and does not omit her face. She is a body not merely saltatory, as a machine might be, but
                        full of soul. When she came bounding on the stage, in two or three long leaps like a fawn,
                        I should have thought she was a Frenchwoman, but the style undeceived me. She came bounding
                        in front, as if she would have pitched herself into the arms of the pit; then made a sudden
                        drop, and addressed three enthusiastic courtesies to the pit and ![]()
                        boxes, with a rapidity and yet a grace, a self-abandonment yet a self-possession, quite
                        extraordinary, and such, as to do justice to it, should be described by a poet uniting the
                        western ideas of the sex with eastern license. Then she is beautiful both in face and
                        figure, and I thought was a proper dancer to appear before a pit full of those fine fellows
                        I have just spoken of. She seemed as complete in her way as themselves. In short, I never
                        saw any thing like it before; and did not wonder, that she had the reputation of turning
                        the heads of dozens wherever she went. 
    
     At Sant-Ambrogio, a little town between
                            Turin and Susa, is a proper castle-topped
                            mountain à la Radcliffe, the only one we had met with. Susa
                        has some remains connected with Augustus; but
                            Augustus is nobody, or ought to be nobody, to a traveller in
                        modern Italy. He, and twenty like him, never gave me one sensation, all the time I was
                        there; and even the better part of the Romans it is difficult to think of. There is
                        something formal and cold about their history, in spite of Virgil and Horace, and even in spite of
                        their own violence, which does not harmonize with the south. And their poets, even the best
                        of them, were copiers of the Greek poets, not originals like Dante and Petrarch. So we slept at
                            Susa, not thinking of Augustus, but
                        listening to waterfalls, and thinking of the Alps. 
    
     Next morning we beheld a sight worth living for. We were now ascending
                        the Alps; and while yet in the darkness before the dawn, we beheld
                        the sunshine of day basking on the top of one of the mountains, We drank it into our souls,
                        and there it is for ever. Dark as any hour may be, it seems as if that sight were left for
                        us to look up to, and feel a hope. The passage of the Alps (thanks
                        to Bonaparte, whom a mountaineer, with brightness in
                        his eyes, called “Napoleone di felice me-![]()
moria”) is now as easy as a road in England. You look up towards airy
                        galleries, and down upon villages that appear like toys, and feel somewhat disappointed at
                        rolling over it all so easily. 
    
     The moment we passed the Alps, we found ourselves
                        in France. At Lanslebourg, French was spoken, and amorous groups
                        gesticulated on the papering and curtains. Savoy is a glorious
                        country, a wonderful intermixture of savage precipices and pastoral meads: but the roads
                        are still uneven and bad. The river ran and tumbled, as if in a race with our tumbling
                        carriage. At one time you are in a road like a gigantic rut, deep down in a valley; and at
                        another, up in the air, wheeling along a precipice, I know not how many times as high as
                            Saint Paul’s. 
    
     At Chambéry I could not resist going to see
                        the house of Rousseau and Madame de Warens, while the coach stopped. It is up a
                        beautiful lane, where you have trees all the way, sloping fields on either side, and a
                        brook; as fit a scene as could be desired. I met some Germans coming away, who
                        congratulated me on being bound, as they had been, to the house of “Jean
                            Jacques.” The house itself is of the humbler genteel class, not fitted
                        to conciliate Mr. Moore; but neat and white, with
                        green blinds. The little chapel, that cost its mistress so much, is still remaining. We
                        proceeded through Lyons and Auxerre to
                            Paris. Beyond Lyons, we met on the road
                        the statue of Louis XIV. going to that city to overawe
                        it with royal brass. It was an equestrian statue, covered up, guarded with soldiers, and
                        looking on the road like some mysterious heap. Don
                            Quixote would have attacked it, and not been thought mad: so much has
                        romance done for us. The natives would infallibly have looked quietly on. There was a riot
                        about it at Lyons, soon after its arrival. Statues rise and fall;
                        but a little on the other side of Lyons, our postilion exclaimed,
                        “Monte Bianco!” and turning ![]()
 round, I beheld, for the
                        first time, Mont Blanc, which had been hidden from us, when near it,
                        by a fog. It looked like a turret in the sky, amber-coloured, golden, belonging to the wall
                        of some etherial world. This, too, is in our memories for ever,—an addition to our
                        stock,—a light for memory to turn to, when it wishes a beam upon its face. 
    
     At Paris we could stop but two days, and I had but
                        two thoughts in my head; one of the Revolution, the other of the times of Moliere and Boileau. Accordingly, I looked about for the Sorbonne,
                        and went to see the place where the guillotine stood; where thousands of spirits underwent
                        the last pang; many guilty, many innocent,—but all the victims of a reaction against
                        tyranny, such as will never let tyranny be what it was, unless a convulsion of nature
                        should swallow up knowledge, and make the world begin over again. These are the thoughts
                        that enable us to bear such sights, and that serve to secure what we hope for.
                            Paris, besides being a beautiful city in the quarter that
                        strangers most look to, the Tuileries, Quai de
                            Voltaire, &c., delights the eye of a man of letters by its heap of
                        book-stalls. There is a want perhaps of old books; but the new are better than the shoal of
                        Missals and Lives of the Saints that disappoint the lover of duodecimos on the stalls of
                        Italy; and the Rousseaus and Voltaires are endless; edition upon edition in all shapes
                        and sizes, in intellectual battle-array, not to be put down, and attracting armies into
                        desertion. I thought, if I were a bachelor, not an Englishman, and had no love for old
                        friends and fields, I could live very well for the rest of my life in a lodging above one
                        of the bookseller’s shops on the Quai de Voltaire, where I
                        should look over the water to the Tuileries, and have the
                            Elysian fields in my eye for my evening walk. 
    
    
    
    
    
     I liked much what little I saw of the French people. They are accused of
                        vanity; and doubtless they have it, and after a more obvious fashion than other nations;
                        but their vanity at least includes the wish to please; other people are necessary to them;
                        they are not wrapped up in themselves; not sulky, not too vain even to tolerate vanity.
                        Their vanity is too much confounded with self-satisfaction. There is a good deal of
                        touchiness, I suspect, among them,—a good deal of ready-made heat, prepared to fire
                        up in case the little commerce of flattery and sweetness is not properly carried on. But
                        this is better than ill temper, or an egotism not to be appeased by any thing short of
                        subjection. On the other hand, there is more melancholy than one could expect, especially
                        in old faces. Consciences in the south are frightened in their old age, perhaps for
                        nothing. In the north, I take it, they are frightened earlier, perhaps from equal want of
                        knowledge. The worst in France is, (at least, from all that I saw) that fine old faces are rare. There are multitudes of pretty girls; but the faces of
                        both sexes fall off deplorably as they advance in life; which is not a good symptom. Nor do
                        the pretty faces, while they last, appear to contain much depth, or sentiment, or firmness
                        of purpose. They seem made like their toys, not to last, but to break up. Fine faces in
                        Italy are as abundant as cypresses. However, in both countries, the inhabitants appeared to
                        us naturally amiable, as well as intelligent; and without disparagement to the angel faces
                        which you meet with in England, and some of which are perhaps even finer than any you see
                        elsewhere, I could not help thinking, that as a race of females, the aspects both of the
                        French and Italian women announced more sweetness and reasonableness of intercourse, than
                        those of my fair and serious countrywomen. A Frenchwoman looked as if she wished to please
                        you at any rate, and to be pleased herself. She is too ![]()
 conscious;
                        and her coquetry is said, and I believe with truth, to promise more than an Englishman
                        would easily find her to perform: but at any rate she thinks of you somehow, and is smiling
                        and good-humoured. An Italian woman appears to think of nothing, not even herself.
                        Existence seems enough for her. But she also is easy of intercourse, smiling when you speak
                        to her, and very unaffected. Now in simplicity of character the Italian appears to we to
                        have the advantage of the English women, and in pleasantness of intercourse both Italian
                        and French. When I came to England, after a residence of four years abroad, I was shocked
                        at the succession of fair sulky faces which I met in the streets of London. They all
                        appeared to come out of unhappy homes. In truth, our virtues, or our climate, or whatever
                        it is, sit so uneasily upon us, that it is surely worth while for our philosophy to enquire
                        whether in some points, or some degree of a point, we are not a little mistaken. Gypseys
                        will hardly allow us to lay it to the climate. 
    
     It was a blessed moment, nevertheless, when we found ourselves among
                        those dear sulky faces, the countrywomen of dearer ones, not sulky. On the 12th of October,
                        we set out from Calais in the steamboat, which carried us rapidly to
                            London, energetically trembling all the way under us, as if its
                        burning body partook of the fervour of our desire. Here, in the neighbourhood of
                            London, we are; and may we never be without our old fields again
                        in this world, or the old “familiar faces” in this world or in the next. 
    
    
      THE END.
    
    
    
    
    Anonymous, 
“Lord Byron and some of his Contemporaries” in New Monthly Magazine
											 Vol. NS 22  (January 1828) 
Gifted, too, like the subject of his Memoir, with very remarkable talents, he is much more to be relied on, both in
                        his choice of points of view, and in his manner of handling his subject: he is not likely
                        to spoil a bon-mot, an epigram, or a conversation and while he can seize all that was
                        really piquant about his Lordship, he is infinitely above retailing the low gossip and
                        garbage which same memoir-writers have done, in the true spirit of a waiting-maid or a
                        lacquey. He possesses, moreover, one eminent qualification for the task which he has
                        undertaken; he has a stern love of truth; and even his enemies will give him credit for
                        being uniformly consistent and honest in the expression of his opinions on all subjects. In
                        his present work he shows himself ready to be devoted as a martyr to Truth, (for that very
                        word of the book is true, no reader can doubt,) and boldly exposes himself to all the
                        vituperation of all the slaves who hated and attacked Lord Byron while
                        living, but who will now come forward with a mock display of generosity, and sympathy with
                        the illustrious departed, of whom they will represent Mr. Hunt as the
                        ungrateful reviler. . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Lord Byron and His Contemporaries [Part I]” in The Athenaeum
											 Vol. 1
											 No. 4  (23 January 1828) 
                    
                        Mr. Hunt has done a bold deed
                        by publishing this work. We are not ourselves quite clear that he was right; but, as he is
                        doubtless well aware, he has at all events laid himself open to unmeasured
                        misrepresentation by the literary ruffians from whom he has already suffered so much. The
                        portion of the book which stands at the beginning, and which is alone particularly
                        mentioned in the title-page, refers exclusively to Lord
                            Byron. Mr. Hunt says, and we firmly believe him, that
                        he has withheld much which might have been told; but he has also told much which many will
                        think, or say, that he ought to have withheld. He has presented us with a totally different
                        view of Lord Byron's character from any that has previously appeared
                        in print, and this not only in general propositions, but by innumerable detailed anecdotes,
                        which it seems to its quite impossible not to believe, and from which it is equally
                        impossible not to draw very similar inferences to those which have occurred to
                            Mr. Hunt.
                 . . .
 
    [William Jerden?], 
“Review of Hunt, Lord Byron and Some of his Contemporaries” in Literary Gazette
											 No. 575  (26 January 1828) 
                        In this quarto the author exhibits himself as a person of
                        considerable talent, and of much literary conceit and affectation. But his deeper offence
                        lies in the essence of the design itself, which appears to us to be one at which an
                        honourable mind would have revolted. To have gone to enjoy the hospitality of a friend and
                        taste the bounty of a patron, and after his death to have made that visit (for avowedly
                        mercenary ends) the source of a long libel upon his memory,—does seem to be very base
                        and unworthy. No resentment of real or fancied ill usage can excuse, far less justify, such
                        a proceeding; and (without referring to this particular instance, but speaking generally of
                        the practice, now too prevalent, of eaves-dropping and word-catching, and watching every
                        minute action exposed in the confidence of private life, for the purpose of book-making,)
                        we will say that these personal and posthumous injuries are a disgrace to their
                        perpetrators and to the press of the country. . . .
 
    [Henry Southern], 
“Leigh Hunt's Lord Byron” in London Magazine
											 Vol. NS 10  (February 1828) 
                        Mr. Leigh Hunt
                         is so naturally prone to unbosom himself to the public, with whom he always in his
                        writings strikes up a friendly confidential intercourse, that previous to the appearance of
                        this work the world was well acquainted with the character of all his friends of public
                        notoriety—with his opinions on all possible topics, and more particularly with his
                        opinion of himself. We looked for, and we have found nothing new in this volume, save that
                        which relates in some way or other to the author’s visit to Italy; for since that
                        event in his life he has had little opportunity of communicating with his dear friend, his
                        pensive public, or we should have as little to learn of the latter as of the former part of
                        his life. It is thus that our attention is chiefly attracted to Mr.
                            Hunt’s account of Lord Byron; for
                        he, though not entirely a new acquaintance, only became thoroughly well known to him in
                        Italy. . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Review of Lord Byron and some of His Contemporaries” in Monthly Review
											 Vol. S3 7  (March 1828) 
But however we may respect the man for his acquirements, his candour, and
                        his natural benevolence; however we may sympathise with him through the painful
                        disappointments, of which he has already numbered too many, we may be allowed, perhaps, to
                        claim for our literature, and for those who are engaged in supporting it, some portion of
                        that spirit of dignity and independence, without which they would be deprived of all their
                        gracefulness and of much of their utility. We are not insensible to the various proofs
                        which we have lately seen, of a disposition that prevails among certain classes of literary
                        men, to degrade their pursuits into a mere matter of trade; to produce a given number of
                        words for a proposed reward; and to praise or to censure according to the interests and
                        desires of those who employ them. But we own that we were not prepared for the extreme
                        degree of literary servility—to call it by no severer name—which is stamped
                        upon the principal pages of the work now before us. Nor does the author attempt to  conceal his shame. It would not, perhaps, have been very
                        difficult for him, by a little address, to make a better appearance in the eye of the
                        public. It is certain, that if he had spoken less of his obligations to his publisher, and
                        of his own original plan in the preparation of his volume be would have less exposed
                        himself, to the censure of the world. He is, however, remarkably communicative upon both
                        these points, imagining, most probably, that by appearing to have no reservations, his
                        faults, such as they are, might be more easily forgiven. . . .
 
