Thomas Moore- Collected Poetical Works

by Thomas Moore

Clerks to Mr. Hanson, Chancery-lane.

  CODICIL. — This is a Codicil to the last will and testament of me, the Right Honourable George Gordon, Lord Byron. I give and bequeath unto Allegra Biron, an infant of about twenty months old, by me brought up, and now residing at Venice, the sum of five thousand pounds, which I direct the executors of my said will to pay to her on her attaining the age of twenty-one years, or on the day of her marriage, on condition that she does not marry with a native of Great Britain, which shall first happen. And I direct my said executors, as soon as conveniently may be after my decease, to invest the said sum of five thousand pounds upon government or real security, and to pay and apply the annual income thereof in or towards the maintenance and education of the said Allegra Biron until she attains her said age of twenty-one years, or shall be married as aforesaid; but in case she shall die before attaining the said age and without having been married, then I direct the said sum of five thousand pounds to become part of the residue of my personal estate, and in all other respects I do confirm my said will, and declare this to be a codicil thereto. In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal, at Venice, this 17th day of November, in the year of our Lord 1818,

  BYRON (L.S.)

  Signed, sealed, published, and declared by the said Lord Byron, as and for a codicil to his will, in the presence of us, who, in his presence, at his request, and in the presence of each other, have subscribed our names as witnesses.

  NEWTON HANSON,

  WILLIAM FLETCHER.

  Proved at London (with a Codicil), 6th of July, 1824, before the Worshipful Stephen Lushington, Doctor of Laws, and surrogate, by the oaths of John Cam Hobhouse and John Hanson, Esquires, the executors, to whom administration was granted, having been first sworn duly to administer.

  NATHANIEL GOSTLING,

  GEORGE JENNER,

  CHARLES DYNELEY,

  Deputy Registrars.

  MISCELLANEOUS PIECES IN PROSE.

  REVIEW OF WORDSWORTH’S POEMS,

  2 Vols. 1807.

  [Footnote 1: I have been a reviewer. In 1807, in a Magazine called “Monthly Literary Recreations,” I reviewed Wordsworth’s trash of that time. In the Monthly Review I wrote some articles which were inserted. This was in the latter part of 1811. — BYRON.]

  (From “Monthly Literary Recreations,” for August, 1807.)

  The volumes before us are by the author of Lyrical Ballads, a collection which has not undeservedly met with a considerable share of public applause. The characteristics of Mr. W.’s muse are simple and flowing, though occasionally inharmonious verse, strong, and sometimes irresistible appeals to the feelings, with unexceptionable sentiments. Though the present work may not equal his former efforts, many of the poems possess a native elegance, natural and unaffected, totally devoid of the tinsel embellishments and abstract hyperboles of several contemporary sonneteers. The last sonnet in the first volume, p. ., is perhaps the best, without any novelty in the sentiments, which we hope are common to every Briton at the present crisis; the force and expression is that of a genuine poet, feeling as he writes: —

  “Another year! another deadly blow!

  Another mighty empire overthrown!

  And we are left, or shall be left, alone —

  The last that dares to struggle with the foe.

  ’Tis well! — from this day forward we shall know

  That in ourselves our safety must be sought,

  That by our own right-hands it must be wrought;

  That we must stand unprop’d, or be laid low.

  O dastard! whom such foretaste doth not cheer!

  We shall exult, if they who rule the land

  Be men who hold its many blessings dear,

  Wise, upright, valiant, not a venal band,

  Who are to judge of danger which they fear,

  And honour which they do not understand.”

  The song at the Feast of Brougham Castle, the Seven Sisters, the Affliction of Margaret —— of —— , possess all the beauties, and few of the defects, of this writer: the following lines from the last are in his first style: —

  “Ah! little doth the young one dream

  When full of play and childish cares,

  What power hath e’en his wildest scream,

  Heard by his mother unawares:

  He knows it not, he cannot guess:

  Years to a mother bring distress,

  But do not make her love the less.”

