This is a modern-English version of The Complete Poetical Works of Oliver Goldsmith, originally written by Goldsmith, Oliver.
It has been thoroughly updated, including changes to sentence structure, words, spelling,
and grammar—to ensure clarity for contemporary readers, while preserving the original spirit and nuance. If
you click on a paragraph, you will see the original text that we modified, and you can toggle between the two versions.
Scroll to the bottom of this page and you will find a free ePUB download link for this book.
OXFORD EDITION
THE COMPLETE
POETICAL WORKS
OF
OLIVER GOLDSMITH
Edited with Introduction and Notes
by
AUSTIN
DOBSON
HON. LL.D. EDIN.
Edited with Introduction and Notes
by
AUSTIN
DOBSON
HON. LL.D. EDIN.
PREFATORY NOTE
This volume is a reprint, extended and revised, of the Selected Poems of Goldsmith issued by the Clarendon Press in 1887. It is ‘extended,’ because it now contains the whole of Goldsmith’s poetry: it is ‘revised’ because, besides the supplementary text, a good deal has been added in the way of annotation and illustration. In other words, the book has been substantially enlarged. Of the new editorial material, the bulk has been collected at odd times during the last twenty years; but fresh Goldsmith facts are growing rare. I hope I have acknowledged obligation wherever it has been incurred; I trust also, for the sake of those who come after me, that something of my own will be found to have been contributed to the literature of the subject.
This volume is a reprint, extended and revised, of the Selected Poems of Goldsmith published by the Clarendon Press in 1887. It's considered ‘extended’ because it now includes all of Goldsmith’s poetry; it’s ‘revised’ since, in addition to the supplementary text, a significant amount of annotation and illustration has been added. In other words, the book has been notably expanded. Most of the new editorial material has been gathered over the last twenty years; however, fresh facts about Goldsmith are becoming scarce. I hope I have credited any obligations where they were due; I also hope, for the benefit of those who come after me, that some of my own contributions to the literature of the subject are present.
AUSTIN DOBSON.
AUSTIN DOBSON.
Ealing, September, 1906.
Ealing, September 1906.
CONTENTS
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
OLIVER GOLDSMITH. From Joseph Marchi’s mezzotint of 1770 after the portrait by Sir Joshua Reynolds. |
PANE OF GLASS with Goldsmith’s autograph signature, dated March, 1746, now at Trinity College, Dublin. |
VIGNETTE TO THE TRAVELLER. Drawn by Samuel Wale, and engraved by Charles Grignion. |
HEADPIECE TO THE TRAVELLER. Engraved on wood by Charlton Nesbit for Bulmer’s Poems of Goldsmith and Parnell, 1795. |
THE TRAVELLER. From a design by Richard Westall, R. A., engraved on wood by Thomas Bewick for Bulmer’s Poems of Goldsmith and Parnell, 1795. |
VIGNETTE TO THE DESERTED VILLAGE, 1770. Drawn and engraved by Isaac Taylor. |
HEADPIECE TO THE DESERTED VILLAGE. Engraved on wood by Charlton Nesbit for Bulmer’s Poems of Goldsmith and Parnell, 1795. |
THE WATER-CRESS GATHERER. Drawn and engraved on wood by John Bewick for Bulmer’s Poems of Goldsmith and Parnell, 1795. |
THE DEPARTURE. Drawn by Robert Johnson, and engraved on wood by Thomas Bewick for Bulmer’s Poems of Goldsmith and Parnell, 1795. |
EDWIN AND ANGELINA. From an original washed drawing made by Thomas Stothard, R.A., for Aikin’s Goldsmith’s Poetical Works, 1805. |
PORTRAIT OF GOLDSMITH, after Sir Joshua Reynolds. From an etching by James Basire on the title-page of Retaliation, 1774. |
SONG FROM THE CAPTIVITY. Facsimile of Goldsmith’s writing and signature, from Prior’s Life of Oliver Goldsmith, M.B., 1837, ii, frontispiece. |
GREEN ARBOUR COURT, OLD BAILEY. From an engraving in the European Magazine for January, 1803. |
KILKENNY WEST CHURCH. From an aquatint by S. Alken of a sketch by R. H. Newell (Goldsmith’s Poetical Works, 1811). |
HAWTHORN TREE. From the same. |
SOUTH VIEW FROM GOLDSMITH’S MOUNT. From the same . . . To face p. 183. [This picture is unavailable.] |
THE SCHOOL HOUSE. From the same. |
PORTRAIT OF GOLDSMITH. Drawn by Henry William Bunbury and etched by James Bretherton. From the Haunch of Venison, 1776. |
PORTRAIT OF GOLDSMITH. From a silhouette by Ozias Humphry, R.A., in the National Portrait Gallery. |
LISSOY (OR LISHOY) MILL. From an aquatint by S. Alken of a sketch by R. H. Newell (Goldsmith’s Poetical Works, 1811). |
THE PARSONAGE. From the same. |
INTRODUCTION
Two of the earlier, and, in some respects, more important Memoirs of Oliver Goldsmith open with a quotation from one of his minor works, in which he refers to the generally uneventful life of the scholar. His own chequered career was a notable exception to this rule. He was born on the 10th of November, 1728, at Pallas, a village in the county of Longford in Ireland, his father, the Rev. Charles Goldsmith, being a clergyman of the Established Church. Oliver was the fifth of a family of five sons and three daughters. In 1730, his father, who had been assisting the rector of the neighbouring parish of Kilkenny West, succeeded to that living, and moved to Lissoy, a hamlet in Westmeath, lying a little to the right of the road from Ballymahon to Athlone. Educated first by a humble relative named Elizabeth Delap, the boy passed subsequently to the care of Thomas Byrne, the village schoolmaster, an old soldier who had fought Queen Anne’s battles in Spain, and had retained from those experiences a wandering and unsettled spirit, which he is thought to have communicated to one at least of his pupils. After an attack of confluent small-pox, which scarred him for life, Oliver was transferred from the care of this not-uncongenial preceptor to a school at Elphin. From Elphin he passed to Athlone; from Athlone to Edgeworthstown, where he remained until he was thirteen or fourteen years of age. The accounts of these early days are contradictory. By his schoolfellows he seems to have been regarded as stupid and heavy,—‘little better than a fool’; but they admitted that he was remarkably active and athletic, and that he was an adept in all boyish sports. At home, notwithstanding a variable disposition, and occasional fits of depression, he showed to greater advantage. He scribbled verses early; and sometimes startled those about him by unexpected ‘swallow-flights’ of repartee. One of these, an oft-quoted retort to a musical friend who had likened his awkward antics in a hornpipe to the dancing of Aesop,—
Two of the earlier, and in some ways more significant Memoirs of Oliver Goldsmith start with a quote from one of his lesser works, where he mentions the generally uneventful life of a scholar. His own varied career was a notable exception to this trend. He was born on November 10, 1728, in Pallas, a village in Longford County, Ireland, to his father, the Rev. Charles Goldsmith, who was a clergyman of the Established Church. Oliver was the fifth of five sons and three daughters. In 1730, his father, who had been helping the rector of the nearby parish of Kilkenny West, took over that position and moved the family to Lissoy, a small settlement in Westmeath, slightly off the road from Ballymahon to Athlone. Initially educated by a humble relative named Elizabeth Delap, Oliver later came under the care of Thomas Byrne, the village schoolmaster, an ex-soldier who had fought in Queen Anne’s wars in Spain and had carried a restless spirit from those experiences, which he is believed to have passed on to at least one of his students. After suffering from a severe case of smallpox that left him scarred for life, Oliver moved from this not-unfriendly teacher to a school in Elphin. From Elphin, he went to Athlone; and from Athlone to Edgeworthstown, where he stayed until he was about thirteen or fourteen years old. Accounts of these early years are mixed. His classmates seem to have seen him as dull and slow—"little better than a fool"; however, they also acknowledged that he was notably energetic and athletic, excelling in all boyish games. At home, despite a fluctuating temperament and occasional bouts of sadness, he often stood out more. He began writing poetry at an early age and sometimes surprised those around him with unexpected sharp retorts. One of these, a frequently quoted comeback to a musical friend who compared his clumsy hornpipe dancing to Aesop's, was—
Heralds! proclaim aloud! all saying,
See Aesop dancing, and his monkey playing,—
Heralds! shout it out loud! everyone saying,
Look at Aesop dancing, and his monkey playing,—
reads more like a happily-adapted recollection than the actual impromptu of a boy of nine. But another, in which, after a painful silence, he replied to the brutal enquiry of a ne’er-do-well relative as to when he meant to grow handsome, by saying that he would do so when the speaker grew good,—is characteristic of the easily-wounded spirit and ‘exquisite sensibility of contempt’ with which he was to enter upon the battle of life.
reads more like a happily-adapted memory than the actual spontaneous response of a nine-year-old boy. But another moment, where, after an awkward silence, he answered the harsh question from a worthless relative about when he planned to become handsome, by saying he'd do so when the speaker became a good person,—is telling of the sensitive nature and 'heightened sensitivity to disdain' with which he was about to face the challenges of life.
In June, 1744, after anticipating in his own person, the plot of his later play of She Stoops to Conquer by mistaking the house of a gentleman at Ardagh for an inn, he was sent to Trinity College, Dublin. The special dress and semi-menial footing of a sizar or poor scholar—for his father, impoverished by the imprudent portioning of his eldest daughter, could not afford to make him a pensioner—were scarcely calculated to modify his personal peculiarities. Added to these, his tutor elect, Dr. Theaker Wilder, was a violent and vindictive man, with whom his ungainly and unhopeful pupil found little favour. Wilder had a passion for mathematics which was not shared by Goldsmith, who, indeed, spoke contemptuously enough of that science in after life. He could, however, he told Malone, ‘turn an Ode of Horace into English better than any of them.’ But his academic career was not a success.
In June 1744, after unknowingly acting out the scenario of his later play, She Stoops to Conquer, by confusing a gentleman's house in Ardagh for an inn, he was sent to Trinity College, Dublin. The specific attire and semi-servant status of a sizar or poor scholar—since his father, who had fallen on hard times due to the reckless dowry given to his eldest daughter, couldn’t afford to make him a pensioner—didn’t really help him fit in. On top of that, his appointed tutor, Dr. Theaker Wilder, was a harsh and vengeful man, and his awkward and unpromising student didn’t get along with him at all. Wilder was passionate about mathematics, a subject Goldsmith didn’t share any enthusiasm for, and he often spoke dismissively of it later in life. However, he did tell Malone that he could "translate an Ode of Horace into English better than any of them." Still, his time at college was not successful.
![[Illustration: Goldsmith’s Autograph]](images/glasspane.jpg)
PANE OF GLASS WITH GOLDSMITH’S AUTOGRAPH
(Trinity
College, Dublin)
PANE OF GLASS WITH GOLDSMITH’S SIGNATURE
(Trinity College, Dublin)
In May, 1747, the year in which his father died,—an event that further contracted his already slender means,—he became involved in a college riot, and was publicly admonished. From this disgrace he recovered to some extent in the following month by obtaining a trifling money exhibition, a triumph which he unluckily celebrated by a party at his rooms. Into these festivities, the heinousness of which was aggravated by the fact that they included guests of both sexes, the exasperated Wilder made irruption, and summarily terminated the proceedings by knocking down the host. The disgrace was too much for the poor lad. He forthwith sold his books and belongings, and ran away, vaguely bound for America. But after considerable privations, including the achievement of a destitution so complete that a handful of grey peas, given him by a girl at a wake, seemed a banquet, he turned his steps homeward, and, a reconciliation having been patched up with his tutor, he was received once more at college. In February, 1749, he took his degree, a low one, as B.A., and quitted the university, leaving behind him, for relics of that time, a scratched signature upon a window-pane, a folio Scapula scored liberally with ‘promises to pay,’ and a reputation for much loitering at the college gates in the study of passing humanity. Another habit which his associates recalled was his writing of ballads when in want of funds. These he would sell at five shillings apiece; and would afterwards steal out in the twilight to hear them sung to the indiscriminate but applauding audience of the Dublin streets.
In May 1747, the year his father died—a loss that further limited his already tight finances—he got caught up in a college riot and was publicly reprimanded. He somewhat recovered from this embarrassment the next month by winning a small financial award, a victory he unfortunately celebrated with a party in his rooms. The party was made even more scandalous by the presence of both male and female guests, which led the angry Wilder to burst in and abruptly end the gathering by knocking the host down. The humiliation was too much for the poor guy. He immediately sold his books and belongings and ran away, vaguely heading for America. However, after enduring significant hardships, including reaching a level of poverty so severe that a handful of gray peas given to him by a girl at a wake felt like a feast, he decided to return home. After patching things up with his tutor, he was readmitted to college. In February 1749, he graduated with a low B.A. degree and left the university, leaving behind a scratched signature on a windowpane, a folio Scapula filled with "promises to pay," and a reputation for hanging around the college gates watching people. Another habit his friends remembered was him writing ballads when he was short on cash. He would sell these for five shillings each and then sneak out at twilight to hear them sung by the enthusiastic but random audience in the streets of Dublin.
What was to be done with a genius so unstable, so erratic? Nothing, apparently, but to let him qualify for orders, and for this he is too young. Thereupon ensues a sort of ‘Martin’s summer’ in his changing life,—a disengaged, delightful time when ‘Master Noll’ wanders irresponsibly from house to house, fishing and flute-playing, or, of winter evenings, taking the chair at the village inn. When at last the moment came for his presentation to the Bishop of Elphin, that prelate, sad to say, rejected him, perhaps because of his college reputation, perhaps because of actual incompetence, perhaps even, as tradition affirms, because he had the bad taste to appear before his examiner in flaming scarlet breeches. After this rebuff, tutoring was next tried. But he had no sooner saved some thirty pounds by teaching, than he threw up his engagement, bought a horse, and started once more for America, by way of Cork. In six weeks he had returned penniless, having substituted for his roadster a sorry jade, to which he gave the contemptuous name of Fiddleback. He had also the simplicity to wonder, on this occasion, that his mother was not rejoiced to see him again. His next ambition was to be a lawyer; and, to this end, a kindly Uncle Contarine equipped him with fifty pounds for preliminary studies. But on his way to London he was decoyed into gambling, lost every farthing, and came home once more in bitter self-abasement. Having now essayed both divinity and law, his next attempt was physic; and, in 1752, fitted out afresh by his long-suffering uncle, he started for, and succeeded in reaching, Edinburgh. Here more memories survive of his social qualities than of his studies; and two years later he left the Scottish capital for Leyden, rather, it may be conjectured, from a restless desire to see the world than really to exchange the lectures of Monro for the lectures of Albinus. At Newcastle (according to his own account) he had the good fortune to be locked up as a Jacobite, and thus escaped drowning, as the ship by which he was to have sailed to Bordeaux sank at the mouth of the Garonne. Shortly afterwards he arrived in Leyden. Gaubius and other Dutch professors figure sonorously in his future works; but whether he had much experimental knowledge of their instructions may be doubted. What seems undeniable is, that the old seduction of play stripped him of every shilling; so that, like Holberg before him, he set out deliberately to make the tour of Europe on foot. Haud inexpertus loquor, he wrote in after days, when praising this mode of locomotion. He first visited Flanders. Thence he passed to France, Germany, Switzerland, and Italy, supporting himself mainly by his flute, and by occasional disputations at convents or universities. ‘Sir,’ said Boswell to Johnson, ‘he disputed his passage through Europe.’ When on the 1st February, 1756, he landed at Dover, it was with empty pockets. But he had sent home to his brother in Ireland his first rough sketch for the poem of The Traveller.
What should be done with a genius who is so unpredictable and erratic? Apparently, nothing but to allow him to qualify for the clergy, but he's too young for that. This leads to a sort of 'Martin's summer' in his unpredictable life—a carefree and enjoyable time when 'Master Noll' aimlessly travels from house to house, fishing and playing the flute, or, in the winter evenings, taking a seat at the village inn. When the time finally came for him to be presented to the Bishop of Elphin, unfortunately, that bishop rejected him, perhaps because of his reputation in college, perhaps due to genuine incompetence, or as tradition suggests, because he had the poor taste to show up for his examination in bright scarlet breeches. After this setback, he tried tutoring next. But as soon as he saved about thirty pounds from teaching, he quit his job, bought a horse, and set off again for America, via Cork. In six weeks, he returned broke, having replaced his decent horse with a pathetic nag, which he contemptuously named Fiddleback. He even naively wondered why his mother wasn't thrilled to see him back. His next goal was to become a lawyer; to this end, his kind Uncle Contarine provided him with fifty pounds for preliminary studies. However, on his way to London, he was lured into gambling, lost every penny, and returned home in deep shame. After trying both theology and law, he next aimed for medicine; in 1752, equipped again by his patient uncle, he set off for Edinburgh and managed to arrive there. Here, he left behind more memories of his social life than of his studies, and two years later, he left the Scottish capital for Leyden, likely driven more by a restless desire to explore the world than by a genuine wish to trade Monro's lectures for Albinus's. In Newcastle (according to his own account), he was fortunate enough to be locked up as a Jacobite, which saved him from drowning when the ship he was supposed to take to Bordeaux sank at the mouth of the Garonne. Shortly thereafter, he arrived in Leyden. Gaubius and other Dutch professors play prominent roles in his later works; however, it's questionable whether he gained much practical knowledge from their teachings. What's clear is that the old temptation of gambling took away every last penny, leading him, like Holberg before him, to intentionally embark on a walking tour of Europe. Haud inexpertus loquor, he wrote later when praising this way of traveling. He first visited Flanders, then moved on to France, Germany, Switzerland, and Italy, mostly supporting himself through his flute and occasional debates at convents or universities. “Sir,” Boswell said to Johnson, “he disputed his way across Europe.” When he landed in Dover on February 1, 1756, he did so with empty pockets. But he had sent his brother in Ireland the first rough draft of his poem The Traveller.
He was now seven-and-twenty. He had seen and suffered much, but he was to have further trials before drifting definitely into literature. Between Dover and London, it has been surmised, he made a tentative appearance as a strolling player. His next ascertained part was that of an apothecary’s assistant on Fish Street Hill. From this, with the opportune aid of an Edinburgh friend, he proceeded—to use an eighteenth-century phrase—a poor physician in the Bankside, Southwark, where least of all, perhaps, was London’s fabled pavement to be found. So little of it, in fact, fell to Goldsmith’s share, that we speedily find him reduced to the rank of reader and corrector of the press to Samuel Richardson, printer, of Salisbury Court, author of Clarissa. Later still he is acting as help or substitute in Dr. Milner’s ‘classical academy’ at Peckham. Here, at last, chance seemed to open to him the prospect of a literary life. He had already, says report, submitted a manuscript tragedy to Richardson’s judgement; and something he said at Dr. Milner’s table attracted the attention of an occasional visitor there, the bookseller Griffiths, who was also proprietor of the Monthly Review. He invited Dr. Milner’s usher to try his hand at criticism; and finally, in April, 1757, Goldsmith was bound over for a year to that venerable lady whom George Primrose dubs ‘the antiqua mater of Grub Street’—in other words, he was engaged for bed, board, and a fixed salary to supply copy-of-all-work to his master’s magazine.
He was now twenty-seven. He had experienced a lot and gone through many hardships, but he was still facing more challenges before fully committing to a career in writing. It is believed that he made a brief appearance as a traveling actor between Dover and London. His next known position was as an assistant to an apothecary on Fish Street Hill. With the timely support of a friend from Edinburgh, he then became—using an old-fashioned term—a struggling physician in Bankside, Southwark, where London’s legendary streets were probably least found. In fact, Goldsmith received so little from it that he quickly found himself working as a reader and proofreader for Samuel Richardson, a printer from Salisbury Court and author of Clarissa. Later, he served as an assistant at Dr. Milner’s "classical academy" in Peckham. At last, it seemed chance was giving him a path to a literary life. Reports say he had already submitted a manuscript play for Richardson's review; and something he mentioned at Dr. Milner’s table caught the attention of a visitor there, the bookseller Griffiths, who also owned the Monthly Review. He invited Dr. Milner’s assistant to try his hand at critique; and finally, in April 1757, Goldsmith secured a year-long agreement with that esteemed figure whom George Primrose refers to as 'the antiqua mater of Grub Street'—in other words, he was hired for food, lodging, and a set salary to provide all kinds of written content for his employer's magazine.
The arrangement thus concluded was not calculated to endure. After some five months of labour from nine till two, and often later, it came suddenly to an end. No clear explanation of the breach is forthcoming, but mere incompatability of temper would probably supply a sufficient ground for disagreement. Goldsmith, it is said, complained that the bookseller and his wife treated him ill, and denied him ordinary comforts; added to which the lady, a harder taskmistress even than the antiqua mater above referred to, joined with her husband in ‘editing’ his articles, a course which, hard though it may seem, is not unprecedented. However this may be, either in September or October, 1757, he was again upon the world, existing precariously from hand to mouth. ‘By a very little practice as a physician, and very little reputation as a poet [a title which, as Prior suggests, possibly means no more than author], I make a shift to live.’ So he wrote to his brother-in-law in December. What his literary occupations were cannot be definitely stated; but, if not prepared before, they probably included the translation of a remarkable work issued by Griffiths and others in the ensuing February. This was the Memoirs of a Protestant, condemned to the Galleys of France for his Religion, being the authentic record of the sufferings of one Jean Marteilhe of Bergerac, a book of which Michelet has said that it is ‘written as if between earth and heaven.’ Marteilhe, who died at Cuylenberg in 1777, was living in Holland in 1758; and it may be that Goldsmith had seen or heard of him during his own stay in that country. The translation, however, did not bear Goldsmith’s name, but that of James Willington, one of his old class-fellows at Trinity College. Nevertheless, Prior says distinctly that Griffiths (who should have known) declared it to be by Goldsmith. Moreover, the French original had been catalogued in Griffiths’ magazine in the second month of Goldsmith’s servitude, a circumstance which colourably supplies the reason for its subsequent rendering into English.
The arrangement that was concluded was not likely to last. After about five months of work from nine to two, and often later, it abruptly ended. There's no clear reason for the breakdown, but simple personality clashes could easily explain the disagreement. Goldsmith reportedly complained that the bookseller and his wife treated him poorly and denied him basic comforts. Additionally, the wife, who was an even tougher taskmaster than the earlier mentioned mother, joined her husband in ‘editing’ his articles, a practice that, although harsh, isn’t exactly uncommon. Regardless of the details, either in September or October 1757, he was back out in the world, living hand-to-mouth. “With very little practice as a physician and little reputation as a poet [a title which, as Prior suggests, likely just means author], I manage to survive,” he wrote to his brother-in-law in December. What exact literary projects he was working on isn’t clearly known; however, if he hadn’t already begun, he probably worked on translating a notable book published by Griffiths and others the following February. This was the Memoirs of a Protestant, condemned to the Galleys of France for his Religion, which tells the true story of the sufferings of one Jean Marteilhe of Bergerac. Michelet remarked that it was “written as if between earth and heaven.” Marteilhe, who died in Cuylenberg in 1777, was living in Holland in 1758; it’s possible that Goldsmith encountered or heard of him during his stay in that country. However, the translation didn’t have Goldsmith’s name on it; it was credited to James Willington, one of his old classmates from Trinity College. Regardless, Prior clearly states that Griffiths (who should have known) asserted it was by Goldsmith. Moreover, the French original had been listed in Griffiths’ magazine during the second month of Goldsmith’s time working for him, which provides a plausible reason for its later translation into English.
The publication of Marteilhe’s Memoirs had no influence upon Goldsmith’s fortunes, for, in a short time, he was again installed at Peckham, in place of Dr. Milner invalided, waiting hopefully for the fulfilment of a promise by his old master to procure him a medical appointment on a foreign station. It is probably that, with a view to provide the needful funds for this expatriation, he now began to sketch the little volume afterwards published under the title of An Enquiry into the Present State of Polite Learning in Europe, for towards the middle of the year we find him addressing long letters to his relatives in Ireland to enlist their aid in soliciting subscriptions for this book. At length the desired advancement was obtained,—a nomination as a physician and surgeon to one of the factories on the coast of Coromandel. But banishment to the East Indies was not to be his destiny. For some unexplained reason the project came to nothing; and then—like Roderick Random—he presented himself at Surgeons’ Hall for the more modest office of a hospital mate. This was on the 21st of December, 1758. The curt official record states that he was ‘found not qualified.’ What made matters worse, the necessity for a decent appearance before the examiners had involved him in new obligations to Griffiths, out of which arose fresh difficulties. To pay his landlady, whose husband was arrested for debt, he pawned the suit he had procured by Griffiths’ aid; and he also raised money on some volumes which had been sent him for review. Thereupon ensued an angry and humiliating correspondence with the bookseller, as a result of which Griffiths, nevertheless, appears to have held his hand.
The release of Marteilhe’s Memoirs didn’t affect Goldsmith's situation, as he soon found himself back at Peckham, replacing Dr. Milner, who was unwell, while he waited hopefully for his old master to fulfill a promise of getting him a medical position overseas. To raise the necessary funds for this move, he started drafting the small book that would later be published as An Enquiry into the Present State of Polite Learning in Europe. By mid-year, he was writing lengthy letters to his relatives in Ireland asking for their help in getting subscriptions for this book. Eventually, he received the desired advancement—a nomination as a physician and surgeon at one of the factories on the coast of Coromandel. However, going to the East Indies wasn’t meant to be. For some unknown reason, the plan fell through, and then—like Roderick Random—he went to Surgeons’ Hall for the more modest position of a hospital mate. This was on December 21, 1758. The brief official record notes that he was ‘found not qualified.’ To make matters worse, the need to present himself decently before the examiners led him to take on new debts with Griffiths, which created further challenges. To pay his landlady, whose husband had been arrested for debt, he pawned the suit he had gotten with Griffiths’ help, and he also borrowed money against some books he had received for review. This resulted in an angry and embarrassing back-and-forth with the bookseller, after which Griffiths, however, seems to have held back.
By this time Goldsmith had moved into those historic but now non-existent lodgings in 12 Green Arbour Court, Old Bailey, which have been photographed for ever in Irving’s Tales of a Traveller. It was here that the foregoing incidents took place; and it was here also that, early in 1759, ‘in a wretched dirty room, in which there was but one chair,’ the Rev. Thomas Percy, afterwards Bishop of Dromore, found him composing (or more probably correcting the proofs of) The Enquiry. ‘At least spare invective ’till my book with Mr. Dodsley shall be publish’d,’—he had written not long before to the irate Griffiths—‘and then perhaps you may see the bright side of a mind when my professions shall not appear the dictates of necessity but of choice.’ The Enquiry came out on the 2nd of April. It had no author’s name, but it was an open secret that Goldsmith had written it; and to this day it remains to the critic one of the most interesting of his works. Obviously, in a duodecimo of some two hundred widely-printed pages, it was impossible to keep the high-sounding promise of its title; and at best its author’s knowledge of the subject, notwithstanding his continental wanderings, can have been but that of an external spectator. Still in an age when critical utterance was more than ordinarily full-wigged and ponderous, it dared to be sprightly and epigrammatic. Some of its passages, besides, bear upon the writer’s personal experiences, and serve to piece the imperfections of his biography. If it brought him no sudden wealth, it certainly raised his reputation with the book-selling world. A connexion already begun with Smollett’s Critical Review was drawn closer; and the shrewd Sosii of the Row began to see the importance of securing so vivacious and unconventional a pen. Towards the end of the year he was writing for Wilkie the collection of periodical essays entitled The Bee; and contributing to the same publisher’s Lady’s Magazine, as well as to The Busy Body of one Pottinger. In these, more than ever, he was finding his distinctive touch; and ratifying anew, with every fresh stroke of his pen, his bondage to authorship as a calling.
By this time, Goldsmith had moved into those historic but now non-existent lodgings at 12 Green Arbour Court, Old Bailey, which have been forever captured in Irving’s Tales of a Traveller. It was here that the earlier events took place; and it was also here that, early in 1759, ‘in a poorly kept room, where there was only one chair,’ the Rev. Thomas Percy, who later became the Bishop of Dromore, found him working on (or more likely correcting the proofs of) The Enquiry. ‘At least hold off on the insults until my book with Mr. Dodsley is published,’—he had written not long before to the angry Griffiths—‘and then maybe you’ll see the bright side of my mind when my statements don’t seem to come from necessity but from choice.’ The Enquiry was released on April 2nd. It didn't have an author’s name, but everyone knew Goldsmith had written it; and to this day, it remains one of the most intriguing of his works to critics. Clearly, in a twelvemo of about two hundred widely-printed pages, it was impossible to fulfill the grand promise of its title; and at best, the author’s understanding of the topic, despite his travels abroad, could only be that of an outside observer. Still, in an era when critical writing was often overly formal and heavy, it dared to be lively and witty. Some of its passages also relate to the writer’s personal experiences, helping to fill in the gaps in his biography. While it didn’t bring him instant riches, it certainly improved his reputation in the book-selling world. A connection he had already started with Smollett’s Critical Review became stronger; and the savvy Sosii of the Row began to recognize the importance of securing such a lively and unconventional writer. By the end of the year, he was writing for Wilkie's collection of periodical essays titled The Bee; and contributing to the same publisher’s Lady’s Magazine, as well as to The Busy Body of one Pottinger. In these works, he was finding his unique style more than ever and reaffirming, with every new piece he wrote, his commitment to authorship as a career.
He had still, however, to conquer the public. The Bee, although it contains one of his most characteristic essays (‘A City Night-Piece’), and some of the most popular of his lighter verses (‘The Elegy on Mrs. Mary Blaize’), never attained the circulation essential to healthy existence. It closed with its eighth number in November, 1759. In the following month two gentlemen called at Green Arbour Court to enlist the services of its author. One was Smollett, with a new serial, The British Magazine; the other was Johnson’s ‘Jack Whirler,’ bustling Mr. John Newbery from the ‘Bible and Sun’ in St. Paul’s Churchyard, with a new daily newspaper, The Public Ledger. For Smollett, Goldsmith wrote the ‘Reverie at the Boar’s Head Tavern’ and the ‘Adventures of a Strolling Player,’ besides a number of minor papers. For Newbery, by a happy recollection of the Lettres Persanes of Montesquieu, or some of his imitators, he struck almost at once into that charming epistolary series, brimful of fine observation, kindly satire, and various fancy, which was ultimately to become the English classic known as The Citizen of the World. He continued to produce these letters periodically until the August of the following year, when they were announced for republication in ‘two volumes of the usual Spectator size.’ In this form they appeared in May, 1762.
He still needed to win over the public. The Bee, even though it featured one of his most notable essays ('A City Night-Piece') and some of his most popular light poetry ('The Elegy on Mrs. Mary Blaize'), never reached the necessary circulation for success. It ended with its eighth issue in November 1759. In the following month, two men visited Green Arbour Court to recruit its author. One was Smollett, with a new serial, The British Magazine; the other was Johnson’s 'Jack Whirler,' a bustling Mr. John Newbery from the 'Bible and Sun' in St. Paul’s Churchyard, with a new daily newspaper, The Public Ledger. For Smollett, Goldsmith wrote 'Reverie at the Boar’s Head Tavern' and 'Adventures of a Strolling Player,' along with several minor pieces. For Newbery, inspired by the Lettres Persanes of Montesquieu or one of his imitators, he quickly began that delightful epistolary series, full of keen observation, gentle satire, and varied imagination, which would ultimately become the English classic known as The Citizen of the World. He continued to produce these letters regularly until August of the following year, when they were announced for reissue in 'two volumes of the usual Spectator size.' They were published in this form in May 1762.
But long before this date a change for the better had taken place in Goldsmith’s life. Henceforth he was sure of work,—mere journey-work though much of it must have been;—and, had his nature been less improvident, of freedom from absolute want. The humble lodgings in the Old Bailey were discarded for new premises at No. 6 Wine Office Court, Fleet Street; and here, on the 31st of May, 1761, with Percy, came one whose name was often in the future to be associated with Goldsmith’s, the great Dictator of London literary society, Samuel Johnson. Boswell, who made Johnson’s acquaintance later, has not recorded the humours of that supper; but it marks the beginning of Goldsmith’s friendship with the man who of all others (Reynolds excepted) loved him most and understood him best.
But long before this date, a positive change had occurred in Goldsmith’s life. From then on, he was assured of work—albeit much of it was likely just routine tasks—and, if he had been a bit more careful with his finances, he could have avoided living in absolute poverty. The modest accommodations in the Old Bailey were replaced with new ones at No. 6 Wine Office Court, Fleet Street; and here, on May 31, 1761, he welcomed someone whose name would often be linked with Goldsmith in the future, the influential leader of London’s literary scene, Samuel Johnson. Boswell, who became acquainted with Johnson later, didn’t record the anecdotes from that dinner; however, it signified the start of Goldsmith’s friendship with the one person who, aside from Reynolds, cared for him the most and understood him the best.
During the remainder of 1761 he continued busily to ply his pen. Besides his contributions to The Ledger and The British Magazine, he edited The Lady’s Magazine, inserting in it the Memoirs of Voltaire, drawn up some time earlier to accompany a translation of the Henriade by his crony and compatriot Edward Purdon. Towards the beginning of 1762 he was hard at work on several compilations for Newbery, for whom he wrote or edited a History of Mecklenburgh, and a series of monthly volumes of an abridgement of Plutarch’s Lives. In October of the same year was published the Life of Richard Nash, apparently the outcome of special holiday-visits to the then fashionable watering-place of Bath, whence its fantastic old Master of the Ceremonies had only very lately made his final exit. It is a pleasantly gossiping, and not unedifying little book, which still holds a respectable place among its author’s minor works. But a recently discovered entry in an old ledger shows that during the latter half of 1762 he must have planned, if he had not, indeed, already in part composed, a far more important effort, The Vicar of Wakefield. For on the 28th of October in this year he sold to one Benjamin Collins, printer, of Salisbury, for 21 pounds, a third in a work with that title, further described as ‘2 vols. 12mo.’ How this little circumstance, discovered by Mr. Charles Welsh when preparing his Life of John Newbery, is to be brought into agreement with the time-honoured story, related (with variations) by Boswell and others, to the effect that Johnson negotiated the sale of the manuscript for Goldsmith when the latter was arrested for rent by his incensed landlady—has not yet been satisfactorily suggested. Possibly the solution is a simple one, referable to some of those intricate arrangements favoured by ‘the Trade’ at a time when not one but half a score publishers’ names figured in an imprint. At present, the fact that Collins bought a third share of the book from the author for twenty guineas, and the statement that Johnson transferred the entire manuscript to a bookseller for sixty pounds, seem irreconcilable. That The Vicar of Wakefield was nevertheless written, or was being written, in 1762, is demonstrable from internal evidence.
During the rest of 1761, he was busy writing. Aside from his contributions to The Ledger and The British Magazine, he edited The Lady’s Magazine, where he included the Memoirs of Voltaire, which he had put together earlier to accompany a translation of the Henriade by his friend Edward Purdon. At the start of 1762, he was hard at work on several compilations for Newbery, for whom he wrote or edited a History of Mecklenburgh and a series of monthly volumes based on Plutarch’s Lives. In October of the same year, The Life of Richard Nash was published, apparently the result of special holiday visits to the trendy spa town of Bath, where its flamboyant old Master of Ceremonies had recently passed away. It’s an entertaining and not uninstructive little book that still holds a respectable place among its author’s minor works. However, a recently discovered entry in an old ledger shows that during the latter half of 1762, he must have planned, if he hadn’t already started on, a much more important project, The Vicar of Wakefield. On October 28th of that year, he sold a third of a work with that title to a printer named Benjamin Collins from Salisbury for 21 pounds, noted as ‘2 vols. 12mo.’ How this little detail, found by Mr. Charles Welsh while preparing his Life of John Newbery, fits into the long-standing story told (with variations) by Boswell and others, stating that Johnson negotiated the sale of the manuscript for Goldsmith when Goldsmith was arrested for rent by his angry landlady—has not yet been satisfactorily explained. Possibly the answer is straightforward, relating to some of those complicated arrangements favored by ‘the Trade’ at a time when not just one but several publishers’ names appeared on a cover. Currently, the fact that Collins bought a third share of the book from the author for twenty guineas, along with the claim that Johnson transferred the entire manuscript to a bookseller for sixty pounds, seem contradictory. Nevertheless, it is clear from internal evidence that The Vicar of Wakefield was being written, or at least had begun, in 1762.
About Christmas in the same year Goldsmith moved into lodgings at Islington, his landlady being one Mrs. Elizabeth Fleming, a friend of Newbery, to whose generalship this step seems attributable. From the curious accounts printed by Prior and Forster, it is clear that the publisher was Mrs. Fleming’s paymaster, punctually deducting his disbursements from the account current between himself and Goldsmith, an arrangement which as plainly indicates the foresight of the one as it implies the improvidence of the other. Of the work which Goldsmith did for the businesslike and not unkindly little man, there is no very definite evidence; but various prefaces, introductions, and the like, belong to this time; and he undoubtedly was the author of the excellent History of England in a Series of Letters addressed by a Nobleman to his Son, published anonymously in June, 1764, and long attributed, for the grace of its style, to Lyttelton, Chesterfield, Orrery, and other patrician pens. Meanwhile his range of acquaintance was growing larger. The establishment, at the beginning of 1764, of the famous association known afterwards as the ‘Literary Club’ brought him into intimate relations with Beauclerk, Reynolds, Langton, Burke, and others. Hogarth, too, is said to have visited him at Islington, and to have painted the portrait of Mrs. Fleming. Later in the same year, incited thereto by the success of Christopher Smart’s Hannah, he wrote the Oratorio of The Captivity, now to be found in most editions of his poems, but never set to music. Then after the slow growth of months, was issued on the 19th December the elaboration of that fragmentary sketch which he had sent years before to his brother Henry from the Continent, the poem entitled The Traveller; or, A Prospect of Society.
About Christmas in the same year Goldsmith moved into a place in Islington, where his landlady was Mrs. Elizabeth Fleming, a friend of Newbery, which seems to explain this move. From the interesting accounts published by Prior and Forster, it’s clear that the publisher was Mrs. Fleming’s paymaster, regularly deducting his payments from the ongoing account between him and Goldsmith. This arrangement highlights the foresight of one and the lack of planning of the other. There isn’t much solid evidence of the work Goldsmith did for the practical and not unkind little man, but he did produce various prefaces, introductions, and similar writings during this time. He was definitely the author of the excellent History of England in a Series of Letters addressed by a Nobleman to his Son, which was published anonymously in June 1764 and was long mistakenly attributed, due to its elegant style, to Lyttelton, Chesterfield, Orrery, and other aristocratic writers. Meanwhile, his circle of acquaintances was expanding. The establishment, at the beginning of 1764, of the well-known group later called the 'Literary Club' brought him into close contact with Beauclerk, Reynolds, Langton, Burke, and others. Hogarth is also said to have visited him in Islington and painted Mrs. Fleming's portrait. Later that same year, inspired by the success of Christopher Smart’s Hannah, he wrote the oratorio The Captivity, which can be found in most editions of his poems, though it was never set to music. Then, after many months of slow progress, he finally published on December 19 the expanded version of that incomplete sketch he had sent years earlier to his brother Henry from the Continent, titled The Traveller; or, A Prospect of Society.