    [John Gibson Lockhart], 
“[Hunt's Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries]” in Quarterly Review
											 Vol. 37
											 No. 74  (March 1828) 
Let us not, however, be unjust to Mr. Leigh
                            Hunt, contemporary of Lord Byron. We
                        find, on referring to his preface, that he disclaims, though not with
                        indignation,—that, alas! he durst not—the catchpenny arrangement of the
                        title-page now before us, and indeed of the contents of the book itself. Had the bookseller
                        permitted the author to obey the dictates of his own taste and judgment, the newspapers,
                        instead of announcing for six months, in every variety of puff direct and puff oblique, the
                        approaching appearance of ‘Lord Byron and some
                            of his Contemporaries,’ would have told us in plain terms to expect the
                        advent of Mr. Leigh Hunt and his following; the
                        ‘pale face rescued from insignificance by thought’ which Mr.
                            Hunt assures us he carries about with him would have fronted Mr.
                            Hunt’s title-page; and Mr. Hunt’s
                        recollections of Lord Byron would have been printed by way of modest
                        appendix to the larger and more interesting part of the work, namely, the autobiography of
                            Mr. Hunt.
                     . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Lord Byron and some of His Contemporaries” in Literary Chronicle
											 No. 454  (26 January 1828) 
We had given Mr.
                            Hunt credit for a superiority to petty resentments and vindictive feelings,
                        and here we find, as far at least as concerns Lord Byron, very little
                        else. We, who have been refreshing our memories as to all that Mr.
                            Hunt has, on various occasions, written of Lord Byron,
                        in which his poetical genius, his liberal politics, his ‘rank worn simply,’ and
                        his ‘total glorious want of vile hypocrisy,’ were earnestly applauded, cannot
                        help persuading ourselves that the portrait now presented would have been more favorable,
                        had the painter been freer from impulses, which it is very natural for him to possess, but
                        which cannot tend to the interests of the public, or to the development of truth. . . .
 
    [Henry Southern], 
“Leigh Hunt's Lord Byron” in London Magazine
											 Vol. NS 10  (February 1828) 
Cause of complaint seems
                        to have existed between the parties, and the unfortunate death of Mr. Shelley rendered the situation of Mr.
                            Hunt, in relation to Lord Byron, one of peculiar
                        delicacy: we cannot allow that these circumstances could in the mind of Mr.
                            Hunt lead to any wilful misrepresentation; but it is not improbable that
                        they may have lent an unjust interpretation to circumstances meant to be taken otherwise,
                        and it is therefore necessary to state in the outset this caution. Mr.
                            Hunt, too, during their intercourse suffered all the pains of dependance: it
                        is needless to remark how sensitive and captious such a situation is calculated to make a
                        man, who if not proud in the ordinary sense of the word, is proud of the levelling  claims of genius, and who saw with disgust that such claims
                        were not allowed to constitute equality with rank and wealth. Mr. Leigh
                            Hunt’s title to entire belief, when due allowance is made to the
                        natural influence of these partly unconscious and secretly operating causes, no one will be
                        hardy enough to deny; and when the denial is made, a look only upon the open, candid,
                        blushing and animated face of the book itself will be sufficient to contradict it. If ever
                        internal evidence was strong enough to quell the very thought of a suspicion, an instance
                        is to be found here. . . .
 
    [John Wilson], 
“Review of Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries” in Blackwood's Magazine
											 Vol. 23
											 No. 136  (March 1828) 
He drivels away in
                        the same mawkish style for several sentences, and what is the upshot? That he would have
                        written the book long ago, had he not preferred enjoying himself on the money, from time to
                        time advanced to him by Mr Colburn. He afterwards
                        acknowledges, “that, had I been rich enough, and could have repaid the handsome
                        conduct of Mr Colburn, with its proper interest, my first impulse, on
                        finishing the book, would have been to put it into the fire.” What mean and miserable
                        contradictions and inconsistencies are crowded and huddled together here! It was for money
                        that the book was written; he admits it, confesses it, hides it, emblazons it, palliates
                        it, avows it, and denies it, all in one and the same breath; yet, in the midst of all this
                        equivocating cowardice, in which he now fears to look the truth in the face, and then
                        strives to stare her out of countenance, all that he has done is still, in his own ultimate
                        belief, “wisest, virtuousest, discreetest, best;” and a man of higher
                        principle, more unimpeachable integrity, and loftier disdain of money, never, on a
                        summer’s morning at Paddington,
                        Lisson Grove, or Hampstead, pulled on a pair
                        of yellow breeches! . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Review of Lord Byron and some of His Contemporaries” in Monthly Review
											 Vol. S3 7  (March 1828) 
His readers will
                        perceive that he doe not attempt to justify his account of Lord
                            Byron upon any public grounds. There are those who will contend that a
                        public man is public property, and that it is lawful even to corrupt his servants, in order
                        to obtain disclosures as to his personal and domestic life; inasmuch as such disclosures
                        may be rendered subservient to the general good. Mr.
                        Hunt, however, uses no such argument as this; which, infamous though it be, has
                        at least a specious and unselfish appearance about it, calculated to gain the assent of the
                        unthinking part of the multitude. He openly avows that he borrowed money, which he could
                        not repay, except by violating his native feelings of right and honour, by composing a
                        work, which, otherwise, he would never have thought of, and which, when composed he would
                        have put into the fire, if his pecuniary circumstances had enabled him to pursue the
                        dictates of his heart. The wretched woman who, under the veil of night, offers her
                        attractions to those who are disposed to pay for them, may tell a similar tale. It is not
                        her love of vice that drives her into the streets; it is not her horror of virtue; for the
                        human heart is not so radically vicious—particularly not in woman—as some
                        philosopher have chosen to represent it: No—she must live—dire necessity urges
                        her to barter, her person for money, and so she goes on in her career of heartless,
                        ignominious depravity. Such a being we commonly call a prostitute. . . .
 
    [John Gibson Lockhart], 
“[Hunt's Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries]” in Quarterly Review
											 Vol. 37
											 No. 74  (March 1828) 
Now the questions which we feel ourselves bound to ask of Mr. Hunt, are simply these:—Did the personal intercourse
                        between him and Lord Byron terminate in an avowal on his
                            (Mr. Hunt’s) part of hostility? And,
                        Would he have written and published about Lord Byron in the tone and
                        temper of this work had Lord Byron been alive? Except when vanity more
                        egregious than ever perverted a human being’s thoughts and feelings interferes, we
                        give Mr. Hunt some credit for fairness—and if he can answer
                        these two questions in the affirmative, we frankly admit that we shall think more
                        charitably, by a shade or two, of this performance than, in the present state of our
                        information, we are able to do. . . .
 
    [John Wilson], 
“Review of Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries” in Blackwood's Magazine
											 Vol. 23
											 No. 136  (March 1828) 
It appears from the
                        Preface that he had painted a full-length portrait of that perfect gentleman, Mr Hazlitt—but partly to oblige Mr Colburn, if we do not mistake, and partly because he
                        must have quarrelled—although he says not—with the amiable original, whom he
                        now accuses of having “a most wayward and cruel temper,” “which has
                        ploughed cuts and furrows in his face”—“and capable of being inhuman in
                        some things”—he has not given the picture a place in the
                        gallery. . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Lord Byron and some of his Contemporaries” in New Monthly Magazine
											 Vol. NS 22  (January 1828) 
From the charge of ingratitude, Mr. Leigh
                            Hunt, in various passages of his book, successfully vindicates himself, and
                        shows that the obligations which Lord Byron has been
                        represented to have heaped on him, have been ludicrously exaggerated both in number and
                        value. Into matters so delicate, however, we do not intend to enter. . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Review of Lord Byron and some of His Contemporaries” in Monthly Review
											 Vol. S3 7  (March 1828) 
We own that we do not think that in this and other such passages, the
                        publisher has been fairly dealt with by the author. The latter seems extremely anxious to
                        shift upon the shoulders of the former, all the blame which can attach to a work of this
                        description. It is obvious that Mr. Colburn wished,
                        and very naturally, to obtain a book that would repay him for his advances and other risks;
                        but it belonged to the author, if he really held any principles of honour sacred, to take
                        his stand upon them. If he has abandoned them, and that for the sake of the reward which he
                        was to get for so doing, it is clear that the taint of the transaction belongs, at least,
                        as much to him who receives, as to him who gives, under circumstances so humiliating. . . .
 
    [John Gibson Lockhart], 
“[Hunt's Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries]” in Quarterly Review
											 Vol. 37
											 No. 74  (March 1828) 
We are constrained to add, however, that on this occasion our
                        ‘pensive hearts’ have withstood the influence both of Burgundy and Moselle. To
                        our fancy, dropping metaphors, this is one of the most melancholy books that any man can
                        take up. The coxcombries of Mr. Hunt’s style both
                        of thought and language, were these things new, and were they all, might indeed furnish
                        inextinguishable laughter to the most saturnine of readers. But we had supped full with
                        these absurdities long ago, and have hardly been able to smile for more than a moment at
                        the most egregious specimens of cockneyism which the quarto presents; and even those who
                        have the advantage of meeting Mr. Leigh Hunt for the first time upon
                        this occasion, will hardly, we are persuaded, after a little reflection, be able to draw
                        any very large store of merriment from his pages. It is the miserable book of a miserable
                        man: the little airy fopperies of its manner are like the fantastic trip and convulsive
                        simpers of some poor worn out wanton, struggling between famine and remorse, leering
                        through her tears. . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Lord Byron and His Contemporaries [Part I]” in The Athenaeum
											 Vol. 1
											 No. 4  (23 January 1828) 
                        Mr. Hunt does not appear before the world to give them an
                        account of events and connections of which they had previously no idea. We have all heard
                        quite enough of Lord Byron's munificence in receiving
                        into his house this distinguished gentleman and his family, to make it a prominent portion
                        of our general idea of his Lordship's character; and after the many statements and
                        insinuations, loud, long, and bitterly injurious to Mr. Hunt, which
                        have been founded upon the universal knowledge of this transaction, it seems to its neither
                        very wonderful nor very blameable, that he should at last come forward himself, and make
                        public his own defence. It is evident, from the whole tone of the book, that Mr.
                            Hunt has not stated in it a word which he does not believe. . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Lord Byron and some of His Contemporaries” in Literary Chronicle
											 No. 454  (26 January 1828) 
How anxiously we have looked for a work of
                        this kind, it would, we fear, be considered beneath the should be imperturbable dignity of
                        a reviewer to confess. We had assigned to Leigh Hunt the office of
                            Byron’s biographer, conceiving him on many accounts
                        eminently calculated for the task. His acquaintance with Byron had
                        been long and tolerably intimate, and, as a literary man, he was well qualified to draw
                        forth and accurately estimate the essentially mental qualities of his subject. His style of
                        composition too, seemed to us the more peculiarly adapted to the purpose, inasmuch as its
                        very defects in this instance resolved themselves into positive advantages,—such, for
                        example, as what is by many considered us over-fondness for minute details, his anatomy of
                        the most trivial of circumstances. We expected him to give not a bold sketchy picture,
                        ‘beslabbered o’er with haste,’ but an elaborate portrait in which
                        ‘each particular hair’ should be apparent, which would he not merely pleasing
                        to the eye, but in which the philosopher and the phrenologist might find ample materials
                        for deep and correct speculation. We did not look for unqualified eulogium,—we were
                        aware that truth would require anything but that,—but we imagined Mr.
                            Hunt to possess too little ascerbity of disposition for the transmutation
                        into vices worthy of record, what at most can be considered but insignificant overflowings
                        of bile, and may frequently bear even an advantageous construction. We have been
                        disappointed: in the present work, as far as it treats of Lord Byron,
                        we trace nothing of that vein of genuine and warm-hearted philanthropy by which the
                        writings of Leigh Hunt have been distinguished even more than by their
                        fancy and originality. . . .
 
    [Henry Southern], 
“Leigh Hunt's Lord Byron” in London Magazine
											 Vol. NS 10  (February 1828) 
Of Moore,
                            Lamb, Campbell, &c., we are familiar with all that the author has said or
                        would repeat for the last or next twenty years. It is a novelty at any rate for one man of
                        genius honestly to give a minute and apparently honest account of the real private
                        character of another: but the privileges of the order to which both parties in fact belong,
                        may excuse the hardihood and the singularity of the scheme. Posterity invariably attempts
                        to rake up every peculiarity or characteristic trait from the memory of every great man;
                        and it is always loudly lamented when neither the investigations of antiquaries nor the
                        researches of ardent admirers can bring to light all that it is wished to discover.
                            Mr. Leigh Hunt has saved posterity any trouble in the case of
                            Lord Byron. We have his portrait here drawn by an acute observer
                        and a shrewd metaphysician, who had the advantage of living with him on terms of
                        intimacy—under the same roof. . . .
 
    [John Wilson], 
“Review of Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries” in Blackwood's Magazine
											 Vol. 23
											 No. 136  (March 1828) 
Is not the tone of this passage insolent, unfeeling, and unmanly? The
                        writer, with flippant impatience to be insulting to the memory of a dead man, vainly tries,
                        by a poor perversion of the very ordinary, harmless, and pleasant circumstances, in which
                        he first saw the “Noble Childe,” to throw over him an air of ridicule, and to
                        make him and his pastime, to a certain degree, an object of contempt. But the ridicule
                        recoils on the Cockney. The “latter,” that is “Mr Jackson’s pupil,” that is, Lord Byron, was swimming with somebody for a wager, and that
                        our classic calls “rehearsing the part of Leander!” To
                        what passage in the life of Leander does the witling refer? “I
                        had been bathing, and was standing on the floating machine adjusting my clothes!” Ay,
                        and a pretty fellow, no doubt, you thought yourself, as you were jauntily buttoning your
                        yellow breeches. You are pleased to say, “so contenting myself with seeing his
                        lordship’s head bob up and down in the water, like a buoy, I came away.” Now do
                        you know, sir, that while you were doing so, a whole young ladies’ ambulating
                        boarding school were splitting their sides with laughter at the truly laughable style in
                        which you were jerking out first the right leg and then the left, to get into the yellow
                        breeches; for your legs and thighs had not been sufficiently dried with the pillow-slip,
                        and for the while a man with moderate haste might count a hundred, in they could not be
                        persuaded to go, but ever and anon were exhibited, below the draggled shirt-tails, in most
                        ludicrous exposure? . . .
 