  The pieces least worthy of the author are those entitled “Moods of my own Mind.” We certainly wish these “Moods” had been less frequent, or not permitted to occupy a place near works which only make their deformity more obvious; when Mr. W. ceases to please, it is by “abandoning” his mind to the most commonplace ideas, at the same time clothing them in language not simple, but puerile. What will any reader or auditor, out of the nursery, say to such namby-pamby as “Lines written at the Foot of Brother’s Bridge?”

  “The cock is crowing,

  The stream is flowing,

  The small birds twitter,

  The lake doth glitter.

  The green field sleeps in the sun;

  The oldest and youngest,

  Are at work with the strongest;

  The cattle are grazing,

  Their heads never raising,

  There are forty feeding like one.

  Like an army defeated,

  The snow hath retreated,

  And now doth fare ill,

  On the top of the bare hill.”

  “The plough-boy is whooping anon, anon,” &c. &c. is in the same exquisite measure. This appears to us neither more nor less than an imitation of such minstrelsy as soothed our cries in the cradle, with the shrill ditty of

  “Hey de diddle,

  The cat and the fiddle:

  The cow jump’d over the moon,

  The little dog laugh’d to see such sport,

  And the dish ran away with the spoon.”

  On the whole, however, with the exception of the above, and other INNOCENT odes of the same cast, we think these volumes display a genius worthy of higher pursuits, and regret that Mr. W. confines his muse to such trifling subjects. We trust his motto will be in future, “Paulo majora canamus.” Many, with inferior abilities, have acquired a loftier seat on Parnassus, merely by attempting strains in which Mr. Wordsworth is more qualified to excel.

  [Footnote 1: This first attempt of Lord Byron at reviewing is remarkable only as showing how plausibly he could assume the established tone and phraseology of these minor judgment-seats of criticism. If Mr. Wordsworth ever chanced to cast his eye over this article, how little could he have expected that under that dull prosaic mask lurked one who, in five short years from thence, would rival even him in poetry! — MOORE.]

  296 REVIEW OF GELL’S GEOGRAPHY OF ITHACA, AND ITINERARY OF GREECE.

  (From the “Monthly Review” for August, 1811.)

  That laudable curiosity concerning the remains of classical antiquity, which has of late years increased among our countrymen, is in no traveller or author more conspicuous than in Mr. Gell. Whatever difference of opinion may yet exist with regard to the success of the several disputants in the famous Trojan controversy, or, indeed, relating to the present author’s merits as an inspector of the Troad, it must universally be acknowledged that any work, which more forcibly impresses on our imaginations the scenes of heroic action, and the subjects of immortal song, possesses claims on the attention of every scholar.

  [Footnote 1: We have it from the best authority that the venerable leader of the Anti-Homeric sect, Jacob Bryant, several years before his death, expressed regret for his ungrateful attempt to destroy some of the most pleasing associations of our youthful studies. One of his last wishes was— “Trojaque nunc stares,” &c.]

  Of the two works which now demand our report, we conceive the former to be by far the most interesting to the reader, as the latter is indisputably the most serviceable to the traveller. Excepting, indeed, the run
ning commentary which it contains on a number of extracts from Pausanias and Strabo, it is, as the title imports, a mere itinerary of Greece, or rather of Argolis only, in its present circumstances. This being the case, surely it would have answered every purpose of utility much better by being printed as a pocket road-book of that part of the Morea; for a quarto is a very unmanageable travelling companion. The maps and drawings, we shall be told, would not permit such an arrangement: but as to the drawings, they are not in general to be admired as specimens of the art; and several of them, as we have been assured by eye-witnesses of the scenes which they describe, do not compensate for their mediocrity in point of execution, by any extraordinary fidelity of representation. Others, indeed, are more faithful, according to our informants. The true reason, however, for this costly mode of publication is in course to be found in a desire of gratifying the public passion for large margins, and all the luxury of typography; and we have before expressed our dissatisfaction with Mr. Gell’s aristocratical mode of communicating a species of knowledge, which ought to be accessible to a much greater portion of classical students than can at present acquire it by his means: — but, as such expostulations are generally useless, we shall be thankful for what we can obtain, and that in the manner in which Mr. Gell has chosen to present it.