In the notes appended to The Traveller in the present volume, its origin and progress are sufficiently explained. Its success was immediate and enduring. The beauty of the descriptive passages, the subtle simplicity of the language, the sweetness and finish of the versification, found ready admirers,—perhaps all the more because of the contrast they afforded to the rough and strenuous sounds with which Charles Churchill had lately filled the public ear. Johnson, who contributed a few lines at the close, proclaimed The Traveller to be the best poem since the death of Pope; and it is certainly not easy to find its equal among the works of contemporary bards. It at once raised Goldsmith from the condition of a clever newspaper essayist, or—as men like Sir John Hawkins would have said—a mere ‘bookseller’s drudge,’ to the foremost rank among the poets of the day. Another result of its success was the revival of some of his earlier work, which, however neglected by the author, had been freely appropriated by the discerning pirate. In June, 1765, Griffin and Newbery published a little volume of Essays by Mr. Goldsmith, including some of the best of his contributions to The Bee, The Busy Body, The Public Ledger, and The British Magazine, besides ‘The Double Transformation’ and ‘The Logicians Refuted,’ two pieces of verse in imitation of Prior and Swift, which have not been traced to an earlier source. To the same year belongs the first version of a poem which he himself regarded as his best work, and which still retains something of its former popularity. This was the ballad of Edwin and Angelina, otherwise known as The Hermit. It originated in certain metrical discussions with Percy, then engaged upon his famous Reliques of English Poetry; and in 1765, Goldsmith, who through his friend Nugent (afterwards Lord Clare) had made the acquaintance of the Earl of Northumberland, printed it privately for the amusement of the Countess. In a revised and amended form it was subsequently given to the world in The Vicar of Wakefield.
In the notes attached to The Traveller in this volume, its origin and development are clearly explained. Its success was both immediate and lasting. The beauty of the descriptive sections, the straightforward simplicity of the language, and the smoothness and polish of the verse all attracted admirers—perhaps even more so because they contrasted with the harsh and forceful sounds that Charles Churchill had recently filled the public ear with. Johnson, who added a few lines at the end, called The Traveller the best poem since Pope died; and it's certainly hard to find anything comparable among the works of contemporary poets. It quickly elevated Goldsmith from being just a clever newspaper writer, or—as people like Sir John Hawkins would have put it—a mere 'bookseller’s drudge,' to the top tier among the poets of the time. Another outcome of its success was the revival of some of his earlier work, which, though neglected by the author, had been freely taken by a discerning pirate. In June 1765, Griffin and Newbery published a small volume of Essays by Mr. Goldsmith, which included some of his best contributions to The Bee, The Busy Body, The Public Ledger, and The British Magazine, in addition to ‘The Double Transformation’ and ‘The Logicians Refuted,’ two poems mimicking Prior and Swift, which haven't been traced to an earlier source. The same year also saw the first version of a poem that he considered his best work and which still holds some of its former popularity. This was the ballad of Edwin and Angelina, also known as The Hermit. It originated from some metric discussions with Percy, who was then working on his famous Reliques of English Poetry; in 1765, Goldsmith, through his friend Nugent (later Lord Clare), got to know the Earl of Northumberland and privately printed it for the Countess's enjoyment. In a revised and polished version, it was later published in The Vicar of Wakefield.
With the exception of an abortive attempt to resume his practice as a medical man,—an attempt which seems to have been frustrated by the preternatural strength of his prescriptions,—the next memorable thing in Goldsmith’s life is the publication of The Vicar of Wakefield itself. It made its appearance on the 27th of March, 1766. A second edition followed in May, a third in August. Why, having been sold (in part) to a Salisbury printer as far back as October, 1762, it had remained unprinted so long; and why, when published, it was published by Francis Newbery and not by John Newbery, Goldsmith’s employer,—are questions at present unsolved. But the charm of this famous novel is as fresh as when it was first issued. Its inimitable types, its happy mingling of Christianity and character, its wholesome benevolence and its practical wisdom, are still unimpaired. We smile at the inconsistencies of the plot; but we are carried onward in spite of them, captivated by the grace, the kindliness, the gentle humour of the story. Yet it is a mistake to suppose that its success was instantaneous. Pirated it was, of course; but, according to expert investigations, the authorized edition brought so little gain to its first proprietors that the fourth issue of 1770 started with a loss. The fifth, published in April, 1774, was dated 1773; and had apparently been withheld because the previous edition, which consisted of no more than one thousand copies, was not exhausted. Five years elapsed before the sixth edition made its tardy appearance in 1779. These facts show that the writer’s contemporaries were not his most eager readers. But he has long since appealed to the wider audience of posterity; and his fame is not confined to his native country, for he has been translated into most European languages. Dr. Primrose and his family are now veritable ‘citizens of the world.’
Except for a failed attempt to restart his medical practice—an effort that seems to have been thwarted by the unusual effectiveness of his prescriptions—the next notable event in Goldsmith's life is the publication of The Vicar of Wakefield. It was released on March 27, 1766. A second edition came out in May, followed by a third in August. It's unclear why it remained unpublished for so long after being sold (at least in part) to a Salisbury printer back in October 1762, and why, when it finally was published, it was done by Francis Newbery instead of John Newbery, Goldsmith's employer. However, the charm of this classic novel remains as fresh as when it first came out. Its unique style, happy blend of Christianity and character, genuine kindness, and practical wisdom are still intact. We might chuckle at the plot's inconsistencies, but we are drawn in anyway, enchanted by the grace, warmth, and gentle humor of the story. Still, it’s a misconception that its success was immediate. It was obviously pirated, but according to experts, the official edition generated so little profit for its original owners that the fourth edition in 1770 was released at a loss. The fifth, published in April 1774, was dated 1773; it seems to have been held back because the previous edition, which was only one thousand copies, hadn't sold out. Five years passed before the sixth edition finally appeared in 1779. These facts indicate that the writer's contemporaries weren't his most enthusiastic readers. However, he has since reached a much wider audience over time, and his fame extends beyond his home country, as he has been translated into most European languages. Dr. Primrose and his family are now true ‘citizens of the world.’
A selection of Poems for Young Ladies, in the ‘Moral’ division of which he included his own Edwin and Angelina; two volumes of Beauties of English Poesy, disfigured with strange heedlessness, by a couple of the most objectionable pieces of Prior; a translation of a French history of philosophy, and other occasional work, followed the publication of the Vicar. But towards the middle of 1766, he was meditating a new experiment in that line in which Farquhar, Steele, Southerne, and others of his countrymen had succeeded before him. A fervent lover of the stage, he detested the vapid and colourless ‘genteel’ comedy which had gradually gained ground in England; and he determined to follow up The Clandestine Marriage, then recently adapted by Colman and Garrick from Hogarth’s Marriage A-la-Mode, with another effort of the same class, depending exclusively for its interest upon humour and character. Early in 1767 it was completed, and submitted to Garrick for Drury Lane. But Garrick perhaps too politic to traverse the popular taste, temporized; and eventually after many delays and disappointments, The Good Natur’d Man, as it was called, was produced at Covent Garden by Colman on the 29th of January, 1768. Its success was only partial; and in deference to the prevailing craze for the ‘genteel,’ an admirable scene of low humour had to be omitted in the representation. But the piece, notwithstanding, brought the author 400 pounds, to which the sale of the book, with the condemned passages restored, added another 100 pounds. Furthermore, Johnson, whose ‘Suspirius’ in The Rambler was, under the name of ‘Croaker,’ one of its most prominent personages, pronounced it to be the best comedy since Cibber’s Provok’d Husband.
A selection of Poems for Young Ladies, in the ‘Moral’ section where he included his own Edwin and Angelina; two volumes of Beauties of English Poesy, badly mixed up with a couple of the least liked pieces by Prior; a translation of a French history of philosophy, and some other occasional works, followed the release of the Vicar. But by the middle of 1766, he was thinking about a new project in the same area where Farquhar, Steele, Southerne, and other countrymen had previously succeeded. A passionate lover of the stage, he hated the dull and lifeless ‘genteel’ comedy that had gradually taken hold in England; and he decided to follow up The Clandestine Marriage, which had recently been adapted by Colman and Garrick from Hogarth’s Marriage A-la-Mode, with another attempt in the same style, relying solely on humor and character for its appeal. Early in 1767, it was finished and presented to Garrick for Drury Lane. However, Garrick, perhaps too careful to challenge popular taste, delayed; and after many setbacks and disappointments, The Good-Natur'd Man, as it was called, was produced at Covent Garden by Colman on January 29, 1768. Its success was only partial; and due to the popular demand for ‘genteel’ comedy, a great scene of low humor had to be cut from the performance. Nevertheless, the play earned the author £400, with an additional £100 from the book's sale that included the omitted content. Furthermore, Johnson, whose ‘Suspirius’ in The Rambler was, under the name ‘Croaker,’ one of the main characters, declared it the best comedy since Cibber’s Provok’d Husband.
During the autumn of 1767, Goldsmith had again been living at Islington. On this occasion he had a room in Canonbury Tower, Queen Elizabeth’s old hunting-lodge, and perhaps occupied the very chamber generally used by John Newbery, whose active life was, in this year, to close. When in London he had modest housing in the Temple. But the acquisition of 500 pounds for The Good Natur’d Man seemed to warrant a change of residence, and he accordingly expended four-fifths of that sum for the lease of three rooms on the second floor of No. 2 Brick Court, which he straightway proceeded to decorate sumptuously with mirrors, Wilton carpets, moreen curtains, and Pembroke tables. It was an unfortunate step; and he would have done well to remember the Nil te quaesiveris extra with which his inflexible monitor, Johnson, had greeted his apologies for the shortcomings of some earlier lodgings. One of its natural results was to involve him in a new sequence of task-work, from which he never afterwards shook himself free. Hence, following hard upon a Roman History which he had already engaged to write for Davies of Russell Street, came a more ambitious project for Griffin, A History of Animated Nature; and after this again, another History of England for Davies. The pay was not inadequate; for the first he was to have 250 guineas, for the second 800 guineas, and for the last 500 pounds. But as employment for the author of a unique novel, an excellent comedy, and a deservedly successful poem, it was surely—in his own words—‘to cut blocks with a razor.’
During the autumn of 1767, Goldsmith was once again living in Islington. This time, he had a room in Canonbury Tower, an old hunting lodge of Queen Elizabeth, and he might have occupied the very room that John Newbery usually used, whose busy life was coming to an end this year. When he was in London, he had modest accommodations in the Temple. However, receiving 500 pounds for The Good-Natur'd Man seemed to justify a change of address, so he spent four-fifths of that amount on the lease of three rooms on the second floor of No. 2 Brick Court, which he quickly decorated lavishly with mirrors, Wilton carpets, moreen curtains, and Pembroke tables. It was an unfortunate decision; he would have been wise to recall the Nil te quaesiveris extra that his stern advisor, Johnson, had used to respond to his excuses for the inadequacies of some previous lodgings. One of the natural consequences of this was that it led him into a new cycle of work that he never escaped from. So, closely following a Roman History he had agreed to write for Davies of Russell Street, he took on a more ambitious project for Griffin, A History of Animated Nature; and after that, another History of England for Davies. The pay was decent; for the first, he was to receive 250 guineas, for the second 800 guineas, and for the last 500 pounds. But for someone who had authored a one-of-a-kind novel, a brilliant comedy, and a well-deserved successful poem, it was, in his own words, “like trying to cut blocks with a razor.”
And yet, apart from the anxieties of growing money troubles, his life could not have been wholly unhappy. There are records of pleasant occasional junketings—‘shoe-maker’s holidays’ he called them—in the still countrified suburbs of Hampstead and Edgware; there was the gathering at the Turk’s Head, with its literary magnates, for his severer hours; and for his more pliant moments, the genial ‘free-and-easy’ or shilling whist-club of a less pretentious kind, where the student of mixed character might shine with something of the old supremacy of George Conway’s inn at Ballymahon. And there must have been quieter and more chastened resting-places of memory, when, softening towards the home of his youth, with a sadness made more poignant by the death of his brother Henry in May, 1768, he planned and perfected his new poem of The Deserted Village.
And yet, aside from the stress of growing financial problems, his life couldn't have been completely unhappy. There are accounts of enjoyable occasional outings—he called them ‘shoemaker’s holidays’—in the still rural suburbs of Hampstead and Edgware; there was the gathering at the Turk’s Head, with its literary heavyweights, during his more serious times; and for his lighter moments, there was the friendly ‘free-and-easy’ or shilling whist club of a simpler kind, where the student of mixed background could shine with a bit of the old glory of George Conway’s inn at Ballymahon. And there must have been quieter, more reflective moments in his memory when, feeling nostalgic about his childhood home, with a sadness made sharper by the death of his brother Henry in May 1768, he planned and completed his new poem, The Deserted Village.
In December, 1769, the recent appointment of his friend Reynolds as President of the Royal Academy brought him the honorary office of Professor of History to that institution; and to Reynolds The Deserted Village was dedicated. It appeared on the 26th of May, 1770, with a success equal, if not superior, to that of The Traveller. It ran through five editions in the year of its publication; and has ever since retained its reputation. If, as alleged, contemporary critics ranked it below its predecessor, the reason advanced by Washington Irving, that the poet had become his own rival, is doubtless correct; and there is always a prejudice in favour of the first success. This, however, is not an obstacle which need disturb the reader now; and he will probably decide that in grace and tenderness of description The Deserted Village in no wise falls short of The Traveller; and that its central idea, and its sympathy with humanity, give it a higher value as a work of art.
In December 1769, the recent appointment of his friend Reynolds as President of the Royal Academy gave him the honorary title of Professor of History at that institution; and to Reynolds, The Deserted Village was dedicated. It was published on May 26, 1770, achieving a success equal to, if not greater than, The Traveller. It went through five editions in the year it was published and has maintained its reputation since then. If, as claimed, contemporary critics ranked it lower than its predecessor, the reason given by Washington Irving—that the poet had become his own rival—is likely correct; and there is always a bias in favor of the first success. However, this is not something that should trouble the reader today; they will probably conclude that in terms of grace and tenderness in description, The Deserted Village is just as good as The Traveller, and that its central theme and compassion for humanity give it a greater value as a work of art.
After The Deserted Village had appeared, Goldsmith made a short trip to Paris, in company with Mrs. and the two Miss Hornecks, the elder of whom, christened by the poet with the pretty pet-name of ‘The Jessamy Bride,’ is supposed to have inspired him with more than friendly feelings. Upon his return he had to fall again to the old ‘book-building’ in order to recruit his exhausted finances. Since his last poem he had published a short Life of Parnell; and Davies now engaged him on a Life of Bolingbroke, and an abridgement of the Roman History. Thus, with visits to friends, among others to Lord Clare, for whom he wrote the delightful occasional verses called The Haunch of Venison, the months wore on until, in December, 1770, the print-shops began to be full of the well-known mezzotint which Marchi had engraved from his portrait by Sir Joshua.
After The Deserted Village came out, Goldsmith took a short trip to Paris with Mrs. and the two Miss Hornecks. The older one, nicknamed by the poet as 'The Jessamy Bride,' is thought to have sparked more than just friendly feelings in him. When he got back, he had to dive back into writing to recover his depleted finances. Since his last poem, he had published a short Life of Parnell; and Davies now hired him to work on a Life of Bolingbroke and a condensed version of Roman History. As the months went by, he visited friends, including Lord Clare, for whom he wrote the charming occasional verses titled The Haunch of Venison. By December 1770, the print shops were starting to fill up with the famous mezzotint that Marchi had engraved from his portrait by Sir Joshua.
His chief publications in the next two years were the above-mentioned History of England, 1771; Threnodia Augustalis, a poetical lament-to-order on the death of the Princess Dowager of Wales, 1772; and the abridgement of the Roman History, 1772. But in the former year he had completed a new comedy, She Stoops to Conquer; or, The Mistakes of a Night, which, after the usual vexatious negotiations, was brought out by Colman at Covent Garden on Monday, the 15th of March, 1773. The manager seems to have acted Goldsmith’s own creation of ‘Croaker’ with regard to this piece, and even to the last moment predicted its failure. But it was a brilliant success. More skilful in construction than The Good Natur’d Man, more various in its contrasts of character, richer and stronger in humour and vis comica, She Stoops to Conquer has continued to provide an inexhaustible fund of laughter to more than three generations of playgoers, and still bids fair to retain the character generally given to it, of being one of the three most popular comedies upon the English stage. When published, it was gratefully inscribed, in one of those admirable dedications of which its author above all men possessed the secret, to Johnson, who had befriended it from the first. ‘I do not mean,’ wrote Goldsmith, ‘so much to compliment you as myself. It may do me some honour to inform the public, that I have lived many years in intimacy with you. It may serve the interests of mankind also to inform them, that the greatest wit may be found in a character, without impairing the most unaffected piety.’
His main publications in the next two years were the aforementioned History of England, 1771; Threnodia Augustalis, a poetic tribute written for the death of the Princess Dowager of Wales, 1772; and the condensed version of Roman History, 1772. However, in the previous year, he had finished a new comedy, She Stoops to Conquer; or, The Mistakes of a Night, which, after the usual frustrating negotiations, was premiered by Colman at Covent Garden on Monday, March 15, 1773. The manager seems to have mirrored Goldsmith’s own character of ‘Croaker’ regarding this piece, and even until the last moment anticipated its failure. Yet, it was a tremendous success. More skillfully constructed than The Good Natur’d Man, with a greater variety of character contrasts, richer and stronger humor, and an engaging comic energy, She Stoops to Conquer has continued to bring endless laughter to more than three generations of theatergoers and is likely to maintain its status as one of the three most popular comedies on the English stage. When it was published, it was kindly dedicated, in one of those excellent dedications that its author uniquely mastered, to Johnson, who had supported it from the beginning. ‘I do not mean,’ wrote Goldsmith, ‘to flatter you so much as to honor myself. It may bring me some recognition to let the public know that I have lived for many years in close friendship with you. It may also benefit humanity to inform them that the greatest wit can be found in a character without diminishing the most genuine piety.’
His gains from She Stoops to Conquer were considerable; but by this time his affairs had reached a stage of complication which nothing short of a miracle could disentangle; and there is reason for supposing that his involved circumstances preyed upon his mind. During the few months of life that remained to him he published nothing, being doubtless sufficiently occupied by the undertakings to which he was already committed. The last of his poetical efforts was the poem entitled Retaliation, a group of epitaph-epigrams prompted by some similar jeux d’esprit directed against himself by Garrick and other friends, and left incomplete at his death. In March, 1774, the combined effects of work and worry, added to a local disorder, brought on a nervous fever, which he unhappily aggravated by the use of a patent medicine called ‘James’s Powder.’ He had often relied upon this before, but in the present instance it was unsuited to his complaint. On Monday, the 4th of April, 1774, he died, in his forty-sixth year, and was buried on the 9th in the burying-ground of the Temple Church. Two years later a monument, with a medallion portrait by Nollekens, and a Latin inscription by Johnson, was erected to him in Westminster Abbey, at the expense of the Literary Club. But although the inscription contains more than one phrase of felicitous discrimination, notably the oft-quoted affectuum potens, at lenis dominator, it may be doubted whether the simpler words used by his rugged old friend in a letter to Langton are not a fitter farewell to Oliver Goldsmith,—‘Let not his frailties be remembered; he was a very great man.’
His earnings from She Stoops to Conquer were significant, but by that time, his situation had become so complicated that only a miracle could sort it out. It’s likely that his tangled circumstances weighed heavily on his mind. During the last few months of his life, he published nothing, probably because he was busy with other commitments. His final poetic work was called Retaliation, a collection of epitaph-epigrams inspired by similar playful criticisms he received from Garrick and other friends, and it remained unfinished at his death. In March 1774, a combination of work stress and a local illness led to a nervous fever, which he unfortunately worsened by taking a patent medicine called ‘James’s Powder.’ He had often depended on it before, but this time it was not appropriate for his condition. On Monday, April 4, 1774, he died at the age of forty-six, and he was buried on the 9th in the Temple Church graveyard. Two years later, a monument featuring a medallion portrait by Nollekens and a Latin inscription by Johnson was erected in Westminster Abbey at the expense of the Literary Club. Although the inscription includes several well-crafted phrases, particularly the often-cited affectuum potens, at lenis dominator, it may be that the simpler words from his rugged old friend in a letter to Langton are a more fitting tribute to Oliver Goldsmith: ‘Let not his frailties be remembered; he was a very great man.’
In person Goldsmith was short and strongly built. His complexion was rather fair, but he was deeply scarred with small-pox; and—if we may believe his own account—the vicissitudes and privations of his early life had not tended to diminish his initial disadvantages. ‘You scarcely can conceive,’ he writes to his brother in 1759, ‘how much eight years of disappointment, anguish, and study, have worn me down. . . . Imagine to yourself a pale melancholy visage, with two great wrinkles between the eye-brows, with an eye disgustingly severe, and a big wig; and you may have a perfect picture of my present appearance,’ i.e. at thirty years of age. ‘I can neither laugh nor drink,’ he goes on; ‘have contracted an hesitating, disagreeable manner of speaking, and a visage that looks ill-nature itself; in short, I have thought myself into a settled melancholy, and an utter disgust of all that life brings with it.’ It is obvious that this description is largely coloured by passing depression. ‘His features,’ says one contemporary, ‘were plain, but not repulsive,—certainly not so when lighted up by conversation.’ Another witness—the ‘Jessamy Bride’—declares that ‘his benevolence was unquestionable, and his countenance bore every trace of it.’ His true likeness would seem to lie midway between the grotesquely truthful sketch by Bunbury prefixed in 1776 to the Haunch of Venison, and the portrait idealized by personal regard, which Reynolds painted in 1770. In this latter he is shown wearing, in place of his customary wig, his own scant brown hair, and, on this occasion, masquerades in a furred robe, and falling collar. But even through the disguise of a studio ‘costume,’ the finely-perceptive genius of Reynolds has managed to suggest much that is most appealing in his sitter’s nature. Past suffering, present endurance, the craving to be understood, the mute deprecation of contempt, are all written legibly in this pathetic picture. It has been frequently copied, often very ineffectively, for so subtle is the art that the slightest deviation hopelessly distorts and vulgarizes what Reynolds has done supremely, once and for ever.
In person, Goldsmith was short and stocky. His complexion was fairly light, but he was heavily scarred from smallpox; and—if we can trust his own words—the struggles and hardships of his early life hadn't lessened his initial disadvantages. “You can hardly imagine,” he wrote to his brother in 1759, “how much eight years of disappointment, anguish, and study have worn me down. . . . Picture a pale, melancholic face with two deep wrinkles between the eyebrows, an eye that looks unpleasantly severe, and a large wig; that would give you a perfect idea of how I look now,” meaning at thirty years old. “I can’t laugh or drink,” he continues; “I’ve developed a hesitant, unpleasant way of speaking, and a face that looks ill-tempered; in short, I’ve thought myself into a deep melancholy and complete disgust with everything life offers.” It’s clear that this description is heavily influenced by his ongoing depression. “His features,” says one contemporary, “were plain, but not unattractive—certainly not when brightened by conversation.” Another observer—the “Jessamy Bride”—states that “his kindness was undeniable, and his face reflected every trace of it.” His true likeness seems to lie somewhere between the grotesquely honest sketch by Bunbury that was added in 1776 to the Haunch of Venison, and the more flattering portrait painted by Reynolds in 1770. In this latter painting, he is depicted wearing his own sparse brown hair instead of his usual wig, and, on this occasion, he shows up in a furred robe and a falling collar. Yet even through the disguise of a studio “costume,” Reynolds’ finely perceptive genius manages to suggest much of the most appealing aspects of his sitter’s character. Past suffering, current endurance, the desire to be understood, the silent plea against scorn, are all clearly written in this moving picture. It has been frequently copied, often very poorly, because the art is so subtle that even the smallest variation completely distorts and reduces what Reynolds has admirably achieved, once and for all.
Goldsmith’s character presents but few real complexities. What seems most to have impressed his contemporaries is the difference, emphasized by the happily-antithetic epigram of Garrick, between his written style and his conversation; and collaterally, between his eminence as a literary man and his personal insignificance. Much of this is easily intelligible. He had started in life with few temporal or physical advantages, and with a native susceptibility that intensified his defects. Until he became a middle-aged man, he led a life of which we do not even now know all the degradations; and these had left their mark upon his manners. With the publication of The Traveller, he became at once the associate of some of the best talent and intellect in England,—of fine gentlemen such as Beauclerk and Langton, of artists such as Reynolds and Garrick, of talkers such as Johnson and Burke. Morbidly self-conscious, nervously anxious to succeed, he was at once forced into a competition for which neither his antecedents nor his qualifications had prepared him. To this, coupled with the old habit of poverty, must be attributed his oft-cited passion for fine clothes, which surely arose less from vanity than from a mistaken attempt to extenuate what he felt to be his most obvious shortcomings. As a talker especially he was ill-fitted to shine. He was easily disconcerted by retort, and often discomfited in argument. To the end of his days he never lost his native brogue; and (as he himself tells us) he had that most fatal of defects to a narrator, a slow and hesitating manner. The perspicuity which makes the charm of his writings deserted him in conversation; and his best things were momentary flashes. But some of these were undoubtedly very happy. His telling Johnson that he would make the little fishes talk like whales; his affirmation of Burke that he wound into a subject like a serpent; and half-a-dozen other well-remembered examples—afford ample proof of this. Something of the uneasy jealousy he is said to have exhibited with regard to certain of his contemporaries may also be connected with the long probation of obscurity during which he had been a spectator of the good fortune of others, to whom he must have known himself superior. His improvidence seems to have been congenital, since it is to be traced ‘even from his boyish days.’ But though it cannot justly be ascribed to any reaction from want to sufficiency, it can still less be supposed to have been diminished by that change. If he was careless of money, it must also be remembered that he gave much of it away; and fortune lingers little with those whose ears are always open to a plausible tale of distress. Of his sensibility and genuine kindheartedness there is no doubt. And it is well to remember that most of the tales to his disadvantage come, not from his more distinguished companions, but from such admitted detractors as Hawkins and Boswell. It could be no mean individuality that acquired the esteem, and deserved the regret, of Johnson and Reynolds.
Goldsmith’s character shows only a few real complexities. What seemed to impress his contemporaries most was the stark contrast, highlighted by Garrick's cleverly opposing epigram, between his writing style and his conversation; and relatedly, between his achievements as a literary figure and his personal unimportance. Much of this is easy to understand. He began life with few social or physical advantages, and with a natural sensitivity that amplified his flaws. Until he reached middle age, he lived a life filled with degradations that we still don't fully understand, which left marks on his manners. With the publication of The Traveller, he suddenly became connected with some of the best talent and intellect in England—fine gentlemen like Beauclerk and Langton, artists like Reynolds and Garrick, and great conversationalists like Johnson and Burke. Overly self-aware and nervously eager to succeed, he was thrown into a competition for which neither his background nor his abilities had prepared him. This, along with his old habit of poverty, explains his frequently mentioned love for fine clothes, which likely stemmed more from a misguided attempt to mask what he perceived as his most glaring shortcomings than from vanity. As a speaker, he particularly struggled to shine. He was easily thrown off by a comeback and often stumbled in arguments. He never lost his natural accent, and (as he himself noted) he had a particularly troublesome flaw for a storyteller: a slow and hesitant way of speaking. The clarity that makes his writings charming was absent in conversation, and his best remarks were often fleeting. Nevertheless, some of those remarks were truly memorable. His comment to Johnson that he would make little fishes talk like whales, his observation about Burke winding into a subject like a serpent, and several other well-remembered examples clearly prove this. Some of the jealousy he is said to have shown towards certain contemporaries may also relate to the long period of obscurity he endured while watching others enjoy success, despite knowing he was superior to them. His carelessness with money seems to have been innate, as it can be traced even back to his childhood. However, while it can't be attributed to a reaction from scarcity to abundance, it certainly wasn't lessened by that change. If he was careless with money, it's important to note that he also gave a lot of it away; fortune rarely lingers with those who are always willing to lend an ear to a convincing tale of hardship. There’s no doubt about his sensitivity and genuine kindness. It’s also worth noting that most negative stories about him come not from his more esteemed companions, but from known critics like Hawkins and Boswell. It takes no small degree of individuality to earn the respect and evoke the regret of Johnson and Reynolds.
In an edition of Goldsmith’s poems, any extended examination of his remaining productions would be out of place. Moreover, the bulk of these is considerably reduced when all that may properly be classed as hack-work has been withdrawn. The histories of Greece, of Rome, and of England; the Animated Nature; the lives of Nash, Voltaire, Parnell, and Bolingbroke, are merely compilations, only raised to the highest level in that line because they proceeded from a man whose gift of clear and easy exposition lent a charm to everything he touched. With the work which he did for himself, the case is different. Into The Citizen of the World, The Vicar of Wakefield, and his two comedies, he put all the best of his knowledge of human nature, his keen sympathy with his kind, his fine common-sense and his genial humour. The same qualities, tempered by a certain grace and tenderness, also enter into the best of his poems. Avoiding the epigram of Pope and the austere couplet of Johnson, he yet borrowed something from each, which he combined with a delicacy and an amenity that he had learned from neither. He himself, in all probability, would have rested his fame on his three chief metrical efforts, The Traveller, The Hermit, and The Deserted Village. But, as is often the case, he is remembered even more favourably by some of those delightful familiar verses, unprinted during his lifetime, which he threw off with no other ambition than the desire to amuse his friends. Retaliation, The Haunch of Venison, the Letter in Prose and Verse to Mrs. Bunbury, all afford noteworthy exemplification of that playful touch and wayward fancy which constitute the chief attraction of this species of poetry. In his imitations of Swift and Prior, and his variations upon French suggestions, his personal note is scarcely so apparent; but the two Elegies and some of the minor pieces retain a deserved reputation. His ingenious prologues and epilogues also serve to illustrate the range and versatility of his talent. As a rule, the arrangement in the present edition is chronological; but it has not been thought necessary to depart from the practice which gives a time-honoured precedence to The Traveller and The Deserted Village. The true sequence of the poems, in their order of publication, is, however, exactly indicated in the table which follows this Introduction.
In a version of Goldsmith’s poems, any in-depth discussion of his other works would seem inappropriate. Additionally, the volume of these is greatly diminished when we exclude what can fairly be called hack work. The histories of Greece, Rome, and England; Animated Nature; and the biographies of Nash, Voltaire, Parnell, and Bolingbroke are just compilations, elevated to a higher standard only because they come from a man whose ability for clear and straightforward writing added appeal to everything he created. The work he crafted for himself tells a different story. In The Citizen of the World, The Vicar of Wakefield, and his two comedies, he infused all the best of his understanding of human nature, his deep empathy for others, his sound common sense, and his warm humor. These same qualities, softened by a certain grace and tenderness, are also present in his finest poems. Steering clear of Pope's sharp epigrams and Johnson's serious couplets, he still borrowed elements from both, blending them with a charm and gentleness he learned from neither. He probably would have based his reputation on his three main poetic works, The Traveller, The Hermit, and The Deserted Village. But, as often happens, he is even more fondly remembered for some of those charming familiar verses, unpublished during his lifetime, which he created simply to entertain his friends. Retaliation, The Haunch of Venison, and the Letter in Prose and Verse to Mrs. Bunbury all showcase that playful touch and whimsical imagination that are the main appeal of this type of poetry. In his imitations of Swift and Prior and his variations on French influences, his unique style is less obvious; however, the two Elegies and some of the shorter pieces maintain a well-deserved reputation. His clever prologues and epilogues also exemplify the breadth and flexibility of his talent. Typically, the arrangement in this edition is chronological; however, it hasn’t been deemed necessary to break the tradition that gives The Traveller and The Deserted Village their historical precedence. The true order of the poems, according to their publication, is precisely indicated in the table that follows this Introduction.
CHRONOLOGY OF GOLDSMITH’S LIFE AND POEMS.
1728 | November 10. Born at Pallas, near Ballymahon, in the county of Longford, Ireland. |
1730 | Family remove to Lissoy, in the county of Westmeath. |
1731 | Under Elizabeth Delap. |
1734 | Under Mr. Thomas Byrne of the village school. |
1736–44 | At school at Elphin (Mr. Griffin’s), Athlone (Mr. Campbell’s), Edgeworthstown (Mr. Hughes’s). |
1744 | June 11. Admitted a sizar of Trinity College, Dublin, ‘annum agens 15.’ |
1747 |
Death of his father, the Rev. Charles Goldsmith. May. Takes part in a college riot. June 15. Obtains a Smythe exhibition. Runs away from college. |
1749 | February 27. Takes his degree as Bachelor of Arts. |
1751 |
Rejected for orders by the Bishop of Elphin. Tutor to Mr. Flinn. Sets out for America (via Cork), but returns. Letter to Mrs. Goldsmith (his mother). |
1752 |
Starts as a law student, but loses his all at play. Goes to Edinburgh to become a medical student. |
1753 |
January 13. Admitted a member of the ‘Medical Society’ of
Edinburgh. May 8. Letter to his Uncle Contarine. September 26. Letter to Robert Bryanton. Letter to his Uncle Contarine. |
1754 | Goes to Leyden. Letter to his Uncle Contarine. |
1755 |
February. Leaves Leyden. Takes degree of Bachelor of Medicine at Louvain (?). Travels on foot in France, Germany, Switzerland, and Italy. Sketches The Traveller. |
1756 | February 1. Returns to Dover. Low comedian; usher (?); apothecary’s journeyman; poor physician in Bankside, Southwark. |
1757 |
Press corrector to Samuel Richardson, printer and novelist; assistant
at Peckham Academy (Dr. Milner’s). April. Bound over to Griffiths the bookseller. Quarrels with Griffiths. December 27. Letter to his brother-in-law, Daniel Hodson. |
1758 |
February. Publishes The Memoirs of a Protestant,
condemned to the Galleys of France for his Religion. Gives up literature and returns to Peckham. August. Leaves Peckham. Letters to Edward Mills, Bryanton, Mrs. Jane Lawder. Appointed surgeon and physician to a factory on the Coast of Coromandel. November (?). Letter to Hodson. Moves into 12 Green Arbour Court, Old Bailey. Coromandel appointment comes to nothing. December 21. Rejected at Surgeons’ Hall as ‘not qualified’ for a hospital mate. |
1759 |
February (?). Letter to Henry Goldsmith. March. Visited by Percy at 12 Green Arbour Court. April 2. Enquiry into the Present State of Polite Learning in Europe published. ‘Prologue of Laberius’ (Enquiry). October 6. The Bee commenced. ‘On a Beautiful Youth struck blind with Lightning’ (Bee). October 13. ‘The Gift’ (Bee). October 18. ‘The Logicians Refuted’ (Busy Body). October 20. ‘A Sonnet’ (Bee). October 22. ‘Stanzas on the Taking of Quebec’ (Busy Body). October 27. ‘Elegy on Mrs. Mary Blaize’ (Bee). November 24. The Bee closed. |
1760 |
January 1. The British Magazine commenced. January 12. The Public Ledger commenced. January 24. First Chinese Letter published (Citizen of the World). May 2. ‘Description of an Author’s Bedchamber’ (‘Chinese Letter’ in Public Ledger). October 21. ‘On seeing Mrs. . . . perform,’ etc. (‘Chinese Letter’ in Public Ledger). Editing Lady’s Magazine. Compiling Prefaces. Moves into 6 Wine Office Court, Fleet Street. |
1761 |
March 4. ‘On the Death of the Right Hon. . . . (‘Chinese
Letter’ in Public Ledger). April 4–14. ‘An Epigram’; to G. C. and R. L. (‘Chinese Letter in Public Ledger). May 13. ‘Translation of a South American Ode.’ (‘Chinese Letter’ in Public Ledger) August 14. Last Chinese Letter published (Citizen of the World). Memoirs of M. de Voltaire published in Lady’s Magazine. |
1762 |
February 23. Pamphlet on Cock Lane Ghost published. February 26. History of Mecklenburgh published. May 1. Citizen of the World published. May 1 to Nov. 1. Plutarch’s Lives, vol. i to vii, published. At Bath and Tunbridge. October 14. Life of Richard Nash published. October 28. Sells third share of Vicar of Wakefield to B. Collins, printer, Salisbury. At Mrs. Fleming’s at Islington. |
1763 | March 31. Agrees with James Dodsley to write a Chronological History of the Lives of Eminent Persons of Great Britain and Ireland. (Never done.) |
1764 |
‘The Club,’ afterwards the Literary Club, founded. Moves into lodgings on the library staircase of the Temple. June 26. History of England, in a series of Letters from a Nobleman to his Son published. October 31. Oratorio of The Captivity sold to James Dodsley. December 19. The Traveller published. |
1765 |
June 4. Essays by Mr. Goldsmith published. ‘The
Double Transformation,’ ‘A New Simile’ (Essays). Edwin and Angelina (The Hermit) printed privately for the amusement of the Countess of Northumberland. Resumes practice as a physician. |
1766 |
March 27. Vicar of Wakefield published. ‘Elegy on
a Mad Dog’; ‘Olivia’s Song’ (Vicar of Wakefield). May 31. Vicar of Wakefield, 2nd edition. June. Translation of Formey’s Concise History of Philosophy and Philosophers published. August 29. Vicar of Wakefield, 3rd edition. December 15. Poems for Young Ladies published. |
1766 | December 28. English Grammar written. |
1767 |
April. Beauties of English Poesy published. July 19. Living in Garden Court, Temple. July 25. Letter to the St. James’s Chronicle. December 22. Death of John Newbery. |
1768 |
February 5. Publishes The Good Natur’d Man, a
Comedy, produced at Covent Garden, January 29. ‘Epilogue to The
Good Natur’d Man.’ Moves to 2 Brick Court, Middle Temple. May. Death of Henry Goldsmith. Living at Edgware. |
1769 |
February 18. ‘Epilogue to Mrs. Lenox’s Sister.’ February 29. Agreement for ‘a new Natural History of Animals’ (Animated Nature). May 18. Roman History published. June 13. Agreement for History of England. December. Appointed Professor of History to the Royal Academy. |
1770 |
January. Letter to Maurice Goldsmith. April 24–May 26. Portrait by Reynolds exhibited. May 26. The Deserted Village published. July 13. Life of Thomas Parnell published. July. On the Continent with the Hornecks. Letters to Reynolds. September 15. Agreement for abridgement of Roman History. December 1. Marchi’s print from Reynold’s portrait published. December 19. Life of Bolingbroke published. Vicar of Wakefield, 4th edition. |
1771 |
Haunch of Venison written. (?) August 6. History of England published. December 11. ‘Prologue to Cradock’s Zobeide.’ |
1772 |
February 20. Threnodia Augustalis published. Watson’s Engraving of Resignation published. December. Abridgement of Roman History published. |
1773 | March 26. Publishes She Stoops to Conquer; or, The Mistakes of a Night, a Comedy, produced at Covent Garden, March 15. ‘Song in She Stoops to Conquer,’ ‘Epilogue to She Stoops to Conquer.’ |
1773 |
March 24. Kenrick’s libel in the London Packet. March 31. Letter in the Daily Advertiser. May 8. The Grumbler produced. Projects a Dictionary of Arts and Sciences. |
1774 |
March 25. Illness. April 4. Death. April 9. ‘Buried 9th April, Oliver Goldsmith, MB, late of Brick-court, Middle Temple’ (Register of Burials, Temple Church). April 19. Retaliation published. April. Vicar of Wakefield, 5th edition (dated 1773). June. Song (‘Ah me, when shall I marry me?’) published. June 28. Letters of Administration granted. June. An History of the Earth and Animated Nature published. ‘Translation from Addison.’ (History, etc., 1774.) |
1776 |
The Haunch of Venison published. ‘Epitaph on Thomas
Parnell,’ and ‘Two Songs from The Captivity (Haunch
of Venison). Monument with medallion by Nollekens erected in the south transept of Westminster Abbey. |
1777 | Poems and Plays published. ‘The Clown’s Reply,’ ‘Epitaph on Edward Purdon’ (Poems, etc., 1777). |
1779 | Vicar of Wakefield, 6th edition. |
1780 |
Poetical and Dramatic Works, Evans’s edition, published. ‘Epilogue for Lee Lewes’ (Poetical, etc., Works, 1780). |
1801 | Miscellaneous Works, Percy’s edition, published. ‘Epilogues (unspoken) to She Stoops to Conquer’ (Misc. Works, 1801). |
1820 | Miscellaneous Works, ‘trade’ edition, published. An Oratorio’ (The Captivity). (Misc. Works, 1820.) |
1837 |
Miscellaneous Works, Prior’s edition, published. ‘Verses
in Reply to an Invitation to Dinner’; ‘Letter in Prose and Verse to
Mrs. Bunbury’ (Misc. Works, 1837). Tablet erected in the Temple Church. |
1854 | Goldsmith’s Works, Cunningham’s edition, published. ‘Translation of Vida’s Game of Chess’ (Works, 1854, vol. iv). |
1864 | January 5. J. H. Foley’s statue placed in front of Dublin University. |
DESCRIPTIVE POEMS
DEAR SIR,
I am sensible that the
friendship between us can acquire no new force from the ceremonies of a
Dedication; and perhaps it demands an excuse thus to prefix your name to
my attempts, which you decline giving with your own. But as a part of this
Poem was formerly written to you from Switzerland, the whole can now, with
propriety, be only inscribed to you. It will also throw a light upon many
parts of it, when the reader understands, that it is addressed to a man,
who, despising Fame and Fortune, has retired early to Happiness and
Obscurity, with an income of forty pounds a year.
