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.