  [Footnote 1: Or, rather, Map; for we have only one in the volume, and that is on too small a scale to give more than a general idea of the relative position of places. The excuse about a larger map not folding well is trifling; see, for instance, the author’s own map of Ithaca.]

  The former of these volumes, we have observed, is the most attractive in the closet. It comprehends a very full survey of the far-famed island which the hero of the Odyssey has immortalized; for we really are inclined to think that the author has established the identity of the modern Theaki with the Ithaca of Homer. At all events, if it be an illusion, it is a very agreeable deception, and is effected by an ingenious interpretation of the passages in Homer that are supposed to be descriptive of the scenes which our traveller has visited. We shall extract some of these adaptations of the ancient picture to the modern scene, marking the points of resemblance which appear to be strained and forced, as well as those which are more easy and natural: but we must first insert some preliminary matter from the opening chapter.

  The following passage conveys a sort of general sketch of the book, which may give our readers a tolerably adequate notion of its contents: —

  “The present work may adduce, by a simple and correct survey of the island, coincidences in its geography, in its natural productions, and moral state, before unnoticed. Some will be directly pointed out; the fancy or ingenuity of the reader may be employed in tracing others; the mind familiar with the imagery of the Odyssey will recognise with satisfaction the scenes themselves; and this volume is offered to the public, not entirely without hopes of vindicating the poem of Homer from the scepticism of those critics who imagine that the Odyssey is a mere poetical composition, unsupported by history, and unconnected with the localities of any particular situation.

  “Some have asserted that, in the comparison of places now existing with the descriptions of Homer, we ought not to expect coincidence in minute details; yet it seems only by these that the kingdom of Ulysses, or any other, can be identified, as, if such as idea be admitted, every small and rocky island in the Ionian Sea, containing a good port, might, with equal plausibility, assume the appellation of Ithaca.

  “The Venetian geographers have in a great degree contributed to raise those doubts which have existed on the identity of the modern with the ancient Ithaca, by giving, in their charts, the name of Val di Compare to the island. That name is, however, totally unknown in the country, where the isle is invariably called Ithaca by the upper ranks, and Theaki by the vulgar. The Venetians have equally corrupted the name of almost every place in Greece; yet, as the natives of Epactos or Naupactos never heard of Lepanto, those of Zacynthos of Zante, or the Athenians of Settines, it would be as unfair to rob Ithaca of its name, on such authority, as it would be to assert that no such island existed, because no tolerable representation of its form can be found in the Venetian surveys.

  “The rare medals of the Island, of which three are represented in the title-page, might be adduced as a proof that the name of Ithaca was not lost during the reigns of the Roman emperors. They have the head of Ulysses, recognised by the pileum, or pointed cap, while the reverse of one presents the figure of a cock, the emblem of his vigilance, with the legend [Greek: ITHAKON]. A few of these medals are preserved in the cabinets of the curious, and one also, with the cock, found in the island, is in the possession of Signor Zavo, of Bathi. The uppermost coin is in the collection of Dr. Hunter; the second is copied from Newman, and the third is the property of R.P. Knight, Esq.

  “Several inscriptions, which will be hereafter produced, will tend to the confirmation of the idea that Ithaca was inhabited about the time when the Romans were masters of Greece; yet there is every reason to believe that few, if any, of the present proprietors of the soil are descended from ancestors who had long resided successively in the island. Even those who lived, at the time of Ulysses, in Ithaca, seem to have been on the point of emigrating to Argos, and no chief remained, after the second in descent from that hero, worthy of being recorded in history. It appears that the isle has been twice colonised from Cephalonia in modern times, and I was informed that a grant had been made by the Venetians, entitling each settler in Ithaca to as much land as his circumstances would enable him to cultivate.”