Dear Sir,
I know that the friendship between us won't gain anything new from the formalities of a Dedication; and I might need to apologize for putting your name at the front of my work when you won’t endorse it yourself. But since part of this Poem was originally written to you from Switzerland, it makes sense for the whole thing to be dedicated to you now. It will also help the reader understand many parts better when they realize it’s addressed to a man who, shunning Fame and Fortune, has chosen to retreat early into Happiness and Obscurity, living on forty pounds a year.
I now perceive, my dear brother, the wisdom of your humble choice. You have entered upon a sacred office, where the harvest is great, and the labourers are but few; while you have left the field of Ambition, where the labourers are many, and the harvest not worth carrying away. But of all kinds of ambition, what from the refinement of the times, from different systems of criticism, and from the divisions of party, that which pursues poetical fame is the wildest.
I now see, my dear brother, the wisdom in your modest decision. You have taken on a sacred role, where the opportunities are abundant but the workers are few; meanwhile, you've left behind the realm of Ambition, where there are many workers but the rewards aren’t worth the effort. Among all forms of ambition, the pursuit of poetic fame is, due to the evolution of the times, various critical approaches, and party divisions, the most chaotic.
Poetry makes a principal amusement among unpolished nations; but in a country verging to the extremes of refinement, Painting and Music come in for a share. As these offer the feeble mind a less laborious entertainment, they at first rival Poetry, and at length supplant her; they engross all that favour once shown to her, and though but younger sisters, seize upon the elder’s birthright.
Poetry is a major source of entertainment for less developed nations; however, in a society that leans towards extreme refinement, Painting and Music also have their place. Since these forms of art provide the weaker mind with a more effortless form of entertainment, they initially compete with Poetry and eventually replace it; they take over all the attention that was once given to her, and even though they are younger sisters, they claim the elder’s inheritance.
Yet, however this art may be neglected by the powerful, it is still in greater danger from the mistaken efforts of the learned to improve it. What criticisms have we not heard of late in favour of blank verse, and Pindaric odes, choruses, anapaests and iambics, alliterative care and happy negligence! Every absurdity has now a champion to defend it; and as he is generally much in the wrong, so he has always much to say; for error is ever talkative.
Yet, even though this art might be ignored by those in power, it faces even more danger from the misguided attempts of scholars to enhance it. What criticisms haven’t we heard lately in favor of blank verse, Pindaric odes, choruses, anapaests and iambics, careful alliteration, and the joy of letting things slide! Every ridiculous idea now has a supporter to back it up; and since he is usually very mistaken, he has a lot to say because errors tend to be quite chatty.
But there is an enemy to this art still more dangerous, I mean Party. Party entirely distorts the judgment, and destroys the taste. When the mind is once infected with this disease, it can only find pleasure in what contributes to increase the distemper. Like the tiger, that seldom desists from pursuing man after having once preyed upon human flesh, the reader, who has once gratified his appetite with calumny, makes, ever after, the most agreeable feast upon murdered reputation. Such readers generally admire some half-witted thing, who wants to be thought a bold man, having lost the character of a wise one. Him they dignify with the name of poet; his tawdry lampoons are called satires, his turbulence is said to be force, and his frenzy fire.
But there's an even more dangerous enemy to this art: Party. Party completely skews judgment and ruins taste. Once the mind is infected with this mindset, it can only find pleasure in things that fuel that infection. Like a tiger that can't stop chasing after humans once it has tasted human flesh, the reader who has once indulged in slander will forever enjoy the twisted satisfaction of destroying reputations. These readers usually admire some dimwit who wants to be seen as bold after losing the reputation of being wise. They give him the title of poet; his cheap insults are called satires, his chaos is seen as strength, and his madness is called passion.
What reception a Poem may find, which has neither abuse, party, nor blank verse to support it, I cannot tell, nor am I solicitous to know. My aims are right. Without espousing the cause of any party, I have attempted to moderate the rage of all. I have endeavoured to show, that there may be equal happiness in states, that are differently governed from our own; that every state has a particular principle of happiness, and that this principle in each may be carried to a mischievous excess. There are few can judge, better than yourself, how far these positions are illustrated in this Poem.
What kind of reception a poem might get, which has no insults, no political agenda, and no free verse to back it up, I can't say, nor do I really care to find out. My goals are clear. Without taking sides, I've tried to tone down the anger on all sides. I've worked to show that different types of government can lead to equal happiness; that every government has its own unique path to happiness, and that this path can be taken too far. Few people can judge better than you how well these points are illustrated in this poem.
I am, dear Sir,
Your most affectionate Brother,
OLIVER GOLDSMITH.
I am, dear Sir,
Your most affectionate Brother,
OLIVER GOLDSMITH.
THE TRAVELLER
OR
A PROSPECT OF
SOCIETY
THE TRAVELER
OR
A VIEW OF SOCIETY
REMOTE, unfriended, melancholy, slow, Or by the lazy Scheldt, or wandering Po; Or onward, where the rude Carinthian boor Against the houseless stranger shuts the door; Or where Campania’s plain forsaken lies, 5 A weary waste expanding to the skies: Where’er I roam, whatever realms to see, My heart untravell’d fondly turns to thee; Still to my brother turns with ceaseless pain, And drags at each remove a lengthening chain. 10 Eternal blessings crown my earliest friend, And round his dwelling guardian saints attend: Bless’d be that spot, where cheerful guests retire To pause from toil, and trim their ev’ning fire; Bless’d that abode, where want and pain repair, 15 And every stranger finds a ready chair; Bless’d be those feasts with simple plenty crown’d, Where all the ruddy family around Laugh at the jests or pranks that never fail, Or sigh with pity at some mournful tale, 20 Or press the bashful stranger to his food, And learn the luxury of doing good. But me, not destin’d such delights to share, My prime of life in wand’ring spent and care, Impell’d, with steps unceasing, to pursue 25 Some fleeting good, that mocks me with the view; That, like the circle bounding earth and skies, Allures from far, yet, as I follow, flies; My fortune leads to traverse realms alone, And find no spot of all the world my own. 30 E’en now, where Alpine solitudes ascend, I sit me down a pensive hour to spend; And, plac’d on high above the storm’s career, Look downward where a hundred realms appear; Lakes, forests, cities, plains, extending wide, 35 The pomp of kings, the shepherd’s humbler pride. When thus Creation’s charms around combine, Amidst the store, should thankless pride repine? Say, should the philosophic mind disdain That good, which makes each humbler bosom vain? 40 Let school-taught pride dissemble all it can, These little things are great to little man; And wiser he, whose sympathetic mind Exults in all the good of all mankind. Ye glitt’ring towns, with wealth and splendour crown’d, 45 Ye fields, where summer spreads profusion round, Ye lakes, whose vessels catch the busy gale, Ye bending swains, that dress the flow’ry vale, For me your tributary stores combine; Creation’s heir, the world, the world is mine! 50 As some lone miser visiting his store, Bends at his treasure, counts, re-counts it o’er; Hoards after hoards his rising raptures fill, Yet still he sighs, for hoards are wanting still: Thus to my breast alternate passions rise, 55 Pleas’d with each good that heaven to man supplies: Yet oft a sigh prevails, and sorrows fall, To see the hoard of human bliss so small; And oft I wish, amidst the scene, to find Some spot to real happiness consign’d, 60 Where my worn soul, each wand’ring hope at rest, May gather bliss to see my fellows bless’d. But where to find that happiest spot below, Who can direct, when all pretend to know? The shudd’ring tenant of the frigid zone 65 Boldly proclaims that happiest spot his own, Extols the treasures of his stormy seas, And his long nights of revelry and ease; The naked negro, panting at the line, Boasts of his golden sands and palmy wine, 70 Basks in the glare, or stems the tepid wave, And thanks his gods for all the good they gave. Such is the patriot’s boast, where’er we roam, His first, best country ever is, at home. And yet, perhaps, if countries we compare, 75 And estimate the blessings which they share, Though patriots flatter, still shall wisdom find An equal portion dealt to all mankind, As different good, by Art or Nature given, To different nations makes their blessings even. 80 Nature, a mother kind alike to all, Still grants her bliss at Labour’s earnest call; With food as well the peasant is supplied On Idra’s cliffs as Arno’s shelvy side; And though the rocky-crested summits frown, 85 These rocks, by custom, turn to beds of down. From Art more various are the blessings sent; Wealth commerce, honour, liberty, content. Yet these each other’s power so strong contest, That either seems destructive of the rest. 90 Where wealth and freedom reign, contentment fails, And honour sinks where commerce long prevails. Hence every state to one lov’d blessing prone, Conforms and models life to that alone. Each to the favourite happiness attends, 95 And spurns the plan that aims at other ends; Till, carried to excess in each domain, This favourite good begets peculiar pain. But let us try these truths with closer eyes, And trace them through the prospect as it lies: 100 Here for a while my proper cares resign’d, Here let me sit in sorrow for mankind, Like yon neglected shrub at random cast, That shades the steep, and sighs at every blast. Far to the right where Apennine ascends, 105 Bright as the summer, Italy extends; Its uplands sloping deck the mountain’s side, Woods over woods in gay theatric pride; While oft some temple’s mould’ring tops between With venerable grandeur mark the scene 110
REMOTE, unfriended, sad, and slow, By the lazy Scheldt, or wandering Po; Or onward, where the rude Carinthian farmer Turns away the homeless stranger at the door; Or where Campania’s plain lies abandoned, 5 A weary wasteland stretching to the skies: Wherever I roam, whatever lands I see, My heart, untouched, fondly turns to you; Still to my brother I turn with endless pain, And at every step, I drag a lengthening chain. 10 Eternal blessings crown my earliest friend, And around his home guardian saints attend: Blessed be that place, where cheerful guests retreat To take a break from work and tend their evening fire; Blessed be that space, where want and pain restore, 15 And every stranger finds a welcoming chair; Blessed be those feasts, crowned with simple plenty, Where the entire lively family gathers around Laughing at jokes or antics that never fail, Or sighing with pity at some sad tale, 20 Or urging the shy stranger to enjoy their meal, And discovering the joy of doing good. But I'm not meant to share such delights, My prime of life spent in wandering and worry, Pushed, with unrelenting steps, to chase 25 Some fleeting good that taunts me from afar; That, like the circle bounding earth and skies, Lures from a distance, yet, as I pursue, it flies; My fate leads me to traverse realms alone, And find no place in all the world my own. 30 Even now, where Alpine solitude rises, I sit down for a thoughtful hour; And placed high above the storm’s wild course, I look down where a hundred realms appear; Lakes, forests, cities, plains, stretching wide, 35 The splendor of kings, the shepherd’s humble pride. When Creation’s charm surrounds us, In the midst of all, should ungrateful pride complain? Should the philosophical mind disdain The good that makes each humbler heart proud? 40 Let taught pride disguise all it can, These small things are great to little people; And wiser is he, whose sympathetic heart Rejoices in all the good of all mankind. O shining towns, blessed with wealth and splendor, 45 O fields, where summer spreads abundance all around, O lakes, whose boats catch the busy breeze, O bending farmers, who tend the flowery vale, For me, your shared offerings unite; Creation’s heir, the world, the world is mine! 50 As some lonely miser visits his stash, Bending over his treasure, counting and recounting it; Hoarding after hoards fills him with rising joy, Yet he still sighs, for hoards are still wanting: Thus, different emotions rise within my heart, 55 Pleased with each good that heaven provides: Yet often a sigh prevails, and sorrows fall, To see the stock of human happiness so small; And often I wish, amidst all this, to find Some place designated for true happiness, 60 Where my weary soul, with each wandering hope at rest, May gather joy from seeing my fellow beings blessed. But where to find that happiest spot below, Who can direct, when everyone claims to know? The trembling resident of the icy zone 65 Boldly proclaims that happiest spot is his own, Praising the treasures of his stormy seas, And his long nights of festivity and ease; The naked African, panting at the equator, 70 Boasts of his golden sands and palm wine, Basking in the sun, or swimming in the warm waves, And thanks his gods for all the good they’ve given. Such is the patriot’s boast, wherever we go, His first, best country is always his home. And yet, perhaps, if we compare countries, 75 And assess the blessings they each share, Though patriots flatter, still wisdom finds An equal portion given to all mankind, As different goods, by Art or Nature provided, To different nations balance their blessings out. 80 Nature, a mother kind to all, Still grants her blessings to Labor’s earnest call; With food, the peasant is nourished On Idra’s cliffs as much as Arno’s riverbank; And though the rocky peaks may scowl, 85 These rocks, with custom, turn to soft beds. From Art come more varied blessings; Wealth, commerce, honor, liberty, content. Yet these each other’s power contest so fiercely, 90 That one seems to destroy the others. Where wealth and freedom reign, contentment often fails, And honor declines where commerce typically dominates. Hence, every state gravitates toward one beloved blessing, 95 Shapes and molds life around that alone. Each favors its specific happiness, And dismisses the plans that aim for different goals; Until, carried to excess in each realm, This favored good creates unique pain. But let's examine these truths more closely, And trace them through the landscape as it lays: 100 Here for a while, my proper cares resigned, Here let me sit in sorrow for all humanity, Like that neglected shrub thrown randomly, That shades the slope and sighs with every breeze. Far to the right where the Apennine rises, 105 Bright as summer, Italy stretches out; Its sloping uplands decorate the mountains, Woods over woods in joyful, theatrical pride; While often some temple's crumbling tops peek through With timeless grandeur marking the landscape. 110
Could Nature’s bounty satisfy the breast, The sons of Italy were surely blest. Whatever fruits in different climes were found, That proudly rise, or humbly court the ground; Whatever blooms in torrid tracts appear, 115 Whose bright succession decks the varied year; Whatever sweets salute the northern sky With vernal lives that blossom but to die; These here disporting own the kindred soil, Nor ask luxuriance from the planter’s toil; 120 While sea-born gales their gelid wings expand To winnow fragrance round the smiling land. But small the bliss that sense alone bestows, And sensual bliss is all the nation knows. In florid beauty groves and fields appear, 125 Man seems the only growth that dwindles here. Contrasted faults through all his manner reign; Though poor, luxurious; though submissive, vain; Though grave, yet trifling; zealous, yet untrue; And e’en in penance planning sins anew. 130 All evils here contaminate the mind, That opulence departed leaves behind; For wealth was theirs, not far remov’d the date, When commerce proudly flourish’d through the state; At her command the palace learn’d to rise, 135 Again the long-fall’n column sought the skies; The canvas glow’d beyond e’en Nature warm, The pregnant quarry teem’d with human form; Till, more unsteady than the southern gale, Commerce on other shores display’d her sail; 140 While nought remain’d of all that riches gave, But towns unmann’d, and lords without a slave; And late the nation found, with fruitless skill, Its former strength was but plethoric ill. Yet still the loss of wealth is here supplied 145 By arts, the splendid wrecks of former pride; From these the feeble heart and long-fall’n mind An easy compensation seem to find. Here may be seen, in bloodless pomp array’d, The paste-board triumph and the cavalcade; 150 Processions form’d for piety and love, A mistress or a saint in every grove. By sports like these are all their cares beguil’d, The sports of children satisfy the child; Each nobler aim, repress’d by long control, 155 Now sinks at last, or feebly mans the soul; While low delights, succeeding fast behind, In happier meanness occupy the mind: As in those domes, where Caesars once bore sway, Defac’d by time and tottering in decay, 160 There in the ruin, heedless of the dead, The shelter-seeking peasant builds his shed, And, wond’ring man could want the larger pile, Exults, and owns his cottage with a smile. My soul, turn from them; turn we to survey 165 Where rougher climes a nobler race display, Where the bleak Swiss their stormy mansions tread, And force a churlish soil for scanty bread; No product here the barren hills afford, But man and steel, the soldier and his sword; 170 No vernal blooms their torpid rocks array, But winter ling’ring chills the lap of May; No Zephyr fondly sues the mountain’s breast, But meteors glare, and stormy glooms invest. Yet still, e’en here, content can spread a charm, 175 Redress the clime, and all its rage disarm. Though poor the peasant’s hut, his feasts though small, He sees his little lot the lot of all; Sees no contiguous palace rear its head To shame the meanness of his humble shed; 180 No costly lord the sumptuous banquet deal To make him loathe his vegetable meal; But calm, and bred in ignorance and toil, Each wish contracting, fits him to the soil. Cheerful at morn he wakes from short repose, 185 Breasts the keen air, and carols as he goes; With patient angle trolls the finny deep, Or drives his vent’rous plough-share to the steep; Or seeks the den where snow-tracks mark the way, And drags the struggling savage into day. 190 At night returning, every labour sped, He sits him down the monarch of a shed; Smiles by his cheerful fire, and round surveys His children’s looks, that brighten at the blaze; While his lov’d partner, boastful of her hoard, 195 Displays her cleanly platter on the board: And haply too some pilgrim, thither led, With many a tale repays the nightly bed. Thus every good his native wilds impart, Imprints the patriot passion on his heart, 200 And e’en those ills, that round his mansion rise, Enhance the bliss his scanty fund supplies. Dear is that shed to which his soul conforms, And dear that hill which lifts him to the storms; And as a child, when scaring sounds molest, 205 Clings close and closer to the mother’s breast, So the loud torrent, and the whirlwind’s roar, But bind him to his native mountains more. Such are the charms to barren states assign’d; Their wants but few, their wishes all confin’d. 210 Yet let them only share the praises due, If few their wants, their pleasures are but few; For every want that stimulates the breast, Becomes a source of pleasure when redrest. Whence from such lands each pleasing science flies, 215 That first excites desire, and then supplies; Unknown to them, when sensual pleasures cloy, To fill the languid pause with finer joy; Unknown those powers that raise the soul to flame, Catch every nerve, and vibrate through the frame. 220 Their level life is but a smould’ring fire, Unquench’d by want, unfann’d by strong desire; Unfit for raptures, or, if raptures cheer On some high festival of once a year, In wild excess the vulgar breast takes fire, 225 Till, buried in debauch, the bliss expire. But not their joys alone thus coarsely flow: Their morals, like their pleasures, are but low; For, as refinement stops, from sire to son Unalter’d, unimprov’d the manners run; 230 And love’s and friendship’s finely pointed dart Fall blunted from each indurated heart. Some sterner virtues o’er the mountain’s breast May sit, like falcons cow’ring on the nest; But all the gentler morals, such as play 235 Through life’s more cultur’d walks, and charm the way, These far dispers’d, on timorous pinions fly, To sport and flutter in a kinder sky. To kinder skies, where gentler manners reign, I turn; and France displays her bright domain. 240 Gay sprightly land of mirth and social ease, Pleas’d with thyself, whom all the world can please, How often have I led thy sportive choir, With tuneless pipe, beside the murmuring Loire! Where shading elms along the margin grew, 245 And freshen’d from the wave the Zephyr flew; And haply, though my harsh touch falt’ring still, But mock’d all tune, and marr’d the dancer’s skill; Yet would the village praise my wondrous power, And dance, forgetful of the noon-tide hour. 250 Alike all ages. Dames of ancient days Have led their children through the mirthful maze, And the gay grandsire, skill’d in gestic lore, Has frisk’d beneath the burthen of threescore. So bless’d a life these thoughtless realms display, 255 Thus idly busy rolls their world away: Theirs are those arts that mind to mind endear, For honour forms the social temper here: Honour, that praise which real merit gains, Or e’en imaginary worth obtains, 260 Here passes current; paid from hand to hand, It shifts in splendid traffic round the land: From courts, to camps, to cottages it strays, And all are taught an avarice of praise; They please, are pleas’d, they give to get esteem, 265 Till, seeming bless’d, they grow to what they seem. But while this softer art their bliss supplies, It gives their follies also room to rise; For praise too dearly lov’d, or warmly sought, Enfeebles all internal strength of thought; 270 And the weak soul, within itself unblest, Leans for all pleasure on another’s breast. Hence ostentation here, with tawdry art, Pants for the vulgar praise which fools impart; Here vanity assumes her pert grimace, 275 And trims her robes of frieze with copper lace; Here beggar pride defrauds her daily cheer, To boast one splendid banquet once a year; The mind still turns where shifting fashion draws, Nor weighs the solid worth of self-applause. 280 To men of other minds my fancy flies, Embosom’d in the deep where Holland lies. Methinks her patient sons before me stand, Where the broad ocean leans against the land, And, sedulous to stop the coming tide, 285 Lift the tall rampire’s artificial pride. Onward, methinks, and diligently slow, The firm-connected bulwark seems to grow; Spreads its long arms amidst the wat’ry roar, Scoops out an empire, and usurps the shore; 290 While the pent ocean rising o’er the pile, Sees an amphibious world beneath him smile; The slow canal, the yellow-blossom’d vale, The willow-tufted bank, the gliding sail, The crowded mart, the cultivated plain, 295 A new creation rescu’d from his reign. Thus, while around the wave-subjected soil Impels the native to repeated toil, Industrious habits in each bosom reign, And industry begets a love of gain. 300 Hence all the good from opulence that springs, With all those ills superfluous treasure brings, Are here displayed. Their much-lov’d wealth imparts Convenience, plenty, elegance, and arts; But view them closer, craft and fraud appear, 305 E’en liberty itself is barter’d here. At gold’s superior charms all freedom flies, The needy sell it, and the rich man buys; A land of tyrants, and a den of slaves, Here wretches seek dishonourable graves, 310 And calmly bent, to servitude conform, Dull as their lakes that slumber in the storm. Heavens! how unlike their Belgic sires of old! Rough, poor, content, ungovernably bold; War in each breast, and freedom on each brow; 315 How much unlike the sons of Britain now! Fir’d at the sound, my genius spreads her wing, And flies where Britain courts the western spring; Where lawns extend that scorn Arcadian pride, And brighter streams than fam’d Hydaspes glide. 320 There all around the gentlest breezes stray, There gentle music melts on ev’ry spray; Creation’s mildest charms are there combin’d, Extremes are only in the master’s mind! Stern o’er each bosom reason holds her state, 325 With daring aims irregularly great; Pride in their port, defiance in their eye, I see the lords of human kind pass by, Intent on high designs, a thoughtful band, By forms unfashion’d, fresh from Nature’s hand; 330 Fierce in their native hardiness of soul, True to imagin’d right, above control, While e’en the peasant boasts these rights to scan, And learns to venerate himself as man. Thine, Freedom, thine the blessings pictur’d here, 335 Thine are those charms that dazzle and endear; Too bless’d, indeed, were such without alloy, But foster’d e’en by Freedom, ills annoy: That independence Britons prize too high, Keeps man from man, and breaks the social tie; 340 The self-dependent lordlings stand alone, All claims that bind and sweeten life unknown; Here by the bonds of nature feebly held, Minds combat minds, repelling and repell’d. Ferments arise, imprison’d factions roar, 345 Repress’d ambition struggles round her shore, Till over-wrought, the general system feels Its motions stop, or frenzy fire the wheels. Nor this the worst. As nature’s ties decay, As duty, love, and honour fail to sway, 350 Fictitious bonds, the bonds of wealth and law, Still gather strength, and force unwilling awe. Hence all obedience bows to these alone, And talent sinks, and merit weeps unknown; Time may come, when stripp’d of all her charms, 355 The land of scholars, and the nurse of arms, Where noble stems transmit the patriot flame, Where kings have toil’d, and poets wrote for fame, One sink of level avarice shall lie, And scholars, soldiers, kings, unhonour’d die. 360 Yet think not, thus when Freedom’s ills I state, I mean to flatter kings, or court the great; Ye powers of truth, that bid my soul aspire, Far from my bosom drive the low desire; And thou, fair Freedom, taught alike to feel 365 The rabble’s rage, and tyrant’s angry steel; Thou transitory flower, alike undone By proud contempt, or favour’s fostering sun, Still may thy blooms the changeful clime endure, I only would repress them to secure: 370 For just experience tells, in every soil, That those who think must govern those that toil; And all that freedom’s highest aims can reach, Is but to lay proportion’d loads on each. Hence, should one order disproportion’d grow, 375 Its double weight must ruin all below. O then how blind to all that truth requires, Who think it freedom when a part aspires! Calm is my soul, nor apt to rise in arms, Except when fast-approaching danger warms: 380 But when contending chiefs blockade the throne, Contracting regal power to stretch their own; When I behold a factious band agree To call it freedom when themselves are free; Each wanton judge new penal statutes draw, 385 Laws grind the poor, and rich men rule the law; The wealth of climes, where savage nations roam, Pillag’d from slaves to purchase slaves at home; Fear, pity, justice, indignation start, Tear off reserve, and bare my swelling heart; 390 Till half a patriot, half a coward grown, I fly from petty tyrants to the throne. Yes, brother, curse with me that baleful hour, When first ambition struck at regal power; And thus polluting honour in its source, 395 Gave wealth to sway the mind with double force. Have we not seen, round Britain’s peopled shore, Her useful sons exchang’d for useless ore? Seen all her triumphs but destruction haste, Like flaring tapers bright’ning as they waste; 400 Seen opulence, her grandeur to maintain, Lead stern depopulation in her train, And over fields where scatter’d hamlets rose, In barren solitary pomp repose? Have we not seen, at pleasure’s lordly call, 405 The smiling long-frequented village fall? Beheld the duteous son, the sire decay’d, The modest matron, and the blushing maid, Forc’d from their homes, a melancholy train, To traverse climes beyond the western main; 410 Where wild Oswego spreads her swamps around, And Niagara stuns with thund’ring sound? E’en now, perhaps as there some pilgrim strays Through tangled forests, and through dangerous ways; Where beasts with man divided empire claim, 415 And the brown Indian marks with murd’rous aim; There, while above the giddy tempest flies, And all around distressful yells arise, The pensive exile, bending with his woe, To stop too fearful, and too faint to go, 420 Casts a long look where England’s glories shine, And bids his bosom sympathise with mine. Vain, very vain, my weary search to find That bliss which only centres in the mind: Why have I stray’d from pleasure and repose, 425 To seek a good each government bestows? In every government, though terrors reign, Though tyrant kings, or tyrant laws restrain, How small, of all that human hearts endure, That part which laws or kings can cause or cure. 430 Still to ourselves in every place consign’d, Our own felicity we make or find: With secret course, which no loud storms annoy, Glides the smooth current of domestic joy. The lifted axe, the agonising wheel, 435 Luke’s iron crown, and Damiens’ bed of steel, To men remote from power but rarely known, Leave reason, faith, and conscience all our own.
Could Nature’s gifts satisfy the heart, The sons of Italy would surely be blessed. Whatever fruits are found in distant lands, That proudly rise or humbly touch the ground; Whatever blooms in scorching regions appear, Whose bright succession decorates the year; Whatever sweets grace the northern sky With springtime lives that blossom just to die; These here rejoicing claim the kindred soil, And don’t rely on the planter’s toil; While sea-born breezes stretch their chilly wings To spread fragrance across the smiling land. But pleasure confined to the senses alone Is small bliss, and it's all the nation knows. In vibrant beauty, groves and fields seem fair, Yet man appears the only growth that shrinks here. Contradictory flaws run through his character; Though poor, he lives in luxury; though submissive, vain; Though serious, yet trivial; zealous, yet untrue; And even in penance, he schemes new sins. All evils here taint the mind, That opulence departed has left behind; For wealth was theirs, not long ago, When commerce flourished proudly throughout the state; By its command, palaces learned to rise, Once more, the long-fallen columns sought the skies; The canvas glowed beyond even Nature's warmth, The rich quarry teemed with human form; Till, more unstable than the southern breeze, Commerce sailed to other shores; While naught remained of all that riches gave, But towns uninhabited and lords without a slave; And lately, the nation found, with futile skill, Its former strength was merely surplus ill. Yet still, the loss of wealth is here made up By arts, the splendid wrecks of former pride; From these, the feeble heart and long-fallen mind Seem to find an easy compensation. Here may be seen, in bloodless pomp adorned, The cardboard triumph and the parade; Processions formed for piety and love, A mistress or a saint in every grove. By games like these are all their worries eased, The games of children satisfy the child; Each nobler aim, suppressed by long control, Now sinks at last or feebly mans the soul; While simple delights quickly follow behind, In happier mediocrity occupy the mind: As in those domes, where Caesars once held sway, Ruined by time and tottering in decay, There in the ruins, careless of the dead, The shelter-seeking peasant builds his shed, And, wondering how man could want a greater dwelling, Rejoices, and claims his cottage with a smile. My soul, turn away from them; let’s survey Where rougher lands show a nobler race, Where the bleak Swiss tread their stormy homes, And force a churlish soil for sparse bread; No produce here the barren hills provide, But man and steel, the soldier and his sword; No spring blooms decorate their sluggish rocks, But lingering winter chills the lap of May; No gentle breezes flatter the mountain's breast, But meteors flash, and stormy gloom descends. Yet still, even here, content can spread a charm, Calm the climate, and disarm all its rage. Though poor the peasant’s hut, his feasts though small, He sees his little lot is shared by all; Sees no adjacent palace raise its head To shame the modesty of his humble shed; No costly lord serves sumptuous banquets here To make him loathe his simple meal; But calm, raised in ignorance and toil, Each wish contracting, aligns him with the soil. Cheerfully at dawn, he wakes from short repose, Breathes the crisp air, and sings as he goes; With patient fishing, trolls the fish-filled deep, Or ventures his plowshare on the steep; Or tracks the den where snow marks the way, And drags the struggling wild beast into day. At night returning, every task complete, He sits down as the monarch of a shed; Smiles by his cheerful fire, and looks around At his children's faces, glowing in the light; While his beloved partner, proud of her stash, Displays her clean plate on the board: And perhaps too, some traveler, led to this place, With many tales repays the nightly bed. Thus every good his native wilds impart, Imprints the love for his homeland on his heart, And even those troubles that rise around his home, Enhance the joy his limited means provide. Dear is that shed to which his soul aligns, And dear is that hill that exposes him to storms; And as a child, when scary sounds disturb, Clings tighter to his mother’s breast, So the loud torrent and the whirlwind’s roar, Only bind him to his native mountains more. Such are the charms assigned to barren states; Their needs are few, their wishes all contained. Yet let them only receive the praises due, If few their wants, their pleasures are few too; For every want that stirs the heart, Becomes a source of pleasure when addressed. Hence from such lands, each enjoyable science flies, That first excites desire, and then supplies; Unknown to them, when physical pleasures tire, To fill the void with finer joy; Unknown those powers that stir the soul to fire, Catch every nerve, and vibrate through the body. Their simple life is but a smoldering fire, Unquenched by need, unfanned by strong desire; Unfit for raptures, or, if raptures cheer On some grand festival of once a year, In wild excess, the common heart ignites, Till buried in debauchery, the bliss expires. But not their joys alone thus coarsely flow: Their morals, like their pleasures, are quite low; For as refinement halts, from father to son Unchanged, unimproved their manners run; And love’s and friendship’s finely pointed darts Fall dulled from each hardened heart. Some sterner virtues o’er the mountain's peak May linger, like falcons crouching on the nest; But all the gentler morals, such as grace Life’s more cultured paths, and charm the way, These widely dispersed, on timid wings fly, To flourish and flutter in a kinder sky. To kinder skies, where gentler manners reign, I turn; and France shows her bright domain. Cheerful, lively land of joy and social ease, Content with yourself, whom all the world can please, How often have I led your playful choir, With untuned pipe, beside the murmuring Loire! Where shaded elms along the banks would grow, And cooling breezes flew fresh from the wave; And perhaps, though my clumsy touch faltered, But mocked all tune and marred the dancer’s skill; Yet would the village praise my wondrous gift, And dance, forgetting the noon-time hour. All ages alike. Dames of ancient days Have guided their children through the joyful dance, And the lively grandfather, skilled in gesture, Has danced beneath the burden of age. So blessed a life these carefree realms display, Thus idly busy, their world rolls away: Theirs are those arts that endear mind to mind, For honor forms the social temper here: Honor, the praise that real merit earns, Or even imaginary worth achieves, Here circulates, traded from hand to hand, It shifts in splendid exchange across the land: From courts to camps to cottages it roams, And all are taught to desire praise; They please, are pleased, they give to gain esteem, Till, seeming blessed, they grow into what they seem. But while this softer art provides their bliss, It also gives their follies room to grow; For praise too dearly loved, or warmly sought, Weakens all internal strength of thought; And the weak soul, within itself unblessed, Leans for all pleasure on another’s breast. Hence ostentation here, with tawdry style, Pants for the common praise that fools provide; Here vanity takes on her pert guise, And trims her rough robes with copper lace; Here, beggar pride cheats her daily cheer, To boast of one splendid banquet once a year; The mind still follows where shifting fashion draws, Nor weighs the solid worth of self-applause. To men of different minds, my thoughts take flight, Embodied in the deep where Holland lies. I envision her patient sons before me, Where the wide ocean leans against the land, And, determined to stop the coming tide, Raise the tall ramparts’ artificial pride. Onward, I imagine, and diligently slow, The firmly connected bulwark seems to grow; Spreads its long arms amidst the crashing waves, Scoops out an empire, and claims the shore; While the pent ocean rising over the wall, Sees an amphibious world beneath him smile; The slow canal, the yellow-flowered vale, The willow-lined banks, the gliding sails, The bustling market, the cultivated plain, A new creation rescued from his reign. Thus, while around the wave-subjected soil Urges the native to tireless toil, Diligent habits reign in each heart, And industry fosters a love of gain. Hence all the good that wealth provides, With all those ills excess can bring, Are here displayed. Their beloved riches offer Convenience, plenty, elegance, and the arts; But look closer, craft and deceit emerge, Even liberty itself is traded here. At gold’s greater charms, all freedom flees, The needy sell it, and the rich man buys; A land of tyrants and a den of slaves, Here wretches seek dishonorable graves, And calmly inclined, to servitude they conform, Dull as their lakes that slumber in the storm. Heavens! how unlike their Belgian sires of old! Rough, poor, content, uncontrollably bold; War in each heart, and freedom on each brow; How much unlike the sons of Britain now! Fired at the thought, my spirit spreads her wings, And flies where Britain welcomes the western spring; Where lawns stretch that mock Arcadian pride, And brighter streams than famed Hydaspes glide. There all around, the gentlest breezes roam, There gentle music flows on every spray; Creation’s mildest charms are there combined, Extremes are only in the master’s mind! Stern over each heart, reason maintains her state, With daring goals irregularly great; Pride in their demeanor, defiance in their gaze, I see the lords of humanity pass by, Intent on lofty ambitions, a thoughtful group, By forms unfashioned, fresh from Nature’s hand; Fierce in their innate strength of spirit, Faithful to imagined rights, above control, While even the peasant learns these rights to observe, And comes to honor himself as a man. Thine, Freedom, thine the blessings depicted here, Thine are those charms that dazzle and endear; Too blessed, indeed, were such without defect, But even supported by Freedom, troubles annoy: That independence Britons value too highly, Keeps man from man, and breaks the social tie; The self-sufficient lords stand alone, All claims that bind and sweeten life unknown; Here by the bonds of nature weakly held, Minds battle minds, repelling and repelled. Stirrings arise, suppressed factions roar, Repressed ambition struggles around her shore, Till overburdened, the whole system feels Its motions stop, or frenzy ignites the wheels. Nor is this the worst. As nature’s ties decay, As duty, love, and honor cease to sway, Fictitious bonds, the bonds of wealth and law, Still gather strength, and impose unwilling awe. Hence all obedience bows only to these, And talent diminishes, and merit weeps unknown; Time may come when stripped of all her charms, The land of scholars, and the cradle of arms, Where noble lineages pass down the patriotic flame, Where kings have labored, and poets wrote for fame, One sink of level greed shall lie, And scholars, soldiers, kings, unhonored die. Yet think not, when I speak of Freedom’s ills, I mean to flatter kings or seek the great; Ye powers of truth, that urge my soul to aspire, Far from my heart drive the low desire; And you, fair Freedom, taught to feel The rage of the masses, and the tyrant’s angry steel; You transitory flower, equally undone By proud disdain, or favor’s nurturing sun, May your blooms endure the changeful climate, I only wish to restrain them to secure: For just experience teaches, in every place, That those who think must govern those who toil; And all that freedom’s highest aims can reach, Is but to lay balanced loads on each. Hence, if one order grows disproportionate, Its heavier weight must ruin all below. Oh then, how blind to all that truth demands, Who think it freedom when a part desires! Calm is my spirit, nor apt to rise in arms, Except when fast-approaching danger ignites: But when competing leaders blockade the throne, Tightening royal power to extend their own; When I see a faction agree To call it freedom when they themselves are free; Each wanton judge drafts new penal laws, Laws crush the poor, and rich men govern the law; The wealth of regions where savage nations roam, Pillaged from slaves to buy slaves at home; Fear, pity, justice, indignation spring, Tear off restraint, and bare my swelling heart; Till half a patriot, half a coward grown, I flee from petty tyrants to the throne. Yes, brother, curse with me that fateful hour, When ambition first struck at royal power; And thus tainting honor at its source, Gave wealth the power to sway the mind with added force. Have we not seen, around Britain’s populated shores, Her useful sons exchanged for useless gold? Seen all her triumphs hasten toward destruction, Like flickering candles burning brighter as they fade; Seen opulence, her grandeur to uphold, Lead stern depopulation in her wake, And over fields where scattered villages rose, In barren solitary pomp lie idle? Have we not seen, at pleasure’s lordly call, The smiling long-frequented village fall? Beheld the dutiful son, the father gone, The modest matron, and the blushing maid, Forced from their homes, a sorrowful procession, To traverse lands beyond the western sea; Where wild Oswego spreads her swamps around, And Niagara roars with a thundering sound? Even now, perhaps as there some traveler wanders Through tangled forests, and through dangerous paths; Where beasts claim divided rule with man, And the brown Indian marks with murderous aim; There, while above, the dizzying storm flies, And all around, distressful cries arise, The pensive exile, burdened by his sorrow, Pauses too afraid, and too faint to go, Glances back at where England’s glories shine, And urges his heart to feel for mine. Futile, very futile, my weary search to discover That bliss which only centers in the mind: Why have I wandered from pleasure and rest, To seek a good each government provides? In every government, though terror reigns, Though tyrant kings, or tyrant laws restrain, How little, of all that human hearts endure, That part which laws or kings can cause or cure. Still to ourselves in every place confined, Our own happiness we make or find: With quiet path, which no loud storms disturb, Glides the smooth current of domestic joy. The lifted axe, the agonizing wheel, Luke’s iron crown, and Damiens’ bed of steel, To men far from power, but rarely known, Leave reason, faith, and conscience all our own.