    [John Wilson], 
“Review of Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries” in Blackwood's Magazine
											 Vol. 23
											 No. 136  (March 1828) 
                        Mr Hunt, however, fears he has gone too far in calling
                        himself a young man who had written a bad volume of poems; and he mentions that Lord Byron, who soon afterwards called upon him in prison,
                        thought it a good volume of poems; “to my astonishment he quoted some of the lines,
                        and would not hear me speak ill of them.” We daresay Mr Hunt was
                        very easily prevented from speaking ill of them; nor is there much magnanimity in now
                        announcing how little they were thought of by himself, and how much by Lord
                            Byron. This is mock-modesty; and, indeed, the would-be careless, but most
                        careful introduction of himself and his versifying at all, on such an occasion, must, out
                        of Cockaigne, be felt to be not a little disgusting and characteristic. . . .
 
    [John Wilson], 
“Review of Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries” in Blackwood's Magazine
											 Vol. 23
											 No. 136  (March 1828) 
We remember once hearing a midshipman giving an account of the death of
                            Lord Nelson, which consisted almost entirely of a
                        description of a musket ball that had lodged in his own buttocks, and been extracted
                        skilfully, but painfully, some months afterwards, as he lay on a sofa in his father’s
                        house at Lymington,—an account of the whole domestic economy
                        of which followed a complimentary character of himself and the surgeon. So is it with
                            Mr Hunt. He keeps perpetually poking and perking
                        his own face into yours, when you are desirous of looking only at Lord
                            Byron’s, nor for a single moment ever seems to have the sense to
                        suspect that the company are all too much disgusted to laugh at the absurdities of his
                        egotism. . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Review of Lord Byron and some of His Contemporaries” in Monthly Review
											 Vol. S3 7  (March 1828) 
Under these circumstances it was, that the author obtained the  information which gives a tainted zest to his work. He did
                        not, be it remembered, meet with Lord Byron on the high
                        road of life, in the general intercourse of society; had that been the case, he might have
                        been justified in recording his impressions of a character, that is likely to be enquired
                        into with some degree of curiosity by posterity. But he never would have enjoyed the
                        opportunity of seeing Lord Byron in Italy, had it not been for the
                        noble lord’s kind intentions towards him in the first instance, and in the next
                        place, for an actual advance of money, sufficient to defray his travelling expences from
                        England to that country; so that while Mr. Hunt resided in Italy, he
                        could have been considered in no other light than as a dependant on Lord
                            Byron. For such a person therefore, to take advantage of his situation, in
                        order to betray to the world all his noble protector’s errors and foibles, seems to
                        us nothing short of a domestic treason. But to publish those foibles for the sake of gain,
                        and to publish nothing but those, for the sake of spleen, indicate a dereliction of
                        principle, and a destitution of honourable feeling, which we shall not venture to
                        characterize. . . .
 
    William Howitt, 
“Leigh Hunt” in Homes and Haunts of the most eminent British Poets  (London:   Richard Bentley,   1847)   2 Vols
The occasion of Leigh Hunt’s visit to Italy,
                        and its results, have been placed before the public, in consequence of their singular
                        nature, and of the high standing of the parties concerned, in a more prominent position
                        than any other portion of his life. There has been much blame and recrimination thrown
                        about on all sides. Mr. Hunt has stated his own case, in his work on
                            Lord Byron and his Contemporaries. The
                        case of Lord Byron has been elaborately stated by Mr. Moore, in his Life and Letters of the noble poet. It is not the place
                        here to discuss the question; but posterity will very easily settle it. My simple opinion
                        is, that Mr. Hunt had much seriously to complain of, and, under the
                        circumstances, has made his statement with great candour. The great misfortune for him, as
                        for the world, was, that almost immediately on his arrival in Italy with his family, his
                        true and zealous friend, Mr. Shelley, perished From
                        that moment, any indifferent spectator might have foreseen the end of the connexion with
                            Lord Byron. He had numerous aristocratic friends, who would, and
                        who did spare no pains to alarm his pride at the union with men of the determined character
                        of Hunt and Hazlitt for
                        progress and free opinion. . . .
 
    
    Anonymous, 
“Lord Byron and His Contemporaries [Part I]” in The Athenaeum
											 Vol. 1
											 No. 4  (23 January 1828) 
But we confess that we have a good deal of doubt whether Mr.
                            Hunt has judged rightly as to the wisdom of speaking about Lord
                            Byron in the tone which he has assumed, considering the importance attached
                        by the world to the kind of favours received by our author from the aristocratic poet. We
                        do not question for a moment, that Lord Byron's kindnesses or
                        ostentations were done after a fashion, which very much tended to merge the sense of
                        obligation in a feeling of insulted self-respect. We are sure, from all we have ever read
                        or heard of Mr. Hunt, that he is really accustomed to consider his own
                        money as of much less consequence than money is commonly held to deserve; and that no man
                        would think less of the inconvenience of giving away any portion of his worldly goods by
                        which he could benefit a friend. But he would do well to remember that men will judge him
                        by their rules, and not by his; and that it is mere folly to afford new weapons against an
                        honourable reputation to those who have uniformly made so malignant a use of previous
                        opportunities. . . .
 
    [William Jerden?], 
“Review of Hunt, Lord Byron and Some of his Contemporaries” in Literary Gazette
											 No. 575  (26 January 1828) 
In the career of social life where civilised well depend so much on their
                        fellow men, it must be that the noblest and proudest natures must often bend (we will not
                        say stoop) to receive benefits: from the king to the beggar, no one ever got through the
                        world without being obliged to others; and the receiver is as much to be esteemed and
                        honoured as the giver. But having once accepted the kindness of a friend, there is no after
                        act on his part, and far less any slight offence, or the mere cessation of bestowing
                        favours, which can form an apology for turning about to sting and wound your benefactor.
                        Silence is imposed, even if gratitude should be forgotten. . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Lord Byron and some of
                    His Contemporaries [Concluded]” in Literary Chronicle
											 No. 455  (2 February 1828) 
                        Of all the grave charges brought against Lord Byron by Mr. Hunt, the only one of real and
                        unquestionable importance, the only one which can at all account for or justify the
                        soreness of feeling by which the writer is evidently actuated, is contained in the
                        following passage:—‘The public have been given to understand that
                            Lord Byron's purse was at my command, and that I used it according
                        to the spirit with which it was offered. I did so. Stern necessity,
                        and a large family, compelled me; and, during our residence at Pisa,
                        I had from him, or rather from his steward, to whom he always sent me for
                            the money, and who doled it me out as if my disgraces were being counted, the sum
                        of seventy pounds!’ There is a meanness and an indelicacy
                        about this, which tends more to lessen Lord Byron, in our estimation,
                        than any of the peculiarities, strange and wayward as they were, upon which Mr.
                            Hunt dwells with such minute severity. . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Review of Lord Byron and some of His Contemporaries” in Monthly Review
											 Vol. S3 7  (March 1828) 
If we rightly understand the drift of this argument, it means that
                            Mr. Hunt would have received as much of Lord Byron’s money as his lordship might have thought proper to give,
                        without feeling himself under the slightest obligation; but that he has since changed his
                        mind on the subject, ‘in practice at least,’ of which we presume the memoir of
                        his lordship is a sufficient example. There is much in this passage that savours of
                            Cobbett’s defence of his non-payment of a
                        loan advanced to him by Sir Francis Burdett. The
                        upshot of their common doctrine is this; that, whereas Messrs Cobbett
                        and Hunt have a high opinion of their own talents; and whereas one is
                        a political, and the other a miscellaneous writer, and they have not as yet amassed
                        fortunes by their publications—therefore, considering ‘the present state of
                        society,’ they need never think of refunding to any person who favours them with
                        pecuniary assistance! Mr. Hunt would, indeed, have us to believe, that
                        ‘in practice at least,’ he has altered those notions of late, thereby affording
                        a ray of encouragement to those who might be inclined to imitate Lord
                            Byron’s generosity. But is he certain that if such persons were to be
                        found, he would not recur to his favourite doctrine? . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Review of Lord Byron and some of His Contemporaries” in Monthly Review
											 Vol. S3 7  (March 1828) 
He had been given to understand, forsooth!
                        that ‘the attachment was real; that it was rescuing Lord Byron
                        from worse connexions; and that the lady’s family approved of it.’ Supposing
                        all this to be true, does it follow that their conduct was the less criminal in the sight
                        of God—or less reprehensible in the opinion of good men?—But we correct
                        ourselves; it seems that Mr. Hunt has also a peculiar theory on this
                        subject, as on that of money. He tells us that he differs, very considerably, ‘with
                        the notions entertained respecting the intercourse of the sexes, in more countries than
                        one;’ by which, we suspect, he means that such intercourse ought to be subject to no
                        laws, human or divine. Truly, we have here a philosopher of the most agreeable
                        description! . . .
 
    [Henry Southern], 
“Leigh Hunt's Lord Byron” in London Magazine
											 Vol. NS 10  (February 1828) 
The portrait will be acknowledged to be one of those which all who do not
                        know the original subject, from the reality of its look, and the force and nature of its
                        impression, will pronounce to be a perfect likeness; and they who did know it would place
                        the question beyond suspicion, unless indeed the picture is too close a resemblance to be
                        flattering, unless, contrary to the usage of artists, it represents deformities as well as
                        beauties. The ravages of the small-pox are never copied in a portrait. Biographies are
                        generally all so much alike, that the changes of a few names and circumstances would make
                        one pass for another. Eulogies deal in generals, and if a foible is confessed, it is
                        commonly one possessed by all mankind. Characters are seldom attempted, except by
                        historians and novelists; in both cases the original dwells only in the author’s
                        fancy. Viewed in this light, the character of Lord Byron
                        is perhaps the very first that was ever drawn from life with fidelity and skill; we have
                        him here as his intimate friends knew him—as those who lived with him felt him to be
                        by hourly experience. . . .
 
    [John Wilson], 
“Review of Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries” in Blackwood's Magazine
											 Vol. 23
											 No. 136  (March 1828) 
Dignified historian! Sublime studies! What peering, and prying, what
                        whisper-listening, what look-eying, what note-jotting, and journalizing must have been
                        there! What sudden leave-taking of bower, arbour, and parlour, at nod or wink of the
                        master, whom he served! This was being something worse than a lick-spittle. . . .
 
    [John Gibson Lockhart], 
“[Hunt's Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries]” in Quarterly Review
											 Vol. 37
											 No. 74  (March 1828) 
With such a feeling running cold all the while at the bottom of his heart,
                        does this unfortunate proceed to fill page after page, through a long quarto volume, with
                        the meatiest details of private gossip,—dirty gabble about men’s wives and
                        men’s mistresses,—and men’s lackeys, and even the mistresses of the
                        lackeys (p. 13)—and, inter alia, with anecdotes of the
                        personal habits of an illustrious poet now no more, such as could never have come to the
                        knowledge of any man who was not treated by Lord Byron either as a friend or as a menial.
                        Such is the result of ‘the handsome conduct’ of Mr.
                            Hunt’s publisher—who, we should not forget, appears to have
                        exercised throughout* the concoction of this work, a species of authority somewhat new in
                        the annals of his calling: . . .
 
    [William Jerden?], 
“Review of Hunt, Lord Byron and Some of his Contemporaries” in Literary Gazette
											 No. 575  (26 January 1828) 
The connexion between Lord Byron and
                        persons in rank, in intellect, and in every high quality of soul, so inferior to himself as
                        the coterie which gathered round him in Italy— and the consequences of that
                        assemblage, may, we think, be very readily accounted for. Lord Byron,
                        with the fervour of a young poet, imagined Leigh
                        Hunt—in prison for libelling his King—a sort of political martyr,
                        and thus prepossessed in his favour was led to estimate his writings by a fictitious
                        standard. But this fit of fancy must almost instantly have been dispelled, as the author
                        shews it to have been, when his lordship came into direct and constant contact with the
                        pert vulgarity and miserable low-mindedness of Cockney-land. We can picture him (the
                        haughty aristocrat and impatient bard) with Mrs.
                            Hunt, as painted by her partial husband, with the whole family of bold
                        brats, as described by their proud papa, and with that papa himself and the rest of the
                        accompanying annoyances; and we no longer wonder that the Pisan establishment of congenial spirits, brought together from various parts of the world,
                        should have turned into a den of disagreeable, envious, bickering, hating, slandering,
                        contemptible, drivelling, and be-devilling wretches. The elements of such an association
                        were discord; and the result was, most naturally, spleen and secret enmity in life, and
                        hate and public contumely after death. . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Lord Byron and some of His Contemporaries” in Literary Chronicle
											 No. 454  (26 January 1828) 
Few people, we believe, will discover either delicacy or good taste in the
                        conduct thus complacently described. In the lady we perceive a very unamiable penchant for
                        saying disagreeable things, not quite so smart as her affectionate husband fancies them,
                        and which could have lost none of their deformity when repeated by Mr. Hunt to his lordship. Then again, does it tell against Byron that he was vexed because the children were kept out of
                        the way? We suspect not, and really cannot help thinking that many of the causes of
                        difference must have originated with the party now complaining. . . .
 
    [John Wilson], 
“Review of Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries” in Blackwood's Magazine
											 Vol. 23
											 No. 136  (March 1828) 
                        Mr Hunt, too, had had his midriff tickled by it out of all
                        measure,—had treasured it up among other bright and original sallies in the
                        store-house of his memory, and suddenly, and without warning, brought it out to annihilate
                        the Noble who had dared to criticise the personal appearance of “some friends of
                        mine.” Poor Byron, how easily wert thou abashed!
                        Disgust and scorn must have tied his tongue; just as they sicken the very eyes that run
                        over the low and loath- some recital by a chuckling Cockney, of
                        his wife’s unmannerly and unwomanly stupidities, mixed up with the poisonous slaver
                        of his own impotent malice, rendering page 27 of “Lord Byron and
                            his Contemporaries, by Leigh Hunt,” the most impertinent piece of printed
                        paper that ever issued from the press. . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Review of Lord Byron and some of His Contemporaries” in Monthly Review
											 Vol. S3 7  (March 1828) 
There is another subject upon which we must touch, though with unfeigned
                        reluctance, and with as much delicacy as we can. It is well known that an intimacy of an
                        improper description took place between Lord Byron and a
                            Signora Guiccoli, soon after his
                        lordship’s arrival in Italy, and that that intimacy continued for a considerable
                        length of time. Mr. Hunt was aware of this; he knew, therefore, that
                        the parties were living in a state of double adultery, openly violating the most sacred
                        duties. Yet he never seems to have hesitated an instant, about introducing Mrs. Hunt and his children to a family thus tainted in all
                        its relations. He complains of having been treated by Lord Byron, on
                        some oc-casions, with disrespect; we ask, what better
                        treatment did he deserve, after degrading himself and his children, by such mean
                        compliances? . . .
 
