« ForrigeFortsett »
not in te
CHILDE HAROL D'S
D. APPLETON & CO., 200 BROADWAY.
“L'UNIVERS EST'UNE ÈSPECE DE LIVRE, DONT ON N'A LU QUE LA PREMIÈRE PAGE QUAND ON N'A VU QUE SON PAYS. J'EN AI FEUILLETÉ UN ASSEZ GRAND NOMBRE, QUE J'AI TROUVÉ ÉGALEMENT MAUVAISES. CET EXAMEN NE M'A POINT ÉTÉ INFRUCTUEUX. JE HAISSAIS MA PATRIE. TOUTES LES IMPERTINENCES DES PEUPLES DIVERS, PARMI LESQUELS J'AI VÉCU, M'ONT RÉCONCILIÉ AVEC ELLE. QUAND JE N'AURAIS TIRÉ D'AUTRE BÉNÉFICE DE MES VOYAGES QUE CELUI-LÀ, JE N'EN REGRETTERAIS NI LES FRAIS, NI LES FATIGUES."
With the different poems which have been published on Spanish subjects, there may be found some slight coincidence in the first part, which treats of the Peninsula, but it can only be casual; as, with the exception of a few concluding stanzas, the whole of this poem was written in the Levant.
The stanza of Spenser, according to one of our most successful poets, admits of every variety. Dr. Beattie makes the following observation :- Not long ago, I began a poem in the style and stanza of Spenser, in which I propose to give full scope to my inclination, and be either droll or pathetic, descriptive or sentimental, tender or satirical, as the humour strikes me; for, if I mistake not, the measure which I have adopted admits equally of all these kinds of composition."* Strengthened in my opinion by such authority, and by the example of some in the highest order of Italian poets, I shall make no apology for attempts at similar variations in the following composition; satisfied that if they are successful, their failure must be in the execution, rather than in the design sanctioned by the practice of Ariosto, Thomson, and Beattie.
* Beattie's Letters.
Londonç Febjuary, 1812.
ADDITION TO THE PREFACE.
I have now waited till almost all our periodical journals have distributed their usual portion of criticism. To the justice of the generality of their criticisms I have nothing to object: it would ill become me to quarrel with their very slight degree of censure, when, perhaps, if they had been less kind they had been more candid. Returning, therefore, to all and each my best thanks for their liberality, on one point alone shall I venture an observation. Amongst the many objections justly urged to the very indifferent character of the “vagrant Childe” (whom, notwithstanding many hints to the contrary, I still maintain to be a fictitious personage), it has been stated, that, besides the anachronism, he is very unknightly, as the times of the Knights were times of Love, Honour, and so forth. Now, it so happens that the good old times, when "l'amour du bon vieux tems, l'amour antique" flourished, were the most profligate of all possible centuries. Those who have any doubts on this subject may consult Sainte-Palaye, passim, and more particularly vol. č. p. 69. The vows of chivalry were no better kept than any other vows whatsoever; and the songs of the Troubadours were not more decent, and certainly were much less refined, than those of Ovid. The “Cours d'amour, parlemens d'amour, ou de courtesie et de gentilesse” had much more of love than of courtesy or gentleness. See Roland on the same subject with Sainte-Palaye. Whatever other objection may be urged to that most unamiable personage, Childe Harold, he was so far perfectly knightly in his attributes—"No waiter, but a