THE DESERTED VILLAGE
DEDICATION
TO SIR JOSHUA REYNOLDS
DEDICATION
TO SIR JOSHUA REYNOLDS
DEAR SIR,
I can have no expectations in
an address of this kind, either to add to your reputation, or to establish
my own. You can gain nothing from my admiration, as I am ignorant of that
art in which you are said to excel; and I may lose much by the severity of
your judgment, as few have a juster taste in poetry than you. Setting
interest therefore aside, to which I never paid much attention, I must be
indulged at present in following my affections. The only dedication I ever
made was to my brother, because I loved him better than most other men. He
is since dead. Permit me to inscribe this Poem to you.
DEAR SIR,
I have no expectations for an address like this, either to enhance your reputation or to build my own. You won’t gain anything from my admiration since I know little about the art you’re said to excel in; and I might lose a lot due to your harsh judgment, as few have a better taste in poetry than you do. So, putting aside any personal interest, which I’ve never really cared about, I hope you’ll allow me to follow my feelings for now. The only dedication I ever made was to my brother because I loved him more than most others. He has since passed away. Please allow me to dedicate this poem to you.
How far you may be pleased with the versification and mere mechanical parts of this attempt, I don’t pretend to enquire; but I know you will object (and indeed several of our best and wisest friends concur in the opinion) that the depopulation it deplores is no where to be seen, and the disorders it laments are only to be found in the poet’s own imagination. To this I can scarce make any other answer than that I sincerely believe what I have written; that I have taken all possible pains, in my country excursions, for these four or five years past, to be certain of what I allege; and that all my views and enquiries have led me to believe those miseries real, which I here attempt to display. But this is not the place to enter into an enquiry, whether the country be depopulating or not; the discussion would take up much room, and I should prove myself, at best, an indifferent politician, to tire the reader with a long preface, when I want his unfatigued attention to a long poem.
How much you might enjoy the writing style and the technical aspects of this piece, I won’t speculate; but I know you’ll argue (and many of our smartest friends agree) that the depopulation it talks about isn’t evident, and the problems it mentions exist only in the poet’s imagination. In response, I can only say that I truly believe what I’ve written; I’ve taken great care over the last four or five years during my travels to confirm what I claim; and all my observations and inquiries have led me to believe those hardships are real, which I am trying to illustrate here. However, this isn’t the right place to debate whether the countryside is depopulating; that discussion would take up too much space, and I would just end up being a poor politician by boring the reader with a lengthy introduction when I actually want their full attention for a long poem.
In regretting the depopulation of the country, I inveigh against the increase of our luxuries; and here also I expect the shout of modern politicians against me. For twenty or thirty years past, it has been the fashion to consider luxury as one of the greatest national advantages; and all the wisdom of antiquity in that particular, as erroneous. Still however, I must remain a professed ancient on that head, and continue to think those luxuries prejudicial to states, by which so many vices are introduced, and so many kingdoms have been undone. Indeed so much has been poured out of late on the other side of the question, that, merely for the sake of novelty and variety, one would sometimes wish to be in the right.
While lamenting the decline of our population, I criticize the rise of our luxuries; and I expect modern politicians to respond with outrage. For the past twenty or thirty years, it has been trendy to view luxury as one of the greatest benefits to our nation, dismissing all wise perspectives from the past on this matter as mistaken. Still, I choose to embrace that old-fashioned view and firmly believe that these luxuries are harmful to societies, introducing numerous vices and leading to the downfall of many kingdoms. In fact, so much has recently been said in favor of the opposite view that, to add a bit of novelty and variety, I sometimes wish to be proven right.
I am, Dear Sir,
Your sincere friend, and ardent admirer,
OLIVER GOLDSMITH.
I am, Dear Sir,
Your genuine friend and enthusiastic admirer,
OLIVER GOLDSMITH.
THE DESERTED VILLAGE
SWEET AUBURN! loveliest village of the plain, Where health and plenty cheer’d the labouring swain, Where smiling spring its earliest visit paid, And parting summer’s lingering blooms delay’d: Dear lovely bowers of innocence and ease, 5 Seats of my youth, when every sport could please, How often have I loiter’d o’er thy green, Where humble happiness endear’d each scene; How often have I paus’d on every charm, The shelter’d cot, the cultivated farm, 10 The never-failing brook, the busy mill, The decent church that topp’d the neighbouring hill, The hawthorn bush, with seats beneath the shade, For talking age and whisp’ring lovers made; How often have I bless’d the coming day, 15 When toil remitting lent its turn to play, And all the village train, from labour free, Led up their sports beneath the spreading tree; While many a pastime circled in the shade, The young contending as the old survey’d; 20 And many a gambol frolick’d o’er the ground, And sleights of art and feats of strength went round; And still as each repeated pleasure tir’d, Succeeding sports the mirthful band inspir’d; The dancing pair that simply sought renown, 25 By holding out to tire each other down; The swain mistrustless of his smutted face, While secret laughter titter’d round the place; The bashful virgin’s side-long looks of love, The matron’s glance that would those looks reprove: 30 These were thy charms, sweet village; sports like these, With sweet succession, taught e’en toil to please; These round thy bowers their cheerful influence shed, These were thy charms—But all these charms are fled. Sweet smiling village, loveliest of the lawn, 35 Thy sports are fled, and all thy charms withdrawn; Amidst thy bowers the tyrant’s hand is seen, And desolation saddens all thy green: One only master grasps the whole domain, And half a tillage stints thy smiling plain: 40 No more thy glassy brook reflects the day, But chok’d with sedges, works its weedy way. Along thy glades, a solitary guest, The hollow-sounding bittern guards its nest; Amidst thy desert walks the lapwing flies, 45 And tires their echoes with unvaried cries. Sunk are thy bowers in shapeless ruin all, And the long grass o’ertops the mould’ring wall; And trembling, shrinking from the spoiler’s hand, Far, far away, thy children leave the land. 50
SWEET AUBURN! the prettiest village on the plains, Where health and happiness cheered the hardworking farmer, Where smiling spring paid its earliest visit, And parting summer's lingering blooms stayed longer: Dear lovely gardens of innocence and ease, 5 Places from my youth, when every game brought joy, How often have I lingered over your greenery, Where simple happiness made every scene special; How often have I paused to admire every charm, The cozy cottage, the tended farm, 10 The always-flowing brook, the busy mill, The respectable church that topped the nearby hill, The hawthorn bush, with seats beneath its shade, Made for chatting elders and whispering lovers; 15 How often have I blessed the coming day, When work gave way to play, And all the villagers, free from toil, Joined in their games beneath the spreading tree; While many a pastime unfolded in the shade, The young competed while the old watched; 20 And many a frolic danced across the ground, And tricks of skill and feats of strength went around; And as each repeated pleasure tired, New games inspired the cheerful group; The dancing couple that simply sought some fame, 25 By trying to outlast each other; The farmer unaware of his smudged face, While secret laughter bubbled around the place; The shy girl’s sideways glances of love, The woman’s look that would scold those glances: 30 These were your charms, sweet village; games like these, With sweet continuity, taught even hard work to please; These spread their joyful influence around your gardens, These were your charms—but all these charms have vanished. Sweet smiling village, prettiest on the lawn, 35 Your games are gone, and all your charms have faded; Amidst your gardens, the tyrant's hand is seen, And sadness fills all your green: One single master controls the whole land, And half the fields stifle your cheerful plain; 40 No longer does your glassy brook reflect the day, But choked with reeds, it struggles on its weedy path. Along your paths, a solitary visitor, The hollow-sounding bittern guards its nest; Amidst your deserted walks, the lapwing flies, 45 And tires the echoes with unchanging cries. Your gardens lie in shapeless ruins, And long grass overtops the crumbling wall; And trembling, shrinking from the spoiler’s hand, Far, far away, your children leave the land. 50
Ill fares the land, to hast’ning ills a prey, Where wealth accumulates, and men decay: Princes and lords may flourish, or may fade; A breath can make them, as a breath has made; But a bold peasantry, their country’s pride, 55 When once destroy’d, can never be supplied. A time there was, ere England’s griefs began, When every rood of ground maintain’d its man; For him light labour spread her wholesome store, Just gave what life requir’d, but gave no more: 60 His best companions, innocence and health; And his best riches, ignorance of wealth. But times are alter’d; trade’s unfeeling train Usurp the land and dispossess the swain; Along the lawn, where scatter’d hamlets rose, 65 Unwieldy wealth, and cumbrous pomp repose; And every want to opulence allied, And every pang that folly pays to pride. Those gentle hours that plenty bade to bloom, Those calm desires that ask’d but little room, 70 Those healthful sports that grac’d the peaceful scene, Liv’d in each look, and brighten’d all the green; These, far departing, seek a kinder shore, And rural mirth and manners are no more. Sweet AUBURN! parent of the blissful hour, 75 Thy glades forlorn confess the tyrant’s power. Here as I take my solitary rounds, Amidst thy tangling walks, and ruin’d grounds, And, many a year elaps’d, return to view Where once the cottage stood, the hawthorn grew, 80 Remembrance wakes with all her busy train, Swells at my breast, and turns the past to pain. In all my wand’rings round this world of care, In all my griefs—and GOD has given my share— I still had hopes my latest hours to crown, 85 Amidst these humble bowers to lay me down; To husband out life’s taper at the close, And keep the flame from wasting by repose. I still had hopes, for pride attends us still, Amidst the swains to show my book-learn’d skill, 90 Around my fire an evening group to draw, And tell of all I felt, and all I saw; And, as a hare, whom hounds and horns pursue, Pants to the place from whence at first she flew, I still had hopes, my long vexations pass’d, 95 Here to return—and die at home at last. O blest retirement, friend to life’s decline, Retreats from care, that never must be mine, How happy he who crowns in shades like these, A youth of labour with an age of ease; 100 Who quits a world where strong temptations try And, since ’tis hard to combat, learns to fly! For him no wretches, born to work and weep, Explore the mine, or tempt the dangerous deep; No surly porter stands in guilty state 105 To spurn imploring famine from the gate; But on he moves to meet his latter end, Angels around befriending Virtue’s friend; Bends to the grave with unperceiv’d decay, While Resignation gently slopes the way; 110 And, all his prospects bright’ning to the last, His Heaven commences ere the world be pass’d!
The land suffers, prey to quickly approaching troubles, Where wealth accumulates, and people decline: Kings and nobles may thrive or may fade; One breath can create them, just as one breath can end them; But a brave peasantry, the pride of their country, 55 Once destroyed, can never be replaced. There was a time before England's sorrows began, When every piece of land supported its people; For them, light work provided what was needed, Just enough for life, but not more than that: 60 Their best companions were innocence and health; And their greatest wealth was ignorance of riches. But times have changed; the unfeeling march of trade Has taken over the land and displaced the farmer; Along the fields, where scattered villages stood, 65 Heavy wealth and burdensome extravagance rest; And every need is linked to opulence, And every pain that foolishness pays for pride. Those gentle hours that abundance made flourish, Those calm desires that asked for little space, 70 Those healthy games that adorned the peaceful scene, Lived in every glance and brightened all the green; These, far departing, seek a kinder shore, And rural joy and customs are no more. Sweet AUBURN! Parent of blissful moments, 75 Your lonely glades reveal the power of the oppressor. Here, as I walk alone, Through your twisting paths and ruined grounds, And after many years, return to see Where once the cottage stood and the hawthorn grew, 80 Memory awakens with all its busy thoughts, Swells in my chest, turning the past to pain. In all my wandering around this world of worries, In all my sorrows—and GOD has given me my share— I still hoped to end my days here, 85 To lie down amidst these humble shelters; To prolong life’s candle to its close, And keep the flame from dying out in rest. I still had hopes, for pride still attends us, Among the farmers to show my educated skills, 90 To draw an evening group around my fire, And share everything I felt and everything I saw; And, like a hare pursued by hounds and horns, Fleeing back to the place from which she first escaped, I still had hopes, once my long troubles passed, 95 To return here—and finally die at home. O blessed retreat, friend to life’s decline, Escape from worry, that will never be mine, How happy is he who crowns in shades like these, A youth of toil with an age of ease; 100 Who leaves a world where strong temptations challenge And, since it’s hard to fight, learns to fly! For him, no wretched souls, born to work and weep, Explore the mine or tempt the dangerous sea; No grumpy gatekeeper stands in guilty state 105 To reject pleading hunger at the door; But he moves on to meet his end, Angels surrounding the friend of Virtue; He bends towards the grave with unnoticed decline, 110 While Resignation gently guides the way; And all his hopes brightening to the last, His Heaven begins before he leaves the world!
Sweet was the sound, when oft at evening’s close Up yonder hill the village murmur rose; There, as I pass’d with careless steps and slow, 115 The mingling notes came soften’d from below; The swain responsive as the milk-maid sung, The sober herd that low’d to meet their young; The noisy geese that gabbled o’er the pool, The playful children just let loose from school; 120 The watchdog’s voice that bay’d the whisp’ring wind, And the loud laugh that spoke the vacant mind; These all in sweet confusion sought the shade, And fill’d each pause the nightingale had made. But now the sounds of population fail, 125 No cheerful murmurs fluctuate in the gale, No busy steps the grass-grown foot-way tread, For all the bloomy flush of life is fled. All but yon widow’d, solitary thing That feebly bends beside the plashy spring; 130 She, wretched matron, forc’d in age, for bread, To strip the brook with mantling cresses spread, To pick her wintry faggot from the thorn, To seek her nightly shed, and weep till morn; She only left of all the harmless train, 135 The sad historian of the pensive plain. Near yonder copse, where once the garden smil’d, And still where many a garden flower grows wild; There, where a few torn shrubs the place disclose, The village preacher’s modest mansion rose. 140 A man he was to all the country dear, And passing rich with forty pounds a year; Remote from towns he ran his godly race, Nor e’er had chang’d, nor wished to change his place; Unpractis’d he to fawn, or seek for power, 145 By doctrines fashion’d to the varying hour; Far other aims his heart had learned to prize, More skill’d to raise the wretched than to rise. His house was known to all the vagrant train, He chid their wand’rings, but reliev’d their pain; 150 The long-remember’d beggar was his guest, Whose beard descending swept his aged breast; The ruin’d spendthrift, now no longer proud, Claim’d kindred there, and had his claims allow’d; The broken soldier, kindly bade to stay, 155 Sat by his fire, and talk’d the night away; Wept o’er his wounds, or tales of sorrow done, Shoulder’d his crutch, and show’d how fields were won. Pleas’d with his guests, the good man learn’d to glow, And quite forgot their vices in their woe; 160 Careless their merits, or their faults to scan, His pity gave ere charity began. Thus to relieve the wretched was his pride, And e’en his failings lean’d to Virtue’s side; But in his duty prompt at every call, 165 He watch’d and wept, he pray’d and felt, for all. And, as a bird each fond endearment tries To tempt its new-fledg’d offspring to the skies, He tried each art, reprov’d each dull delay, Allur’d to brighter worlds, and led the way. 170
Sweet was the sound when, often at evening's close, The village chatter rose from up the hill; As I passed by with casual steps and slow, The mixed notes floated softly from below; The farmer replied as the milkmaid sang, The quiet herd lowed to greet their young; The noisy geese gabbed over the pool, The playful kids just released from school; The watchdog’s bark that greeted the whispering wind, And the loud laughter that showed a carefree mind; All these in sweet confusion sought the shade, Filling every pause the nightingale made. But now the sounds of life are fading, No cheerful murmurs drift in the breeze, No busy steps tread the grass-grown path, For all the vibrant flush of life has gone. All except for that widow, lonely and frail, Who bends weakly by the muddy spring; She, poor woman forced by age to struggle, To gather the brook’s greenery spread, To pick her winter wood from the thorn, To seek her nightly shelter and weep until morning; She is the only one left of all the harmless crowd, The sad storyteller of the pensive plain. Near that thicket, where once the garden thrived, And still where many a wildflower grows; There, where a few torn shrubs reveal the spot, The village preacher's humble home stood. He was a man beloved by the whole countryside, And quite well off, earning forty pounds a year; Far from towns he lived his righteous life, Never changed, nor wished to change his place; Unpracticed in flattery or seeking power, By following doctrines shaped for the moment; His heart valued different goals, More skilled at uplifting the downtrodden than rising himself. His home was known to all the wandering souls, He scolded their straying, but eased their pain; The long-remembered beggar was his guest, Whose descending beard brushed against his aged chest; The ruined spendthrift, now no longer proud, Claimed kinship there, and had his claims accepted; The broken soldier, kindly invited to stay, Sat by his fire and talked the night away; Wept over his wounds or shared tales of sorrow, Shouldered his crutch and showed how battles were won. Pleasantly entertained, the good man learned to glow, And quite forgot their flaws in their heartache; He didn't care about their merits or faults, His compassion came before charity began. Thus, easing the suffering was his pride, And even his flaws leaned towards virtue; But in his duty, he was quick to respond, He watched and wept, prayed and felt for all. And, like a bird trying every loving gesture To coax its newly fledged young to the sky, He tried every approach, reproved each dull delay, Enticed to brighter worlds, and led the way.
Beside the bed where parting life was laid, And sorrow, guilt, and pain, by turns dismay’d, The reverend champion stood. At his control, Despair and anguish fled the struggling soul; Comfort came down the trembling wretch to raise, 175 And his last falt’ring accents whisper’d praise. At church, with meek and unaffected grace, His looks adorn’d the venerable place; Truth from his lips prevail’d with double sway, And fools, who came to scoff, remain’d to pray. 180 The service pass’d, around the pious man, With steady zeal, each honest rustic ran; Even children follow’d with endearing wile, And pluck’d his gown, to share the good man’s smile. His ready smile a parent’s warmth express’d, 185 Their welfare pleas’d him, and their cares distress’d; To them his heart, his love, his griefs were given, But all his serious thoughts had rest in Heaven. As some tall cliff, that lifts its awful form, Swells from the vale, and midway leaves the storm, 190 Though round its breast the rolling clouds are spread, Eternal sunshine settles on its head. Beside yon straggling fence that skirts the way, With blossom’d furze unprofitably gay, There, in his noisy mansion, skill’d to rule, 195 The village master taught his little school; A man severe he was, and stern to view; I knew him well, and every truant knew; Well had the boding tremblers learn’d to trace The day’s disasters in his morning face; 200 Full well they laugh’d, with counterfeited glee, At all his jokes, for many a joke had he; Full well the busy whisper, circling round, Convey’d the dismal tidings when he frown’d; Yet he was kind; or if severe in aught, 205 The love he bore to learning was in fault; The village all declar’d how much he knew; ’Twas certain he could write, and cypher too; Lands he could measure, terms and tides presage, And e’en the story ran that he could gauge. 210 In arguing too, the parson own’d his skill, For e’en though vanquish’d, he could argue still; While words of learned length and thund’ring sound Amazed the gazing rustics rang’d around, And still they gaz’d, and still the wonder grew, 215 That one small head could carry all he knew. But past is all his fame. The very spot Where many a time he triumph’d, is forgot. Near yonder thorn, that lifts its head on high, Where once the sign-post caught the passing eye, 220 Low lies that house where nut-brown draughts inspir’d, Where grey-beard mirth and smiling toil retir’d, Where village statesmen talk’d with looks profound, And news much older than their ale went round. Imagination fondly stoops to trace 225 The parlour splendours of that festive place; The white-wash’d wall, the nicely sanded floor, The varnish’d clock that click’d behind the door; The chest contriv’d a double debt to pay, A bed by night, a chest of drawers by day; 230 The pictures plac’d for ornament and use, The twelve good rules, the royal game of goose; The hearth, except when winter chill’d the day, With aspen boughs, and flowers, and fennel gay; While broken tea-cups, wisely kept for show, 235 Rang’d o’er the chimney, glisten’d in a row. Vain, transitory splendours! Could not all Reprieve the tottering mansion from its fall! Obscure it sinks, nor shall it more impart An hour’s importance to the poor man’s heart; 240 Thither no more the peasant shall repair To sweet oblivion of his daily care; No more the farmer’s news, the barber’s tale, No more the wood-man’s ballad shall prevail; No more the smith his dusky brown shall clear, 245 Relax his pond’rous strength, and lean to hear; The host himself no longer shall be found Careful to see the mantling bliss go round; Nor the coy maid, half willing to be press’d, Shall kiss the cup to pass it to the rest. 250 Yes! let the rich deride, the proud disdain, These simple blessings of the lowly train; To me more dear, congenial to my heart, One native charm, than all the gloss of art; Spontaneous joys, where Nature has its play, 255 The soul adopts, and owns their first-born sway; Lightly they frolic o’er the vacant mind, Unenvied, unmolested, unconfin’d: But the long pomp, the midnight masquerade, With all the freaks of wanton wealth array’d, 260 In these, ere triflers half their wish obtain, The toiling pleasure sickens into pain; And, e’en while fashion’s brightest arts decoy, The heart distrusting asks, if this be joy. Ye friends to truth, ye statesmen, who survey 265 The rich man’s joys increase, the poor’s decay, ’Tis yours to judge, how wide the limits stand Between a splendid and a happy land. Proud swells the tide with loads of freighted ore, And shouting Folly hails them from her shore; 270 Hoards, e’en beyond the miser’s wish abound, And rich men flock from all the world around. Yet count our gains. This wealth is but a name That leaves our useful products still the same. Nor so the loss. The man of wealth and pride 275 Takes up a space that many poor supplied; Space for his lake, his park’s extended bounds, Space for his horses, equipage, and hounds; The robe that wraps his limbs in silken sloth Has robb’d the neighbouring fields of half their growth, 280 His seat, where solitary sports are seen, Indignant spurns the cottage from the green; Around the world each needful product flies, For all the luxuries the world supplies: While thus the land adorn’d for pleasure, all 285 In barren splendour feebly waits the fall. As some fair female unadorn’d and plain, Secure to please while youth confirms her reign, Slights every borrow’d charm that dress supplies, Nor shares with art the triumph of her eyes: 290 But when those charms are pass’d, for charms are frail, When time advances, and when lovers fail, She then shines forth, solicitous to bless, In all the glaring impotence of dress. Thus fares the land, by luxury betray’d, 295 In nature’s simplest charms at first array’d; But verging to decline, its splendours rise, Its vistas strike, its palaces surprise; While scourg’d by famine from the smiling land, The mournful peasant leads his humble band; 300 And while he sinks, without one arm to save, The country blooms—a garden, and a grave. Where then, ah! where, shall poverty reside, To ’scape the pressure of continuous pride? If to some common’s fenceless limits stray’d, 305 He drives his flock to pick the scanty blade, Those fenceless fields the sons of wealth divide, And e’en the bare-worn common is denied. If to the city sped—What waits him there? To see profusion that he must not share; 310 To see ten thousand baneful arts combin’d To pamper luxury, and thin mankind; To see those joys the sons of pleasure know Extorted from his fellow creature’s woe. Here, while the courtier glitters in brocade, 315 There the pale artist plies the sickly trade; Here, while the proud their long-drawn pomps display, There the black gibbet glooms beside the way. The dome where Pleasure holds her midnight reign Here, richly deck’d, admits the gorgeous train; 320 Tumultuous grandeur crowds the blazing square, The rattling chariots clash, the torches glare. Sure scenes like these no troubles e’er annoy! Sure these denote one universal joy! Are these thy serious thoughts?—Ah, turn thine eyes 325 Where the poor houseless shiv’ring female lies. She once, perhaps, in village plenty bless’d, Has wept at tales of innocence distress’d; Her modest looks the cottage might adorn, Sweet as the primrose peeps beneath the thorn; 330 Now lost to all; her friends, her virtue fled, Near her betrayer’s door she lays her head, And, pinch’d with cold, and shrinking from the shower, With heavy heart deplores that luckless hour, When idly first, ambitious of the town, 335 She left her wheel and robes of country brown. Do thine, sweet AUBURN, thine, the loveliest train, Do thy fair tribes participate her pain? E’en now, perhaps by cold and hunger led, At proud men’s doors they ask a little bread! 340 Ah, no. To distant climes, a dreary scene, Where half the convex world intrudes between, Through torrid tracts with fainting steps they go, Where wild Altama murmurs to their woe. Far different there from all that charm’d before, 345 The various terrors of that horrid shore; Those blazing suns that dart a downward ray, And fiercely shed intolerable day; Those matted woods where birds forget to sing, But silent bats in drowsy clusters cling; 350 Those pois’nous fields with rank luxuriance crown’d, Where the dark scorpion gathers death around; Where at each step the stranger fears to wake The rattling terrors of the vengeful snake; Where crouching tigers wait their hapless prey, 355 And savage men more murd’rous still than they; While oft in whirls the mad tornado flies, Mingling the ravag’d landscape with the skies. Far different these from every former scene, The cooling brook, the grassy-vested green, 360 The breezy covert of the warbling grove, That only shelter’d thefts of harmless love.
Next to the bed where life was fading away, And sorrow, guilt, and pain took turns to distress, The respected champion stood. Under his influence, Despair and anguish left the struggling soul; Comfort came down to uplift the trembling wretch, And his last faltering words whispered praise. At church, with humble and genuine grace, His presence embellished the venerable place; Truth from his lips held double authority, And the fools who came to mock stayed to pray. The service concluded, around the pious man, With steady passion, each honest villager gathered; Even children followed with endearing charm, And tugged at his gown, eager for the good man’s smile. His ready smile showed a parent's warmth, Their welfare pleased him, and their troubles worried him; To them he gave his heart, his love, his griefs, But all his serious thoughts rested in Heaven. Like a tall cliff that rises majestically, Swelling from the valley and leaving behind the storm, Though rolling clouds surround its base, Eternal sunshine settles on its peak. Beside that straggling fence along the road, With blooming gorse, cheerfully pointless, There, in his noisy house, skilled at ruling, The village master taught his little school; He was a serious man, stern in appearance; I knew him well, and every truant recognized him; The anxious tremblers had learned to read The day's misfortunes in his morning face; They laughed, with fake cheerfulness, At all his jokes, for he had many; Well did the busy whispers circulate, Delivering the grim news when he frowned; Yet he was kind; or if strict in anything, His love for learning was to blame; The villagers all agreed on how much he knew; It was clear he could read and calculate; He could measure land, predict the tides, And the story even went that he could judge. In debating, the parson acknowledged his skill, For even when defeated, he could still argue; While words of learned length and thunderous sound Amazed the watching villagers gathered around, And they gazed, and the wonder grew, That one small mind could hold all he knew. But all his fame has passed. The very spot Where he once triumphed is forgotten. Near that thorn, which lifts its head high, Where the sign post once caught people’s eyes, Low lies that house where nut-brown drinks inspired, Where grey-haired laughter and smiling toil retreated, Where village leaders spoke with serious looks, And news much older than their ale circulated. Imagination fondly bends to trace The elegant comfort of that festive place; The fresh white wall, the neatly sanded floor, The varnished clock that ticked behind the door; The chest designed to serve a double purpose, A bed by night, a chest of drawers by day; The pictures placed for decoration and use, The twelve useful rules, the royal game of goose; The hearth, except when winter chilled the day, With aspen branches, and flowers, and cheerful herbs; While broken teacups, wisely kept for display, Rang over the mantel, gleaming in a row. Vain, fleeting splendors! Could not all Rescue the tottering house from its fall! It sinks into obscurity, and shall not again give An hour’s importance to the heart of the poor man; There no longer shall the peasant go To sweetly forget his daily cares; No longer shall the farmer’s news, the barber’s tales, No longer shall the woodman’s ballad prevail; No longer shall the blacksmith clear his dark brow, Relax his heavy strength, and lean to listen; The host himself will no longer be found Carefully seeing the overflowing joy spread; Nor the shy maid, half willing to be pressed, Shall lift the cup to pass it to the rest. Yes! let the rich mock, the proud disdain, These simple blessings of the humble class; To me, more dear, congenial to my heart, One natural charm, than all the elegance of art; Spontaneous joys, where Nature plays, The soul embraces, and owns their first-born sway; Lightly they frolic over the empty mind, Unenvied, unbothered, unconfined: But the long theatrics, the midnight masquerade, With all the whims of wanton wealth arrayed, In these, before the triflers obtain their wish, The toiling pleasure sickens into pain; And even while fashion’s brightest arts entice, The heart distrusting asks, if this is joy. You friends of truth, you statesmen, who observe The rich man’s joys increase, the poor’s decline, It’s up to you to judge how wide the gap stands Between a splendid and a happy land. Proud swells the tide with loads of heavy ore, And shouting Folly hails them from her shore; Wealth, even beyond the miser’s wish, abounds, And rich men flock from all around the world. Yet consider our gains. This wealth is just a label That leaves our useful products still the same. Nor so the loss. The wealthy man and his pride Occupy space that many poor once filled; Space for his lake, his park’s expanded grounds, Space for his horses, equipment, and hounds; The robe that wraps his limbs in luxurious idleness Has robbed the neighboring fields of half their growth, His seat, where solitary pastimes are witnessed, Indignantly pushes the cottage from the green; Around the world each needed product flies, For all the luxuries the world offers: While thus the land, adorned for pleasure, Awaits its downfall in barren splendor. Like a lovely woman unadorned and plain, Sure to please as her youth validates her reign, Disregards every borrowed charm that fashion offers, Nor shares with adornment the victory of her eyes: But when those charms have faded, for charms are fragile, When time passes, and when lovers fail, She then shines forth, eager to bless, In all the glaring impotence of attire. Thus fares the land, betrayed by luxury, Initially dressed in nature’s simplest charms; But nearing an end, its splendors rise, Its vistas strike, its palaces astonish; While scourged by famine from the smiling land, The sorrowful peasant leads his humble group; And while he sinks, without a hand to save, The country blooms—a garden, and a grave. Where then, ah! where shall poverty dwell, To escape the burden of constant pride? If to some common’s fenceless borders strayed, He drives his flock to graze on the scanty grass, Those fenceless fields the sons of wealth seize, And even the bare-worn common is denied. If to the city he hurries—What awaits him there? To see abundance that he must not share; To see ten thousand harmful arts combined To indulge luxury, and diminish mankind; To see those joys the sons of pleasure enjoy Extracted from his fellow creature’s pain. Here, while the courtier glimmers in finery, There the pale artist toils at a sickly trade; Here, while the proud display their long-drawn splendors, There the dark gallows loom beside the way. The dome where Pleasure holds her midnight reign Here, richly adorned, welcomes the lavish procession; Tumultuous grandeur crowds the blazing square, The rattling chariots clash, the torches blaze. Sure scenes like these are free from worry! Sure these indicate one universal joy! Are these your serious thoughts?—Ah, turn your eyes Where the poor houseless, shivering woman lies. She, perhaps once blessed in village prosperity, Has wept at tales of innocence distressed; Her modest beauty could have graced a cottage, Sweet as the primrose peeking beneath the thorn; Now lost to everything; her friends, her virtue gone, Near her betrayer’s door, she lays her head, And, chilled and shrinking from the rain, With a heavy heart laments that unfortunate hour, When, idly first, ambitious of the city, She left her spinning wheel and country brown dress. Do thine, sweet AUBURN, thine, the loveliest array, Do your fair tribes share her pain? Even now, perhaps, driven by cold and hunger, At rich men’s doors they ask for a little bread! Ah, no. To distant lands, a bleak sight, Where half the curved world intrudes between, Through scorched paths with fainting steps they tread, Where wild Altama murmurs to their grief. Very different there from all that once charmed, The various terrors of that dreadful shore; Those blazing suns that send a harsh ray down, And fiercely pour intolerable daylight; Those tangled woods where birds forget to sing, But silent bats in drowsy clusters cling; Those dangerous fields with rank, lush abundance crowned, Where the dark scorpion brings death all around; Where at every step, the stranger fears to disturb The rattling terrors of the vengeful snake; Where crouching tigers wait for helpless prey, And savage men more murderous still than they; While often in whirls the mad tornado sweeps, Mingling the ravaged landscape with the sky. Far different these from every previous scene, The cooling brook, the grassy, green expanse, The breezy shelter of the warbling grove, That only concealed thefts of innocent love.
Good heaven! what sorrows gloom’d that parting day, That call’d them from their native walks away; When the poor exiles, every pleasure pass’d, 365 Hung round their bowers, and fondly look’d their last, And took a long farewell, and wish’d in vain For seats like these beyond the western main; And shudd’ring still to face the distant deep, Return’d and wept, and still return’d to weep. 370 The good old sire, the first prepar’d to go To new-found worlds, and wept for others’ woe; But for himself, in conscious virtue brave, He only wish’d for worlds beyond the grave. His lovely daughter, lovlier in her tears, 375 The fond companion of his helpless years, Silent went next, neglectful of her charms, And left a lover’s for a father’s arms. With louder plaints the mother spoke her woes, And bless’d the cot where every pleasure rose 380 And kiss’d her thoughtless babes with many a tear, And clasp’d them close, in sorrow doubly dear; Whilst her fond husband strove to lend relief In all the silent manliness of grief. O Luxury! thou curs’d by Heaven’s decree, 385 How ill exchang’d are things like these for thee! How do thy potions, with insidious joy Diffuse their pleasures only to destroy! Kingdoms, by thee, to sickly greatness grown, Boast of a florid vigour not their own; 390 At every draught more large and large they grow, A bloated mass of rank unwieldy woe; Till sapp’d their strength, and every part unsound, Down, down they sink, and spread a ruin round. E’en now the devastation is begun, 395 And half the business of destruction done; E’en now, methinks, as pond’ring here I stand, I see the rural virtues leave the land: Down where yon anchoring vessel spreads the sail, That idly waiting flaps with ev’ry gale, 400 Downward they move, a melancholy band, Pass from the shore, and darken all the strand. Contented toil, and hospitable care, And kind connubial tenderness, are there; And piety, with wishes plac’d above, 405 And steady loyalty, and faithful love. And thou, sweet Poetry, thou loveliest maid, Still first to fly where sensual joys invade; Unfit in these degenerate times of shame, To catch the heart, or strike for honest fame; 410 Dear charming nymph, neglected and decried, My shame in crowds, my solitary pride; Thou source of all my bliss, and all my woe, That found’st me poor at first, and keep’st me so; Thou guide by which the nobler arts excel, 415 Thou nurse of every virtue, fare thee well! Farewell, and Oh! where’er thy voice be tried, On Torno’s cliffs, or Pambamarca’s side, Whether where equinoctial fervours glow, Or winter wraps the polar world in snow, 420 Still let thy voice, prevailing over time, Redress the rigours of th’ inclement clime; Aid slighted truth; with thy persuasive strain Teach erring man to spurn the rage of gain; Teach him, that states of native strength possess’d, 425 Though very poor, may still be very bless’d; That trade’s proud empire hastes to swift decay, As ocean sweeps the labour’d mole away; While self-dependent power can time defy, As rocks resist the billows and the sky. 430
Good heavens! What sadness overshadowed that parting day, That called them away from their homeland; When the poor exiles, having experienced every joy, Lingered around their homes, gazing one last time, And said their long goodbyes, wishing in vain For places like these beyond the western ocean; And shuddering at the thought of the distant sea, They returned and wept, and kept coming back to cry. The good old father, the first to prepare to leave For new-found worlds, wept for others' troubles; But for himself, knowing his own virtue, He only wished for worlds beyond the grave. His lovely daughter, even more beautiful in her tears, The dear companion of his helpless years, Walked silently next, forgetting her own charms, And left a lover's arms for her father's embrace. With louder cries, the mother voiced her sorrows, And blessed the cottage where every joy blossomed And kissed her thoughtless babies with many tears, Holding them tightly, in a sorrow doubly precious; While her devoted husband tried to provide comfort In all the silent strength of his grief. Oh Luxury! You are cursed by heaven's decree, How poorly exchanged are things like these for you! How do your potions, with deceitful joy, Spread their pleasures only to destroy! Kingdoms, made sickly and grand by you, Boast of a vibrant strength that isn’t their own; With each sip, they grow larger and larger, A bloated mass of overwhelming misery; Till drained of strength, and every part unhealthy, Down they sink, spreading ruin all around. Even now the destruction has begun, And half of the work of ruin is done; Even now, as I reflect here, I see the rural virtues leaving the land: Down where that anchored ship sets sail, That idly flaps with every gust of wind, They move downward, a mournful group, Leaving the shore and darkening all the beaches. Contented labor, caring hospitality, And loving marital tenderness are there; And piety, with aspirations placed above, And unwavering loyalty, and faithful love. And you, sweet Poetry, the loveliest maiden, Always the first to escape where earthly pleasures invade; Unfit in these degenerate times of disgrace, To win hearts or strive for true fame; Dear, charming nymph, neglected and ridiculed, My embarrassment in crowds, my solitary pride; You are the source of all my happiness and all my sorrow, Who found me poor at first, and keep me so; You are the guide by which the nobler arts excel, You are the nurturer of every virtue, farewell to you! Farewell, and oh! wherever your voice may be heard, On the cliffs of Torno or by the side of Pambamarca, Whether where equinoctial heat glows, Or winter envelops the polar world in snow, Still let your voice, prevailing through time, Ease the harshness of the severe climate; Support overlooked truth; with your persuasive melody Teach erring man to reject the greed for gain; Teach him that regions endowed with native strength, Though very poor, may still be very blessed; That trade’s proud empire hastens to quick decay, As the ocean sweeps away the labor of men; While self-sufficient strength can defy time, As rocks resist the waves and the sky.