    [John Wilson], 
“Review of Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries” in Blackwood's Magazine
											 Vol. 23
											 No. 136  (March 1828) 
During this period Lord Byron wrote
                        occasional letters to Mr Hunt, some of which are highly
                        complimentary, but they soon wax somewhat cool—“My dear
                            Hunt,” changes into “Dear Hunt,” “Yours,
                        most affectionately,” drops off—and it is plain enough that his Lordship is
                        getting sick and ashamed of the connexion. No wonder. The tone and temper of Mr
                            Hunt’s character, manners, and pursuits, as given by himself, must
                        have been most offensive to a man of high breeding and elevated sentiments like
                            Lord Byron; and his Lordship’s admiration of “Rimini,” was not such as to stand against
                        the public disgrace of having it dedicated to “My dear
                        Byron.” The pride of the peer revolted, as was natural and
                        right, from such an unwarrantable freedom—and with his own pen, it has since
                        appeared, he erased the nauseous familiarity,—for Leigh Hunt
                        very properly substituting “impudent varlet.” . . .
 
    [John Wilson], 
“Review of Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries” in Blackwood's Magazine
											 Vol. 23
											 No. 136  (March 1828) 
                        Mr Hunt had been a despicable abuser of all lords, before
                        he had ever sat in company with one; and even now, he is embued with the rancorous dislike
                        of high-birth, that is the glory and the shame of the lord-hating gang to which he yet
                        appertains. But how quickly quailed his  paltry heart, and
                        cringed his servile shoulders, and bent his Cockney knees, and sought the floor the
                        pertness of his radical-looking eyes, at the very first condescending visit from a lord!
                        The Examiner died within him,—all his
                        principles slipt out of being like rain-drops on a window-pane, at the first smiting of the
                        sun—and, oh! the self-glorification that must have illuminated his face, “saved
                        only by thought from insignificance,” when, as he even now exults to record it,
                            Lady Byron continued sitting impatiently in her
                        carriage at his door at Paddington, and sending message after
                        message, to the number of Two, to her lord, fascinated by the glitter of mean eyes, and
                        preferring, to the gentle side of his young and newly-wedded wife, the company of a
                        Cockney, whose best bits were distributed through the taverns for tenpence every
                        Sunday! . . .
 
    [John Gibson Lockhart], 
“[Hunt's Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries]” in Quarterly Review
											 Vol. 37
											 No. 74  (March 1828) 
                        Mr. Hunt tells his readers that Lord Byron threw
                        him back his Spenser, saying ‘he could make
                        nothing of him’: but whether are we to believe that the noble lord, sickened (as all
                            Mr. Hunt’s readers have been for twenty years past) with Mr.
                        Hunt’s endless and meaningless chatter about the half dozen poets, good, bad, and
                        indifferent, whom he patronizes, was willing to annoy Mr. Hunt by the
                        cavalier treatment of one of his principal protegés, or that
                        the author of one of the noblest poems that have been written in the Spenserian stanza was
                        both ignorant of the Faëry Queen,
                        and incapable of comprehending anything of its merits? No man who knew anything of
                            Lord Byron can hesitate for a moment about the answer.
                            Lord Byron, we have no sort of doubt, indulged his passion for
                        mystifying, at the expense of this gentleman, to an improper and unjustifiable  extent. His delight was at all times in the study of
                        man. . . .
 
    [John Gibson Lockhart], 
“[Hunt's Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries]” in Quarterly Review
											 Vol. 37
											 No. 74  (March 1828) 
It is equally certain, that we have now before us a
                        voluminous collection of Lord Byron’s private correspondence,
                        addressed, for the most part, to persons whom Mr. Hunt,
                        however ridiculously, describes as his own personal enemies—letters written before,
                        during, and after the period of Mr. Hunt’s intercourse with
                            Lord Byron in Italy; and although there occur many jokes upon
                            Mr. Hunt, many ludicrous and quizzical
                        notices of him, yet we have sought in vain for a single passage indicative of spleen or
                        resentment of any shape or degree. On the contrary, he always upholds Mr.
                            Hunt, as a man able, honest, and well-intentioned, and therefore, in spite
                        of all his absurdities, entitled to a certain measure of respect as well as kindness. The
                        language is uniformly kind. We shall illustrate what we have said by a few extracts.
                            Mr. Hunt will perceive that Lord
                            Byron’s account of his connexion with 
                            The Liberal
                         is rather different from that given in the book on our table. Mr.
                            Hunt describes himself as pressed by Lord Byron into
                        the undertaking of that hapless magazine: Lord Byron, on the contrary,
                        represents himself as urged to the service by the Messrs. Hunt themselves. . . .
 
    [John Gibson Lockhart], 
“[Hunt's Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries]” in Quarterly Review
											 Vol. 37
											 No. 74  (March 1828) 
‘Genoa,
                             10bre 25th, 1822.—Now do you see what you, and your friends do by your
                            injudicious rudeness? actually cement a sort of connexion which you strove to prevent,
                            and which, had the Hunts
                            prospered, would not, in all probability, have continued. As it
                            is, I will not quit them in their adversity, though it should cost me character, fame,
                            money, and the usual et cetera. My original motives I already explained; (in the letter
                            which you thought proper to show;) they are the true ones, and I
                            abide by them, as I tell you, and I told Leigh Hunt,
                            when he questioned me on the subject of that letter. He was violently hurt, and never
                            will forgive me at the bottom; but I cannot help that. I never meant to make a parade
                            of it; but if he chose to question me, I could only answer the plain truth, and I
                            confess, I did not see any thing in the letter to hurt him, unless I said he was
                            “a bore,” which I don’t remember. Had this
                            Journal gone on well, and I could have aided to make it better for them, I should then
                            have left them after a safe pilotage off a lee shore to make a prosperous voyage by
                            themselves. As it is, I can’t, and would not if I could, leave them among the
                            breakers. As to any community of feeling, thought, or opinion, between Leigh
                                Hunt and me, there is little or none. . . .
 
    [John Wilson], 
“Review of Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries” in Blackwood's Magazine
											 Vol. 23
											 No. 136  (March 1828) 
Before the First Number of this poorest of all Periodicals had left the
                        anvil, Lord Byron had grown sick and ashamed of the
                        Editor, and he “only made use of it for the publication of some things which his Tory
                        bookseller was afraid to put forth.” Hunt
                        attributes its downfall almost entirely to Lord Byron’s want of
                        spirit and independence. But Hunt himself, he acknowledges, grew daily
                        stupider and weaker in mind and body, and could indite nothing but drivel. Poor Shelley was dead—Hazlitt worse than dead—how then could the Liberal live even with “The Vision of Judgement, in which my brother saw nothing
                        but Byron, and a judicious hit at the Tories, and he prepared his
                        machine accordingly, for sending forward the blow unmitigated. Unfortunately it recoiled,
                        and played the devil with all of us.” Mr Hunt then tries to
                        attribute the death of the monster—which at its birth was little better than an
                        abortion—to the sneers of Mr Moore and
                            Mr Hobhouse. Poor blind bat, does he not know
                        that all Britain loathed it? That it was damned, not by acclamation, but by one hiss and
                        hoot? That every man who was betrayed by the name of Byron to take it
                        into his hands, whether in private house, bookseller’s shop, or coffee-room, called
                        instantly and impatiently for a basin of water, soap and towels. . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Review of Lord Byron and some of His Contemporaries” in Monthly Review
											 Vol. S3 7  (March 1828) 
We remember to have seen some numbers of the “Liberal,” the periodical publication in the management
                        of which, Mr. Hunt assisted Lord
                            Byron; and although it is written, that of the dead nothing that is not good
                        should be said, yet we must declare, that a more silly, a more vulgar, a more
                        unentertaining, or at the same time, a more ostentatious work never dishonoured our
                        literature. In matters of morality, it was at least of a very questionable charac-ter; in matters of religion it was offensively conceited and
                        profane. It perished in the disgrace it deserved, and let it therefore rest in
                        contempt. . . .
 
    [John Gibson Lockhart], 
“[Hunt's Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries]” in Quarterly Review
											 Vol. 37
											 No. 74  (March 1828) 
He thought, no doubt, that his own compositions
                        would be easily distinguished from those of Messrs. Hunt and Co.; and
                        that, therefore, he might benefit these needy people without materially injuring his own
                        reputation. Humble as was his estimate of the talents of all his coadjutors, except
                            Mr. Shelley, he had not foreseen that, instead
                        of his genius floating their dulness, an exactly opposite consequence would attend that
                        unnatural coalition. In spite of some of the ablest pieces that ever came from
                            Lord Byron’s pen,—in spite of the magnificent poetry
                        of heaven and Earth,—the eternal laws of gravitation held their course: Messrs.
                            Hunt, Hazlitt, and Co.
                        furnished the principal part of the cargo; and the ‘Liberal’ sunk to the bottom of the waters of oblivion
                        almost as rapidly as the Table-Talk, or the Foliage, or the Endymion.
                     . . .
 
    [John Wilson], 
“Review of Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries” in Blackwood's Magazine
											 Vol. 23
											 No. 136  (March 1828) 
Among the other causes of the death of the Liberal, Mr Hunt refers to
                        one bitterly spoken of by Hazlitt, in a note quoted
                        from some manuscripts—the attacks on it in Blackwood’s Magazine. So infamous, it appears, had
                            Hazlitt been rendered by some able articles in this work, that he
                        had been excommunicated from all decent society, and nobody would touch a dead book of his,
                        any more than they would the body of a man who had died of  the
                        plague. This is an incredible instance of the power of the press. What! a man of such pure
                        morals, delightful manners, high intellects, and true religion, as Mr
                            Hazlitt, to be ruined in soul, body, and estate, pen, pencil, and pallet, by
                        a work which Mr Hunt himself declared in the Examiner had no sale—almost the entire impression of every
                        number lying in cellars, in the capacity of dead stock? . . .
 
    [William Jerden?], 
“Review of Hunt, Lord Byron and Some of his Contemporaries” in Literary Gazette
											 No. 575  (26 January 1828) 
We are not inclined to press this matter beyond its just bounds, nor, to
                        set a higher value upon pecuniary obligations than they deserve; but surely, in spite of
                        the cant and wire-drawing distinctions of the author, it must be felt by every
                        well-constituted and upright mind, that the acceptance of such favours ought, at least, to
                        prevent their acceptor from violating the grave of his friend; for, as
                            the world goes, money is the greatest test of friendship; find the man who gives
                        it liberally and generously, as Lord Byron did to
                            Mr. Hunt, affords the surest criterion of his regard and
                        affection. Yet, writhing under a recollection of bounties ill-bestowed, thus does the
                        quondam worshipper of that noble lord, and of his rank and title, profane his character,
                        when death has sealed the lips which (if utter scorn did not close them) might have
                        punished the perfidy with immortal ignominy. . . .
 
    
    Anonymous, 
“Review of Lord Byron and some of His Contemporaries” in Monthly Review
											 Vol. S3 7  (March 1828) 
It is not our province to defend Lord
                            Byron’s character from the imputations which are here made against it.
                        They may be all well founded, for aught that we know; but that they are set forth in a
                        vindictive, not to say a malignant spirit, no man can doubt, who understands that it is the
                        duty of a biographer to give the lights as well as shades to his portrait, which properly
                        belong to it. If Mr. Hunt is to be believed,
                            Lord Byron had not a single virtue, to redeem or palliate the
                        above formidable list of vices and infirmities; whereas it is notorious, that his lordship
                        had done many kind and generous acts towards literary friends; that he was never niggardly
                        of his praise where he thought it deserved; that throughout his too brief existence, he had
                        been animated by an unquenchable love of liberty, and had essentially served it by his
                        writings, and that finally he sacrificed his life upon its altar. These things alone, not
                        to say a word of his transcendant genius, ought to shed a brightness on his history, which
                        should cast many of his infirmities into the shade. It cannot be denied, that his great
                        poetical talents were sullied by many impurities, but these will of themselves decay in
                        time, and leave his name in that fine splendour, in which it was invested when it first
                        obtained its ascendant in our horizon. . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Review of Lord Byron and some of His Contemporaries” in Monthly Review
											 Vol. S3 7  (March 1828) 
Much of what Mr. Hunt is pleased to call his account
                        of Lord Byron, is rather a dissertation upon his
                        character, than a history of his life. He takes a verse from the noble lord’s poems,
                        or a confession of an idle moment, and makes it the theme of half a dozen tiresome prosing
                        pages. There is little that is new in his narrative, and of that little, there is still
                        less that is important. . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Lord Byron and His Contemporaries [Part I]” in The Athenaeum
											 Vol. 1
											 No. 4  (23 January 1828) 
But the great value of this
                        portion of the work undoubtedly is, that it gives us a far clearer and more consistent view
                        of the character of the singular man and celebrated writer of whom it treats, than any
                        other book that has hitherto appeared. We see him in these pages living and moving before
                        us, not merely with his wings and scars, with the power and desperation, of his poetry, but
                        with the circumstances and attributes of ordinary humanity. And it is now, indeed, time
                        that we should begin to judge him calmly and fairly; for the renown, and the all but
                        disgrace which alike filled the air as with an immeasurable cloud, have shrunk, as did the
                        gigantic genius of the Arabian Tale, into a narrow urn. It is not more than his errors
                        deserve to say, that they were the rank produce of a noble soil, the weeds which grow among
                        Asphodel and Amaranth, on the summit of Olympus, and around the
                        footsteps of the glorified immortals. It is good for us that books exist which display the
                        union of poetic ability with a scorn and a selfishness of which literature scarce afforded
                        us any previous example; for the works of Byron may be a warning to
                        every mind, the mightiest or the meanest, that there are failings and vices which will even
                        break the sceptre and scatter to the winds the omnipotence of genius . . .
 