  Mr. Gell then proceeds to invalidate the authority of previous writers on the subject of Ithaca. Sir George Wheeler and M. le Chevalier fall under his severe animadversion; and, indeed, according to his account, neither of these gentlemen had visited the island, and the description of the latter is “absolutely too absurd for refutation.” In another place, he speaks of M. le C. “disgracing a work of such merit by the introduction of such fabrications;” again, of the inaccuracy of the author’s maps; and, lastly, of his inserting an island at the southern entry of the Channel between Cephalonia and Ithaca, which has no existence. This observation very nearly approaches to the use of that monosyllable which Gibbon, without expressing it, so adroitly applied to some assertion of his antagonist, Mr. Davies. In truth, our traveller’s words are rather bitter towards his brother tourist: but we must conclude that their justice warrants their severity.

  [Footnote 1: See his Vindication of the 15th and 16th chapters of the Decline and Fall, &c.]

  In the second chapter, the author describes his landing in Ithaca, and arrival at the rock Korax and the fountain Arethusa, as he designates it with sufficient positiveness. — This rock, now known by the name of Korax, or Koraka Petra, he contends to be the same with that which Homer mentions as contiguous to the habitation of Eumæus, the faithful swine-herd of Ulysses. — We shall take the liberty of adding to our extracts from Mr. Gell some of the passages in Homer to which he refers only, conceiving this to be the fairest method of exhibiting the strength or the weakness of his argument. “Ulysses,” he observes, “came to the extremity of the isle to visit Eumusæ, and that extremity was the most southern; for Telemachus, coming from Pylos, touched at the first south-eastern part of Ithaca with the same intention.”

  [Greek:

  Kai tote dê r’ Odusêa kakos pothen êgage daimôn

  Agrou ep’ eschatiên, hothi domata naie subôtês;

  Enth’ êlthen philos uios Odussêos theioio,

  Ek Pulou êmathoenios iôn sun nêi melainê;

  Odussei O.

  Autar epên prôtên aktên Ithakês aphikêai,

  Nêa men es polin otrunai kai panlas hetairous;

  Autos de prôtisa subôtên eisaphikesthai,

  k.t.l. Odussei O.]

  These citations, we think, appear to justify the author in his attempt to identify the situation of his rock and fountain with the place of those mentioned by Homer. But let us now follow him in the closer desc
ription of the scene. — After some account of the subjects in the plate affixed, Mr. Gell remarks: “It is impossible to visit this sequestered spot without being struck with the recollection of the Fount of Arethusa and the Rock Korax, which the poet mentions in the same line, adding, that there the swine eat the sweet acorns, and drank the black water.”

  [Footnote 1: “Sweet acorns.” Does Mr. Gell translate from the Latin? To avoid similar cause of mistake, [Greek: menoeikea] should not be rendered suavem but gratam, as Barnes has given it.]

  [Greek:

  Dêeis ton ge suessi parêmenon; ai de nemontai

  Par Korakos petrê, epi te krênê Arethousê,

  Esthousai balanon menoeikea, kai melan hudôr

  Pinousai;

  Odussei N.]

  “Having passed some time at the fountain, taken a drawing, and made the necessary observations on the situation of the place, we proceeded to an examination of the precipice, climbing over the terraces above the source, among shady fig-trees, which, however, did not prevent us from feeling the powerful effects of the mid-day sun. After a short but fatiguing ascent, we arrived at the rock, which extends in a vast perpendicular semicircle, beautifully fringed with trees, facing to the southeast. Under the crag we found two caves of inconsiderable extent, the entrance of one of which, not difficult of access, is seen in the view of the fount. They are still the resort of sheep and goats, and in one of them are small natural receptacles for the water, covered by a stalagmitic incrustation.

  “These caves, being at the extremity of the curve formed by the precipice, open toward the south, and present us with another accompaniment of the fount of Arethusa, mentioned by the poet, who informs us that the swineherd Eumæus left his guests in the house, whilst he, putting on a thick garment, went to sleep near the herd, under the hollow of the rock, which sheltered him from the northern blast. Now we know that the herd fed near the fount; for Minerva tells Ulysses that he is to go first to Eumæus, whom he should find with the swine, near the rock Korax and the fount of Arethusa. As the swine then fed at the fountain, so it is necessary that a cavern should be found in its vicinity; and this seems to coincide, in distance and situation, with that of the poem. Near the fount also was the fold or stathmos of Eumæus; for the goddess informs Ulysses that he should find his faithful servant at or above the fount.