LYRICAL AND MISCELLANEOUS
PIECES
PART OF A PROLOGUE WRITTEN AND
SPOKEN BY THE POET LABERIUS
A ROMAN KNIGHT, WHOM CAESAR FORCED
UPON THE STAGE
PRESERVED BY MACROBIUS.
WHAT! no way left to shun th’ inglorious stage, And save from infamy my sinking age! Scarce half alive, oppress’d with many a year, What in the name of dotage drives me here? A time there was, when glory was my guide, 5 Nor force nor fraud could turn my steps aside; Unaw’d by pow’r, and unappall’d by fear, With honest thrift I held my honour dear; But this vile hour disperses all my store, And all my hoard of honour is no more. 10 For ah! too partial to my life’s decline, Caesar persuades, submission must be mine; Him I obey, whom heaven itself obeys, Hopeless of pleasing, yet inclin’d to please. Here then at once, I welcome every shame, 15 And cancel at threescore a life of fame; No more my titles shall my children tell, The old buffoon will fit my name as well; This day beyond its term my fate extends, For life is ended when our honour ends. 20
WHAT! No way to escape this disgraceful stage, And save my reputation as I age! Barely alive, weighed down by years, What in the name of old age brings me here? There was a time when glory led my way, Neither force nor deception could sway my stay; Unmoved by power, untroubled by fear, I valued my honor with honest care; But this wretched moment wipes out my gain, And all my treasure of honor is gone. For ah! too lenient towards my life's decline, Caesar insists that I must submit, it's time; Him I obey, whom even heaven obeys, Hopeless of pleasing, still eager to please. So here, at once, I welcome every shame, And wipe out at sixty a life of acclaim; My titles will no longer be told by my kin, The old fool will fit my name just as well; Today my fate stretches beyond its end, For life is over when our honor ends.
ON A BEAUTIFUL YOUTH STRUCK BLIND WITH LIGHTNING
(Imitated from the Spanish.)
(Copied from the Spanish.)
SURE ’twas by Providence design’d, Rather in pity, than in hate, That he should be, like Cupid, blind, To save him from Narcissus’ fate.
SURE ’twas by Providence designed, More out of pity than out of hate, That he should be, like Cupid, blind, To spare him from Narcissus’ fate.
THE GIFT
TO IRIS, IN BOW STREET, CONVENT GARDEN
TO IRIS, IN BOW STREET, CONVENT GARDEN
SAY, cruel IRIS, pretty rake, Dear mercenary beauty, What annual offering shall I make, Expressive of my duty? My heart, a victim to thine eyes, 5 Should I at once deliver, Say, would the angry fair one prize The gift, who slights the giver? A bill, a jewel, watch, or toy, My rivals give—and let ’em; 10 If gems, or gold, impart a joy, I’ll give them—when I get ’em. I’ll give—but not the full-blown rose, Or rose-bud more in fashion; Such short-liv’d offerings but disclose 15 A transitory passion. I’ll give thee something yet unpaid, Not less sincere, than civil: I’ll give thee—Ah! too charming maid, I’ll give thee—To the devil. 30
SAY, cruel IRIS, pretty flirt, Dear mercenary beauty, What annual gift should I give, As a sign of my loyalty? My heart, a victim to your eyes, 5 Should I just give it up? Tell me, would the angry beauty value A gift from someone who doesn’t appreciate the giver? A bill, a jewel, a watch, or toy, My rivals give—and let them; 10 If gems or gold bring joy, I’ll give them—when I can get them. I’ll give—but not the fully bloomed rose, Or the rosebud that's in style; Such short-lived gifts only reveal 15 A fleeting passion. I’ll give you something yet unpaid, No less sincere than polite: I’ll give you—Ah! too charming maid, I’ll give you—To the devil. 30
THE LOGICIANS REFUTED
IN IMITATION OF DEAN SWIFT
INSPIRED BY DEAN SWIFT
LOGICIANS have but ill defin’d As rational, the human kind; Reason, they say, belongs to man, But let them prove it if they can. Wise Aristotle and Smiglecius, 5 By ratiocinations specious, Have strove to prove with great precision, With definition and division, Homo est ratione praeditum,— But for my soul I cannot credit ’em; 10 And must in spite of them maintain, That man and all his ways are vain; And that this boasted lord of nature Is both a weak and erring creature; That instinct is a surer guide 15 Than reason-boasting mortals’ pride; And that brute beasts are far before ’em, Deus est anima brutorum. Who ever knew an honest brute At law his neighbour prosecute, 20 Bring action for assault and battery, Or friend beguile with lies and flattery? O’er plains they ramble unconfin’d, No politics disturb their mind; They eat their meals, and take their sport, 25 Nor know who’s in or out at court; They never to the levee go To treat as dearest friend, a foe; They never importune his grace, Nor ever cringe to men in place; 30 Nor undertake a dirty job, Nor draw the quill to write for B——b. Fraught with invective they ne’er go To folks at Pater-Noster-Row; No judges, fiddlers, dancing-masters, 35 No pick-pockets, or poetasters, Are known to honest quadrupeds; No single brute his fellow leads. Brutes never meet in bloody fray, Nor cut each others’ throats, for pay. 40 Of beasts, it is confess’d, the ape Comes nearest us in human shape; Like man he imitates each fashion, And malice is his ruling passion; But both in malice and grimaces 45 A courtier any ape surpasses. Behold him humbly cringing wait Upon a minister of state; View him soon after to inferiors, Aping the conduct of superiors; 50 He promises with equal air, And to perform takes equal care. He in his turn finds imitators; At court, the porters, lacqueys, waiters, Their master’s manners still contract, 55 And footmen, lords and dukes can act. Thus at the court both great an small Behave alike—for all ape all.
LOGICIANS have poorly defined As rational, the human race; Reason, they say, belongs to man, But let them prove it if they can. Wise Aristotle and Smiglecius, By clever arguments, Have tried to prove with great accuracy, With definition and categorization, Homo est ratione praeditum,— But honestly, I can't believe them; And despite them, I maintain, That man and all his ways are vain; And that this praised lord of nature Is both a weak and mistaken creature; That instinct is a more reliable guide Than reason's boastful pride; And that brute animals are far ahead of them, Deus est anima brutorum. Who ever saw an honest beast Sue his neighbor in court, File charges for assault and battery, Or deceive a friend with lies and flattery? They roam freely across the plains, No politics disturb their brains; They enjoy their meals and have their fun, Not knowing who's in or out at court; They never go to the levee To treat a foe as a dear friend; They never bother their grace, Nor ever bow down to those in place; Nor take on a dirty job, Nor write for B——b. Loaded with insults, they never go To folks at Pater-Noster-Row; No judges, musicians, dancing teachers, No pickpockets or pretentious poets, Are known to honest quadrupeds; No single animal leads the others. Animals never meet in bloody fights, Nor slit each other's throats for pay. Of beasts, it's acknowledged, the ape Is closest to us in human form; Like man, he mimics every trend, And malice is his main intent; But in both malice and grimaces A courtier surpasses any ape. Watch him humbly waiting, On a minister of state; Soon after, see him with inferiors, Imitating the conduct of superiors; He promises with the same charm, And takes equal care to perform. He in turn finds imitators; At court, the porters, lackeys, waiters, Still mimic their master's behavior, And footmen, lords, and dukes can act. Thus at court, both great and small Behave the same—for all ape all.
A SONNET
WEEPING, murmuring, complaining, Lost to every gay delight; MYRA, too sincere for feigning, Fears th’ approaching bridal night. Yet, why impair thy bright perfection? 5 Or dim thy beauty with a tear? Had MYRA followed my direction, She long had wanted cause of fear.
WEEPING, murmuring, complaining, Lost to every joyful delight; MYRA, too genuine to pretend, Fears the upcoming wedding night. Yet, why ruin your bright perfection? 5 Or cloud your beauty with a tear? If MYRA had taken my advice, She would have long since lacked a reason to fear.
STANZAS
ON THE TAKING OF QUEBEC, AND DEATH
OF GENERAL WOLFE
ON THE TAKING OF QUEBEC, AND DEATH
OF GENERAL WOLFE
AMIDST the clamour of exulting joys, Which triumph forces from the patriot heart, Grief dares to mingle her soul-piercing voice, And quells the raptures which from pleasures start. O WOLFE! to thee a streaming flood of woe, 5 Sighing we pay, and think e’en conquest dear; QUEBEC in vain shall teach our breast to glow, Whilst thy sad fate extorts the heart-wrung tear. Alive the foe thy dreadful vigour fled, And saw thee fall with joy-pronouncing eyes: 10 Yet they shall know thou conquerest, though dead— Since from thy tomb a thousand heroes rise!
AMIDST the noise of joyful celebrations, Which victory brings from the patriotic heart, Grief dares to mix its soul-piercing voice, And quiets the excitement that springs from pleasure. O WOLFE! to you we pour a stream of sorrow, 5 Sighing as we acknowledge that even victory feels costly; QUEBEC in vain will try to teach our hearts to rejoice, While your tragic fate draws forth our heartfelt tears. While alive, the enemy fled from your fierce strength, And watched you fall with gleeful eyes: 10 Yet they will realize you conquer, even in death— Because from your grave a thousand heroes rise!
AN ELEGY ON THAT GLORY OF HER SEX,
MRS. MARY BLAIZE
GOOD people all, with one accord, Lament for Madam BLAIZE, Who never wanted a good word— From those who spoke her praise. The needy seldom pass’d her door, 5 And always found her kind; She freely lent to all the poor,— Who left a pledge behind. She strove the neighbourhood to please, With manners wond’rous winning, 10 And never follow’d wicked ways,— Unless when she was sinning. At church, in silks and satins new, With hoop of monstrous size, She never slumber’d in her pew,— 15 But when she shut her eyes. Her love was sought, I do aver, By twenty beaux and more; The king himself has follow’d her,— When she has walk’d before. 20 But now her wealth and finery fled, Her hangers-on cut short all; The doctors found, when she was dead,— Her last disorder mortal. Let us lament, in sorrow sore, 25 For Kent-street well may say, That had she liv’d a twelve-month more,— She had not died to-day.
Good people all, united in grief, Mourn for Madam Blaze, Who never received a kind word— From those who praised her. The needy rarely passed her door, And always found her caring; She generously lent to all the poor— Who left a promise behind. She tried to please the neighborhood, With charming manners, And never went down a wicked path— Unless she was being sinful. At church, in new silks and satins, With a hoop of enormous size, She never dozed off in her pew— Except when she closed her eyes. Many suitors pursued her, I assure you, Twenty or more; The king himself has followed her— When she walked ahead. But now her wealth and elegance are gone, Her hangers-on have abandoned her; The doctors discovered, when she passed, That her final illness was fatal. Let us mourn, in deep sorrow, For Kent Street can surely say, That had she lived another year— She wouldn't have died today.
DESCRIPTION OF AN AUTHOR’S BEDCHAMBER
WHERE the Red Lion flaring o’er the way, Invites each passing stranger that can pay; Where Calvert’s butt, and Parsons’ black champagne, Regale the drabs and bloods of Drury-lane; There in a lonely room, from bailiffs snug, 5 The Muse found Scroggen stretch’d beneath a rug; A window, patch’d with paper, lent a ray, That dimly show’d the state in which he lay; The sanded floor that grits beneath the tread; The humid wall with paltry pictures spread: 10 The royal game of goose was there in view, And the twelve rules the royal martyr drew; The seasons, fram’d with listing, found a place, And brave prince William show’d his lamp-black face: The morn was cold, he views with keen desire 15 The rusty grate unconscious of a fire; With beer and milk arrears the frieze was scor’d, And five crack’d teacups dress’d the chimney board; A nightcap deck’d his brows instead of bay, A cap by night—a stocking all the day! 20
WHERE the Red Lion blazes over the street, Welcoming every passing stranger who can pay; Where Calvert's ale and Parsons' dark champagne, Entertain the ladies and gentlemen of Drury Lane; There in a lonely room, safe from bailiffs, The Muse found Scroggen stretched beneath a rug; A window patched with paper let in a ray, That dimly showed the state in which he lay; The sandy floor that grits beneath the step; The damp wall adorned with cheap pictures: The royal game of goose was in sight, And the twelve rules drawn by the royal martyr; The seasons, framed with tape, found a spot, And brave Prince William showed his soot-black face: The morning was cold, he eyed with eager longing The rusty grate aware of no fire; With overdue beer and milk, the frieze was scorched, And five cracked teacups decorated the mantel; A nightcap crowned his head instead of laurel, A cap by night—a stocking all day!
ON SEEING MRS. ** PERFORM IN THE CHARACTER OF ****
FOR you, bright fair, the nine address their lays, And tune my feeble voice to sing thy praise. The heartfelt power of every charm divine, Who can withstand their all-commanding shine? See how she moves along with every grace, 5 While soul-brought tears steal down each shining face. She speaks! ’tis rapture all, and nameless bliss, Ye gods! what transport e’er compared to this. As when in Paphian groves the Queen of Love With fond complaint addressed the listening Jove, 10 ’Twas joy, and endless blisses all around, And rocks forgot their hardness at the sound. Then first, at last even Jove was taken in, And felt her charms, without disguise, within.
FOR you, bright and beautiful, the nine share their songs, And my weak voice is tuned to sing your praise. The heartfelt power of every divine charm, Who can resist their all-commanding glow? Look at her move with every grace, 5 While tears from deep emotion run down every shining face. She speaks! It’s sheer joy and indescribable bliss, Oh gods! What ecstasy can compare to this? Like when in the groves of Paphos the Queen of Love Complained sweetly to the attentive Jove, 10 It was joy and endless bliss all around, And even the rocks forgot their hardness at the sound. Then finally, even Jove was captivated, And felt her charms, unveiled, within.
OF THE DEATH OF THE LEFT HON. ***
YE Muses, pour the pitying tear For Pollio snatch’d away; O! had he liv’d another year!— He had not died to-day. O! were he born to bless mankind, 5 In virtuous times of yore, Heroes themselves had fallen behind!— Whene’er he went before. How sad the groves and plains appear, And sympathetic sheep; 10 Even pitying hills would drop a tear!— If hills could learn to weep. His bounty in exalted strain Each bard might well display; Since none implor’d relief in vain!— 15 That went reliev’d away. And hark! I hear the tuneful throng His obsequies forbid, He still shall live, shall live as long!— As ever dead man did. 20
Muses, shed a tear of sympathy For Pollio taken too soon; Oh! if he had lived one more year!— He wouldn't have died today. Oh! if he were born to help humanity, 5 In the noble times of the past, Even heroes would have been left in his shadow!— Whenever he stepped forward. How sorrowful the groves and fields look, And the sheep seem to share the grief; 10 Even the hills would cry a tear!— If only hills could learn to weep. His generosity in grand verses Every poet could celebrate; For no one who asked for help left empty-handed!— 15 They went away helped. And listen! I hear the melodious crowd Denying his last rites, He will live on, live on forever!— Just like any dead man has. 20
AN EPIGRAM
ADDRESSED TO THE GENTLEMEN REFLECTED
ON IN
THE ROSCIAD, A POEM, BY THE AUTHOR
Worried with debts and past all hopes of bail,
His pen he
prostitutes t’ avoid a gaol.
ROSCOM.
Worried about debts and having lost all hope of getting bailed out,
He sells his writing to avoid going to jail.
ROSCOM.
LET not the hungry Bavius’ angry stroke Awake resentment, or your rage provoke; But pitying his distress, let virtue shine, And giving each your bounty, let him dine; For thus retain’d, as learned counsel can, 5 Each case, however bad, he’ll new japan; And by a quick transition, plainly show ’Twas no defect of yours, but pocket low, That caused his putrid kennel to o’erflow.
Don’t let the angry strike of hungry Bavius Trigger your resentment or provoke your rage; Instead, feeling sorry for his struggle, let your goodness shine, And share your generosity, let him eat; For by holding back like wise advice can, Any situation, no matter how bad, he’ll turn around; And with a quick change, he’ll clearly show It wasn’t your fault, but being broke, That made his filthy situation overflow.
TO G. C. AND R. L.
’TWAS you, or I, or he, or all together, ’Twas one, both, three of them, they know not whether; This, I believe, between us great or small, You, I, he, wrote it not—’twas Churchill’s all.
’Twas you, or I, or him, or all of us together, It was one, both, three of them, they don’t know which; This, I believe, whether it’s a big deal or not, You, I, he, didn’t write it—it was all Churchill’s.
TRANSLATION OF A SOUTH AMERICAN ODE
IN all my Enna’s beauties blest, Amidst profusion still I pine; For though she gives me up her breast, Its panting tenant is not mine.
IN all my Enna’s beauties blessed, Amidst abundance still I long; For though she offers me her breast, Its breathless occupant is not mine.
THE DOUBLE TRANSFORMATION
A TALE
SECLUDED from domestic strife, Jack Book-worm led a college life; A fellowship at twenty-five Made him the happiest man alive; He drank his glass and crack’d his joke, 5 And freshmen wonder’d as he spoke. Such pleasures, unalloy’d with care, Could any accident impair? Could Cupid’s shaft at length transfix Our swain, arriv’d at thirty-six? 10 O had the archer ne’er come down To ravage in a country town! Or Flavia been content to stop At triumphs in a Fleet-street shop. O had her eyes forgot to blaze! 15 Or Jack had wanted eyes to gaze. O!——But let exclamation cease, Her presence banish’d all his peace. So with decorum all things carried; Miss frown’d, and blush’d, and then was—married. 20 Need we expose to vulgar sight The raptures of the bridal night? Need we intrude on hallow’d ground, Or draw the curtains clos’d around? Let it suffice, that each had charms; 25 He clasp’d a goddess in his arms; And though she felt his usage rough, Yet in a man ’twas well enough. The honey-moon like lightning flew, The second brought its transports too. 30 A third, a fourth, were not amiss, The fifth was friendship mix’d with bliss: But when a twelvemonth pass’d away, Jack found his goddess made of clay; Found half the charms that deck’d her face 35 Arose from powder, shreds, or lace; But still the worst remain’d behind, That very face had robb’d her mind. Skill’d in no other arts was she But dressing, patching, repartee; 40 And, just as humour rose or fell, By turns a slattern or a belle; ’Tis true she dress’d with modern grace, Half naked at a ball or race; But when at home, at board or bed, 45 Five greasy nightcaps wrapp’d her head. Could so much beauty condescend To be a dull domestic friend? Could any curtain-lectures bring To decency so fine a thing? 50 In short, by night, ’twas fits or fretting; By day, ’twas gadding or coquetting. Fond to be seen, she kept a bevy Of powder’d coxcombs at her levy; The ’squire and captain took their stations, 55 And twenty other near relations; Jack suck’d his pipe, and often broke A sigh in suffocating smoke; While all their hours were pass’d between Insulting repartee or spleen. 60 Thus as her faults each day were known, He thinks her features coarser grown; He fancies every vice she shows, Or thins her lip, or points her nose: Whenever rage or envy rise, 65 How wide her mouth, how wild her eyes! He knows not how, but so it is, Her face is grown a knowing phiz; And, though her fops are wond’rous civil, He thinks her ugly as the devil. 70 Now, to perplex the ravell’d noose, As each a different way pursues, While sullen or loquacious strife, Promis’d to hold them on for life, That dire disease, whose ruthless power 75 Withers the beauty’s transient flower: Lo! the small-pox, whose horrid glare Levell’d its terrors at the fair; And, rifling ev’ry youthful grace, Left but the remnant of a face. 80 The glass, grown hateful to her sight, Reflected now a perfect fright: Each former art she vainly tries To bring back lustre to her eyes. In vain she tries her paste and creams, 85 To smooth her skin, or hide its seams; Her country beaux and city cousins, Lovers no more, flew off by dozens: The ’squire himself was seen to yield, And e’en the captain quit the field. 90 Poor Madam, now condemn’d to hack The rest of life with anxious Jack, Perceiving others fairly flown, Attempted pleasing him alone. Jack soon was dazzl’d to behold 95 Her present face surpass the old; With modesty her cheeks are dy’d, Humility displaces pride; For tawdry finery is seen A person ever neatly clean: 100 No more presuming on her sway, She learns good-nature every day; Serenely gay, and strict in duty, Jack finds his wife a perfect beauty.
```html SECLUDED from domestic strife, Jack Book-worm led a college life; A fellowship at twenty-five Made him the happiest man alive; He drank his glass and cracked his joke, 5 And freshmen wondered as he spoke. Such pleasures, untroubled by care, Could any accident disrupt? Could Cupid’s arrow finally strike Our guy, now thirty-six? 10 Oh, had the archer never come down To wreak havoc in a small town! Or Flavia been content to stay Celebrating victories in a shop on Fleet Street. Oh, had her eyes forgotten to blaze! 15 Or Jack had lacked eyes to gaze. Oh!—But let’s stop the exclamations, Her presence shattered all his peace. So with decorum, all went smoothly; Miss frowned, and blushed, and then got—married. 20 Do we need to expose to common sight The raptures of the wedding night? Do we need to intrude on sacred ground, Or draw the curtains closed around? Let it suffice that each had charms; 25 He clasped a goddess in his arms; And though she felt his touch was rough, Yet in a man, it was good enough. The honeymoon flew by like lightning, The second brought its joys too. 30 A third and a fourth were enjoyable, The fifth was friendship mixed with bliss: But after a year had gone by, Jack found his goddess was made of clay; Found half the charms that adorned her face 35 Came from powder, scraps, or lace; But still, the worst was yet to come, That very face had robbed her mind. Skilled in no other arts was she But dressing, makeup, quick comebacks; 40 And, just as her mood rose or fell, By turns a sloven or a belle; It’s true she dressed with modern style, Half-naked at a ball or race; But when at home, at table or bed, 45 Five greasy nightcaps wrapped her head. Could so much beauty condescend To be a dull domestic friend? Could any nagging lectures bring To decency such a fine thing? 50 In short, by night, it was fits or fretting; By day, it was roaming or flirting. Eager to be seen, she kept a group Of powdered fops at her side; The squire and captain took their spots, 55 And twenty other close relations; Jack puffed his pipe and often exhaled A sigh in suffocating smoke; While all their hours passed between Insulting banter or resentment. 60 Thus as her faults were revealed each day, He thought her features coarser grown; He imagined every vice she displayed Thinned her lip or sharpened her nose: Whenever anger or envy rose, 65 How wide her mouth, how wild her eyes! He didn’t know why, but it was so, Her face had become a knowing grin; And, though her fops were wonderfully polite, He found her ugly as the devil. 70 Now, to complicate the tangled mess, As each pursued a different path, While sullen or chatty disputes Promised to keep them together for life, That dreadful sickness, whose ruthless power 75 Withers the beauty’s fleeting flower: Behold! the smallpox, whose horrid glare Aimed its terrors at the fair; And, stripping every youthful grace, Left only remnants of a face. 80 The mirror, now hated by her sight, Reflected a perfect fright: Each former trick she vainly attempted To restore luster to her eyes. In vain she used her powders and creams, 85 To smooth her skin or hide its flaws; Her country suitors and city cousins, Once lovers, now vanished by the dozens: The squire himself was seen to yield, And even the captain quit the field. 90 Poor madam, now condemned to struggle The rest of her life with anxious Jack, Realizing others had flown away, Tried to please him alone. Jack soon was dazzled to see 95 Her current face surpassed the old; With modesty, her cheeks were tinted, Humility displaced pride; For flashy finery was replaced By a person always neatly clean: 100 No longer presuming on her power, She learned to be good-natured every day; Cheerfully at ease, and strict in duty, Jack found his wife a perfect beauty. ```
A NEW SIMILE
IN THE MANNER OF SWIFT
LONG had I sought in vain to find A likeness for the scribbling kind; The modern scribbling kind, who write In wit, and sense, and nature’s spite: Till reading, I forget what day on, 5 A chapter out of Tooke’s Pantheon, I think I met with something there, To suit my purpose to a hair; But let us not proceed too furious, First please to turn to god Mercurius; 10 You’ll find him pictur’d at full length In book the second, page the tenth: The stress of all my proofs on him I lay, And now proceed we to our simile. Imprimis, pray observe his hat, 15 Wings upon either side—mark that. Well! what is it from thence we gather? Why these denote a brain of feather. A brain of feather! very right, With wit that’s flighty, learning light; 20 Such as to modern bard’s decreed: A just comparison,—proceed. In the next place, his feet peruse, Wings grow again from both his shoes; Design’d, no doubt, their part to bear, 25 And waft his godship through the air; And here my simile unites, For in a modern poet’s flights, I’m sure it may be justly said, His feet are useful as his head. 30 Lastly, vouchsafe t’observe his hand, Filled with a snake-encircl’d wand; By classic authors term’d caduceus, And highly fam’d for several uses. To wit—most wond’rously endu’d, 35 No poppy water half so good; For let folks only get a touch, Its soporific virtue’s such, Though ne’er so much awake before, That quickly they begin to snore. 40 Add too, what certain writers tell, With this he drives men’s souls to hell. Now to apply, begin we then; His wand’s a modern author’s pen; The serpents round about it twin’d 45 Denote him of the reptile kind; Denote the rage with which he writes, His frothy slaver, venom’d bites; An equal semblance still to keep, Alike too both conduce to sleep. 50 This diff’rence only, as the god Drove souls to Tart’rus with his rod, With his goosequill the scribbling elf, Instead of others, damns himself. And here my simile almost tript, 55 Yet grant a word by way of postscript. Moreover, Merc’ry had a failing: Well! what of that? out with it—stealing; In which all modern bards agree, Being each as great a thief as he: 60 But ev’n this deity’s existence Shall lend my simile assistance. Our modern bards! why what a pox Are they but senseless stones and blocks?
LONG had I searched in vain to find a likeness for the modern scribblers; The modern scribblers who write with wit, and sense, and nature’s spite: Until one day, while reading, I lost track of time, 5 and came across a chapter in Tooke’s Pantheon, where I think I found something there, that fits my purpose perfectly; But let’s not rush too much, first, let’s turn to god Mercury; 10 You’ll find him depicted in full detail in book two, page ten: The weight of all my arguments rests on him, and now let’s move on to our comparison. First, please notice his hat, 15 with wings on either side—note that. So, what do we take from this? Well, it shows a mind that’s light as a feather. A mind that's light as a feather! Exactly, with wit that's flighty and learning that’s shallow; 20 just like what is expected from a modern bard: A fair comparison—let’s continue. Next, look at his feet, with wings growing from both of his shoes; Designed, no doubt, to help him soar, 25 and carry him through the air; And here my comparison comes together, for in a modern poet’s flights, I’m sure it can be rightly said, his feet are just as useful as his head. 30 Lastly, take a moment to observe his hand, holding a snake-encircled wand; Often called the caduceus by classic writers, and famous for several purposes. To put it simply—wonderfully endowed, 35 nothing is as effective as it; Just let people get a touch, and its soothing power is such, that even if they were wide awake before, they’ll quickly start to snore. 40 And also, as certain writers say, with this, he sends people’s souls to hell. Now to apply this, let’s begin; his wand represents a modern author’s pen; The serpents entwined around it 45 signify his crafty nature; They show the fury with which he writes, his frothy drivel, venomous bites; Keeping a similar likeness, both lead to sleep in their own way. 50 The only difference is that while the god sent souls to Tartarus with his rod, the scribbling elf, with his pen, isn’t damning others, he’s damning himself. And here my comparison almost stumbles, 55 yet allow me a word in closing. Moreover, Mercury had one flaw: Well! What of that? Just say it—he stole; In which all modern bards agree, being just as much of a thief as he: 60 But even this god’s existence will help my comparison along. Our modern bards! what a nuisance, are they but senseless stones and blocks?
EDWIN AND ANGELINA
A BALLAD
‘TURN, gentle hermit of the dale, And guide my lonely way, To where yon taper cheers the vale With hospitable ray. ‘For here, forlorn and lost I tread, 5 With fainting steps and slow; Where wilds immeasurably spread, Seem length’ning as I go.’ ‘Forbear, my son,’ the hermit cries, ‘To tempt the dangerous gloom; 10 For yonder faithless phantom flies To lure thee to thy doom. ‘Here to the houseless child of want My door is open still; And though my portion is but scant, 15 I give it with good will. ‘Then turn to-night, and freely share Whate’er my cell bestows; My rushy couch, and frugal fare, My blessing and repose. 20 ‘No flocks that range the valley free To slaughter I condemn: Taught by that power that pities me, I learn to pity them. ‘But from the mountain’s grassy side 25 A guiltless feast I bring; A scrip with herbs and fruits supplied, And water from the spring. ‘Then, pilgrim, turn, thy cares forgo; All earth-born cares are wrong: 30 Man wants but little here below, Nor wants that little long.’ Soft as the dew from heav’n descends, His gentle accents fell: The modest stranger lowly bends, 35 And follows to the cell. Far in a wilderness obscure The lonely mansion lay; A refuge to the neighbouring poor And strangers led astray. 40 No stores beneath its humble thatch Requir’d a master’s care; The wicket, opening with a latch, Receiv’d the harmless pair. And now, when busy crowds retire 45 To take their evening rest, The hermit trimm’d his little fire, And cheer’d his pensive guest: And spread his vegetable store, And gaily press’d, and smil’d; 50 And, skill’d in legendary lore, The lingering hours beguil’d. Around in sympathetic mirth Its tricks the kitten tries; The cricket chirrups in the hearth; 55 The crackling faggot flies. But nothing could a charm impart To soothe the stranger’s woe; For grief was heavy at his heart, And tears began to flow. 60 His rising cares the hermit spied, With answ’ring care oppress’d; ‘And whence, unhappy youth,’ he cried, ‘The sorrows of thy breast? ‘From better habitations spurn’d, 65 Reluctant dost thou rove; Or grieve for friendship unreturn’d, Or unregarded love? ‘Alas! the joys that fortune brings Are trifling, and decay; 70 And those who prize the paltry things, More trifling still than they. ‘And what is friendship but a name, A charm that lulls to sleep; A shade that follows wealth or fame, 75 But leaves the wretch to weep? ‘And love is still an emptier sound, The modern fair one’s jest: On earth unseen, or only found To warm the turtle’s nest. 80 ‘For shame, fond youth, thy sorrows hush, And spurn the sex,’ he said: But, while he spoke, a rising blush His love-lorn guest betray’d. Surpris’d, he sees new beauties rise, 85 Swift mantling to the view; Like colours o’er the morning skies, As bright, as transient too. The bashful look, the rising breast, Alternate spread alarms: 90 The lovely stranger stands confess’d A maid in all her charms. ‘And, ah! forgive a stranger rude, A wretch forlorn,’ she cried; ‘Whose feet unhallow’d thus intrude 95 Where heaven and you reside. ‘But let a maid thy pity share, Whom love has taught to stray; Who seeks for rest, but finds despair Companion of her way. 100 ‘My father liv’d beside the Tyne, A wealthy lord was he; And all his wealth was mark’d as mine, He had but only me. ‘To win me from his tender arms 105 Unnumber’d suitors came; Who prais’d me for imputed charms, And felt or feign’d a flame. Each hour a mercenary crowd With richest proffers strove: 110 Amongst the rest young Edwin bow’d, But never talk’d of love. ‘In humble, simplest habit clad, No wealth nor power had he; Wisdom and worth were all he had, 115 But these were all to me. ‘And when beside me in the dale He caroll’d lays of love; His breath lent fragrance to the gale, And music to the grove. 120 ‘The blossom opening to the day, The dews of heaven refin’d, Could nought of purity display, To emulate his mind. ‘The dew, the blossom on the tree, 125 With charms inconstant shine; Their charms were his, but woe to me! Their constancy was mine. ‘For still I tried each fickle art, Importunate and vain: 130 And while his passion touch’d my heart, I triumph’d in his pain. ‘Till quite dejected with my scorn, He left me to my pride; And sought a solitude forlorn, 135 In secret, where he died. ‘But mine the sorrow, mine the fault, And well my life shall pay; I’ll seek the solitude he sought, And stretch me where he lay. 140 ‘And there forlorn, despairing, hid, I’ll lay me down and die; ’Twas so for me that Edwin did, And so for him will I.’ ‘Forbid it, heaven!’ the hermit cried, 145 And clasp’d her to his breast: The wondering fair one turn’d to chide, ’Twas Edwin’s self that prest. ‘Turn, Angelina, ever dear, My charmer, turn to see 150 Thy own, thy long-lost Edwin here, Restor’d to love and thee. ‘Thus let me hold thee to my heart, And ev’ry care resign; And shall we never, never part, 155 My life—my all that’s mine? ‘No, never from this hour to part, We’ll live and love so true; The sigh that rends thy constant heart Shall break thy Edwin’s too.’ 160
‘Turn, gentle hermit of the valley, And guide my lonely way, To where that candle lights the vale With a welcoming ray. ‘For here, forlorn and lost I tread, 5 With weary steps and slow; Where wilds that seem never-ending Stretch on as I go.’ ‘Hold on, my son,’ the hermit cries, ‘Don’t risk the dangerous darkness; 10 For that treacherous shadow is luring You toward your doom. ‘Here, to the homeless child of need My door is always open; And even though I have little, 15 I give it with good will. ‘So turn tonight, and freely share Whatever my humble space provides; My rushy bed and simple meal, My blessing and peace. 20 ‘No flocks wandering in the valley Do I condemn to slaughter: Taught by that power that sympathizes with me, I learn to care for them. ‘But from the mountain’s grassy side 25 I bring a guiltless feast; A bag filled with herbs and fruits, And water from the spring. ‘Then, traveler, turn, forget your cares; All worries on earth are misguided: 30 Man wants very little here below, And doesn’t want that little long.’ Soft as the dew from heaven falls, His gentle words flowed: The modest stranger humbly bows, 35 And follows to the shelter. Far in an obscure wilderness The lonely home stood; A refuge to the neighboring poor And lost travelers. 40 No supplies beneath its humble roof Required a master’s care; The gate, opening with a latch, Welcomed the innocent pair. And now, when busy crowds retreat 45 To take their evening rest, The hermit tended his little fire, And cheered his thoughtful guest: And spread his vegetable bounty, And smiled cheerfully; 50 And, skilled in legendary tales, He entertained the passing hours. Around, in shared laughter, The kitten plays its tricks; The cricket chirps in the hearth; 55 The crackling logs pop. But nothing could bring a charm To ease the stranger’s grief; For sorrow weighed on his heart, And tears began to flow. 60 The hermit noticed his rising cares, With matching concern; ‘And why, unhappy youth,’ he cried, ‘Do you bear the burdens of your heart? ‘Are you driven from better homes, Reluctant to roam; 65 Or do you grieve for friendship lost, Or unreturned love? ‘Alas! The joys that fate brings Are fleeting and fade away; 70 And those who value trivial things, Are even more trivial than they. ‘And what is friendship but a name, A spell that lulls to sleep; A shadow that follows wealth or fame, 75 But leaves the wretch to weep? ‘And love is an even emptier word, Just a joke for the modern girl: On earth unseen, or only found To warm the turtle’s nest. 80 ‘For shame, foolish youth, hush your sorrows, And dismiss the fair sex,’ he said: But while he spoke, a rising blush Gave away his lovesick guest. Surprised, he saw new beauties appear, 85 Quickly rising to view; Like colors across the morning skies, Bright, but fleeting too. The bashful look, the rising breath, Alternately sparked alarms: 90 The lovely stranger stood revealed As a maiden in all her charms. ‘And, ah! forgive a rude stranger, A forlorn wretch,’ she cried; ‘Whose unholy feet intrude 95 Where heaven and you reside. ‘But let a maid share your pity, Who has learned to stray through love; Who searches for peace but finds despair As her companion along the way. 100 ‘My father lived by the Tyne, A wealthy lord was he; And all his wealth was marked for me, He had only me to give. ‘To win me from his loving arms 105 Countless suitors came; Who praised me for the charms they imagined, And either felt or faked a flame. Each hour a mercenary crowd Vied with offers of wealth: 110 Among them, young Edwin bowed, But never spoke of love. ‘Dressed in plain, simple clothes, He had no wealth or power; Wisdom and worth were all he owned, 115 But those were everything to me. ‘And when beside me in the valley He sang sweet love songs; His breath lent fragrance to the air, And music to the grove. 120 ‘The blossom opening to the day, The dews from heaven refined, Could display no purity That could match his mind. ‘The dew, the blossom on the tree, 125 With charms that quickly fade; Their charms were his, but woe to me! Their constancy was mine. ‘For I kept trying every fickle art, Persistent and vain: 130 And while his passion touched my heart, I reveled in his pain. ‘Until, dejected by my scorn, He left me to my pride; And sought a lonely place, 135 In secret, where he died. ‘But mine is the sorrow, mine the fault, And my life shall pay the price; I’ll seek the solitude he sought, And lay down where he lies. 140 ‘And there, lonely, despairing, hidden, I’ll lay myself down and die; ’Twas for me that Edwin did, And so for him will I.’ ‘Forbid it, heaven!’ the hermit cried, 145 And clasped her to his chest: The amazed fair one turned to scold, ’Twas Edwin himself that pressed. ‘Turn, Angelina, ever dear, My beloved, turn to see 150 Your own, your long-lost Edwin here, Restored to love and you. ‘Thus let me hold you to my heart, And let go of every care; And shall we never, never part, 155 My life—my everything that’s mine? ‘No, never from this hour to part, We’ll live and love so true; The sigh that tears your constant heart Will break your Edwin’s too.’ 160
ELEGY ON THE DEATH OF A MAD DOG
Good people all, of every sort, Give ear unto my song; And if you find it wond’rous short, It cannot hold you long. In Islington there was a man, 5 Of whom the world might say, That still a godly race he ran, Whene’er he went to pray. A kind and gentle heart he had, To comfort friends and foes; 10 The naked every day he clad, When he put on his clothes. And in that town a dog was found, As many dogs there be, Both mongrel, puppy, whelp, and hound, 15 And curs of low degree. This dog and man at first were friends; But when a pique began, The dog, to gain some private ends, Went mad and bit the man. 20 Around from all the neighbouring streets The wond’ring neighbours ran, And swore the dog had lost his wits, To bite so good a man. The wound it seem’d both sore and sad 25 To every Christian eye; And while they swore the dog was mad, They swore the man would die. But soon a wonder came to light, That show’d the rogues they lied: 30 The man recover’d of the bite, The dog it was that died.
Good people, listen to my song; And if you find it surprisingly short, It won't keep you long. In Islington, there was a man, Of whom the world might say, That he led a good life, Whenever he went to pray. He had a kind and gentle heart, To comfort both friends and foes; He clothed the needy every day, When he got dressed. And in that town, a dog was found, Like many dogs there are, Both mixed-breed, puppy, whelp, and hound, And scruffy dogs of low degree. This dog and man were friends at first; But when a disagreement arose, The dog, looking to serve his own interests, Went crazy and bit the man. From all the neighboring streets, The amazed neighbors ran, And swore the dog had lost his mind, To bite such a good man. The wound seemed both painful and sad To every Christian eye; And while they insisted the dog was mad, They claimed the man would die. But soon a surprising truth came to light, That showed the liars they were wrong: The man recovered from the bite, The dog was the one who died.