    [Henry Southern], 
“Leigh Hunt's Lord Byron” in London Magazine
											 Vol. NS 10  (February 1828) 
Shall, then,
                        the public be informed of that which does not concern it; or shall we accuse the publisher
                        of such information of a breach of faith—of a treacherous betrayal of that which is
                        only revealed under the sacred confidence of domestic intercourse? We confess that these
                        fine words fall dead upon our ears. We see no reason that men should not be known as they
                        really are, but many for it; it is the first step to amendment. Had all the published lives
                        and characters been written in their true colours, the world would have been much further
                        advanced in virtue. This hypocrisy in glossing over vice—in smoothing down the
                        roughness and defects of character, is a kind of premium upon the indulgence of evil
                        passion. Though the world may have little to do with the private virtues directly; inasmuch
                        as these constitute by far the greater portion of its aggregate of happiness; there is no
                        more important subject can be discussed before it than the excellencies and failings of
                        eminent individuals. . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Lord Byron and some of
                    His Contemporaries [Concluded]” in Literary Chronicle
											 No. 455  (2 February 1828) 
                        Mr. Hunt asserts, on more than one occasion, that
                            Lord Byron had ‘no address,’ no
                        conversational powers, none, in short, of those little, pleasant, companionable qualities,
                        for which, we believe, Mr. Hunt himself is so deservedly celebrated.
                        Any deficiency of this sort, we should set down as no very culpable matter; but it happens
                        that there are many testimonies on this subject opposed to that of Mr.
                            Hunt. Some of these, we confess, may not appear either to him or to
                        ourselves, of a very conclusive order; but what will he say to that of Mr. Shelley? It is known, that in Julian and Maddalo, Mr. Shelley
                        introduces us to himself and Lord Byron; and thus favorably, both in
                        prose and verse, does he describe the latter: ‘I say that
                            Maddalo is proud, because I can find no other word to express the
                        concentered and impatient feelings which consume him; but it is on his own hopes and
                        affections only that he seems to trample, for, in social life no human being can be more
                        gentle, patient, and unassuming than Maddalo. He is cheerful, frank,
                        and witty. His more serious conversation is a sort of intoxication;  men are held by it as by a spell. He has travelled much; and
                        there is an inexpressible charm in his relation of his adventures in different
                        countries.’ The whole portrait is worthy of quotation . . .
 
    [John Gibson Lockhart], 
“[Hunt's Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries]” in Quarterly Review
											 Vol. 37
											 No. 74  (March 1828) 
We should, indeed, have reason to blush, could we think for a moment of
                        entering into the details given by Mr. Leigh Hunt,
                        concerning the manners, habits, and conversation of Lord
                            Byron. The witness is, in our opinion, disqualified to give evidence upon
                        any such subjects; his book proves him to be equally ignorant of what manners are, and
                        incompetent to judge what manners ought to be: his elaborate portraiture of his own habits
                        is from beginning to end a very caricatura of absurdity; and the man who wrote this book,
                        studiously cast, as the whole language of it is,  in a
                        free-and-easy, conversational tone, has no more right to decide about the conversation of
                        such a man as Lord Byron, than has a pert apprentice to pronounce 
                            ex cathedrá
                        —from his one shilling gallery, to wit—on the dialogue of a polite
                        comedy. We can easily believe, that Lord Byron never talked his best
                        when this was his companion. We can also believe that Lord
                            Byron’s serious conversation, even in its lowest tone, was often
                        unintelligible to Mr. Leigh Hunt.
                     . . .
 
    [John Wilson], 
“Review of Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries” in Blackwood's Magazine
											 Vol. 23
											 No. 136  (March 1828) 
How insidiously the serpent slides through the folds of these passages,
                        leaving his slime behind him as he wriggles out of sight! There is a
                            Sporus-like effeminacy in the loose and languid language in which
                        he drawls out his sentence into what he thinks the fine-sounding word,
                            Sardanapalus. What if the Grand
                            Signior did take the youthful Byron for a woman in
                        disguise? The mistake of that barbarian no more proved that his lordship had an effeminate
                        appearance, than a somewhat similar mistake of the Sandwich Islanders proved the jolly crew
                        of the Endeavour, sailing round the world with Cook,
                        to be like Gosport-girls. . . .
 
    [Henry Southern], 
“Leigh Hunt's Lord Byron” in London Magazine
											 Vol. NS 10  (February 1828) 
                        Mr. Hunt enters into an examination of the various publications which
                        have been broached on the subject of Lord Byron’s
                        life and character; and as he condescends to criticise some very paltry performances, we
                        are surprised that he did not bestow some attention on a paper which formerly appeared in
                        this magazine (for October, 1824). It is the only
                        sketch that has been written in the same spirit as his own; and since it remarkably
                        coincides in all leading points with the view above given, may be considered a confirmation
                        of its truth. This sketch appeared soon after Lord Byron’s
                        death, and attracted much attention at the time, it having been copied from our pages into
                        almost every other journal of the day. It was thought much too true, much too
                        unceremonious, and the very reverse of sentimental, the tone into which the nation struck
                        after the death of this remarkable person. . . .
 
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Anonymous, 
“Review of Lord Byron and some of His Contemporaries” in Monthly Review
											 Vol. S3 7  (March 1828) 
There are upwards of forty pages
                        out of one hundred and fifty, devoted solely to a dull criticism on a work, entitled,
                            “The Life, Writings, Opinions, and Times, of
                            Lord Byron,”—a spurious compilation, known to be such by any man who
                        has the slightest judgment. Yet does Mr. Hunt set about refuting the
                        numberless fabrications of this precious publication, with as much solemnity as if it had
                        proceeded from a respectable quarter. But his motive is evident enough. He wished merely to
                        eke out his memoir, and give it as imposing an appearance as possible. . . .
 
    [John Wilson], 
“Review of Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries” in Blackwood's Magazine
											 Vol. 23
											 No. 136  (March 1828) 
In another part of the book, Hunt
                        quotes a few sentences, which seem very good ones, from an old article in the Magazine on
                            Lord Byron,—and adds, “there follows
                        something about charity, and clay-idols, and brutal outrages of all the best feelings; and
                            Mr Blackwood, having finished his sermon,
                        retires to count his money, his ribaldry, and his kicks.” Here
                            Hunt considers Mr Blackwood as the writer of
                        the Critique, or Sermon in question, and indeed he often speaks of that gentleman as the
                        author of the articles that have kicked up such a “stoure” in Cockney-land. On
                        other occasions, when it suits his purpose, he gives himself the lie direct,—but
                        probably all this passes for wit behind the counter. Mr
                            Colburn, however, cannot like it: nor would it be fair, notwithstanding the
                        judicious erasures which he has made on the MS. in its progress through the press, to
                        consider that gentleman the author of “Lord Byron and his
                            Contemporaries,” any more than of those very entertaining but somewhat
                        personal articles in the Magazine of which he is
                        proprietor, entitled “Sketches of the
                            Irish Bar.” That Mr Blackwood should occasionally
                        retire to count his money, seems not at all unreasonable in a publisher carrying on a
                        somewhat complicated, extensive, and flourishing trade. It is absolutely necessary that he
                        should so retire into the Sanctum, at which times even we do not think of disturbing
                        him . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Lord Byron and some of
                    His Contemporaries [Concluded]” in Literary Chronicle
											 No. 455  (2 February 1828) 
With respect to Mr. Hunt's opinion of
                            Lord Byron's poetical ability, little need be said.
                        Whatever may be our respect for his general criticisms, in this particular instance we
                        entertain but little; nor need we stay to consider what he himself would say of a critic
                        who should acknowledge that he had read only a portion of certain works which he has no
                        hesitation in condemning, almost unqualifiedly, as a whole. ‘To the
                            best of my recollection I never even read Parisina, nor is this the only one of
                            his lordship's works of which I can say as much, acquainted as I am with the
                        others.’ There is an unpleasant assumption in this passage, which comes very
                        gracelessly from Mr. Hunt; at all events, it is a question whether our
                        dislike of the effrontery does not exceed our gratitude for the candour of the
                        acknowledgment. . . .
 
    [John Gibson Lockhart], 
“[Hunt's Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries]” in Quarterly Review
											 Vol. 37
											 No. 74  (March 1828) 
Even as to the more solemn subject of
                        religion, we ought to take shame to ourselves for even for a moment considering Lord Byron and Mr. Leigh
                            Hunt as brother infidels. The dark doubts which
                        disturbed to its depths the noble intellect of the one had little, indeed, in common with
                        the coxcombical phantasies which floated and float on the surface of the other’s
                        shallowness. Humility,—a most absurd delusion of humility, be it allowed, made the
                        one majestic creature unhappy: the most ludicrous conceit, grafted on the most deplorable
                        incapacity, has filled the paltry mind of the gentleman-of the-press now before us, with a
                        chaos of crude, pert dogmas, which defy all analysis, and which it is just possible to pity
                        more than despise. . . .
 
    [William Jerden?], 
“Review of Hunt, Lord Byron and Some of his Contemporaries” in Literary Gazette
											 No. 575  (26 January 1828) 
The confessions in this passage betray some symptoms of grace, and prove
                        that the writer could not entirely reconcile his mind to the despicable course of doing
                        wrong to the memory of his benefactor for the sake of paltry lucre, if not also for the
                        gratification of still baser passions. Indeed the struggle between a sense of rectitude in
                        this respect, and the dishonour of publishing these memoirs, is obvious in many
                        places. . . .
 
    [John Gibson Lockhart], 
“[Hunt's Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries]” in Quarterly Review
											 Vol. 37
											 No. 74  (March 1828) 
Now a question suggests itself to us, which we are sure Mr. Hunt, with the high feelings thus entertained and expressed
                        by him, will thank us for asking. It is well known, that Lord
                            Byron took leave finally of Mr. Leigh Hunt by letter.
                        The letter in question we never saw, but we have conversed with those who read it; and from
                        their account of its contents—they describe it as a document of considerable length,
                        and as containing a full narrative of the whole circumstances under which Lord
                            Byron and Mr. Hunt met and parted, according to his
                        lordship’s view of the case—we confess we have been rather surprized to find it
                        altogether omitted in Mr. Leigh Hunt’s quarto. Mr.
                            Hunt prints very carefully various letters, in which Lord
                            Byron treats of matters nowise bearing on the differences which occurred
                        between  these two distinguished contemporaries: and our
                        question is, was it from humanity to the dead, or from humanity to the living, that
                            Mr. Leigh Hunt judged it proper to omit in this work the
                        apparently rather important letter to which we refer? If Mr. Hunt has
                        had the misfortune to mislay the document, and sought in vain for it amongst his
                        collections, he ought, we rather think, to have stated that fact, and stated also, in so
                        far as his memory might serve him, his impression of the character and tendency of this
                        valedictory epistle. But in case he has both lost the document and totally forgotten what
                        it contained, we are happy in having this opportunity of informing him, that a copy of it
                        exists in very safe keeping. . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Lord Byron and His Contemporaries [Part II]” in The Athenaeum
											 Vol. 1
											 No. 5  (29 January 1828) 
Of Mr. Moore there is a very lively, pleasant, and
                        characteristic description. Mr. Hunt’s anecdotes about the
                        writer of ‘Lalla Rookh’ are,
                        in general, good-humoured enough; and we scarcely understand why Mr.
                            Hunt should have quarrelled with so distinguished and amiable a person, for
                        saying that there was ‘a taint in the Liberal,’
                        especially as he himself expresses the same thing in other words, when he talks of his
                        objections to the publication of the parody
                        on ‘The Vision of
                        Judgment.’ . . .
 
    [John Wilson], 
“Review of Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries” in Blackwood's Magazine
											 Vol. 23
											 No. 136  (March 1828) 
Of Mr
                            Moore he begins with drawing a favourable likeness—but having
                        something of the spleen towards him too, he puts on not a few touches, meant to dash its
                        pleasantness, and leaves it in a very unfinished state—for no other or better reason
                        that we can discover, than that Mr Moore most justly had said to
                            Lord Byron that “the Liberal had a taint in
                        it,” had, at a public dinner in Paris, spoken highly of
                        England, and in some verses written rather disparagingly of that very indulgent person,
                            Madame Warrens. On one occasion, he designates
                        him by the geographic designation of “a Derbyshire poet”—Mr
                            Moore, we believe, having had a cottage in that county—admitting in a
                        note, that at the time he had been too angry with Mr Moore to honour
                        him so highly as to call him by his name—and on many occasions he sneers at him for
                        living so much it in that high society, from which all Cockneys are of course
                        excluded—and saw, as has been mentioned, he threatens him with the posthumous satire
                        of Lord Byron.
                     . . .
 
    
    Anonymous, 
“Lord Byron and His Contemporaries [Part II]” in The Athenaeum
											 Vol. 1
											 No. 5  (29 January 1828) 
Moreover, his reasoning as to
                            Mr. Moore’s conduct with regard to Lord
                            Byron’s
                        Memoirs, seems to us to be at once vague and
                        inapplicable. What Mr. Hunt seems to aim at, is to make out an
                        inconsistency in Mr. Moore’s conduct, because he accepted 2000
                        guineas’ worth from Lord Byron, but would not accept the same
                        sum in money from Lord Byron’s family. The difference is obvious. In the one case the
                        present was a mark of friendship; in the other it was a payment, and might have been
                        thought and called a bribe. Suppose Mr. Shelley, when he dedicated
                            ‘The Cenci’ to
                            Mr. Hunt, had given him the copyright; and that, if the Tragedy
                        had not been already published, our author had seen fit, after his friend’s death, to
                        throw it into the fire, would he have accepted 200l. or 200 pence
                        from the Society for the Suppression of Vice as a reward for his conduct? Mr.
                            Hunt almost always makes blunders when he talks about money-matters. He says
                        himself that he has no head for them; and he really ought to leave the discussion of them
                        to calculating stockbrokers or cool reviewers, while he writes (we hope) another
                            ‘Rimini.’ . . .
 
    
    Anonymous, 
“Lord Byron and His Contemporaries [Part II]” in The Athenaeum
											 Vol. 1
											 No. 5  (29 January 1828) 
On Shelley there is a long and most
                        interesting article. He was the greatest man of all those who are mentioned by Mr. Hunt; he was also his most intimate friend; and the notices
                        we have of him are proportionally valuable. Mr. Hunt’s book,
                        from bearing the name of Lord Byron on its title-page,
                        will probably go into the hands of many persons who know nothing of
                            Shelley but the name. We trust that the delightful, and we are
                        sure, most accurate portrait drawn by our author in the book before us, and the exquisite
                        specimens of poetry which he has extracted from Mr. Shelley’s
                        works, will induce a more detailed acquaintance with the writings of one of the most
                        benevolent men and powerful poets that have lived in any age or country. Of the errors of
                        some of his opinions, taken in their broad and obvious import, few men have had the
                        boldness to profess themselves apologists, and fewer still have had the charity to seek
                        among those errors for precious, though sometimes latent, germs of truth. We will venture
                        to assert, that those of his doctrines which are at first sight the most awfully
                        pernicious, are uniformly objectionable for the form rather than the spirit, the phrase
                        more than the feeling. It is, on the other hand, undeniable, that his sympathies are the
                        fondest and the best, his aspirations the purest and most lofty. . . .
 
    [John Wilson], 
“Review of Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries” in Blackwood's Magazine
											 Vol. 23
											 No. 136  (March 1828) 
We took a deep interest in Mr
                            Shelley. Full of admiration of his genius, and pity for his misconduct and
                        misfortunes, we spoke of him at all times with an earnestness of feeling, which we know he
                        felt, and for which we received written expressions of gratitude from some by whom he was,
                        in spite of all his unhappy errors, most tenderly beloved. Mr
                            Hunt must know this; but he is one of those “lovers of truth,”
                        who will not, if he can help it, suffer any one single spark of it to spunk out, unless it
                        shine in his own face, and display its pretty features to the public, “rescued only
                        by thought from insignificance.” Moreover, he hates this Magazine, not altogether, perhaps, without some little reason
                        of a personal kind—and, therefore, as a “lover of truth,” is bound never
                        to see any good in it, even if that good be the cordial praise of the genius of his dearest
                        friend, and, when it was most needed, a fearless vindication of all that could be
                        vindicated in his opinions, and conduct. . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Lord Byron and His Contemporaries [Part II]” in The Athenaeum
											 Vol. 1
											 No. 5  (29 January 1828) 
Judging of his mind as displayed in
                        his poetry, his hopes are fierce and rushing longings; his dislike, a curse; his
                        sympathies, an absorbing passion; the habitual pulses of his frame are the shocks of an
                        earthquake. Such was the spirit, clothing in the most glorious forms of beauty the one
                        purpose of purifying and ennobling its kind, on which were poured out all the vials of
                        muddy wrath in the power of the ‘Quarterly
                        Review.’ Such was the spirit  which, in all
                        but its productions, is absolutely unknown to us, except through the short notice, at the
                        beginning of a volume of posthumous poems, and a part of the book with which Mr. Hunt has just enlivened society and enriched literature.
                        His information is full and consolatory, and we find in every line the authoritative
                        verification of those conclusions, as to Mr. Shelley’s reverence
                        and practice of all excellence, and habitual belief in the goodness of the Great Spirit
                        that pervades the universe, which are at once a triumph of candour and charity, and an
                        utter confusion and prostration to the whole herd of selfish bigots. . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Lord Byron and some of
                    His Contemporaries [Concluded]” in Literary Chronicle
											 No. 455  (2 February 1828) 
The articles descriptive of Shelley, Keats, Charles Lamb, &c. are worthy of them and of the writer.
                        They are correct and beautiful sketches, and will do much towards giving popular opinion a
                        right direction respecting the two first. The portraits of Keats and
                            Lamb are welcome ornaments to the volume; we regret that they were
                        not accompanied by one of Shelley. . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Review of Lord Byron and some of His Contemporaries” in Monthly Review
											 Vol. S3 7  (March 1828) 
                        The author’s memoir of Mr.
                                Moore is too scanty, and, we may add, too prejudiced to deserve any
                            particular notice from us. That of Mr.
                            Shelley, on the contrary, is nothing but a panegyric. Of the genius of that
                        ill-starred and eccentric man, we have always thought very highly; his private life offers
                        little worthy of our admiration, and his religious principles still less. His end was
                        tragical, and contains a lesson that should appal the most thoughtless of his
                        disciples. . . .
 
    [John Gibson Lockhart], 
“[Hunt's Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries]” in Quarterly Review
											 Vol. 37
											 No. 74  (March 1828) 
So much for Mr. Leigh Hunt versus Lord Byron: the other
                        contemporaries that figure in this volume are, with two or three exceptions, persons whose
                        insignificance equals that of the author himself; and as they have had no hand, that we
                        know of, in this absurd exposure of themselves, we should be sorry either to waste our time
                        or to wound their feelings by any remarks on Mr. Hunt’s
                        delineations of them. Mr. Shelley’s portrait
                        appears to be the  most elaborate of these minor efforts of
                            Mr. Hunt’s pencil. Why does Mr. Hunt
                        conceal (if he be aware of the fact) that this unfortunate man of genius was bitterly
                        sensible ere he died of the madness and profligacy of the early career which drew upon his
                        head so much indignation, reproach, and contumely—that he confessed with tears ‘that he well knew he had been all in the
                        wrong’? . . .
 
    William Howitt, 
“Leigh Hunt” in Homes and Haunts of the most eminent British Poets  (London:   Richard Bentley,   1847)   2 Vols
Every lover
                        of true poetry and of an excellent and high-hearted man, must regret that his visit to
                        Italy was dashed by such melancholy circumstances, for no man was ever made more thoroughly
                        to enjoy that fine climate and classical land. Yet as the friend of Shelley, Keats,
                            Charles Lamb, and others of the first spirits of
                        the age, Mr. Hunt must be allowed, in this respect, to have been one
                        of the happiest of men. It were no mean boon of providence to have been permitted to live
                        in the intimacy of men like these; but, besides this, he had the honour to suffer, with
                        those beautiful and immortal spirits, calumny and persecution. They have achieved justice
                        through death—he has lived injustice down. As a politician, there is a great debt of
                        gratitude due to him from the people, for he was their firm champion when reformers
                        certainly did not walk about in silken slippers. He fell on evil days, and he was one of
                        the first and foremost to mend them. . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Review of Lord Byron and some of His Contemporaries” in Monthly Review
											 Vol. S3 7  (March 1828) 
In the memoir which Mr.
                            Hunt has given of him, we frequently observe the phrase
                        ‘conventional,’ and ‘unconventional.’ It seems, that he imagines
                        the community divisible into these two classes, the former including those who acknowledge
                        an allegiance to the general rules of society, the latter consisting of those who would
                        like to live according to regulations of their own. Mr. Shelley has a
                        conspicuous place among the unconventional, and, if we mistake not, Mr.
                            Hunt aspires to a similar honour;—par
                                nobile-fratres. The author indulges us with a long and tedious
                        review of his friend’s different poetical works, of course exalting them to the
                        highest pitch of reputation. It will avail them little. The tendency to corruption and
                        decay, which in a signal manner is engendered in all obscene things, pervades them to the
                        core, and has already bowed them to the dust, with which they will soon be covered. . . .
 
    [John Wilson], 
“Review of Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries” in Blackwood's Magazine
											 Vol. 23
											 No. 136  (March 1828) 
Gentle Reader—Let us so arouse your imagination, that you see a
                        Lion sleeping in the shade, or rather couched an a conscious slumber, his magnificent mane
                        spread abroad in the forest gloom, and the growling thunder hushed beneath it as in a
                        lowering cloud. Suppose him Sir Walter. Among the
                        branches of a tree, a little way off, sits a monkey, and did you ever hear such a chatter?
                        The blear-eyed abomination makes his very ugliest mouths at the monarch of the wood; and
                        shrieking in his rage, not altogether unlike something human, dangles first from one twig,
                        and then from another, still higher and higher up the tree, with an instinctive though
                        unnecessary regard for the preservation of his nudities, clinging at once by paw and by
                        tail, making assurance doubly sure that he shall not lose his hold, and drop down within
                        range of Sir Leoline. Suppose him Leigh Hunt. The sweet
                        little cherub that sits up aloft fondly and idly imagines, that the Lion is lying there
                        meditating his destruction,—that those claws, whose terrors are now tamed in glossy
                        velvet, and which, if suddenly unsheathed, would be seen blushing perhaps with the blood of
                        pard or panther, were given him by nature for the express purpose of waging high warfare
                        with the genus Simia! . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Lord Byron and His Contemporaries [Part II]” in The Athenaeum
											 Vol. 1
											 No. 5  (29 January 1828) 
Of the remaining notices, we are most obliged to the author for that on
                            Mr. Keats. The names of Coleridge and of Lamb call up to us so much more vivid ideas of the persons in question,
                        that we learn comparatively little about them even from Mr.
                            Hunt’s very pleasant sketches. But Mr.
                            Keats’s reputation is at present but the shadow of a glory,—and
                        it is also plain enough to be seen that his works, beautiful as they are, are yet but the
                        faint shadow of his mind. His friend has commemorated his high genius, melancholy fate, and
                        unmerited contumelies, in a fitting tone of feeling. . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Lord Byron and His Contemporaries [Part II]” in The Athenaeum
											 Vol. 1
											 No. 5  (29 January 1828) 
His
                        was another of the bright minds at which a part of the public looked, for a time, only
                        through the smoky glass of the Quarterly
                            Reviewers. But by a just and necessary retribution, the abuse of power has
                        destroyed itself, and we doubt whether two hundred persons in the kingdom would now attach
                        the slightest importance to the most violent lucubrations of Mr. Murray’s critics. In the case of poor Keats, the mischief was irreparable; for it is clear, that whatever
                        predisposition to disease may have existed, the brutality of the extra-orthodox Reviewers
                        was the proximate cause of the death of an amiable man and a great poet, at an age when
                        most of his contemporaries were thinking of nothing but pounds and shillings, or the
                        excitements of ballrooms and burgundy, or the pleasure of covering the world with floods of
                        anonymous calumny. . . .
 
    [John Gibson Lockhart], 
“[Hunt's Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries]” in Quarterly Review
											 Vol. 37
											 No. 74  (March 1828) 
We believe we could not illustrate our view of the whole of this business
                        more effectually than by simply presenting a few extracts from Lord
                            Byron’s private letters in which this Mr.
                            Keats is alluded to. Our readers have probably, forgotten all about
                            ‘Endymion, a
                            poem,’ and the other works of this young man, the all but universal roar
                        of laughter with which they were received some ten or twelve years ago, and the ridiculous
                        story (which Mr. Hunt denies) of the author’s death
                        being caused by the reviewers. Mr. Hunt was the great patron, the
                        ‘guide, philosopher, and friend’ of Mr. Keats; it was he
                        who first puffed the youth into notice in his newspaper. The youth returned the compliment
                        in sonnets and canzonets, and presented his patron with a lock of Milton’s hair, and wrote a poem on the occasion. . . .
 
    [John Wilson], 
“Review of Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries” in Blackwood's Magazine
											 Vol. 23
											 No. 136  (March 1828) 
This sounds all mighty valiant—and no one can read the words,
                        without believing that “Hunt sent a challenge to
                            Dunbar, saying, Charlie meet me if you
                        daur,” and that his challenge struck a cold terror into the heart of “rough old
                            General Izzard.” But Mr
                            Hunt has waxed tea-pot valiant, when recording in old age the bold
                        achievements of his youth. All that he did was, to ask the General’s name, that he
                        might bring an action against him for libel. Half a syllable, with any other import, would
                        have brought the General, without an hour’s delay, before the eyes of the astonished
                        Cockney. Hunt then kept fiddle-faddling with attorneys, and
                        solicitors, and barristers, for months together, till finding fees troublesome, and that
                        there had been no libel, but in his own diseased imagination, or guilty conscience, he
                        “retreated into his contempt,” and in contempt he has, we believe, ever since
                        remained. . . .
 
    
    Anonymous, 
“Review of Lord Byron and some of His Contemporaries” in Monthly Review
											 Vol. S3 7  (March 1828) 
There are hundreds of others who lived in the
                        time of  Lord Byron, and had just as much title to notice as of those,
                        with perhaps one or two exceptions, who are here enumerated. Keats
                        died at the age of twenty-four, in a state little short of madness.
                            Campbell still lives to adorn his country, and promote the welfare
                        of his race. Dubois is scarcely known; Theodore
                            Hook, too well known for his, at least presumed, connexion with the basest
                        system of calumny that ever disgraced the public press; Mathews still
                        delights the town, and one of the Smiths, at least, has retired to Tor Hill, to die with one Reuben Apsley. Coleridge has grown
                        fat and idle; Charles Lamb has outgrown his visions; and as to the
                        rest, and even as to most of these, what had they particularly to do with Lord
                            Byron, that they should be denominated his
                        contemporaries? . . .
 
    [John Wilson], 
“Review of Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries” in Blackwood's Magazine
											 Vol. 23
											 No. 136  (March 1828) 
To Mr Campbell he is exceedingly
                        complimentary—and has, he thinks, hit off the character of that delightful poet in
                        two words; he is a “French Virgil.” What
                        that means, we do not presume even to conjecture; but be its intents wicked or charitable,
                        it is a mere parody on Mr Charles Lamb’s not
                        very prudent or defensible remark about Voltaire,—of which, a word by and by. In the midst even of his
                        admiration, he cannot help being impertinent; and he tells the world that Mr
                            Campbell gladly relaxes from the  loftiness of
                        poetry, and delights in Cotton’s Travestie of Virgil, (a most beastly
                        book) and that his conversation “is as far as may be from any thing like a
                        Puritan.” In short, he insinuates, that Mr Campbell’s
                        conversation is what some might call free and. easy, and others indecent,—a
                        compliment, we believe, as awkward as untrue. He pretends to be enraptured with the
                        beautiful love and marriage scenes in Gertrude of Wyoming; but we know better, and beg to assure him that he is not.
                        In confirmation of the correctness of our opinion, we refer him to the Story of Rimini. . . .
 
    [John Wilson], 
“Review of Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries” in Blackwood's Magazine
											 Vol. 23
											 No. 136  (March 1828) 
Mr Theodore Hook he also attempts
                        to characterise; and to us, who know a thing or two, this is about one of the basest bits
                        of his book. Not a syllable of censure does he pass upon that gentleman, but a wish
                        “that he had stuck to his humours and farces, for which he had real talent, instead of writing politics.” Now, there is no term of
                        contumely and abuse allowable in low society, which Mr
                            Hunt and his brothers, and the rest of the gang, have not heaped upon
                            Mr Hook’s head, in the Examiner, as if he were excommunicated and outcast from the company of all
                        honest men. But Mr Colburn is Mr
                            Hook’s publisher, and he is now also Mr
                            Hunt’s; and therefore he, who takes for motto, “It is for slaves
                        to lie, and freemen to speak truth,” thus compromises, we must not say his
                        conscience, but that which, with him, stands instead of it, party and personal spite, and
                        winds up a most flattering account of Mr Hook’s delightful,
                        companionable qualities, with the slightest and faintest expression of dissent,—if it
                        even amount to that,—from his politics, that, his breath, which is “sweet
                        air,” can be made to murmur. . . .
 