SONG
FROM ‘THE VICAR OF WAKEFIELD’
WHEN lovely woman stoops to folly, And finds too late that men betray, What charm can soothe her melancholy, What art can wash her guilt away? The only art her guilt to cover, 5 To hide her shame from every eye, To give repentance to her lover, And wring his bosom, is—to die.
WHEN a beautiful woman makes a mistake, And realizes too late that men can be unfaithful, What can comfort her sadness, What can erase her guilt? The only way to hide her guilt, To conceal her shame from everyone, To make her lover feel remorse, And break his heart, is— to die.
EPILOGUE TO ‘THE GOOD NATUR’D MAN’
As puffing quacks some caitiff wretch procure To swear the pill, or drop, has wrought a cure; Thus on the stage, our play-wrights still depend For Epilogues and Prologues on some friend, Who knows each art of coaxing up the town, 5 And make full many a bitter pill go down. Conscious of this, our bard has gone about, And teas’d each rhyming friend to help him out. ‘An Epilogue—things can’t go on without it; It could not fail, would you but set about it.’ 10 ‘Young man,’ cries one—a bard laid up in clover— ‘Alas, young man, my writing days are over; Let boys play tricks, and kick the straw; not I: Your brother Doctor there, perhaps, may try.’ ‘What I? dear Sir,’ the Doctor interposes 15 ‘What plant my thistle, Sir, among his roses! No, no; I’ve other contests to maintain; To-night I head our troops at Warwick Lane: Go, ask your manager.’ ‘Who, me? Your pardon; Those things are not our forte at Covent Garden.’ 20 Our Author’s friends, thus plac’d at happy distance, Give him good words indeed, but no assistance. As some unhappy wight, at some new play, At the Pit door stands elbowing a way, While oft, with many a smile, and many a shrug, 25 He eyes the centre, where his friends sit snug; His simp’ring friends, with pleasure in their eyes, Sink as he sinks, and as he rises rise; He nods, they nod; he cringes, they grimace; But not a soul will budge to give him place. 30 Since then, unhelp’d, our bard must now conform ‘To ’bide the pelting of this pitiless storm’— Blame where you must, be candid where you can; And be each critic the Good Natur’d Man.
As some obnoxious charlatan gets a miserable loser to swear that the pill or drop has cured them; similarly, on stage, our playwrights still rely on a friend for the epilogues and prologues, someone who knows how to win over the audience and make many a bitter pill easier to swallow. Aware of this, our poet has reached out and teased every rhyming buddy to help him out. ‘An epilogue—things can't go on without it; it wouldn’t fail if you would just get started on it.’ ‘Young man,’ one replies—a poet living the easy life—‘Sadly, young man, my writing days are behind me; let the kids play pranks and mess around; not me: your brother the doctor there might give it a shot.’ ‘What, me? No way,’ the doctor chimes in, ‘What would I do, grow my thistle among his roses! No, no; I have other battles to fight; tonight I'm leading our team at Warwick Lane: go ask your manager.’ ‘Who, me? Sorry; those things aren’t our strong suit at Covent Garden.’ Our author’s friends, positioned at a comfortable distance, offer him kind words indeed, but no actual help. Like some unfortunate soul at a new play, standing at the Pit door trying to make his way in, often smiling and shrugging as he watches the center where his friends are comfortably seated; his clueless friends, with joy in their eyes, go down with him as he sinks, and rise as he rises; he nods, they nod; he bows, they make faces; but not a single person will move to give him space. So now, unsupported, our bard must conform ‘to endure the pelting of this merciless storm’—blame where you must, be honest where you can; and may each critic be the Good-Natured Man.
EPILOGUE TO ‘THE SISTER’
WHAT! five long acts—and all to make us wiser! Our authoress sure has wanted an adviser. Had she consulted me, she should have made Her moral play a speaking masquerade; Warm’d up each bustling scene, and in her rage 5 Have emptied all the green-room on the stage. My life on’t, this had kept her play from sinking; Have pleas’d our eyes, and sav’d the pain of thinking. Well! since she thus has shown her want of skill, What if I give a masquerade?—I will. 10 But how? ay, there’s the rub! (pausing)—I’ve got my cue: The world’s a masquerade! the maskers, you, you, you. (To Boxes, Pit, and Gallery.) ——, what a group the motley scene discloses! False wits, false wives, false virgins, and false spouses! Statesmen with bridles on; and, close beside ’em, 15 Patriots, in party-coloured suits, that ride ’em. There Hebes, turn’d of fifty, try once more To raise a flame in Cupids of threescore. These in their turn, with appetites as keen, Deserting fifty, fasten on fifteen, 20 Miss, not yet full fifteen, with fire uncommon, Flings down her sampler, and takes up the woman: The little urchin smiles, and spreads her lure, And tries to kill, ere she’s got power to cure. Thus ’tis with all—their chief and constant care 25 Is to seem everything but what they are. Yon broad, bold, angry spark, I fix my eye on, Who seems to have robb’d his vizor from the lion; Who frowns, and talks, and swears, with round parade, Looking as who should say, D——! who’s afraid? 30 (Mimicking) Strip but his vizor off, and sure I am You’ll find his lionship a very lamb. Yon politician, famous in debate, Perhaps, to vulgar eyes, bestrides the state; Yet, when he deigns his real shape t’ assume, 35 He turns old woman, and bestrides a broom. Yon patriot, too, who presses on your sight, And seems to every gazer all in white, If with a bribe his candour you attack, He bows, turns round, and whip—the man’s a black! 40 Yon critic, too—but whither do I run? If I proceed, our bard will be undone! Well then a truce, since she requests it too: Do you spare her, and I’ll for once spare you.
WHAT! Five long acts—and all to make us wiser! Our author really could have used some advice. If she’d consulted me, she should have made Her moral play a lively masquerade; She could have energized each busy scene, and in her fury Have emptied the entire green room onto the stage. I swear this would have kept her play from failing; It would have pleased our eyes and spared us the pain of thinking. Well! since she has so clearly shown her lack of skill, What if I put on a masquerade?—I will. But how? Ah, there’s the challenge! (pausing)—I’ve got my cue: The world’s a masquerade! The maskers are you, you, you. (To Boxes, Pit, and Gallery.) —What a group this colorful scene reveals! Fake intellects, fake wives, fake virgins, and fake spouses! Statesmen with constraints on; and right beside them, Patriots in colorful suits, riding along with them. There are women, over fifty, trying once more To spark a fire in the Cupids who are sixty or more. These, in their turn, with appetites as fierce, Leaving behind fifty, latch onto fifteen, A girl who’s not yet fifteen, with an uncommon fire, Drops her sewing and takes up flirting: The little one grins and casts her bait, And tries to cause chaos before she gains control. Thus it is with all—their main and constant concern Is to seem everything but what they are. That broad, bold, angry guy, I focus on, Who looks like he stole his mask from a lion; He frowns, talks, and swears with great display, Looking as though he thinks, D—! Who’s afraid? (Mimicking) Just strip away his mask, and I’m sure You’ll find he’s really a very docile lamb. That politician, famous for debates, Might, to ordinary eyes, seem to rule the state; Yet, when he dares to reveal his true self, He turns into an old woman, and rides a broomstick. That patriot, too, who catches your eye, And appears to every observer to be pure white, If you challenge his integrity with a bribe, He bows, turns around, and bam—the guy's a fraud! That critic, too—but where am I going? If I keep this up, our author will be in trouble! Well then, let’s have a truce, since she asks for it too: You spare her, and I’ll for once spare you.
PROLOGUE TO ‘ZOBEIDE’
IN these bold times, when Learning’s sons explore The distant climate and the savage shore; When wise Astronomers to India steer, And quit for Venus, many a brighter here; While Botanists, all cold to smiles and dimpling, 5 Forsake the fair, and patiently—go simpling; When every bosom swells with wond’rous scenes, Priests, cannibals, and hoity-toity queens: Our bard into the general spirit enters, And fits his little frigate for adventures: 10 With Scythian stores, and trinkets deeply laden, He this way steers his course, in hopes of trading— Yet ere he lands he ’as ordered me before, To make an observation on the shore. Where are we driven? our reck’ning sure is lost! 15 This seems a barren and a dangerous coast. —— what a sultry climate am I under! Yon ill foreboding cloud seems big with thunder. (Upper Gallery.) There Mangroves spread, and larger than I’ve seen ’em— (Pit.) Here trees of stately size—and turtles in ’em— 20 (Balconies.) Here ill-condition’d oranges abound— (Stage.) And apples (takes up one and tastes it), bitter apples strew the ground. The place is uninhabited, I fear! I heard a hissing—there are serpents here! O there the natives are—a dreadful race! 25 The men have tails, the women paint the face! No doubt they’re all barbarians.—Yes, ’tis so, I’ll try to make palaver with them though; (Making signs.) ’Tis best, however, keeping at a distance. Good Savages, our Captain craves assistance; 30 Our ship’s well stor’d;—in yonder creek we’ve laid her; His honour is no mercenary trader; This is his first adventure; lend him aid, Or you may chance to spoil a thriving trade. His goods, he hopes are prime, and brought from far, 35 Equally fit for gallantry and war. What! no reply to promises so ample? I’d best step back—and order up a sample.
IN these bold times, when the sons of Learning explore distant climates and wild shores; When wise Astronomers head to India, and leave many brighter prospects here for Venus; While Botanists, indifferent to smiles and charm, 5 abandon beauty and patiently go collecting; When every heart swells with amazing scenes, Priests, cannibals, and pompous queens: Our poet joins the general spirit, and prepares his little ship for adventures: 10 Loaded with Scythian treasures and trinkets, he sets his course this way, hoping to trade— yet before he lands he has instructed me to make an observation on the shore. Where have we ended up? Our navigation is surely lost! 15 This looks like a barren and dangerous coast. —What a hot climate am I in! That ominous cloud looks heavy with thunder. (Upper Gallery.) There Mangroves spread, larger than I’ve ever seen— (Pit.) Here trees of impressive size—and turtles in them— 20 (Balconies.) Here poorly conditioned oranges are plentiful— (Stage.) And apples (picks one up and tastes it), bitter apples litter the ground. This place is uninhabited, I fear! I heard a hissing—there are snakes here! Oh, there are the natives—a terrifying race! 25 The men have tails, the women paint their faces! No doubt they’re all barbarians.—Yes, that’s true, I’ll try to communicate with them, though; (Makes signs.) It’s best, however, to keep my distance. Good Savages, our Captain asks for assistance; 30 Our ship is well stocked—she’s docked in that creek; His honor is not a greedy trader; This is his first venture; lend him aid, or you might ruin a promising trade. He hopes his goods are top quality, brought from far, 35 equally suitable for both gallantry and war. What! No reply to such generous promises? I’d better step back—and bring up a sample.
THRENODIA AUGUSTALIS:
SACRED TO THE MEMORY
OF HER LATE ROYAL HIGHNESS
THE PRINCESS DOWAGER OF WALES.
OVERTURE—A SOLEMN DIRGE. AIR—TRIO.
SACRED TO THE MEMORY
OF HER LATE ROYAL HIGHNESS
THE PRINCESS DOWAGER OF WALES.
OVERTURE—A SOLEMN DIRGE. AIR—TRIO.
ARISE, ye sons of worth, arise, And waken every note of woe; When truth and virtue reach the skies, ’Tis ours to weep the want below!
RISE, you sons of value, rise, And stir every note of sorrow; When truth and virtue reach the heavens, It’s our turn to mourn the lack below!
CHORUS.
CHORUS.
When truth and virtue, etc. 5
When truth and virtue, etc. 5
MAN SPEAKER.
MALE SPEAKER.
The praise attending pomp and power, The incense given to kings, Are but the trappings of an hour— Mere transitory things! The base bestow them: but the good agree 10 To spurn the venal gifts as flattery. But when to pomp and power are join’d An equal dignity of mind— When titles are the smallest claim— When wealth and rank and noble blood, 15 But aid the power of doing good— Then all their trophies last; and flattery turns to fame. Bless’d spirit thou, whose fame, just born to bloom Shall spread and flourish from the tomb, How hast thou left mankind for heaven! 20 Even now reproach and faction mourn. And, wondering how their rage was borne, Request to be forgiven. Alas! they never had thy hate: Unmov’d in conscious rectitude, 25 Thy towering mind self-centred stood, Nor wanted man’s opinion to be great. In vain, to charm thy ravish’d sight, A thousand gifts would fortune send; In vain, to drive thee from the right, 30 A thousand sorrows urg’d thy end: Like some well-fashion’d arch thy patience stood, And purchas’d strength from its increasing load. Pain met thee like a friend that set thee free; Affliction still is virtue’s opportunity! 35 Virtue, on herself relying, Ev’ry passion hush’d to rest, Loses ev’ry pain of dying In the hopes of being blest. Ev’ry added pang she suffers 40 Some increasing good bestows, Ev’ry shock that malice offers Only rocks her to repose.
The praise that comes with show and power, The respect given to kings, Are just the decorations of a moment— Just temporary things! The lowly offer them: but the good choose 10 To reject these insincere gifts as flattery. But when show and power are joined With an equal nobility of mind— When titles mean the least— When wealth and status and noble lineage, 15 Only support the ability to do good— Then all their trophies endure; and flattery turns to fame. Blessed spirit you, whose fame, just beginning to flourish Shall spread and thrive from the grave, How have you left humanity for heaven! 20 Even now, criticism and conflict grieve. And, astonished by how your anger was endured, Request to be forgiven. Alas! they never had your disdain: Unmoved in your moral integrity, 25 Your elevated mind remained self-sufficient, Nor needed others’ opinions to be great. In vain, to dazzle your captivated sight, A thousand gifts would fortune bring; In vain, to lead you away from the right, 30 A thousand sorrows urged your end: Like a well-formed arch, your patience stood, And gained strength from its growing burden. Pain met you like a friend who set you free; Adversity is always virtue’s chance! 35 Virtue, relying on herself, Every passion silenced to rest, Loses every pain of dying In the hope of being blessed. Every added pain she endures 40 Bestows some growing good, Every blow that malice brings Only rocks her into peace.
SONG. BY A MAN—AFFETTUOSO.
SONG. BY A GUY—AFFECTIONATE.
Virtue, on herself relying, Ev’ry passion hush’d to rest, 45 Loses ev’ry pain of dying In the hopes of being blest. Ev’ry added pang she suffers Some increasing good bestows, Ev’ry shock that malice offers, 50 Only rocks her to repose.
Virtue, relying on herself, Every passion calmed to rest, Loses every pain of dying In hopes of being blessed. Every added pain she endures Brings some growing good, Every shock that malice brings, Only rocks her to peace.
WOMAN SPEAKER.
WOMAN SPEAKER.
Yet, ah! what terrors frowned upon her fate— Death, with its formidable band, Fever and pain and pale consumptive care, Determin’d took their stand: 55 Nor did the cruel ravagers design To finish all their efforts at a blow; But, mischievously slow, They robb’d the relic and defac’d the shrine. With unavailing grief, 60 Despairing of relief, Her weeping children round Beheld each hour Death’s growing power, And trembled as he frown’d. 65 As helpless friends who view from shore The labouring ship, and hear the tempest roar, While winds and waves their wishes cross— They stood, while hope and comfort fail, Not to assist, but to bewail 70 The inevitable loss. Relentless tyrant, at thy call How do the good, the virtuous fall! Truth, beauty, worth, and all that most engage, But wake thy vengeance and provoke thy rage. 75
Yet, oh! what terrors overshadowed her fate— Death, with its fearsome crew, Fever and pain and the worries of a fading life, Determined took their stand: Nor did the cruel destroyers plan To end their efforts with a single blow; But, annoyingly slow, They stripped the remnants and desecrated the shrine. With futile grief, Despairing of relief, Her weeping children stood around, Watching each hour Death’s growing power, And shuddered as he glared. As helpless friends who watch from shore The struggling ship, and hear the storm roar, While winds and waves thwart their wishes— They remained, as hope and comfort faded, Not to help, but to mourn The unavoidable loss. Relentless tyrant, at your call How do the good, the virtuous fall! Truth, beauty, worth, and all that truly matters, But stir your wrath and provoke your rage.
SONG. BY A MAN.—BASSO.—STACCATO.—SPIRITOSO.
SONG. BY A MAN.—BASS.—STACCATO.—SPIRITED.
When vice my dart and scythe supply, How great a king of terrors I! If folly, fraud, your hearts engage, Tremble, ye mortals, at my rage! Fall, round me fall, ye little things, 80 Ye statesmen, warriors, poets, kings; If virtue fail her counsel sage, Tremble, ye mortals, at my rage!
When my weapon of vice is sharp and ready, How fearsome a ruler of terror I am! If foolishness or deceit capture your hearts, Tremble, you mortals, at my fury! Fall, all of you, little beings, You statesmen, warriors, poets, kings; If virtue loses her wise guidance, Tremble, you mortals, at my fury!
MAN SPEAKER.
MAN SPEAKER.
Yet let that wisdom, urged by her example, Teach us to estimate what all must suffer; 85 Let us prize death as the best gift of nature— As a safe inn, where weary travellers, When they have journeyed through a world of cares, May put off life and be at rest for ever. Groans, weeping friends, indeed, and gloomy sables, 90 May oft distract us with their sad solemnity: The preparation is the executioner. Death, when unmasked, shows me a friendly face, And is a terror only at a distance; For as the line of life conducts me on 95 To Death’s great court, the prospect seems more fair. ’Tis Nature’s kind retreat, that’s always open To take us in when we have drained the cup Of life, or worn our days to wretchedness. In that secure, serene retreat, 100 Where all the humble, all the great, Promiscuously recline; Where wildly huddled to the eye, The beggar’s pouch and prince’s purple lie, May every bliss be thine. 105 And ah! bless’d spirit, wheresoe’er thy flight, Through rolling worlds, or fields of liquid light, May cherubs welcome their expected guest; May saints with songs receive thee to their rest; May peace that claimed while here thy warmest love, 110 May blissful endless peace be thine above!
Yet let that wisdom, inspired by her example, Teach us to appreciate what everyone must endure; Let us value death as the greatest gift of nature— As a safe haven, where weary travelers, After journeying through a world of worries, Can leave life behind and find eternal rest. Groans, crying friends, and somber black attire, May often distract us with their sad seriousness: The preparation is the executioner. Death, when revealed, shows me a friendly face, And is only frightening from a distance; For as the path of life leads me onward To Death’s grand court, the view seems much brighter. It’s Nature’s gentle retreat, always open To welcome us when we have drained the cup Of life or spent our days in misery. In that secure, peaceful retreat, Where all the humble and all the great, Rest side by side; Where the beggar’s tattered clothes and the prince’s royal robes Are jumbled together in sight, May every joy be yours. And oh! blessed spirit, wherever your journey takes you, Through endless worlds, or fields of glowing light, May cherubs greet their anticipated guest; May saints welcome you with songs to their rest; May the peace that claimed your deepest affection here, May blissful, endless peace be yours above!
SONG. BY A WOMAN.—AMOROSO.
SONG. BY A WOMAN.—AMOROUS.
Lovely, lasting Peace below, Comforter of every woe, Heav’nly born, and bred on high, To crown the favourites of the sky— 115 Lovely, lasting Peace, appear; This world itself, if thou art here, Is once again with Eden blest, And man contains it in his breast.
Beautiful, enduring Peace below, Comforter of every sorrow, Heavenly born, and raised up high, To crown the favorites of the sky— Beautiful, enduring Peace, appear; This world itself, if you're here, Is once again blessed like Eden, And humanity holds you in their hearts.
WOMAN SPEAKER.
WOMAN SPEAKER.
Our vows are heard! Long, long to mortal eyes, 120 Her soul was fitting to its kindred skies: Celestial-like her bounty fell, Where modest want and patient sorrow dwell; Want pass’d for merit at her door, Unseen the modest were supplied, 125 Her constant pity fed the poor— Then only poor, indeed, the day she died. And oh! for this! while sculpture decks thy shrine, And art exhausts profusion round, The tribute of a tear be mine, 130 A simple song, a sigh profound. There Faith shall come, a pilgrim gray, To bless the tomb that wraps thy clay; And calm Religion shall repair To dwell a weeping hermit there. 135 Truth, Fortitude, and Friendship shall agree To blend their virtues while they think of thee.
Our vows are heard! For a long time, to human eyes, 120 Her soul was suited to its heavenly home: Like a goddess, her kindness spread, Where humble need and quiet sorrow reside; Need passed for worth at her door, 125 The unnoticed were helped, Her unwavering compassion supported the needy— They were only truly poor the day she died. And oh! for this! while sculpture adorns your shrine, And art pours out in abundance around, Let my tribute be a tear, 130 A simple song, a deep sigh. There Faith will come, a gray pilgrim, To bless the grave that holds your remains; And calm Religion will return To live as a weeping hermit there. 135 Truth, Strength, and Friendship will unite To share their virtues while they remember you.
AIR. CHORUS.—POMPOSO.
AIR. CHORUS.—POMPOSO.
Let us, let all the world agree, To profit by resembling thee.
Let's all the world agree, To benefit by being like you.
PART II
OVERTURE—PASTORALE
MAN SPEAKER.
PART II
OVERTURE—PASTORALE
MALE SPEAKER.
FAST by that shore where Thames’ translucent stream Reflects new glories on his breast, Where, splendid as the youthful poet’s dream, He forms a scene beyond Elysium blest— Where sculptur’d elegance and native grace 5 Unite to stamp the beauties of the place, While sweetly blending still are seen The wavy lawn, the sloping green— While novelty, with cautious cunning, Through ev’ry maze of fancy running, 10 From China borrows aid to deck the scene— There, sorrowing by the river’s glassy bed, Forlorn, a rural bard complain’d, All whom Augusta’s bounty fed, All whom her clemency sustain’d; 15 The good old sire, unconscious of decay, The modest matron, clad in homespun gray, The military boy, the orphan’d maid, The shatter’d veteran, now first dismay’d; These sadly join beside the murmuring deep, 20 And, as they view The towers of Kew, Call on their mistress—now no more—and weep.
FAST by that shore where the clear Thames stream Reflects new glories on its surface, Where, as splendid as a young poet’s dream, He creates a scene beyond blessed Elysium— Where sculpted elegance and natural grace 5 Come together to highlight the beauty of the place, While gently blending are seen The wavy lawn, the sloping green— While novelty, with careful craft, Through every twist of imagination, drifting, 10 Borrows ideas from China to enhance the scene— There, sorrowing by the river’s smooth edge, Forlorn, a rural poet complained, All whom Augusta’s generosity nourished, All whom her kindness supported; 15 The good old father, unaware of aging, The modest matron, dressed in homespun gray, The military boy, the orphaned girl, The shattered veteran, now first shocked; These sadly gather beside the murmuring deep, 20 And, as they gaze At the towers of Kew, Call on their mistress—now gone—and weep.
CHORUS.—AFFETTUOSO.—LARGO.
CHORUS.—SENTIMENTAL.—SLOW.
Ye shady walks, ye waving greens, Ye nodding towers, ye fairy scenes— 25 Let all your echoes now deplore That she who form’d your beauties is no more.
You shady paths, you waving greens, You nodding towers, you fairy scenes— 25 Let all your echoes now mourn That she who shaped your beauty is no more.
MAN SPEAKER.
MAN SPEAKER.
First of the train the patient rustic came, Whose callous hand had form’d the scene, Bending at once with sorrow and with age, 30 With many a tear and many a sigh between; ‘And where,’ he cried, ‘shall now my babes have bread, Or how shall age support its feeble fire? No lord will take me now, my vigour fled, Nor can my strength perform what they require; 35 Each grudging master keeps the labourer bare— A sleek and idle race is all their care. My noble mistress thought not so: Her bounty, like the morning dew, Unseen, though constant, used to flow; 40 And as my strength decay’d, her bounty grew.’
First from the train, the weary farmer arrived, Whose rough hands had shaped the landscape, Bowed down with both sorrow and age, With many a tear and many a sigh in between; ‘And where,’ he cried, ‘will my children get food now, Or how will the old support their fading fire? No lord will take me now that my strength is gone, Nor can I meet the demands they have; Each ungrateful master keeps the worker struggling— A sleek and lazy bunch are all they care about. My kind mistress never thought that way: Her generosity, like the morning dew, Invisible yet constant, used to flow; And as my strength faded, her kindness increased.’
WOMAN SPEAKER.
WOMAN SPEAKER.
In decent dress, and coarsely clean, The pious matron next was seen— Clasp’d in her hand a godly book was borne, By use and daily meditation worn; 45 That decent dress, this holy guide, Augusta’s care had well supplied. ‘And ah!’ she cries, all woe-begone, ‘What now remains for me? Oh! where shall weeping want repair, 50 To ask for charity? Too late in life for me to ask, And shame prevents the deed, And tardy, tardy are the times To succour, should I need. 55 But all my wants, before I spoke, Were to my Mistress known; She still reliev’d, nor sought my praise, Contented with her own. But ev’ry day her name I’ll bless, 60 My morning prayer, my evening song, I’ll praise her while my life shall last, A life that cannot last me long.’
Dressed appropriately and fairly clean, the devoted woman was next seen— Clutching a sacred book that was well-used from daily reading and reflection; That decent dress and this holy guide Augusta had carefully provided. ‘Oh no!’ she cries, looking sorrowful, ‘What am I to do now? Where can I go to seek help, to ask for charity? It’s too late in my life to ask, and shame stops me from doing it. Times are slow to offer support if I should ever need it. But all my needs, before I spoke, were already known to my Mistress; she always helped me without looking for praise, satisfied with her own kindness. But every day I will bless her name, in my morning prayers, my evening songs, I’ll praise her as long as I live, a life that won’t last me much longer.’
SONG. BY A WOMAN.
SONG. BY A FEMALE ARTIST.
Each day, each hour, her name I’ll bless— My morning and my evening song; 65 And when in death my vows shall cease, My children shall the note prolong.
Every day, every hour, I’ll praise her name— My morning and my evening song; 65 And when in death my promises end, My children will carry on the tune.
MAN SPEAKER.
MALE SPEAKER.
The hardy veteran after struck the sight, Scarr’d, mangled, maim’d in every part, Lopp’d of his limbs in many a gallant fight, 70 In nought entire—except his heart. Mute for a while, and sullenly distress’d, At last the impetuous sorrow fir’d his breast. ‘Wild is the whirlwind rolling O’er Afric’s sandy plain, 75 And wild the tempest howling Along the billow’d main: But every danger felt before— The raging deep, the whirlwind’s roar— Less dreadful struck me with dismay, 80 Than what I feel this fatal day. Oh, let me fly a land that spurns the brave, Oswego’s dreary shores shall be my grave; I’ll seek that less inhospitable coast, And lay my body where my limbs were lost.’ 85
The tough veteran, after being struck, Scarred, mangled, and broken in every way, Missing limbs from many brave battles, In nothing whole—except for his heart. Quiet for a moment, and gloomily upset, Finally, overwhelming sorrow ignited his chest. ‘Wild is the whirlwind sweeping Over Africa’s sandy plains, And wild is the storm howling Across the stormy sea: But every danger I’ve faced before— The raging ocean, the whirlwind’s roar— Felt less terrifying to me, Than what I feel this tragic day. Oh, let me escape to a land that rejects the brave, Oswego’s bleak shores will be my grave; I’ll look for that less unwelcoming shore, And rest my body where I lost my limbs.’
SONG. BY A MAN.—BASSO. SPIRITOSO.
SONG. BY A MAN.—BASS. LIVELY.
Old Edward’s sons, unknown to yield, Shall crowd from Crecy’s laurell’d field, To do thy memory right; For thine and Britain’s wrongs they feel, Again they snatch the gleamy steel, 90 And wish the avenging fight.
Old Edward’s sons, determined not to give in, Will come from Crecy’s celebrated battlefield, To honor your memory; For they feel your and Britain’s injustices, Once more they grab the shining steel, 90 And long for the just fight.
WOMAN SPEAKER.
WOMAN SPEAKER.
In innocence and youth complaining, Next appear’d a lovely maid, Affliction o’er each feature reigning, Kindly came in beauty’s aid; 95 Every grace that grief dispenses, Every glance that warms the soul, In sweet succession charmed the senses, While pity harmonized the whole. ‘The garland of beauty’—’tis thus she would say— 100 ‘No more shall my crook or my temples adorn, I’ll not wear a garland—Augusta’s away, I’ll not wear a garland until she return; But alas! that return I never shall see, The echoes of Thames shall my sorrows proclaim, 105 There promised a lover to come—but, O me! ’Twas death,—’twas the death of my mistress that came. But ever, for ever, her image shall last, I’ll strip all the spring of its earliest bloom; On her grave shall the cowslip and primrose be cast, 110 And the new-blossomed thorn shall whiten her tomb.’
In innocence and youth complaining, Next appeared a lovely maid, Affliction over each feature reigning, Kindly came in beauty’s aid; Every grace that grief dispenses, Every glance that warms the soul, In sweet succession charmed the senses, While pity harmonized the whole. ‘The garland of beauty’—this is how she would say— ‘No more shall my crook or my temples adorn, I won’t wear a garland—Augusta’s away, I won’t wear a garland until she returns; But alas! that return I’ll never see, The echoes of Thames shall proclaim my sorrows, There promised a lover to come—but, oh no! It was death—it was the death of my mistress that came. But forever, her image shall last, I’ll strip all the spring of its earliest bloom; On her grave shall the cowslip and primrose be cast, And the newly blossomed thorn shall whiten her tomb.’
SONG. BY A WOMAN.—PASTORALE.
SONG. BY A WOMAN.—PASTORALE.
With garlands of beauty the queen of the May No more will her crook or her temples adorn; For who’d wear a garland when she is away, When she is remov’d, and shall never return. 115 On the grave of Augusta these garlands be plac’d, We’ll rifle the spring of its earliest bloom, And there shall the cowslip and primrose be cast, And the new-blossom’d thorn shall whiten her tomb.
With beautiful garlands, the queen of May No longer will adorn her crook or her temples; For who’d wear a garland when she’s gone, When she’s taken away and will never return. 115 Let these garlands be placed on Augusta's grave, We’ll gather the spring’s first flowers, And there will be cowslips and primroses laid, And the newly blossomed thorn will brighten her tomb.
CHORUS.—ALTRO MODO.
CHORUS.—ANOTHER WAY.
On the grave of Augusta this garland be plac’d, 120 We’ll rifle the spring of its earliest bloom, And there shall the cowslip and primrose be cast, And the tears of her country shall water her tomb.
On Augusta's grave, let's lay this wreath, 120 We’ll gather the spring's first blooms, And there we'll lay cowslips and primroses, And the tears of her nation will water her tomb.
SONG
FROM ‘SHE STOOPS TO CONQUER’
LET school-masters puzzle their brain, With grammar, and nonsense, and learning; Good liquor, I stoutly maintain, Gives ‘genus’ a better discerning. Let them brag of their heathenish gods, 5 Their Lethes, their Styxes, and Stygians: Their Quis, and their Quaes, and their Quods, They’re all but a parcel of Pigeons. Toroddle, toroddle, toroll. When Methodist preachers come down A-preaching that drinking is sinful, 10 I’ll wager the rascals a crown They always preach best with a skinful. But when you come down with your pence, For a slice of their scurvy religion, I’ll leave it to all men of sense, 15 But you, my good friend, are the pigeon. Toroddle, toroddle, toroll. Then come, put the jorum about, And let us be merry and clever; Our hearts and our liquors are stout; Here’s the Three Jolly Pigeons for ever. 20 Let some cry up woodcock or hare, Your bustards, your ducks, and your widgeons; But of all the birds in the air, Here’s a health to the Three Jolly Pigeons. Toroddle, toroddle, toroll.
LET schoolteachers scratch their heads, With grammar, nonsense, and learning; Good drinks, I firmly believe, Make ‘genus’ much more discerning. Let them boast of their pagan gods, 5 Their Lethes, their Styxes, and Stygians: Their Quis, and their Quaes, and their Quods, They’re all just a bunch of Pigeons. Toroddle, toroddle, toroll. When Methodist preachers come down Preaching that drinking is sinful, 10 I’ll bet the rascals a crown They always preach best when they’re tipsy. But when you show up with your change, For a slice of their shabby religion, I’ll leave it to all sensible folks, 15 But you, my good friend, are the pigeon. Toroddle, toroddle, toroll. So come, let’s pass the jug around, And let’s be cheerful and clever; Our hearts and our drinks are strong; Here’s to the Three Jolly Pigeons forever. 20 Let some praise woodcock or hare, Your bustards, your ducks, and your widgeons; But of all the birds in the air, Here’s a toast to the Three Jolly Pigeons. Toroddle, toroddle, toroll.
EPILOGUE TO ‘SHE STOOPS TO CONQUER’
WELL, having stoop’d to conquer with success, And gain’d a husband without aid from dress, Still, as a Bar-maid, I could wish it too, As I have conquer’d him, to conquer you: And let me say, for all your resolution, 5 That pretty Bar-maids have done execution. Our life is all a play, compos’d to please, ‘We have our exits and our entrances.’ The First Act shows the simple country maid, Harmless and young, of ev’ry thing afraid; 10 Blushes when hir’d, and, with unmeaning action, ‘I hopes as how to give you satisfaction.’ Her Second Act displays a livelier scene— Th’ unblushing Bar-maid of a country inn, Who whisks about the house, at market caters, 15 Talks loud, coquets the guests, and scolds the waiters. Next the scene shifts to town, and there she soars, The chop-house toast of ogling connoisseurs. On ’Squires and Cits she there displays her arts, And on the gridiron broils her lovers’ hearts: 20 And as she smiles, her triumphs to complete, Even Common-Councilmen forget to eat. The Fourth Act shows her wedded to the ’Squire, And Madam now begins to hold it higher; Pretends to taste, at Operas cries caro, 25 And quits her Nancy Dawson, for Che faro, Doats upon dancing, and in all her pride, Swims round the room, the Heinel of Cheapside; Ogles and leers with artificial skill, ’Till having lost in age the power to kill, 30 She sits all night at cards, and ogles at spadille. Such, through our lives, the eventful history— The Fifth and Last Act still remains for me. The Bar-maid now for your protection prays. Turns Female Barrister, and pleads for Bayes. 35
WELL, having stooped to conquer with success, And gained a husband without needing fancy clothes, Still, as a barmaid, I wish for one more win, Since I’ve conquered him, I want to conquer you too: And let me say, despite your determination, That pretty barmaids have made quite an impression. Our life is like a play, crafted to entertain, ‘We have our exits and our entrances.’ The First Act shows the simple country girl, Innocent and young, afraid of everything; She blushes when hired, and with meaningless gestures, ‘I hope to give you satisfaction.’ Her Second Act reveals a livelier scene— The bold barmaid of a country inn, Who bustlingly moves about, caters at the market, Talks loudly, flirts with the guests, and scolds the waiters. Next, the scene shifts to town, and there she shines, The favorite of ogling connoisseurs at the chop house. On ‘Squires and Citizens, she shows off her skills, And on the grill, she sizzles her lovers’ hearts: And as she smiles, to complete her triumph, Even Common-Councilmen forget to eat. The Fourth Act shows her married to the ‘Squire, And now she begins to act even more refined; Pretends to enjoy, at Operas she cries caro, And trades in her Nancy Dawson for Che faro, Is infatuated with dancing, and in all her pride, Swirls around the room, the belle of Cheapside; Flirts and teases with practiced skill, ‘Till having lost in age the power to charm, She sits all night at cards, and ogles at spadille. Such, throughout our lives, is the eventful story— The Fifth and Last Act still awaits me. The barmaid now prays for your protection. She turns to be a female barrister and pleads for Bayes.
![[Illustration: ]](images/goldie.jpg)
PORTRAIT OF GOLDSMITH
AFTER REYNOLDS
(Vignette to ‘Retaliation’)
PORTRAIT OF GOLDSMITH
AFTER REYNOLDS
(Vignette to ‘Retaliation’)
RETALIATION
A POEM
OF old, when Scarron his companions invited, Each guest brought his dish, and the feast was united; If our landlord supplies us with beef, and with fish, Let each guest bring himself, and he brings the best dish: Our Dean shall be venison, just fresh from the plains; 5 Our Burke shall be tongue, with a garnish of brains; Our Will shall be wild-fowl, of excellent flavour, And Dick with his pepper shall heighten their savour: Our Cumberland’s sweet-bread its place shall obtain, And Douglas is pudding, substantial and plain: 10 Our Garrick’s a salad; for in him we see Oil, vinegar, sugar, and saltness agree: To make out the dinner, full certain I am, That Ridge is anchovy, and Reynolds is lamb; That Hickey’s a capon, and by the same rule, 15 Magnanimous Goldsmith a gooseberry fool. At a dinner so various, at such a repast, Who’d not be a glutton, and stick to the last? Here, waiter! more wine, let me sit while I’m able, Till all my companions sink under the table; 20 Then, with chaos and blunders encircling my head, Let me ponder, and tell what I think of the dead. Here lies the good Dean, re-united to earth, Who mix’d reason with pleasure, and wisdom with mirth: If he had any faults, he has left us in doubt, 25 At least, in six weeks, I could not find ’em out; Yet some have declar’d, and it can’t be denied ’em, That sly-boots was cursedly cunning to hide ’em. Here lies our good Edmund, whose genius was such, We scarcely can praise it, or blame it too much; 30 Who, born for the Universe, narrow’d his mind, And to party gave up what was meant for mankind. Though fraught with all learning, yet straining his throat To persuade Tommy Townshend to lend him a vote; Who, too deep for his hearers, still went on refining, 35 And thought of convincing, while they thought of dining; Though equal to all things, for all things unfit, Too nice for a statesman, too proud for a wit: For a patriot, too cool; for a drudge, disobedient; And too fond of the right to pursue the expedient. 40 In short, ’twas his fate, unemploy’d, or in place, Sir, To eat mutton cold, and cut blocks with a razor. Here lies honest William, whose heart was a mint, While the owner ne’er knew half the good that was in’t; The pupil of impulse, it forc’d him along, 45 His conduct still right, with his argument wrong; Still aiming at honour, yet fearing to roam, The coachman was tipsy, the chariot drove home; Would you ask for his merits? alas! he had none; What was good was spontaneous, his faults were his own. 50 Here lies honest Richard, whose fate I must sigh at; Alas, that such frolic should now be so quiet! What spirits were his! what wit and what whim! Now breaking a jest, and now breaking a limb; Now wrangling and grumbling to keep up the ball, 55 Now teasing and vexing, yet laughing at all! In short, so provoking a devil was Dick, That we wish’d him full ten times a day at Old Nick; But, missing his mirth and agreeable vein, As often we wish’d to have Dick back again. 60 Here Cumberland lies, having acted his parts, The Terence of England, the mender of hearts; A flattering painter, who made it his care To draw men as they ought to be, not as they are. His gallants are all faultless, his women divine, 65 And comedy wonders at being so fine; Like a tragedy queen he has dizen’d her out, Or rather like tragedy giving a rout. His fools have their follies so lost in a crowd Of virtues and feelings, that folly grows proud; 70 And coxcombs, alike in their failings alone, Adopting his portraits, are pleas’d with their own. Say, where has our poet this malady caught? Or, wherefore his characters thus without fault? Say, was it that vainly directing his view 75 To find out men’s virtues, and finding them few, Quite sick of pursuing each troublesome elf, He grew lazy at last, and drew from himself? Here Douglas retires, from his toils to relax, The scourge of impostors, the terror of quacks: 80 Come, all ye quack bards, and ye quacking divines, Come, and dance on the spot where your tyrant reclines: When Satire and Censure encircl’d his throne, I fear’d for your safety, I fear’d for my own; But now he is gone, and we want a detector, 85 Our Dodds shall be pious, our Kenricks shall lecture; Macpherson write bombast, and call it a style, Our Townshend make speeches, and I shall compile; New Lauders and Bowers the Tweed shall cross over, No countryman living their tricks to discover; 90 Detection her taper shall quench to a spark, And Scotchman meet Scotchman, and cheat in the dark. Here lies David Garrick, describe me, who can, An abridgment of all that was pleasant in man; As an actor, confess’d without rival to shine: 95 As a wit, if not first, in the very first line: Yet, with talents like these, and an excellent heart, The man had his failings, a dupe to his art. Like an ill-judging beauty, his colours he spread, And beplaster’d with rouge his own natural red. 100 On the stage he was natural, simple, affecting; ’Twas only that when he was off he was acting. With no reason on earth to go out of his way, He turn’d and he varied full ten times a day. Though secure of our hearts, yet confoundedly sick 105 If they were not his own by finessing and trick, He cast off his friends, as a huntsman his pack, For he knew when he pleas’d he could whistle them back. Of praise a mere glutton, he swallow’d what came, And the puff of a dunce he mistook it for fame; 110 Till his relish grown callous, almost to disease, Who pepper’d the highest was surest to please. But let us be candid, and speak out our mind, If dunces applauded, he paid them in kind. Ye Kenricks, ye Kellys, and Woodfalls so grave, 115 What a commerce was yours, while you got and you gave! How did Grub-street re-echo the shouts you rais’d, While he was be-Roscius’d, and you were be-prais’d! But peace to his spirit, wherever it flies, To act as an angel, and mix with the skies: 120 Those poets, who owe their best fame to his skill, Shall still be his flatterers, go where he will. Old Shakespeare, receive him, with praise and with love, And Beaumonts and Bens be his Kellys above. Here Hickey reclines, a most blunt, pleasant creature, 125 And slander itself must allow him good nature: He cherish’d his friend, and he relish’d a bumper; Yet one fault he had, and that one was a thumper. Perhaps you may ask if the man was a miser! I answer, no, no, for he always was wiser: 130 Too courteous, perhaps, or obligingly flat? His very worst foe can’t accuse him of that: Perhaps he confided in men as they go, And so was too foolishly honest! Ah no! Then what was his failing? come, tell it, and burn ye! 135 He was, could he help it?—a special attorney. Here Reynolds is laid, and, to tell you my mind, He has not left a better or wiser behind: His pencil was striking, resistless, and grand; His manners were gentle, complying, and bland; 140 Still born to improve us in every part, His pencil our faces, his manners our heart: To coxcombs averse, yet most civilly steering, When they judg’d without skill he was still hard of hearing: When they talk’d of their Raphaels, Correggios, and stuff, 145 He shifted his trumpet, and only took snuff.