    [John Gibson Lockhart], 
“[Hunt's Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries]” in Quarterly Review
											 Vol. 37
											 No. 74  (March 1828) 
And, by the way, why did Mr.
                            Hunt inflict on Mr. Horatio Smith so
                        great an injury as to say, after describing his acts of generous friendship to the
                        unfortunate Mr. Shelley, that he (Mr. Smith)
                        differed with Mr. Shelley ‘on some points,’ without stating distinctly what
                        those points were—namely, every point, whether of religious belief or of moral
                        opinion, on which Mr. Shelley differed, at the time of his
                        acquaintance with Mr. Smith, from all the respectable part of the
                        English community? We are happy to have this opportunity of doing justice, on competent
                        authority, to a person whom, judging merely from the gentleman-like and moral tone of all
                        his writings, we certainly should never have expected to meet with in the sort of company
                        with which this, no doubt, unwelcome eulogist has thought fit to associate his name.  . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Review of Lord Byron and some of His Contemporaries” in Monthly Review
											 Vol. S3 7  (March 1828) 
Availing himself of the comprehensiveness of his title-page, Mr. Hunt has
                        given us memoirs of Keats, Campbell, Dubois,
                            Theodore Hook, Mathews, Messrs. James and Horace Smith, 
                        Fuseli, Bonnycastle, Kinnaird, Charles Lamb, and Mr.
                            Coleridge, many of them it must be owned, respectable names, to whose merits
                        we offer no objection. But, why they should be set down as the
                        contemporaries of Lord Byron, we are rather at a loss to
                        conjecture. . . .
 
    [John Wilson], 
“Review of Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries” in Blackwood's Magazine
											 Vol. 23
											 No. 136  (March 1828) 
All this proves, that Mr Lamb has a
                        head worthy of Aristotle, and that he ought to have a
                        face like that of Bacon. The saying about Voltaire is most repulsively narrated; and Mr
                            Lamb, who took such offence with Mr
                            Southey for regretting that Elia’s essays had not
                        a sounder religious feeling, what will he say—or feel, at least—about the sad
                        jumble of offensive and childish nonsense, which, without having the capacity of
                        re-creating the circumstances in which the words were uttered, or imparting the slightest
                        feeling of the spirit in which they were conceived, Hunt
                        has palmed off upon the public as characteristic specimens of the conversation of
                            Charles Lamb?
                     . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Lord Byron and His Contemporaries [Part II]” in The Athenaeum
											 Vol. 1
											 No. 5  (29 January 1828) 
The
                        200 concluding pages are devoted by the author to his own memoirs. These are sparkling and
                        interesting, and exhibit no falling off of talent, or lack of matter. But the entertainment
                        to be drawn from them is of so different a kind from that of the previous notices, and so
                        much less concentrated and engrossing, that Mr. Hunt certainly judged
                        rightly in his original plan of opening the volume with that which is personal to himself;
                        and thus giving us a ‘diapason ending full’ in Byron and Shelley. Indeed, we would
                        advise the readers of the book to proceed after this fashion; and, beginning with the last
                        division of work, to travel regularly backwards. . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Review of Lord Byron and some of His Contemporaries” in Monthly Review
											 Vol. S3 7  (March 1828) 
We come now to Mr. Hunt’s recollections of his
                        own life, to which we find a portrait prefixed, calculated to do any thing but conciliate
                        our confidence. We have not the honour of knowing the original; but if this portrait be at
                        all like him we must confess, that we should have no great fancy for his company. We
                        understand that he is rather displeased with his painter, or at least, his engraver,
                        who, he thinks, has made him look like a thief. The picture certainly does warrant the
                        idea, for we could almost imagine, that he had something under his cloak which he had
                        purloined, and was making the best of his way home with it. . . .
 
    [John Gibson Lockhart], 
“[Hunt's Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries]” in Quarterly Review
											 Vol. 37
											 No. 74  (March 1828) 
                        Mr. Hunt received from the hand of nature talents which,
                        if properly cultivated and employed, might have raised him to distinction; and, we really
                        believe, feelings calculated to procure him a kind reception from the world. His vanity, a
                        vanity to which it is needless to look for any parallel even among the vain race of
                        rhymers, has destroyed all. Under the influence of that disease—for it deserves no
                        other name—he has set himself up as the standard in every thing. While yet a
                        stripling, most imperfectly educated, and lamentably ignorant of men as they are, and have
                        been, he dared to set his own crude fancies in direct opposition to all that is received
                        among sane men, either as to the moral government of the world, or the political government
                        of this nation, or the purposes and conduct of literary enterprise. This was ‘the
                            Moloch of absurdity’ of which Lord Byron has spoken so justly. The consequences—we
                        believe we may safely say the last consequences—of all this rash and wicked nonsense
                        are now before us. The last wriggle of expiring imbecility appears in these days to be a
                        volume of personal Reminiscences; and we have now heard the feeble death-rattle of the once
                        loud-tongued as well as brazen-faced Examiner.  . . .
 
    
    [Henry Southern], 
“Leigh Hunt's Lord Byron” in London Magazine
											 Vol. NS 10  (February 1828) 
One of
                        the cleverest sketches of character we remember is that of Mr. Leigh
                            Hunt’s father, the Rev. Isaac
                            Hunt, originally a barrister in America, then a fugitive loyalist, and
                        afterwards a clergyman of the Church of England, who lost a bishopric by his too social
                        qualities. . . .
 
    [John Gibson Lockhart], 
“[Hunt's Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries]” in Quarterly Review
											 Vol. 37
											 No. 74  (March 1828) 
Mr. Hunt speaks with no respect of his
                        father’s talents, but represents him as a graceful elocutionist. He was, we gather,
                        one of those comely, smooth-tongued, demi-theatrical spouters who sometimes command for a
                        season or two the rapture of pretty ladies, and the flutter of perfumed
                        pocket-handkerchiefs. Totally destitute of the learning of his new profession, and by no
                        means remarkable, if we are to believe his son, for clerical propriety of habits, it is not
                        wonderful that the creole orator was disappointed in his expectation of church patronage;
                        or indeed, that, after a little time, his chapel-celebrity was perceptibly on the decline.
                        Government gave him a moderate pension as an American loyalist; and as soon as he found
                        that this was to be all, the reverend gentleman began to waver somewhat in his opinions
                        both as to church and state. In a word, he ended in being an unitarian, and a republican,
                        and an universalist; and found that this country was as yet far too much in the dark to
                        approve either of his new opinions, or of the particular circumstances under which he had
                        abandoned his old ones. Worldly disappointment soon turns a weak mind sour; and stronger
                        minds than this have had recourse to dangerous stimulants in their afflictions. . . .
 
    William Howitt, 
“Leigh Hunt” in Homes and Haunts of the most eminent British Poets  (London:   Richard Bentley,   1847)   2 Vols
That is a fine filial eulogy; but still finer and more eloquent has been
                        the practical one of the life and writings of the son. Whoever knows anything of these,
                        perceives how the qualities of the mother have lived on, not only in the grateful
                        admiration of the poet, but in his character and works. This is another proud testimony
                        added to the numerous ones revealed in the biographies of illustrious men, of the vital and
                        all-prevailing influence of mothers. What does not the world owe to noble-minded women in
                        this respect? and what do not women owe to the world and themselves in the consciousness of
                        the possession of this authority? To stamp, to mould, to animate to good, the generation
                        that succeeds them, is their delegated office. The are admitted to the co-workmanship with
                        God; his actors in the after age are placed in their hands at the outset of their career,
                        when they are plastic as wax, and pliant as the green withe. It is they who can shape and
                        bend as they please. It is they—as the your, beings advance into the world of life,
                        as passions kindle, as eager desires seize them one after another, as they ire alive with
                        ardour, and athirst for knowledge and experience of the great scene of existence into which
                        they are  thrown—it is they who can guide, warn, inspire with
                        the upward or the downward tendency, and cast through them on the future ages the blessings
                        or the curses of good or evil. They are the gods and prophets of childhood. . . .
 
    William Howitt, 
“Leigh Hunt” in Homes and Haunts of the most eminent British Poets  (London:   Richard Bentley,   1847)   2 Vols
The whole description of this charming and cordial family, is one of those
                        beautiful and sunny scenes in human life, to which the heart never wearies of turning. It
                        makes the rememberer exclaim:—“Blessed house! May a blessing be upon your
                        rooms, and your lawn, and your neighbouring garden, and the quiet old monastic name of your
                        street; and may it never he a thoroughfare; and may all your inmates he happy! Would to God
                        one could renew, at a moment’s notice, the happy hours we have enjoyed in last times,
                        with the same circles, in the same houses!” . . .
 
    Anonymous, 
“Review of Lord Byron and some of His Contemporaries” in Monthly Review
											 Vol. S3 7  (March 1828) 
For such education as he has received, he has been
                        chiefly indebted to Christ Hospital. Whatever reputation he has
                        earned in literature, he owes, and to his credit be it spoken, entirely to his own
                        exertions. If we were asked what we think of Mr. Hunt’s
                        politics, we should answer, that, generally speaking, we approve of them; liberal measures
                        have always found in him a steady and energetic, and sometimes, even an eloquent defender.
                        Several of his miscellaneous compositions in light literature, we think favourably of. They
                        have in them a raciness, occasionally, that reminds us of the elder masters of our
                        language. His poetry we think verbose, and conceited in its diction, sickly in its imagery,
                            cockneyfied (to use an expressive phrase) in its descriptive
                        passages, and poor and tawdry in its sentiments. The most interesting portion of his
                        memoir, is that which relates to his imprisonment; it has been already  before the world in another publication, and therefore we
                        pass it over. . . .
 
    [John Gibson Lockhart], 
“[Hunt's Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries]” in Quarterly Review
											 Vol. 37
											 No. 74  (March 1828) 
We had always understood, that Mr. Hunt,
                        before he was known by anything but his juvenile verses, obtained some situation in the
                        War-office; and that he lost this, after many warnings, in consequence of libelling the
                            Duke of York, then commander-in-chief, in the
                        newspapers; but of this story, there is no trace in the quarto before us, and we,
                        therefore, suppose it must have been, at least, an exaggeration. If it were true, it might
                        account, in some measure, for the peculiar bitterness of personal spleen with which the
                            Examiner, from the beginning of its career,
                        was accustomed to treat almost every branch of the Royal family. . . .
 
    [John Gibson Lockhart], 
“[Hunt's Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries]” in Quarterly Review
											 Vol. 37
											 No. 74  (March 1828) 
Mr. Hunt then fills several pages of his
                        quarto with blasphemous extracts from the last number of the Philosophical Dictionary now printing in that
                        commodious fashion at the Examiner press;  and having used his scissars and paste as largely as he
                        judged right and proper in regard to the interests of the proprietors of that useful work,
                        he adds, ‘At these passages I used to roll with laughter; and I cannot help laughing
                        now, writing, as I am, alone, by my fireside,’ (p. 394). . . .
 
    Leigh Hunt, 
“Memoir of Mr. James Henry Leigh Hunt. Written by Himself” in Monthly Magazine
											 Vol. NS 7  (April 1810) 
After spending some time in that gloomiest of all “darkness palpable,” a lawyer’s office—and
                            plunging, when I left it, into alternate study and morbid idleness, studious all night,
                            and hypochondriac all day, to the great and reprehensible injury of my health and
                            spirits, it fell into my way to commence theatrical critic in a newly established
                            paper, called the News, and
                            I did so with an ardour proportioned to the want of honest newspaper criticism, and to
                            the insufferable dramatic nonsense which then rioted in public favour. . . .
 
    [John Gibson Lockhart], 
“[Hunt's Lord Byron and Some of His Contemporaries]” in Quarterly Review
											 Vol. 37
											 No. 74  (March 1828) 
We presume the turnkeys make a pretty penny by showing the spot where the
                        great Mr. Hunt actually 
                            
                                 ‘sat amidst his books, and saw the imaginary sky overhead and the paper
                                    roses about him.’—p. 425.
                            
                         The Raleigh chamber in the
                            Tower, Galileo’s dungeon at
                            Rome, and Tasso’s
                        at Ferrara, are the only scenes of parallel interest that, at this
                        moment, suggest themselves to our recollection. . . .
 
    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).
               
 
    Vittorio Alfieri  (1749-1803)  
                  Italian tragic poet, author of 
Saul (1782), 
Antigone (1783), and 
Maria Stuart (1804); he was the
                        consort of Louisa, (Jacobite) countess of Albany.
               
 
    Anacreon  (582 BC.-485 BC)  
                  Greek lyric poet of whose writings little survives; 
anacreontic
                            verse celebrates love and wine.
               
 
    
    Ludovico Ariosto  (1474-1533)  
                  Italian poet, author of the epic romance 
Orlando Furioso
                        (1532).
               
 
    
    Pierre Bayle  (1647-1706)  
                  Huguenot philosopher; author of 
Dictionnaire historique et
                            critique, 2 vols (1697), 4 vols (1702).
               
 
    John Bell  (1745-1831)  
                  London printer and bookseller whose 
Poets of Great Britain
                        (1777-82) was a less expensive alternative to that produced by Samuel Johnson and the
                        booksellers. Bell published 
The World newspaper in which much of the
                        Della Cruscan verse originally appeared.
               
 
    Francesco Berni  (1498-1535)  
                  Italian comic poet who produced a refacciamento of Boiardo's 
Orlando
                            innamorato (1542).
               
 
    
    Matteo Maria Boiardo  (1441 c.-1494)  
                  Italian poet and humanist, author of the chivalric romance 
Orlando
                            innamorato (1487).
               
 
    
    Vincent Bourne  (1694-1747)  
                  Latin poet and master of Westminster School, where he taught William Cowper.
               
 
    Charles Armitage Brown  (1787-1842)  
                  Russia merchant and friend of John Keats, with whom he traveled to Scotland in 1818; he
                        later resided in Italy (1822-35).
               
 
    
    
    
    
    Richard Carew  (1555-1620)  
                  Cornish poet and antiquary who published a translation of Tasso as 
Godfrey of Bulloigne (1594) and 
Survey of Cornwall
                        (1602).
               
 
    Thomas Carew  (1595-1640)  
                  Courtier and cavalier poet who wrote a notable elegy for John Donne and a notable masque
                        for Charles I., 
Coelum Britannicum.
               
 
    Catullus  (84 BC c.-54 BC)  
                  Roman lyric poet who addressed erotic verses to a woman he calls Lesbia.
               
 
    
    Emperor Charlemagne  (742-814)  
                  King of the Franks and Emperor of the West who built his palace school at Aachen.
               
 
    Geoffrey Chaucer  (1340 c.-1400)  
                  English Poet, the author of 
The Canterbury Tales (1390 c.).
               
 
    Samuel Taylor Coleridge  (1772-1834)  
                  English poet and philosopher who projected 
Lyrical Ballads (1798)
                        with William Wordsworth; author of 
Biographia Literaria (1817), 
On the Constitution of the Church and State (1829) and other
                        works.
               
 
    
    Jean-Antoine-Nicholas Condorcet  (1749-1794)  
                  French philosopher; author of 
Esquisse d'un tableau historique des
                            progrès de l'esprit humain (1794). He died in prison under disputed
                        circumstances.
               
 
    Abraham Cowley  (1618-1667)  
                  English royalist poet; his most enduring work was his posthumously-published 
Essays (1668).
               
 
    Sir William Curtis, first baronet  (1752-1829)  
                  A banker and friend of George IV; he was Lord Mayor of London (1795) and as Tory MP for
                        London (1790-1818) was a target of Whig mockery.
               
 
    Dante Alighieri  (1265-1321)  
                  Florentine poet, the author of the 
Divine Comedy and other
                        works.
               
 
    Henry Augustus Dillon-Lee, thirteenth viscount Dillon  (1777-1832)  
                  Irish peer, son of the twelfth viscount; he was MP for Harwich (1799-1802) and Mayo
                        (1802-13) and contributed to the 
New Monthly Magazine. Hazlitt said
                        of him, “but for some twist in his brain, would have been a clever man.”
               
 
    
    Andrea Doria  (1466-1560)  
                  Genoese admiral and republican who fought in the French service before going over to
                        Charles V.
               
 
    Sir Francis Drake  (1540-1596)  
                  The first Englishman to circumnavigate the globe (1577-80) in expeditions against the
                        Spanish, and who participated in the destruction of the Armada (1588).
               
 
    John Dryden  (1631-1700)  
                  English poet laureate, dramatist, and critic; author of 
Of Dramatick
                            Poesie (1667), 
Absalom and Achitophel (1681), 
Alexander's Feast; or the Power of Musique (1697), 
The Works of Virgil translated into English Verse (1697), and 
Fables (1700).
               
 
    Claude Duval  (1643-1670)  
                  English highwayman, born in Normandy, whose exploits are recorded in 
The Memoires of Monsieur Du Vall (1670). Samuel Butler commemorated him in a
                        Pindaric ode.
               
 
    
    Henry Fielding  (1707-1754)  
                  English dramatist, essayist, and novelist; author of 
Joseph
                            Andrews (1742) and 
The History of Tom Jones (1749).
               
 
    Thomas Fortescue  (1545-1602)  
                  English translator of 
The Forest, or, Collection of Histories
                        (1571), accused of practicing magic. He was a native of Devon.
               
 
    
    Thomas Fuller  (1608-1661)  
                  English divine and biographer whose 
Worthies of England was
                        posthumously published in 1662.
               
 
    Galileo Galilei  (1564-1642)  
                  Italian astronomer and mathematician, inventor of the telescope.
               
 
    Sir William Garrow  (1760-1840)  
                  English barrister; he was MP for Gatton (1805), solicitor-general (1812),
                        attorney-general (1813), and baron of the Exchequer (1817-32).
               
 
    John Gay  (1685-1732)  
                  English poet and Scriblerian satirist; author of 
The Shepherd's
                            Week (1714), 
Trivia (1714), and 
The
                            Beggar's Opera (1727).
               
 
    Lady Jane Grey  (1537-1554)  
                  Great-niece of Henry VIII and claimant to the throne of England as heir to Edward VI; she
                        was beheaded when Mary became queen.
               
 
    
    Hesiod  (700 BC fl.)  
                  Greek poet; author of 
The Works and Days.
                    
                  
                
    Joseph Hine  (1846 fl.)  
                  Born in Cumberland where he knew Wordsworth, he was a schoolmaster at Plymouth,
                        afterwards at Brixton where he knew Leigh Hunt; he edited a selection of Wordsworth's poems
                        (1831) and published 
One Hundred Original Tales for Children
                        (1846).
               
 
    Homer  (850 BC fl.)  
                  Poet of the 
Iliad and 
Odyssey.
                    
                  
                
    Richard Hooker  (1554-1600)  
                  English theologian whose 
Of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Politie
                        (1593, 1597) became a foundational Anglican text.
               
 
    Horace  (65 BC-8 BC)  
                  Roman lyric poet; author of 
Odes,
                        
                     Epistles, Satires, and the 
Ars Poetica.
               
 
    Marianne Hunt  [née Kent]   (1787-1857)  
                  The daughter of Anne Kent and wife of Leigh Hunt; they were married in 1809. Charles
                        MacFarlane, who knew her in the 1830s, described her as “his mismanaging, unthrifty
                        wife, the most barefaced, persevering, pertinacious of mendicants.”
               
 
    John Jewel, bishop of Salisbury  (1522-1571)  
                  Protestant controversialist who defined Anglican theology in opposition to his Roman and
                        Puritan opponents; he was bishop of Salisbury (1560-71).
               
 
    Seymour Stocker Kirkup  (1788-1880)  
                  English painter who studied under John Flaxman and was a member of the Keats-Shelley
                        circle; he spent most of his career working in Florence.
               
 
    Charles Lamb [Elia]   (1775-1834)  
                  English essayist and boyhood friend of Coleridge at Christ's Hospital; author of 
Essays of Elia published in the 
London
                            Magazine (collected 1823, 1833) and other works.
               
 
    Walter Savage Landor  (1775-1864)  
                  English poet and man of letters, author of the epic 
Gebir (1798)
                        and 
Imaginary Conversations (1824-29). He resided in Italy from 1815
                        to 1835.
               
 
    M. Laurent  (1845 fl.)  
                  A director of Covent Garden Theater (1845); he seems not to have used a forename.
               
 
    
    
    Niccolò Machiavelli  (1469-1527)  
                  Florentine statesman and political theorist, author of 
The Prince
                        (1513).
               
 
    Christopher Marlowe  (1564-1593)  
                  Elizabethan poet and dramatist, author of 
The Jew of Malta and 
Dr. Faustus.
               
 
     De Martini  (1820 fl.)  
                  A dancer Leigh Hung admired at Turin.
               
 
    John Milton  (1608-1674)  
                  English poet and controversialist; author of 
Comus (1634), 
Lycidas (1638), 
Areopagitica (1644), 
Paradise Lost (1667), and other works.
               
 
    Moliere  (1622-1673)  
                  French actor and playwright; author of 
Tartuffe (1664) and 
Le Misanthrope (1666).
               
 
    Thomas Moore  (1779-1852)  
                  Irish poet and biographer, author of the 
Irish Melodies (1807-34),
                            
The Fudge Family in Paris (1818), and 
Lalla
                            Rookh (1817); he was Byron's close friend and designated biographer.
               
 
    
    Joseph Shepherd Munden  (1758-1832)  
                  English comic actor and secretary of the Beefsteak Club; he was the friend of Charles
                        Lamb.
               
 
    Emperor Napoleon I  (1769-1821)  
                  Military leader, First Consul (1799), and Emperor of the French (1804), after his
                        abdication he was exiled to Elba (1814); after his defeat at Waterloo he was exiled to St.
                        Helena (1815).
               
 
    Ovid  (43 BC-17 AD c.)  
                  Roman poet famous for his erotic 
Art of Love and his mythological
                        poem, 
The Metamorphoses.
               
 
    Samuel Parr  (1747-1825)  
                  English schoolmaster, scholar, and book collector whose strident politics and assertive
                        personality involved him in a long series of quarrels.
               
 
    
    William Pitt the younger  (1759-1806)  
                  The second son of William Pitt, earl of Chatham (1708-1778); he was Tory prime minister
                        1783-1801.
               
 
    Plato  (427 BC-327 BC)  
                  Athenian philosopher who recorded the teachings of his master Socrates in a series of
                        philosophical dialogues.
               
 
    Pliny the elder  (23-79)  
                  Roman natural historian, author of 
Naturalis Historia in
                        thirty-seven books.
               
 
    
    Humphrey Prideaux  (1648-1724)  
                  Dean of Norwich; author of a 
Life of Mahomet (1697) and works of
                        ecclesiastical history.
               
 
    Ptolemy  (90 c.-168 c.)  
                  Greek astronomer, mathematician, and geographer.
               
 
    Francçois Rabelais  (1494 c.-1533)  
                  French physician and satirist; author of 
Gargantua and Pantagruel
                        (1532-34, 1546-52, 1562); the English translation by Urquhart and Motteux (1653, 1693-94)
                        has been much admired.
               
 
    
    Sir Walter Raleigh  (1554-1618)  
                  English soldier, courtier, poet, and historian; after a long imprisonment he was executed
                        at the behest of Spain.
               
 
    Raphael  (1483-1520)  
                  Of Urbino; Italian painter patronized by Leo X.
               
 
    Francesco Redi  (1626-1698)  
                  Italian man of letters and member of the Accademia della Crusca. He is the author of 
Bacco in Toscana (1685) in praise of wine.
               
 
    Samuel Rogers  (1763-1855)  
                  English poet, banker, and aesthete, author of the ever-popular 
Pleasures of Memory (1792), 
Columbus (1810), 
Jaqueline (1814), and 
Italy (1822-28).
               
 
    Jean-Jacques Rousseau  (1712-1778)  
                  Swiss-born man of letters; author of, among others, 
Julie ou la
                            Nouvelle Heloïse (1761), 
Émile (1762) and 
Les Confessions (1782).
               
 
    Jaufre Rudel  (d. 1147 c.)  
                  French troubadour who joined the second crusade; six of his lyrics survive.
               
 
    
    
    John Sharpe  (1777-1860)  
                  London bookseller active 1801-1830 who published illustrated editions of 
British Classics, 
Sharpe's British Theatre,
                        and 
British Poets.
                    
                  
                
    Percy Bysshe Shelley  (1792-1822)  
                  English poet, with Byron in Switzerland in 1816; author of 
Queen
                            Mab (1813), 
The Revolt of Islam (1817), 
The Cenci and 
Prometheus Unbound (1820), and 
Adonais (1821).
               
 
    Sir Philip Sidney  (1554-1586)  
                  English poet, courtier, and soldier, author of the 
Arcadia (1590),
                            
Astrophel and Stella (1591) and 
Apology for
                            Poetry (1595).
               
 
    Simonides  (556 BC-468 BC)  
                  Greek poet from the Ionian island of Ceos who was thought to have been at the Battle of
                        Marathon; little of his poetry survives.
               
 
    Pope Sixtus V  (1520-1590)  
                  Felice Peretti di Montalto succeeded Gregory XIII in 1585 and devoted himself to building
                        projects in Rome.
               
 
    Sydney Smith  (1771-1845)  
                  Clergyman, wit, and one of the original projectors of the 
Edinburgh
                            Review; afterwards lecturer in London and one of the Holland House
                        denizens.
               
 
    Tobias Smollett  (1721-1771)  
                  Scottish physician and man of letters; author of the novels 
Roderick
                            Random (1747) and 
Humphry Clinker (1771).
               
 
    Sophocles  (496 BC c.-406 BC c.)  
                  Greek tragic poet; author of 
Antigone and 
Oedipus Rex.
                    
                  
                
    Edmund Spenser  (1552 c.-1599)  
                  English poet, author of 
The Shepheards Calender (1579) and 
The Faerie Queene (1590, 1596).
               
 
    
    
    Thomas Stucley  (1520 c.-1578)  
                  Military adventurer who at various times was in the service of Queen Elizabeth and Philip
                        II of Spain.
               
 
    Alessandro Tassoni  (1565-1635)  
                  Italian poet, author of the burlesque 
La secchia rapita
                        (1622).
               
 
    Thales  (634 BC c.-546 BC c.)  
                  Greek astronomer and geometer, one of the Seven Sages of antiquity.
               
 
    Titian  (1487 c.-1576)  
                  Venetian painter celebrated for his portraits.
               
 
    Virgil  (70 BC-19 BC)  
                  Roman epic poet; author of 
Eclogues,
                        
                     Georgics, and the 
Aenead.
               
 
    Voltaire  (1694-1778)  
                  French historian and man of letters; author of, among many other works, 
The Age of Louis XIV (1751) and 
Candide (1759).
               
 
    
    
    John Wolcot [Peter Pindar]   (1738-1819)  
                  English satirist who made his reputation by ridiculing the Royal Academicians and the
                        royal family.
               
 
    William Wordsworth  (1770-1850)  
                  With Coleridge, author of 
Lyrical Ballads (1798), Wordsworth
                        survived his early unpopularity to succeed Robert Southey as poet laureate in 1843.
               
 
    
                  The Adventurer.    (1752-1754). The 
Adventurer, edited by John Hawkesworth was collected in two
                        volumes. Contributors included Samuel Johnson and Joseph Warton.
 
    
                  The Examiner.    (1808-1881). Founded by John and Leigh Hunt, this weekly paper divided its attention between literary
                        matters and radical politics; William Hazlitt was among its regular contributors.
 
    
    
    
    
                  The Arabian Nights.   (1705-08 English trans.).   Also known as 
The Thousand and One Nights. Antoine Galland's
                        French translation was published 1704-17, from which the original English versions were
                        taken.
 
    
    
    
    
    
    George Gordon Byron, sixth Baron Byron  (1788-1824) 
                  Don Juan.   (London: 1819-1824).   A burlesque poem in ottava rima published in installments: Cantos I and II published in
                        1819, III, IV and V in 1821, VI, VII, and VIII in 1823, IX, X, and XI in 1823, XII, XIII,
                        and XIV in 1823, and XV and XVI in 1824.
 
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Sir Philip Sidney  (1554-1586) 
                  Arcadia.   (London: William Ponsonbie, 1593).   The “New Arcadia“ consisting of the text as Sidney left it; the “Old
                        Arcadia“ containing additional episodes was not published until the twentieth
                        century.