OF old, when Scarron invited his friends, Each guest brought a dish, and the feast was a blend; If our host supplies us with beef and with fish, Let each guest bring themselves, and that’s the best dish: Our Dean will be venison, freshly from the plains; Our Burke will be tongue, garnished with brains; Our Will will be wild fowl, of excellent flavor, And Dick with his pepper will enhance their savor: Our Cumberland’s sweetbread will find its place, And Douglas is pudding, simple and base: Our Garrick’s a salad; for in him we see Oil, vinegar, sugar, and saltiness agree: To fill out the dinner, I know for sure, That Ridge is anchovy, and Reynolds is lamb; That Hickey’s a capon, and by the same rule, Magnanimous Goldsmith is a gooseberry fool. At a dinner so varied, at such a feast, Who wouldn’t be a glutton and stick to the end? Here, waiter! more wine, let me sit while I’m able, Till all my friends sink under the table; Then, with chaos and blunders swirling in my head, Let me ponder and say what I think of the dead. Here lies the good Dean, reunited with earth, Who mixed reason with pleasure, and wisdom with mirth: If he had any faults, he left us unsure, At least, in six weeks, I couldn’t find any for sure; Yet some have said, and it can’t be denied, That sly-boots was quite clever in hiding them inside. Here lies our good Edmund, whose genius was such, We scarcely can praise it or blame it too much; Who, born for the Universe, narrowed his mind, And to party gave up what was meant for mankind. Though full of learning, yet straining his throat To persuade Tommy Townshend to lend him a vote; Who, too deep for his listeners, kept on refining, And thought of convincing while they thought of dining; Though capable of all things, for all things unfit, Too picky for a statesman, too proud for a wit: For a patriot, too cool; for a worker, disobedient; And too fond of the right to pursue the expedient. In short, it was his fate, unemployed or in place, To eat mutton cold and cut blocks with a razor. Here lies honest William, whose heart was a mint, While the owner never knew half the good that was in it; The pupil of impulse, it forced him along, His conduct still right, with his argument wrong; Still aiming at honor, yet fearing to roam, The coachman was drunk, the chariot drove home; Would you ask for his merits? alas! he had none; What was good was spontaneous, his faults were his own. Here lies honest Richard, whose fate I must mourn; Alas, that such a lively spirit should now be so worn! What energy he had! what wit and what whim! Now breaking a joke, and now breaking a limb; Now wrangling and grumbling to keep up the ball, Now teasing and vexing, yet laughing at all! In short, so much of a nuisance was Dick, That we wished him full ten times a day at Old Nick; But, missing his humor and agreeable style, As often we wished to have Dick back for a while. Here Cumberland lies, after playing his part, The Terence of England, the mender of hearts; A flattering painter, who took care to show Men as they ought to be, not as they are though. His gallants are all faultless, his ladies divine, And comedy wonders at being so fine; Like a tragedy queen he has dressed her out, Or rather like tragedy throwing a rout. His fools have their follies so lost in a crowd Of virtues and feelings, that folly grows proud; And fools, alike in their failings alone, Adopting his portraits, are pleased with their own. Say, where has our poet caught this disease? Or, why are his characters thus without ease? Say, was it that vainly directing his view To find men’s virtues, and finding so few, Quite sick of pursuing each troublesome elf, He grew lazy at last, and drew from himself? Here Douglas retires, to relax from his toils, The scourge of impostors, the terror of spoils: Come, all you quack bards, and you quacking divines, Come, and dance on the spot where your tyrant reclines: When Satire and Censure encircled his throne, I feared for your safety, I feared for my own; But now he is gone, and we lack a detector, Our Dodds shall be pious, our Kenricks shall lecture; Macpherson write bombast, and call it a style, Our Townshend make speeches, and I shall compile; New Lauders and Bowers the Tweed shall cross over, No countryman living to discover their tricks; Detection her taper shall shrink to a spark, And Scotsman meet Scotsman, and cheat in the dark. Here lies David Garrick, describe him, who can, An abridgment of all that was pleasant in man; As an actor, without rival to shine: As a wit, if not first, in the very first line: Yet, with talents like these, and an excellent heart, The man had his failings, a dupe to his art. Like an ill-judging beauty, his colors he spread, And plastered with rouge his own natural red. On the stage he was natural, simple, affecting; It was only that when he was off he was acting. With no reason on earth to go out of his way, He turned and he varied full ten times a day. Though sure of our hearts, yet utterly sick If they were not his own by finessing and trick, He cast off his friends, as a huntsman his pack, For he knew when he pleased he could whistle them back. Of praise, a mere glutton, he swallowed what came, And the puff of a fool he mistook for fame; Till his taste grown callous, almost to disease, Who peppered the highest was surest to please. But let us be honest, and speak our mind, If fools applauded, he paid them in kind. You Kenricks, you Kellys, and Woodfalls so grave, What a trade was yours, while you got and you gave! How did Grub-street re-echo the shouts you raised, While he was be-Roscius'd, and you were be-praised! But peace to his spirit, wherever it goes, To act as an angel and mingle with the skies: Those poets who owe their best fame to his skill, Shall still be his admirers, go where he will. Old Shakespeare, receive him, with praise and with love, And Beaumonts and Bens be his Kellys above. Here Hickey rests, a most blunt, pleasant creature, And slander itself must allow him good nature: He cherished his friend, and enjoyed a good drink; Yet one flaw he had, and that one made people think. Perhaps you may ask if the man was a miser! I answer, no, no, for he always was wiser: Too polite, perhaps, or obligingly bland? His very worst foe can’t accuse him of that: Perhaps he trusted in men as they go, And so was too foolishly honest! Ah no! Then what was his failing? Come, tell it and burn me! He was, could he help it?—a special attorney. Here Reynolds is laid, and I’ll tell you my mind, He hasn’t left a better or wiser behind: His pencil was striking, irresistible, grand; His manners were gentle, compliant, and bland; Still born to improve us in every part, His pencil our faces, his manners our heart: To fools averse, yet most civilly steering, When they judged without skill he was still hard of hearing: When they talked of their Raphaels, Correggios, and stuff, He shifted his trumpet and only took snuff.
POSTSCRIPT
PS
After the Fourth Edition of this Poem was printed, the Publisher received an Epitaph on Mr. Whitefoord, from a friend of the late Doctor Goldsmith, inclosed in a letter, of which the following is an abstract:—
After the Fourth Edition of this Poem was printed, the Publisher got an Epitaph on Mr. Whitefoord from a friend of the late Doctor Goldsmith, included in a letter, of which the following is a summary:—
‘I have in my possession a sheet of paper, containing near forty lines in the Doctor’s own hand-writing: there are many scattered, broken verses, on Sir Jos. Reynolds, Counsellor Ridge, Mr. Beauclerk, and Mr. Whitefoord. The Epitaph on the last-mentioned gentleman is the only one that is finished, and therefore I have copied it, that you may add it to the next edition. It is a striking proof of Doctor Goldsmith’s good-nature. I saw this sheet of paper in the Doctor’s room, five or six days before he died; and, as I had got all the other Epitaphs, I asked him if I might take it. “In truth you may, my Boy,” (replied he,) “for it will be of no use to me where I am going.”’
‘I have in my possession a sheet of paper with nearly forty lines in the Doctor’s own handwriting. There are many scattered, broken verses about Sir Jos. Reynolds, Counsellor Ridge, Mr. Beauclerk, and Mr. Whitefoord. The epitaph for the last-mentioned gentleman is the only one that’s complete, so I’ve copied it for you to add to the next edition. It’s a striking testament to Doctor Goldsmith’s good nature. I saw this sheet of paper in the Doctor’s room five or six days before he died, and since I had all the other epitaphs, I asked him if I could take it. “In truth you may, my Boy,” he replied, “for it will be of no use to me where I am going.”’
HERE Whitefoord reclines, and deny it who can, Though he merrily liv’d, he is now a ‘grave’ man; Rare compound of oddity, frolic, and fun! Who relish’d a joke, and rejoic’d in a pun; 150 Whose temper was generous, open, sincere; A stranger to flatt’ry, a stranger to fear; Who scatter’d around wit and humour at will; Whose daily bons mots half a column might fill; A Scotchman, from pride and from prejudice free; 155 A scholar, yet surely no pedant was he. What pity, alas! that so lib’ral a mind Should so long be to news-paper essays confin’d; Who perhaps to the summit of science could soar, Yet content ‘if the table he set on a roar’; 160 Whose talents to fill any station were fit, Yet happy if Woodfall confess’d him a wit. Ye news-paper witlings! ye pert scribbling folks Who copied his squibs, and re-echoed his jokes; Ye tame imitators, ye servile herd, come, 165 Still follow your master, and visit his tomb: To deck it, bring with you festoons of the vine, And copious libations bestow on his shrine: Then strew all around it (you can do no less) Cross-readings, Ship-news, and Mistakes of the Press. 170 Merry Whitefoord, farewell! for thy sake I admit That a Scot may have humour, I had almost said wit: This debt to thy mem’ry I cannot refuse, ‘Thou best humour’d man with the worst humour’d muse.’
HERE Whitefoord lies back, and who can deny it, Though he lived happily, he is now a serious man; A rare mix of quirkiness, playfulness, and fun! He loved a good joke and enjoyed a clever pun; Whose temperament was generous, open, sincere; A stranger to flattery, a stranger to fear; Who scattered wit and humor around at will; Whose daily clever remarks could fill half a column; A Scot, unburdened by pride or prejudice; A scholar, yet certainly not a pedant. What a shame, alas! that such a generous mind Should be confined for so long to newspaper essays; Who might have soared to the heights of science, Yet was content if his table made a roar; Whose talents could grace any position, Yet was happy if Woodfall acknowledged him as a wit. You newspaper wits! you annoying scribblers Who copied his quips and echoed his jokes; You tame imitators, you servile crowd, come, Still follow your master and visit his tomb: To decorate it, bring festoons of wine, And pour generous libations at his shrine: Then scatter around it (you can do no less) Cross-readings, Ship-news, and Mistakes of the Press. Merry Whitefoord, farewell! for your sake I concede That a Scot may have humor, I almost said wit: This debt to your memory I cannot deny, ‘You were the most humorous man with the least humorous muse.’
SONG
INTENDED TO HAVE BEEN SUNG IN
‘SHE STOOPS TO CONQUER’
AH me! when shall I marry me? Lovers are plenty; but fail to relieve me: He, fond youth, that could carry me, Offers to love, but means to deceive me. But I will rally, and combat the ruiner: 5 Not a look, not a smile shall my passion discover: She that gives all to the false one pursuing her, Makes but a penitent, loses a lover.
Oh my! When will I get married? There are plenty of lovers, but none can help me: He, the charming young man, who could win me over, Claims to love me, but only intends to trick me. But I will stand strong and fight against the destroyer: 5 Not a glance, not a smile will show my feelings: She who gives everything to the deceitful one chasing her, Ends up with nothing but regret, losing a true lover.
TRANSLATION
CHASTE are their instincts, faithful is their fire, No foreign beauty tempts to false desire; The snow-white vesture, and the glittering crown, The simple plumage, or the glossy down Prompt not their loves:—the patriot bird pursues 5 His well acquainted tints, and kindred hues. Hence through their tribes no mix’d polluted flame, No monster-breed to mark the groves with shame; But the chaste blackbird, to its partner true, Thinks black alone is beauty’s favourite hue. 10 The nightingale, with mutual passion blest, Sings to its mate, and nightly charms the nest; While the dark owl to court its partner flies, And owns its offspring in their yellow eyes.
Pure are their instincts, loyal is their fire, No outside beauty lures to false desire; The snow-white garments and the shining crown, The simple feathers or the glossy down Don't inspire their loves:—the patriotic bird follows 5 Its familiar colors and related hues. So through their groups, no mixed polluted flame, No unnatural breed to shame the woods; But the faithful blackbird, true to its mate, Sees that black alone is beauty’s favorite color. 10 The nightingale, blessed with shared passion, Sings to its partner and charms the nest at night; While the dark owl courts its mate, Acknowledging its offspring in their yellow eyes.
THE HAUNCH OF VENISON
A POETICAL EPISTLE TO LORD
CLARE
THANKS, my Lord, for your venison, for finer or fatter Never rang’d in a forest, or smok’d in a platter; The haunch was a picture for painters to study, The fat was so white, and the lean was so ruddy. Though my stomach was sharp, I could scarce help regretting 5 To spoil such a delicate picture by eating; I had thoughts, in my chambers, to place it in view, To be shown to my friends as a piece of virtù; As in some Irish houses, where things are so so, One gammon of bacon hangs up for a show: 10 But for eating a rasher of what they take pride in, They’d as soon think of eating the pan it is fried in. But hold—let me pause—Don’t I hear you pronounce This tale of the bacon a damnable bounce? Well, suppose it a bounce—sure a poet may try, 15 By a bounce now and then, to get courage to fly. But, my Lord, it’s no bounce: I protest in my turn, It’s a truth—and your Lordship may ask Mr. Byrne. To go on with my tale—as I gaz’d on the haunch, I thought of a friend that was trusty and staunch; 20 So I cut it, and sent it to Reynolds undress’d, To paint it, or eat it, just as he lik’d best. Of the neck and the breast I had next to dispose; ’Twas a neck and a breast—that might rival M—r—’s: But in parting with these I was puzzled again, 25 With the how, and the who, and the where, and the when. There’s H—d, and C—y, and H—rth, and H—ff, I think they love venison—I know they love beef; There’s my countryman H—gg—ns—Oh! let him alone, For making a blunder, or picking a bone. 30 But hang it—to poets who seldom can eat, Your very good mutton’s a very good treat; Such dainties to them, their health it might hurt, It’s like sending them ruffles, when wanting a shirt. While thus I debated, in reverie centred, 35 An acquaintance, a friend as he call’d himself, enter’d; An under-bred, fine-spoken fellow was he, And he smil’d as he look’d at the venison and me. ‘What have we got here?—Why, this is good eating! Your own, I suppose—or is it in waiting?’ 40 ‘Why, whose should it be?’ cried I with a flounce, ‘I get these things often;’—but that was a bounce: ‘Some lords, my acquaintance, that settle the nation, Are pleas’d to be kind—but I hate ostentation.’ ‘If that be the case, then,’ cried he, very gay, 45 ‘I’m glad I have taken this house in my way. To-morrow you take a poor dinner with me; No words—I insist on’t—precisely at three: We’ll have Johnson, and Burke; all the wits will be there; My acquaintance is slight, or I’d ask my Lord Clare. 50 And now that I think on’t, as I am a sinner! We wanted this venison to make out the dinner. What say you—a pasty? it shall, and it must, And my wife, little Kitty, is famous for crust. Here, porter!—this venison with me to Mile-end; 55 No stirring—I beg—my dear friend—my dear friend! Thus snatching his hat, he brush’d off like the wind, And the porter and eatables follow’d behind. Left alone to reflect, having emptied my shelf, ‘And nobody with me at sea but myself’; 60 Though I could not help thinking my gentleman hasty, Yet Johnson, and Burke, and a good venison pasty, Were things that I never dislik’d in my life, Though clogg’d with a coxcomb, and Kitty his wife. So next day, in due splendour to make my approach, 65 I drove to his door in my own hackney coach. When come to the place where we all were to dine, (A chair-lumber’d closet just twelve feet by nine:) My friend bade me welcome, but struck me quite dumb, With tidings that Johnson and Burke would not come; 70 ‘For I knew it,’ he cried, ‘both eternally fail, The one with his speeches, and t’other with Thrale; But no matter, I’ll warrant we’ll make up the party With two full as clever, and ten times as hearty. The one is a Scotchman, the other a Jew, 75 They[’re] both of them merry and authors like you; The one writes the Snarler, the other the Scourge; Some think he writes Cinna—he owns to Panurge.’ While thus he describ’d them by trade, and by name, They enter’d and dinner was serv’d as they came. 80 At the top a fried liver and bacon were seen, At the bottom was tripe in a swinging tureen; At the sides there was spinach and pudding made hot; In the middle a place where the pasty—was not. Now, my Lord as for tripe, it’s my utter aversion, 85 And your bacon I hate like a Turk or a Persian; So there I sat stuck, like a horse in a pound, While the bacon and liver went merrily round. But what vex’d me most was that d—’d Scottish rogue, With his long-winded speeches, his smiles and his brogue; 90 And, ‘Madam,’ quoth he, ‘may this bit be my poison, A prettier dinner I never set eyes on; Pray a slice of your liver, though may I be curs’d, But I’ve eat of your tripe till I’m ready to burst.’ ‘The tripe,’ quoth the Jew, with his chocolate cheek, 95 ‘I could dine on this tripe seven days in the week: I like these here dinners so pretty and small; But your friend there, the Doctor, eats nothing at all.’ ‘O—Oh!’ quoth my friend, ‘he’ll come on in a trice, He’s keeping a corner for something that’s nice: 100 There’s a pasty’—‘A pasty!’ repeated the Jew, ‘I don’t care if I keep a corner for’t too.’ ‘What the de’il, mon, a pasty!’ re-echoed the Scot, ‘Though splitting, I’ll still keep a corner for thot.’ ‘We’ll all keep a corner,’ the lady cried out; 105 ‘We’ll all keep a corner,’ was echoed about. While thus we resolv’d, and the pasty delay’d, With look that quite petrified, enter’d the maid; A visage so sad, and so pale with affright, Wak’d Priam in drawing his curtains by night. 110 But we quickly found out, for who could mistake her? That she came with some terrible news from the baker: And so it fell out, for that negligent sloven Had shut out the pasty on shutting his oven Sad Philomel thus—but let similes drop— 115 And now that I think on’t, the story may stop. To be plain, my good Lord, it’s but labour misplac’d To send such good verses to one of your taste; You’ve got an odd something—a kind of discerning— A relish—a taste—sicken’d over by learning; 120 At least, it’s your temper, as very well known, That you think very slightly of all that’s your own: So, perhaps, in your habits of thinking amiss, You may make a mistake, and think slightly of this.
THANKS, my Lord, for your venison; nothing finer or fatter Has ever been hunted in a forest or served on a platter; The haunch was a sight for artists to admire, The fat was so white, and the lean was so red. Though I was quite hungry, I couldn't help but think About ruining such a delicate masterpiece by eating; I considered putting it in my chambers for display, To show to my friends as a piece of art; Like in some Irish homes, where they have things hung up, One piece of bacon is kept on show: But when it comes time to eat something they take pride in, They’d just as soon think of eating the pan it's cooked in. But wait—let me pause—don’t I hear you say This story about the bacon is just a tall tale? Well, if it is a tall tale—surely a poet can try, With a tall tale now and then, to gather the courage to soar. But, my Lord, it’s not a tall tale: I swear it’s true, And your Lordship can check with Mr. Byrne. To continue with my story—as I gazed at the haunch, I thought of a friend who was loyal and true; So I cut it and sent it to Reynolds unprepared, To paint it or eat it, just as he preferred. As for the neck and the breast, I had to decide; It was a neck and a breast that could rival M—r—’s: But parting with those left me puzzled again, About the how, the who, the where, and the when. There’s H—d, and C—y, and H—rth, and H—ff; I think they love venison—I know they love beef; There’s my countryman H—gg—ns—Oh! just leave him alone, For making a mistake, or picking a bone. But why complain? To poets who can rarely eat, Your very good mutton is quite a nice treat; Such delicacies might hurt their health, It’s like giving them ruffles when they need a shirt. While I was contemplating, lost in thought, An acquaintance, a friend as he called himself, walked in; He was a well-spoken, under-bred fellow, And he smiled as he looked at the venison and me. ‘What have we here?—This looks delicious! Yours, I suppose? Or is it being held for guests?’ ‘Why, whose could it be?’ I replied with a flourish, ‘I get these things all the time;’—but that was a stretch: ‘Some lords I know, who help run the country, Are kind enough to be generous—but I dislike show-off.’ ‘If that’s the case,’ he said, very cheerfully, ‘I’m glad I stopped by your place. Tomorrow, you must join me for a simple dinner; No arguing—I insist—precisely at three: We’ll have Johnson and Burke; all the smart crowd will be there; My circle is small, or I’d invite my Lord Clare. And now that I think of it, as I’m a sinner! We needed this venison to complete the meal. What do you say—a pasty? It will happen, it must, And my wife, little Kitty, is famous for her crust. Hey, porter! Take this venison to Mile End with me; No delay—please, my dear friend! He snatched up his hat and rushed out like the wind, With the porter and food trailing behind. Left alone to ponder, having cleared my shelf, ‘And nobody with me but myself;’ Though I couldn’t help but think my friend was a bit hasty, Still, Johnson, Burke, and a good venison pasty, Were things I’d never disliked in my life, Even if I had to deal with a fool and Kitty, his wife. So the next day, in full glamour, I made my way, I drove to his house in my own hackney coach. When I arrived at the place where we were to dine, (A cluttered little room just twelve feet by nine:) My friend welcomed me but left me speechless, With the news that Johnson and Burke wouldn’t be coming; ‘Because I knew it,’ he exclaimed, ‘they’re both always no-shows, One with his speeches, the other with Thrale; But no matter, we’ll surely find two just as clever, And ten times as hearty. One’s a Scotsman, the other a Jew, They’re both jolly and writers like you; One writes the Snarler, the other the Scourge; Some think he writes Cinna—he admits to Panurge.’ While he described them by their trade and their name, They arrived, and dinner was served as they came. At the top, there was fried liver and bacon on display, At the bottom, tripe in a swinging tureen; On the sides, there was spinach and warmed pudding; In the middle was a spot where the pasty was not. Now, my Lord, when it comes to tripe, it’s my absolute dislike, And your bacon I hate like a Turk or a Persian; So there I was, stuck, like a horse in a pen, While the bacon and liver went cheerfully around. But what annoyed me the most was that d—n Scottish rogue, With his long-winded speeches, his smiles, and his accent; And, ‘Madam,’ he said, ‘may this piece be my poison, I’ve never seen a nicer dinner; May I have a slice of your liver, though I ought to be cursed, But I’ve eaten so much of your tripe, I’m about to burst.’ ‘The tripe,’ said the Jew, with his chocolate-colored cheek, ‘I could dine on this tripe seven days a week: I love these little dinners that are pretty and small; But your friend, the Doctor, isn’t eating at all.’ ‘Oh—oh!’ said my friend, ‘he’ll join us shortly, He’s saving room for something nice: There’s a pasty—’ ‘A pasty!’ repeated the Jew, ‘I don’t mind saving some room for that too.’ ‘What the devil, man, a pasty!’ echoed the Scotsman, ‘Though I'm bursting, I’ll still save some room for that.’ ‘We’ll all save some room,’ the lady exclaimed; ‘We’ll all save some room,’ was echoed all around. As we decided, and the pasty was delayed, With a look that could freeze, in walked the maid; A visage so grim, and so pale with fright, Woke Priam by drawing his curtains at night. But we quickly realized, for who could mix it up? She came with some terrible news from the baker: And as it turned out, because of that careless fool Had shut the pasty out when closing his oven. Sad Philomel thus—but I’ll let the similes go— And now that I think about it, the story can stop. To be honest, my good Lord, it’s just wasted effort To send such fine verses to one of your taste; You’ve got a unique something—a kind of insight— A flavor—a taste—ruined by learning; At least, it’s known that your nature is such That you think very little of anything that’s yours: So, perhaps, in your way of thinking, you might miss And mistakenly think little of this.
EPITAPH ON THOMAS PARNELL
THIS tomb, inscrib’d to gentle Parnell’s name, May speak our gratitude, but not his fame. What heart but feels his sweetly-moral lay, That leads to truth through pleasure’s flowery way! Celestial themes confess’d his tuneful aid; 5 And Heaven, that lent him genius, was repaid. Needless to him the tribute we bestow— The transitory breath of fame below: More lasting rapture from his works shall rise, While Converts thank their poet in the skies. 10
THIS tomb, dedicated to gentle Parnell’s name, May express our gratitude, but not his fame. What heart doesn’t feel his sweetly moral verse, That leads to truth through pleasure’s flowery path! Heavenly themes acknowledged his musical touch; 5 And Heaven, which gifted him with genius, got its due. Our praise is unnecessary for him— The fleeting breath of fame down here: Longer-lasting joy from his works will emerge, While followers thank their poet in the skies. 10
THE CLOWN’S REPLY
JOHN TROTT was desired by two witty peers To tell them the reason why asses had ears? ‘An’t please you,’ quoth John, ‘I’m not given to letters, Nor dare I pretend to know more than my betters; Howe’er, from this time I shall ne’er see your graces, 5 As I hope to be saved! without thinking on asses.’
JOHN TROTT was asked by two clever nobles To explain why donkeys have ears? 'If it pleases you,' said John, 'I'm not one for letters, Nor would I pretend to know more than those who are better; However, from now on I’ll never see your grace, 5 As I hope to be saved! without thinking of donkeys.'
EPITAPH ON EDWARD PURDON
HERE lies poor Ned Purdon, from misery freed, Who long was a bookseller’s hack; He led such a damnable life in this world,— I don’t think he’ll wish to come back.
HERE lies poor Ned Purdon, finally at peace, Who was for a long time a bookseller's flunky; He had such a miserable life in this world— I doubt he’ll want to return.
EPILOGUE FOR MR. LEE LEWES
HOLD! Prompter, hold! a word before your nonsense; I’d speak a word or two, to ease my conscience. My pride forbids it ever should be said, My heels eclips’d the honours of my head; That I found humour in a piebald vest, 5 Or ever thought that jumping was a jest. (Takes off his mask.) Whence, and what art thou, visionary birth? Nature disowns, and reason scorns thy mirth, In thy black aspect every passion sleeps, The joy that dimples, and the woe that weeps. 10 How has thou fill’d the scene with all thy brood, Of fools pursuing, and of fools pursu’d! Whose ins and outs no ray of sense discloses, Whose only plot it is to break our noses; Whilst from below the trap-door Demons rise, 15 And from above the dangling deities; And shall I mix in this unhallow’d crew? May rosined lightning blast me, if I do! No—I will act, I’ll vindicate the stage: Shakespeare himself shall feel my tragic rage. 20 Off! off! vile trappings! a new passion reigns! The madd’ning monarch revels in my veins. Oh! for a Richard’s voice to catch the theme: ‘Give me another horse! bind up my wounds!—soft— ’twas but a dream.’ Aye, ’twas but a dream, for now there’s no retreating: 25 If I cease Harlequin, I cease from eating. ’Twas thus that Aesop’s stag, a creature blameless, Yet something vain, like one that shall be nameless, Once on the margin of a fountain stood, And cavill’d at his image in the flood. 30 ‘The deuce confound,’ he cries, ‘these drumstick shanks, They never have my gratitude nor thanks; They’re perfectly disgraceful! strike me dead! But for a head, yes, yes, I have a head. How piercing is that eye! how sleek that brow! 35 My horns! I’m told horns are the fashion now.’ Whilst thus he spoke, astonish’d, to his view, Near, and more near, the hounds and huntsmen drew. ‘Hoicks! hark forward!’ came thund’ring from behind, He bounds aloft, outstrips the fleeting wind: 40 He quits the woods, and tries the beaten ways; He starts, he pants, he takes the circling maze. At length his silly head, so priz’d before, Is taught his former folly to deplore; Whilst his strong limbs conspire to set him free, 45 And at one bound he saves himself,—like me. (Taking a jump through the stage door.)
STOP! Prompter, hold on! I need to say something before you keep going; I’d like to express a thought or two, to clear my conscience. My pride won’t allow it to be said, That my feet overshadow the honors on my head; That I found laughter in a silly costume, 5 Or even thought that jumping was a joke. (Takes off his mask.) Where are you from, and what are you, strange creation? Nature rejects, and reason mocks your joy, In your dark presence, every emotion rests, The joy that brings smiles, and the sorrow that weeps. 10 How have you filled the scene with all your crowd, Of fools chasing, and fools being chased! Whose ups and downs no sense can reveal, Whose only storyline is to get us hurt; While below the trap-door, monsters emerge, 15 And from above, dangling gods appear; And should I join this cursed group? May a lightning strike me if I do! No—I will act, I’ll defend the stage: Shakespeare himself shall feel my dramatic fury. 20 Away! Away! disgusting costumes! A new feeling takes over! The raging king is alive in my veins. Oh! for a Richard’s voice to pick up the theme: ‘Give me another horse! Bind up my wounds!—wait— it was just a dream.’ Yes, it was just a dream, for there’s no turning back now: 25 If I stop being Harlequin, I stop having food to eat. It was like the story of Aesop’s stag, an innocent creature, Yet a bit vain, like someone who shall remain nameless, Once stood on the edge of a fountain, And complained about his reflection in the water. 30 ‘Curse these skinny legs,’ he cries, ‘they deserve no gratitude or thanks; They’re completely shameful! Strike me down! But I do have a head, yes, I have a head. How piercing is that eye! How smooth that brow! 35 My horns! I’ve heard horns are in style now.’ While he spoke, astonished, to his surprise, Closer and closer, the hounds and hunters approached. ‘Hey! Forward!’ came a loud call from behind, He leaps up, outgunning the rushing wind: 40 He leaves the woods and takes the well-trodden paths; He starts, he pants, he takes the winding route. Finally, his foolish head, once so prized, Regrets his earlier vanity; While his strong legs work together to set him free, 45 And in one jump, he saves himself—just like I do. (Taking a jump through the stage door.)
EPILOGUE
INTENDED TO HAVE BEEN SPOKEN FOR
‘SHE STOOPS TO CONQUER’
Enter MRS. BULKLEY, who curtsies very low as beginning to speak. Then enter MISS CATLEY, who stands full before her, and curtsies to the audience.
Enter Mrs. Bulkeley, who curtsies very low as she starts to speak. Then enter Miss Catley, who stands facing her and curtsies to the audience.
MRS. BULKLEY.
Mrs. Bulkley.
HOLD, Ma’am, your pardon. What’s your business here?
HOLD, Ma'am, pardon me. What brings you here?
MISS CATLEY.
Ms. Catley.
The Epilogue.
The Afterword.
MRS. BULKLEY.
MRS. BULKLEY.
The Epilogue?
The Afterword?
MISS CATLEY.
Ms. Catley.
Yes, the Epilogue, my dear.
Yes, the Epilogue, my friend.
MRS. BULKLEY.
MRS. BULKLEY.
Sure you mistake, Ma’am. The Epilogue, I bring it.
Sure you’re mistaken, Ma’am. I’ll bring the Epilogue.
MISS CATLEY.
Miss Catley.
Excuse me, Ma’am. The Author bid me sing it.
Excuse me, Ma’am. The Author asked me to sing it.
Recitative.
Spoken dialogue.
Ye beaux and belles, that form this splendid ring, 5 Suspend your conversation while I sing.
You handsome men and beautiful women, who make up this lovely circle, 5 Pause your chatting while I sing.
MRS. BULKLEY.
MRS. BULKLEY.
MISS CATLEY.
Miss Catley.
What if we leave it to the House?
What if we let the House decide?
MRS. BULKLEY.
Mrs. Bulkley.
The House!—Agreed.
The House!—Deal.
MISS CATLEY.
Miss Catley.
Agreed.
Agreed.
MRS. BULKLEY.
MRS. BULKLEY.
And she, whose party’s largest, shall proceed. And first I hope, you’ll readily agree I’ve all the critics and the wits for me. They, I am sure, will answer my commands: 15 Ye candid-judging few, hold up your hands. What! no return? I find too late, I fear, That modern judges seldom enter here.
And she whose group is the biggest will go first. And I hope you’ll all easily agree I’ve got all the critics and the clever people on my side. I’m sure they will follow my orders: You few who judge fairly, raise your hands. What? No response? I realize too late, I’m afraid, That today’s judges rarely come around here.
MISS CATLEY.
Miss Catley.
I’m for a different set.—Old men, whose trade is Still to gallant and dangle with the ladies;— 20
I’m for a different group.—Old men, whose job is Still to flirt and show off for the ladies;— 20
Recitative.
Spoken song.
Who mump their passion, and who, grimly smiling, Still thus address the fair with voice beguiling:—
Who hide their passion, and who, with a grim smile, Still speak to the beautiful with an enticing voice:—
Air—Cotillon.
Air—Dance party.
MRS. BULKLEY.
MRS. BULKLEY.
Let all the old pay homage to your merit; Give me the young, the gay, the men of spirit. 30 Ye travell’d tribe, ye macaroni train, Of French friseurs, and nosegays, justly vain, Who take a trip to Paris once a year To dress, and look like awkward Frenchmen here, Lend me your hands.—Oh! fatal news to tell: 35 Their hands are only lent to the Heinel.
Let all the old people recognize your talent; Give me the young, the fun, the spirited men. 30 You well-traveled group, you macaroni crew, Of French hairstylists and fancy flowers, it's true, Who make a trip to Paris once a year To get dressed up and look like clumsy Frenchmen here, Lend me your hands.—Oh! terrible news to share: 35 Their hands are only given to the Heinel.
MISS CATLEY.
Miss Catley.
Ay, take your travellers, travellers indeed! Give me my bonny Scot, that travels from the Tweed. Where are the chiels? Ah! Ah, I well discern The smiling looks of each bewitching bairn. 40
Oh, bring your travelers, travelers for sure! I want my handsome Scot, who comes from the Tweed. Where are the guys? Ah! Ah, I can see clearly The smiling faces of each charming kid. 40
Air—A bonny young lad is my Jockey.
Air—My Jockey is a handsome young guy.
I’ll sing to amuse you by night and by day, And be unco merry when you are but gay; When you with your bagpipes are ready to play, My voice shall be ready to carol away With Sandy, and Sawney, and Jockey 45 With Sawney, and Jarvie, and Jockey.
I’ll sing to entertain you day and night, And be really cheerful when you’re feeling light; When you have your bagpipes and are set to play, My voice will be ready to sing along all day With Sandy, and Sawney, and Jockey With Sawney, and Jarvie, and Jockey.
MRS. BULKLEY.
Mrs. Bulkley.
Ye gamesters, who, so eager in pursuit, Make but of all your fortune one va toute; Ye jockey tribe, whose stock of words are few, ‘I hold the odds.—Done, done, with you, with you;’ 50 Ye barristers, so fluent with grimace, ‘My Lord,—your Lordship misconceives the case;’ Doctors, who cough and answer every misfortuner, ‘I wish I’d been called in a little sooner:’ Assist my cause with hands and voices hearty; 55 Come, end the contest here, and aid my party.
You gamblers, who, so eager in your pursuit, Make all your fortune one big bet; You jockeys, whose vocabulary is limited, 'I hold the odds. —Done, done, with you, with you;’ You lawyers, so smooth with your faces, 'My Lord,—your Lordship misunderstands the case;’ Doctors, who cough and respond to every misfortune, 'I wish I’d been called in a little sooner:' Help my cause with your hearty hands and voices; Come, let’s end the contest here, and support my side.
MISS CATLEY.
Air—Ballinamony.
MISS CATLEY.
Air—Ballinamony.
Ye brave Irish lads, hark away to the crack, Assist me, I pray, in this woful attack; For sure I don’t wrong you, you seldom are slack, When the ladies are calling, to blush and hang back; 60 For you’re always polite and attentive, Still to amuse us inventive, And death is your only preventive: Your hands and your voices for me.
You brave Irish guys, listen up to the fun, Help me, please, in this terrible run; I don’t mean to offend you, you hardly ever shun, When the ladies are calling, to blush and run; 60 Because you’re always polite and caring, Always coming up with something daring, And death is the only thing that keeps you from sharing: Your hands and your voices for me.
MRS. BULKLEY.
MRS. BULKLEY.
Well, Madam, what if, after all this sparring, 65 We both agree, like friends, to end our jarring?
Well, Madam, what if, after all this back-and-forth, 65 We both agree, like friends, to stop our fighting?
MISS CATLEY.
Ms. Catley.
And that our friendship may remain unbroken, What if we leave the Epilogue unspoken?
And to keep our friendship strong and intact, What if we don't say the Epilogue out loud?
MRS. BULKLEY.
MRS. BULKLEY.
Agreed.
Agreed.
MISS CATLEY.
Ms. Catley.
Agreed.
Agreed.
MRS. BULKLEY.
MRS. BULKLEY.
And now with late repentance, Un-epilogued the Poet waits his sentence. 70 Condemn the stubborn fool who can’t submit To thrive by flattery, though he starves by wit. (Exeunt.)
And now with late regret, Unfinished, the Poet waits for his fate. 70 Condemn the stubborn fool who can't give in To prosper through flattery, even if he suffers from wit. (Exeunt.)
EPILOGUE
INTENDED TO HAVE BEEN SPOKEN FOR
‘SHE STOOPS TO CONQUER’
THERE is a place, so Ariosto sings, A treasury for lost and missing things; Lost human wits have places assign’d them, And they, who lose their senses, there may find them. But where’s this place, this storehouse of the age? 5 The Moon, says he:—but I affirm the Stage: At least in many things, I think, I see His lunar, and our mimic world agree. Both shine at night, for, but at Foote’s alone, We scarce exhibit till the sun goes down. 10 Both prone to change, no settled limits fix, And sure the folks of both are lunatics. But in this parallel my best pretence is, That mortals visit both to find their senses. To this strange spot, Rakes, Macaronies, Cits 15 Come thronging to collect their scatter’d wits. The gay coquette, who ogles all the day, Comes here at night, and goes a prude away. Hither the affected city dame advancing, Who sighs for operas, and dotes on dancing, 20 Taught by our art her ridicule to pause on, Quits the Ballet, and calls for Nancy Dawson. The Gamester too, whose wit’s all high or low, Oft risks his fortune on one desperate throw, Comes here to saunter, having made his bets, 25 Finds his lost senses out, and pay his debts. The Mohawk too—with angry phrases stored, As ‘D— —, Sir,’ and ‘Sir, I wear a sword’; Here lesson’d for a while, and hence retreating, Goes out, affronts his man, and takes a beating. 30 Here come the sons of scandal and of news, But find no sense—for they had none to lose. Of all the tribe here wanting an adviser Our Author’s the least likely to grow wiser; Has he not seen how you your favour place, 35 On sentimental Queens and Lords in lace? Without a star, a coronet or garter, How can the piece expect or hope for quarter? No high-life scenes, no sentiment:—the creature Still stoops among the low to copy nature. 40 Yes, he’s far gone:—and yet some pity fix, The English laws forbid to punish lunatics.
THERE’s a place, as Ariosto sings, A treasure trove for lost and missing things; Lost human minds have their assigned spots, And those who lose their senses can find them there. But where is this place, this warehouse of the age? 5 The Moon, he says—but I argue the Stage: At least in many respects, it seems to me His lunar and our mimic world agree. Both shine at night, except for Foote’s alone, We hardly show up until the sun goes down. 10 Both are prone to change, with no fixed limits, And it's clear that people in both are lunatics. But in this comparison, my best point is, That mortals visit both to regain their senses. To this strange spot, Rakes, Macaronies, Cits 15 Come streaming in to gather their scattered wits. The flirty coquette, who flirts all day, Comes here at night and leaves a prude away. Here comes the trendy city dame advancing, Who sighs for operas and loves to go dancing, 20 Taught by our art to pause and reflect, Quits the Ballet and calls for Nancy Dawson. The Gambler too, whose wit is all high or low, Often bets his fortune on one desperate throw, Comes here to stroll, having placed his bets, 25 Finds his lost senses out, and pays his debts. The Mohawk too—with angry phrases ready, Like ‘D—n, Sir,’ and ‘Sir, I wear a sword’; Here schooled for a while, then retreating, Goes out, confronts his man, and takes a beating. 30 Here come the gossipers and news seekers, But find no sense—for they had none to lose. Of all the crowd here seeking advice, Our Author's the least likely to get wise; Has he not seen how you place your favor, 35 On sentimental Queens and Lords in lace? Without a star, a coronet, or garter, How can the piece expect or hope for mercy? No high-life scenes, no sentiment:—the creature Still stoops among the low to copy nature. 40 Yes, he’s pretty far gone:—and yet let some pity remain, The English laws forbid punishing lunatics.
THE CAPTIVITY
AN
ORATORIO
AN
ORATORIO
THE PERSONS.
THE PEOPLE.
FIRST ISRAELITISH PROPHET. SECOND ISRAELITISH PROPHET. ISRAELITISH WOMAN. FIRST CHALDEAN PRIEST. SECOND CHALDEAN PRIEST. CHALDEAN WOMAN. CHORUS OF YOUTHS AND VIRGINS. |
SCENE—The Banks of the River Euphrates, near
Babylon.
SCENE—The banks of the Euphrates River, close to Babylon.
YE captive tribes, that hourly work and weep Where flows Euphrates murmuring to the deep, Suspend awhile the task, the tear suspend, And turn to God, your Father and your Friend. Insulted, chain’d, and all the world a foe, 5 Our God alone is all we boast below.
You captive tribes, who work and weep every hour Where the Euphrates flows into the deep, Take a moment to pause from your work, dry your tears, And turn to God, your Father and your Friend. Insulted, chained, with the whole world against you, Our God alone is all we have to boast about.
FIRST PROPHET.
AIR.
FIRST PROPHET.
AIR.
Our God is all we boast below, To him we turn our eyes; And every added weight of woe Shall make our homage rise. 10
Our God is all we brag about here, To Him we look with hope; And every extra burden we bear Will lift our respect higher. 10
SECOND PROPHET.
SECOND PROPHET.
And though no temple richly drest, Nor sacrifice is here; We’ll make his temple in our breast, And offer up a tear. [The first stanza repeated by the Chorus.
And even if there’s no grand temple, Or sacrifice here; We’ll create his temple in our hearts, And shed a tear. [The first stanza repeated by the Chorus.
That strain once more; it bids remembrance rise, 15 And brings my long-lost country to mine eyes. Ye fields of Sharon, dress’d in flow’ry pride, Ye plains where Jordan rolls its glassy tide, Ye hills of Lebanon, with cedars crown’d, Ye Gilead groves, that fling perfumes around, 20 These hills how sweet! Those plains how wond’rous fair, But sweeter still, when Heaven was with us there!
That melody again; it calls back memories, 15 And brings my long-lost homeland into view. O fields of Sharon, adorned in floral beauty, O plains where Jordan flows like glass, O hills of Lebanon, crowned with cedars, O Gilead groves, that spread delightful scents, 20 How sweet are these hills! How amazing are those plains, But even sweeter when Heaven was with us there!
AIR.
AIR.
O Memory, thou fond deceiver, Still importunate and vain; To former joys recurring ever, 25 And turning all the past to pain; Hence intruder, most distressing, Seek the happy and the free: The wretch who wants each other blessing, Ever wants a friend in thee. 30
O Memory, you sweet deceiver, Always needy and so vain; Constantly recalling past joys, 25 Yet turning everything to pain; So go away, you most troubling guest, Look for the happy and the free: The miserable who lacks other blessings, Always seeks a friend in you. 30
FIRST PROPHET.
RECITATIVE.
FIRST PROPHET.
NARRATION.
Yet, why complain? What, though by bonds confin’d, Should bonds repress the vigour of the mind? Have we not cause for triumph when we see Ourselves alone from idol-worship free? Are not this very morn those feasts begun? 35 Where prostrate error hails the rising sun? Do not our tyrant lords this day ordain For superstitious rites and mirth profane? And should we mourn? Should coward virtue fly, When impious folly rears her front on high? 40 No; rather let us triumph still the more, And as our fortune sinks, our wishes soar.
Yet, why complain? What if we're bound by chains, Should those chains hold back our mind's energy? Don't we have a reason to celebrate when we see That we're free from idol-worship? Aren't those feasts starting right now? 35 Where misguided beliefs greet the rising sun? Aren't our oppressive leaders planning today For superstitious rituals and useless fun? And should we be sad? Should brave virtue retreat, When disrespectful nonsense stands tall? 40 No; instead, let us celebrate even more, And as our luck declines, our hopes rise higher.
AIR.
AIR.
The triumphs that on vice attend Shall ever in confusion end; The good man suffers but to gain, 45 And every virtue springs from pain: As aromatic plants bestow No spicy fragrance while they grow; But crush’d, or trodden to the ground, Diffuse their balmy sweets around. 50
The victories that come with vice Will always end in chaos; The good person suffers but to improve, And every virtue comes from pain: Just like aromatic plants don’t release Their spicy fragrance while they’re growing; But when crushed or trodden down, They spread their sweet scents all around.
SECOND PROPHET.
RECITATIVE.
SECOND PROPHET.
NARRATION.
But hush, my sons, our tyrant lords are near; The sounds of barb’rous pleasure strike mine ear; Triumphant music floats along the vale; Near, nearer still, it gathers on the gale; The growing sound their swift approach declares;— 55 Desist, my sons, nor mix the strain with theirs.
But quiet down, my sons, our tyrant rulers are close; The sounds of cruel revelry reach my ears; Triumphant music flows through the valley; Closer, closer still, it carries on the breeze; The increasing noise signals their rapid approach; — Stop, my sons, and don’t mix our tune with theirs.
Enter CHALDEAN PRIESTS attended.
FIRST PRIEST.
AIR.
Enter CHALDEAN PRIESTS attended.
FIRST PRIEST.
AIR.
Come on, my companions, the triumph display; Let rapture the minutes employ; The sun calls us out on this festival day, And our monarch partakes in the joy. 60
Come on, friends, let’s celebrate our victory; Let joy fill our time; The sun is shining for us on this festive day, And our king is sharing in the happiness. 60
SECOND PRIEST.
SECOND PRIEST.
Like the sun, our great monarch all rapture supplies, Both similar blessings bestow; The sun with his splendour illumines the skies, And our monarch enlivens below.
Like the sun, our great king brings joy to all, Both granting similar gifts; The sun with his brilliance lights up the sky, And our king brings life to the earth.
A CHALDEAN WOMAN.
AIR.
A Chaldean woman.
Air.
Haste, ye sprightly sons of pleasure; 65 Love presents the fairest treasure, Leave all other joys for me.
Hurry, you lively enjoyers of life; Love offers the greatest gift, Leave all other pleasures for me.
A CHALDEAN ATTENDANT.
A Chaldean helper.
Or rather, Love’s delights despising, Haste to raptures ever rising Wine shall bless the brave and free. 70
Or rather, instead of loving, Hurry to the joys that are always climbing Wine will bless the bold and free. 70
FIRST PRIEST.
FIRST PRIEST.
Wine and beauty thus inviting, Each to different joys exciting, Whither shall my choice incline?
Wine and beauty are so inviting, Each offering different joys, Which way should I lean?
SECOND PRIEST.
SECOND PRIEST.
I’ll waste no longer thought in choosing; But, neither this nor that refusing, 75 I’ll make them both together mine.
I won’t spend any more time deciding; But, neither wanting this nor that, I’ll claim them both as mine.
RECITATIVE.
RECITATIVE.
But whence, when joy should brighten o’er the land, This sullen gloom in Judah’s captive band? Ye sons of Judah, why the lute unstrung? Or why those harps on yonder willows hung? 80 Come, take the lyre, and pour the strain along, The day demands it; sing us Sion’s song. Dismiss your griefs, and join our warbling choir, For who like you can wake the sleeping lyre?
But where, when joy should light up the land, Is this heavy gloom among Judah's captive group? Hey, sons of Judah, why is the lute silent? Or why are those harps hanging on the willows over there? Come, grab the lyre, and let the music flow, This day calls for it; sing us Zion's song. Set aside your sorrows, and join our singing group, Because who can wake the sleeping lyre like you?
SECOND PROPHET.
SECOND PROPHET.
Bow’d down with chains, the scorn of all mankind, 85 To want, to toil, and every ill consign’d, Is this a time to bid us raise the strain, Or mix in rites that Heaven regards with pain? No, never! May this hand forget each art That speeds the power of music to the heart, 90 Ere I forget the land that gave me birth, Or join with sounds profane its sacred mirth!
Bowed down with chains, the scorn of all humanity, To want, to struggle, and every hardship assigned, Is this a time to urge us to sing, Or participate in ceremonies that Heaven sees as painful? No, never! May this hand forget every skill That brings the power of music to the heart, Before I forget the land that gave me birth, Or mix its sacred joy with unholy sounds!
FIRST PRIEST.
FIRST PRIEST.
Insulting slaves! If gentler methods fail, The whips and angry tortures shall prevail. [Exeunt Chaldeans
Insulting slaves! If softer methods don’t work, The whips and painful tortures will take over. [Exeunt Chaldeans
FIRST PROPHET.
FIRST PROPHET.
Why, let them come, one good remains to cheer; 95 We fear the Lord, and know no other fear.
Why, let them come, there's one good thing to lift our spirits; We fear the Lord, and have no other fears.
CHORUS.
CHORUS.
Can whips or tortures hurt the mind On God’s supporting breast reclin’d? Stand fast, and let our tyrants see That fortitude is victory. [Exeunt.
Can whips or torture harm the mind While resting on God's supportive breast? Stand strong, and let our oppressors see That resilience is victory. [Exeunt.
ACT II.
Scene as before. CHORUS OF ISRAELITES.
ACT II.
Scene as before. CHORUS OF ISRAELITES.
O PEACE of mind, angelic guest! Thou soft companion of the breast! Dispense thy balmy store. Wing all our thoughts to reach the skies, Till earth, receding from our eyes, 5 Shall vanish as we soar.
O peace of mind, heavenly friend! You gentle comfort of the heart! Share your soothing presence. Lift all our thoughts to touch the skies, Until earth, fading from our sight, 5 Disappears as we rise.
FIRST PRIEST.
RECITATIVE.
FIRST PRIEST.
RECITATIVE.
No more! Too long has justice been delay’d, The king’s commands must fully be obey’d; Compliance with his will your peace secures, Praise but our gods, and every good is yours. 10 But if, rebellious to his high command, You spurn the favours offer’d from his hand, Think, timely think, what terrors are behind; Reflect, nor tempt to rage the royal mind.
No more! Justice has been delayed for too long, The king's orders must be fully obeyed; Following his wishes ensures your peace, Just praise our gods, and all good things are yours. But if you rebel against his high command, And reject the favors offered from his hand, Think, think carefully about the dangers that await; Consider this, and don't push the royal anger.
SECOND PRIEST.
AIR.
SECOND PRIEST.
TUNE.
Fierce is the whirlwind howling 15 O’er Afric’s sandy plain, And fierce the tempest rolling Along the furrow’d main: But storms that fly, To rend the sky, 20 Every ill presaging, Less dreadful show To worlds below Than angry monarch’s raging.
The wind howls fiercely 15 Over Africa's sandy plains, And the storm rolls violently Along the choppy seas: But storms that come, To tear the sky, 20 Every bad omen bringing, Are less frightening To the worlds below Than the rage of an angry king.
![[Illustration: ]](images/autograph.jpg)
GOLDSMITH’S AUTOGRAPH
(Stanzas from ‘The Captivity’)
GOLDSMITH’S AUTOGRAPH
(Stanzas from ‘The Captivity’)
ISRAELITISH WOMAN.
RECITATIVE.
ISRAELITE WOMAN.
RECITATIVE.
Ah, me! What angry terrors round us grow; 25 How shrinks my soul to meet the threaten’d blow! Ye prophets, skill’d in Heaven’s eternal truth, Forgive my sex’s fears, forgive my youth! If, shrinking thus, when frowning power appears, I wish for life, and yield me to my fears. 30 Let us one hour, one little hour obey; To-morrow’s tears may wash our stains away.
Oh, woe is me! What fierce fears surround us; How my soul shrinks at the impending blow! You prophets, wise in Heaven's eternal truth, Forgive my gender's fears, forgive my youth! If, shrinking like this when threatening power shows up, I long for life and give in to my fears. Let us obey for just one hour, one tiny hour; Tomorrow's tears might wash our stains away.
AIR.
Air.
To the last moment of his breath On hope the wretch relies; And e’en the pang preceding death 35 Bids expectation rise. Hope, like the gleaming taper’s light, Adorns and cheers our way; And still, as darker grows the night, Emits a brighter ray. 40
Until the very last moment of his life, The miserable person holds onto hope; And even the pain right before death Causes hope to rise. Hope, like the light of a flickering candle, Brightens and lifts our path; And as the night grows darker, It shines even brighter.
SECOND PRIEST. RECITATIVE.
SECOND PRIEST. SPEECH.
Why this delay? At length for joy prepare; I read your looks, and see compliance there. Come on, and bid the warbling rapture rise, Our monarch’s fame the noblest theme supplies. Begin, ye captive bands, and strike the lyre, 45 The time, the theme, the place, and all conspire.
Why the hold-up? Finally get ready for joy; I see your expressions and notice your agreement. Come on, and let the joyful music soar, Our king’s glory is the best theme for sure. Start, you captive groups, and play the lyre, 45 The moment, the subject, the setting, all align.
CHALDEAN WOMAN.
AIR.
CHALDEAN WOMAN.
AIR.
See the ruddy morning smiling, Hear the grove to bliss beguiling; Zephyrs through the woodland playing, Streams along the valley straying. 50
Look at the rosy morning smiling, Listen to the grove enchanting; Gentle breezes through the woods playing, Streams wandering along the valley. 50
FIRST PRIEST.
FIRST PRIEST.
While these a constant revel keep, Shall Reason only teach to weep? Hence, intruder! We’ll pursue Nature, a better guide than you.
While these constantly party, Should Reason only tell us to cry? Get out of here, intruder! We'll follow Nature, a better guide than you.
SECOND PRIEST.
SECOND PRIEST.
Every moment, as it flows, 55 Some peculiar pleasure owes; Then let us, providently wise, Seize the debtor as it flies. Think not to-morrow can repay The pleasures that we lose to-day; 60 To-morrow’s most unbounded store Can but pay its proper score.
Every moment, as it passes, Brings some special pleasure with it; So let’s be smart and wise, Capture the moment as it flies. Don’t think tomorrow can make up For the joys we miss today; Tomorrow’s endless supply Can only settle its own debt.
FIRST PRIEST.
RECITATIVE.
FIRST PRIEST.
RECITATIVE.
But hush! See, foremost of the captive choir, The master-prophet grasps his full-ton’d lyre. Mark where he sits, with executing art, 65 Feels for each tone, and speeds it to the heart; See how prophetic rapture fills his form, Awful as clouds that nurse the growing storm; And now his voice, accordant to the string, Prepares our monarch’s victories to sing. 70
But shh! Look, at the front of the captured choir, The master-prophet holds his well-tuned lyre. Notice where he sits, skillfully playing, Searching for each note, and sending it straight to the heart; Watch how prophetic excitement fills his being, Fearsome like clouds that gather before a storm; And now his voice, in harmony with the strings, Gets ready to sing about our leader's victories.
FIRST PROPHET.
AIR.
FIRST PROPHET.
AIR.
From north, from south, from east, from west, Conspiring nations come; Tremble thou vice-polluted breast; Blasphemers, all be dumb. The tempest gathers all around, 75 On Babylon it lies; Down with her! down—down to the ground; She sinks, she groans, she dies.
From the north, from the south, from the east, from the west, Nations plot together; Tremble you, corrupt heart; Blasphemers, be silent. The storm is closing in, It’s bearing down on Babylon; Bring her down! Bring her down—down to the ground; She falls, she aches, she perishes.
SECOND PROPHET.
SECOND PROPHET.
Down with her, Lord, to lick the dust, Ere yonder setting sun; 80 Serve her as she hath served the just! ’Tis fixed—it shall be done.
Down with her, Lord, to lick the dust, Before that setting sun; 80 Treat her as she has treated the just! It’s settled—it will be done.
FIRST PRIEST.
RECITATIVE.
FIRST PRIEST.
NARRATIVE.
No more! When slaves thus insolent presume, The king himself shall judge, and fix their doom. Unthinking wretches! have not you, and all, 85 Beheld our power in Zedekiah’s fall? To yonder gloomy dungeon turn your eyes; See where dethron’d your captive monarch lies, Depriv’d of sight and rankling in his chain; See where he mourns his friends and children slain. 90 Yet know, ye slaves, that still remain behind More ponderous chains, and dungeons more confin’d.
No more! When slaves get so bold, The king himself will judge and decide their fate. Unthinking fools! haven’t you all Seen our strength in Zedekiah’s downfall? Look over to that dark dungeon; See where your dethroned king lies captive, Blind and suffering in his chains; See how he grieves for his slain friends and children. Yet know, you slaves, that there are still Heavier chains and even tighter dungeons ahead.
CHORUS OF ALL.
ALL CHORUS.
Arise, all potent ruler, rise, And vindicate thy people’s cause; Till every tongue in every land 95 Shall offer up unfeign’d applause. [Exeunt.
Rise, all-powerful ruler, rise, And defend your people's cause; Until every tongue in every land 95 Shall give sincere applause. [Exeunt.
ACT III.
Scene as before.
FIRST PRIEST.
RECITATIVE.
ACT III.
Scene remains the same.
FIRST PRIEST.
RECITATIVE.
YES, my companions, Heaven’s decrees are past, And our fix’d empire shall for ever last; In vain the madd’ning prophet threatens woe, In vain rebellion aims her secret blow; Still shall our fame and growing power be spread, 5 And still our vengeance crush the traitor’s head.
YES, my friends, Heaven’s will is done, And our established empire will last forever; The raging prophet's threats are useless, Rebellion’s hidden strikes are futile; Our fame and growing power will continue to spread, And our vengeance will still crush the traitor’s head.
AIR.
Air.
Coeval with man Our empire began, And never shall fail Till ruin shakes all; 10 When ruin shakes all, Then shall Babylon fall.
Our empire started at the same time as humanity, and it will never fail until everything is in ruins; 10 When everything is in ruins, then Babylon will fall.
FIRST PROPHET.
RECITATIVE.
FIRST PROPHET.
NARRATIVE.
’Tis thus that pride triumphant rears the head, A little while, and all their power is fled; But ha! what means yon sadly plaintive train, 15 That this way slowly bend along the plain? And now, methinks, to yonder bank they bear A palled corse, and rest the body there. Alas! too well mine eyes indignant trace The last remains of Judah’s royal race: 20 Our monarch falls, and now our fears are o’er, Unhappy Zedekiah is no more!
'Tis thus that pride proudly lifts its head, For a little while, and then all their power is gone; But wait! What does that sadly mournful group mean, That slowly makes its way along the plain? And now, I think, they carry a pale body And rest it there by the bank. Alas! my eyes can clearly see The last remnants of Judah’s royal family: Our king has fallen, and now our fears are over, Unlucky Zedekiah is no more!
AIR.
Air.
Ye wretches who, by fortune’s hate, In want and sorrow groan; Come ponder his severer fate, 25 And learn to bless your own. You vain, whom youth and pleasure guide, Awhile the bliss suspend; Like yours, his life began in pride, Like his, your lives shall end. 30
You miserable people who, by the hatred of fate, Groan in need and sorrow; Come consider his harsher fate, And learn to be grateful for your own. You vain ones, led by youth and pleasure, Pause your bliss for a moment; Like yours, his life started in pride, Like his, your lives will end.
SECOND PROPHET.
RECITATIVE.
SECOND PROPHET.
RECITATIVE.
Behold his wretched corse with sorrow worn, His squalid limbs with pond’rous fetters torn; Those eyeless orbs that shock with ghastly glare, Those ill-becoming rags—that matted hair! And shall not Heaven for this its terrors show, 35 Grasp the red bolt, and lay the guilty low? How long, how long, Almighty God of all, Shall wrath vindictive threaten ere it fall!
Look at his miserable body, worn with grief, His filthy limbs torn by heavy chains; Those eyeless sockets that horrify with a haunted stare, Those ragged clothes— that tangled hair! And won't Heaven reveal its terrors for this, Grasp the lightning bolt, and bring the guilty down? How long, how long, Almighty God of everything, Will vengeful wrath threaten before it strikes?
ISRAELITISH WOMAN.
AIR.
ISRAELITE WOMAN.
AIR.
As panting flies the hunted hind, Where brooks refreshing stray; 40 And rivers through the valley wind, That stop the hunter’s way: Thus we, O Lord, alike distrest, For streams of mercy long; Those streams which cheer the sore opprest, 45 And overwhelm the strong.
As panting flies the hunted deer, Where cool streams wander; And rivers meander through the valley, That block the hunter’s path: So we, O Lord, equally distressed, Yearn for streams of mercy; Those streams that uplift the deeply troubled, And overpower the strong.
FIRST PROPHET.
RECITATIVE.
FIRST PROPHET.
SPEECH.
But, whence that shout? Good heavens! amazement all! See yonder tower just nodding to the fall: See where an army covers all the ground, Saps the strong wall, and pours destruction round; 50 The ruin smokes, destruction pours along; How low the great, how feeble are the strong! The foe prevails, the lofty walls recline— O God of hosts, the victory is thine!
But where did that shout come from? Good grief! Everyone is amazed! Look at that tower about to fall: See how an army covers the ground, Weakening the strong wall and spreading destruction everywhere; The ruins are smoking, destruction is everywhere; How lowly the great are, how weak the powerful! The enemy is winning, the tall walls are collapsing— Oh God of hosts, the victory is yours!
CHORUS OF ISRAELITES.
ISRAELITE CHORUS.
Down with them, Lord, to lick the dust; 55 Thy vengeance be begun: Serve them as they have serv’d the just, And let thy will be done.
Bring them down, Lord, to lick the dust; 55 Start your vengeance now: Treat them as they have treated the just, And let your will be done.
FIRST PRIEST.
RECITATIVE.
FIRST PRIEST.
RECITATIVE.
All, all is lost. The Syrian army fails, Cyrus, the conqueror of the world, prevails, 60 The ruin smokes, the torrent pours along; How low the proud, how feeble are the strong! Save us, O Lord! to thee, though late, we pray, And give repentance but an hour’s delay.
Everything is lost. The Syrian army is defeated, Cyrus, the conqueror of the world, wins, 60 The ruins smolder, the flood rushes by; How low the proud, how weak the strong! Save us, O Lord! To you, though late, we pray, And grant us even an hour's delay for repentance.
FIRST AND SECOND PRIEST.
AIR.
FIRST AND SECOND PRIEST.
AIR.
Thrice happy, who in happy hour 65 To Heaven their praise bestow, And own his all-consuming power Before they feel the blow!
Three times happy are those who in their joyful moments 65 Give praise to Heaven, And acknowledge his all-consuming power Before they experience the impact!
FIRST PROPHET.
RECITATIVE.
FIRST PROPHET.
NARRATION.
Now, now’s our time! ye wretches bold and blind, Brave but to God, and cowards to mankind, 70 Too late you seek that power unsought before, Your wealth, your pride, your kingdom, are no more.
Now, now is our time! you bold and blind wretches, Brave only to God, and cowards to people, 70 It’s too late to seek the power you didn’t want before, Your wealth, your pride, your kingdom, are gone.
AIR.
Air.
O Lucifer, thou son of morn, Alike of Heaven and man the foe; Heaven, men, and all, 75 Now press thy fall, And sink thee lowest of the low.
O Lucifer, you morning star, Enemy of both Heaven and humanity; Heaven, people, and everything, 75 Now push for your downfall, And bring you to the lowest of the low.
FIRST PROPHET.
FIRST PROPHET.
O Babylon, how art thou fallen! Thy fall more dreadful from delay! Thy streets forlorn 80 To wilds shall turn, Where toads shall pant, and vultures prey.
O Babylon, how have you fallen! Your fall is even more terrible because of the delay! Your streets, once lively, 80 will turn to wastelands, Where toads will gasp for breath, and vultures will feed.
SECOND PROPHET.
RECITATIVE.
SECOND PROPHET.
NARRATIVE.
Such be her fate. But listen! from afar The clarion’s note proclaims the finish’d war! Cyrus, our great restorer, is at hand, 85 And this way leads his formidable band. Give, give your songs of Sion to the wind, And hail the benefactor of mankind: He comes pursuant to divine decree, To chain the strong, and set the captive free. 90
Such is her fate. But listen! From a distance, the horn's call announces the end of the war! Cyrus, our great restorer, is here, and this way comes his powerful group. Send your songs of Zion into the air, and welcome the benefactor of humanity: He arrives according to divine order, to bind the strong and free the captive.
CHORUS OF YOUTHS.
GROUP OF YOUNG PEOPLE.
Rise to transports past expressing, Sweeter from remember’d woes; Cyrus comes, our wrongs redressing, Comes to give the world repose.
Rise to transports of the past, Sweeter from remembered sorrows; Cyrus comes, our wrongs correcting, Comes to bring the world peace.
CHORUS OF VIRGINS.
Chorus of Virgins.
Cyrus comes, the world redressing, 95 Love and pleasure in his train; Comes to heighten every blessing, Comes to soften every pain.
Cyrus arrives, making everything right, 95 Bringing love and joy with him; He comes to amplify each blessing, Comes to ease every pain.
SEMI-CHORUS.
SEMI-CHORUS.
Hail to him with mercy reigning, Skilled in every peaceful art; 100 Who from bonds our limbs unchaining, Only binds the willing heart.
Hail to him whose mercy reigns, Skilled in every peaceful art; Who, freeing our limbs from chains, Only binds the willing heart.
THE LAST CHORUS.
THE FINAL CHORUS.
But chief to Thee, our God, defender, friend, Let praise be given to all eternity; O Thou, without beginning, without end, 105 Let us, and all, begin and end, in Thee!
But above all, to You, our God, protector, friend, Let praise be offered forever; O You, with no beginning and no end, 105 Let us, and everyone, start and finish in You!
VERSES IN REPLY TO AN INVITATION TO
DINNER AT DR. BAKER’S.
‘This is a poem! This is a copy of verses!’
YOUR mandate I got, You may all go to pot; Had your senses been right, You’d have sent before night; As I hope to be saved, 5 I put off being shaved; For I could not make bold, While the matter was cold, To meddle in suds, Or to put on my duds; 10 So tell Horneck and Nesbitt, And Baker and his bit, And Kauffmann beside, And the Jessamy Bride, With the rest of the crew, 15 The Reynoldses two, Little Comedy’s face, And the Captain in lace, (By-the-bye you may tell him, I have something to sell him; 20 Of use I insist, When he comes to enlist. Your worships must know That a few days ago, An order went out, 25 For the foot guards so stout To wear tails in high taste, Twelve inches at least: Now I’ve got him a scale To measure each tail, 30 To lengthen a short tail, And a long one to curtail.)— Yet how can I when vext, Thus stray from my text? Tell each other to rue 35 Your Devonshire crew, For sending so late To one of my state. But ’tis Reynolds’s way From wisdom to stray, 40 And Angelica’s whim To be frolick like him, But, alas! Your good worships, how could they be wiser, When both have been spoil’d in to-day’s Advertiser?
I received your request, You can all go to hell; If you had your wits about you, You would have sent it before nightfall; As I hope to be saved, 5 I’ve postponed shaving; Because I didn’t feel bold, While things were still unsettled, To mess with suds, Or to get dressed; 10 So tell Horneck and Nesbitt, And Baker and his friend, And Kauffmann as well, And the Jessamy Bride, Along with the rest of the group, 15 The two Reynoldses, Little Comedy’s portrayal, And the Captain in lace, (By the way, you can let him know, I have something to sell him; 20 It’s useful, I promise, When he comes to enlist. You all should know That a few days ago, 25 An order went out, For the foot guards so strong To wear tails in style, At least twelve inches long: Now I have a scale for him To measure each tail, 30 To lengthen a short tail, And to shorten a long one.)— Yet how can I, feeling disturbed, Stray from my point? Tell each other to regret 35 Your Devonshire group, For sending so late To someone of my importance. But it’s Reynolds’s habit To stray from wisdom, 40 And Angelica’s tendency To be cheeky like him, But, alas! Your good sirs, how could they be smarter, When both have been ruined in today’s Advertiser?
OLIVER GOLDSMITH.
OLIVER GOLDSMITH.
LETTER IN PROSE AND VERSE TO
MRS. BUNBURY
MADAM,
I read your letter with all that allowance
which critical candour could require, but after all find so much to object
to, and so much to raise my indignation, that I cannot help giving it a
serious answer.
MADAM,
I read your letter with all the understanding that one should have, but I still find so many things to disagree with and so much that angers me, that I feel compelled to give you a thoughtful response.
I am not so ignorant, Madam, as not to see there are many sarcasms contained in it, and solecisms also. (Solecism is a word that comes from the town of Soleis in Attica, among the Greeks, built by Solon, and applied as we use the word Kidderminster for curtains, from a town also of that name;—but this is learning you have no taste for!)—I say, Madam, there are sarcasms in it, and solecisms also. But not to seem an ill-natured critic, I’ll take leave to quote your own words, and give you my remarks upon them as they occur. You begin as follows:—
I'm not so clueless, Madam, that I can't see there are many sarcastic remarks in it, as well as some grammatical mistakes. (A solecism is a term that comes from the town of Soleis in Attica, built by Solon, and it's used like we use the word Kidderminster for curtains, from another town of the same name;—but I know this is knowledge you don't care for!)—I say, Madam, there are sarcastic remarks in it, and grammatical mistakes as well. But to avoid coming off as a rude critic, I’ll take the liberty to quote your own words and share my thoughts on them as they come up. You start as follows:—
‘I hope, my good Doctor, you soon will be here,
And your spring-velvet coat very smart will appear,
To open our ball the first day of the year.’
‘I hope, my good Doctor, you'll be here soon,
And your stylish spring coat will look great,
To kick off our ball on the first day of the year.’
Pray, Madam, where did you ever find the epithet ‘good,’ applied to the title of Doctor? Had you called me ‘learned Doctor,’ or ‘grave Doctor,’ or ‘noble Doctor,’ it might be allowable, because they belong to the profession. But, not to cavil at trifles, you talk of my ‘spring-velvet coat,’ and advise me to wear it the first day in the year,—that is, in the middle of winter!—a spring-velvet in the middle of winter!!! That would be a solecism indeed! and yet, to increase the inconsistence, in another part of your letter you call me a beau. Now, on one side or other, you must be wrong. If I am a beau, I can never think of wearing a spring-velvet in winter: and if I am not a beau, why then, that explains itself. But let me go on to your two next strange lines:—
Pray, Madam, where did you ever find the term ‘good’ used with the title of Doctor? If you had called me ‘learned Doctor,’ or ‘grave Doctor,’ or ‘noble Doctor,’ that might be acceptable, since they fit the profession. But, not to nitpick, you mention my ‘spring-velvet coat,’ and suggest I wear it on the first day of the year—that is, in the middle of winter! A spring-velvet in the middle of winter!!! That would be a serious mistake! Yet, to add to the confusion, in another part of your letter, you refer to me as a beau. So, you must be wrong on one count. If I am a beau, I should never consider wearing a spring-velvet in winter; and if I am not a beau, then that clears everything up. But let me move on to your next two strange lines:—
‘And bring with you a wig, that is modish and gay,
dance with the girls that are makers of hay.’
‘And bring a stylish and cheerful wig with you,
dance with the girls who make hay.’
The absurdity of making hay at Christmas, you yourself seem sensible of: you say your sister will laugh; and so indeed she well may! The Latins have an expression for a contemptuous sort of laughter, ‘Naso contemnere adunco’; that is, to laugh with a crooked nose. She may laugh at you in the manner of the ancients if she thinks fit. But now I come to the most extraordinary of all extraordinary propositions, which is, to take your and your sister’s advice in playing at loo. The presumption of the offer raises my indignation beyond the bounds of prose; it inspires me at once with verse and resentment. I take advice! and from whom? You shall hear.
The ridiculousness of trying to enjoy things at Christmas, you seem to recognize: you mention your sister will laugh; and she very well might! The Romans had a saying for a scornful laugh, ‘Naso contemnere adunco’; that is, to laugh with a crooked nose. She could laugh at you like the ancients if she wants. But now I get to the most bizarre of all bizarre ideas, which is to take your and your sister’s advice on playing loo. The audacity of the suggestion makes me so angry it pushes me beyond plain speech; it sparks both poetry and resentment in me. I take advice! And from whom? You’ll see.
First let me suppose, what may shortly be true, The company set, and the word to be, Loo; All smirking, and pleasant, and big with adventure, And ogling the stake which is fix’d in the centre. Round and round go the cards, while I inwardly damn 5 At never once finding a visit from Pam. I lay down my stake, apparently cool, While the harpies about me all pocket the pool. I fret in my gizzard, yet, cautious and sly, I wish all my friends may be bolder than I: 10 Yet still they sit snug, not a creature will aim By losing their money to venture at fame. ’Tis in vain that at niggardly caution I scold, ’Tis in vain that I flatter the brave and the bold: All play their own way, and they think me an ass,— 15 ‘What does Mrs. Bunbury?’ ‘I, Sir? I pass.’ ‘Pray what does Miss Horneck? Take courage, come do,’— ‘Who, I? let me see, Sir, why I must pass too.’ Mr. Bunbury frets, and I fret like the devil, To see them so cowardly, lucky, and civil. 20 Yet still I sit snug, and continue to sigh on, Till made by my losses as bold as a lion, I venture at all,—while my avarice regards The whole pool as my own—‘Come, give me five cards.’ ‘Well done!’ cry the ladies; ‘Ah, Doctor, that’s good! 25 The pool’s very rich—ah! the Doctor is loo’d!’ Thus foil’d in my courage, on all sides perplex’d, I ask for advice from the lady that’s next: ‘Pray, Ma’am, be so good as to give your advice; Don’t you think the best way is to venture for ’t twice?’ 30 ‘I advise,’ cries the lady, ‘to try it, I own.— Ah! the Doctor is loo’d! Come, Doctor, put down.’ Thus, playing, and playing, I still grow more eager, And so bold, and so bold, I’m at last a bold beggar. Now, ladies, I ask, if law-matters you’re skill’d in, 35 Whether crimes such as yours should not come before Fielding? For giving advice that is not worth a straw, May well be call’d picking of pockets in law; And picking of pockets, with which I now charge ye, Is, by quinto Elizabeth, Death without Clergy. 40 What justice, when both to the Old Bailey brought! By the gods, I’ll enjoy it; though ’tis but in thought! Both are plac’d at the bar, with all proper decorum, With bunches of fennel, and nosegays before ’em; Both cover their faces with mobs and all that; 45 But the judge bids them, angrily, take off their hat. When uncover’d, a buzz of enquiry runs round,— ‘Pray what are their crimes?’—‘They’ve been pilfering found.’ ‘But, pray, whom have they pilfer’d?’—‘A Doctor, I hear.’ ‘What, yon solemn-faced, odd-looking man that stands near!’ 50 ‘The same.’—‘What a pity! how does it surprise one! Two handsomer culprits I never set eyes on!’ Then their friends all come round me with cringing and leering, To melt me to pity, and soften my swearing. First Sir Charles advances with phrases well strung, 55 ‘Consider, dear Doctor, the girls are but young.’ ‘The younger the worse,’ I return him again, ‘It shows that their habits are all dyed in grain.’ ‘But then they’re so handsome, one’s bosom it grieves.’ ‘What signifies handsome, when people are thieves?’ 60 ‘But where is your justice? their cases are hard.’ ‘What signifies justice? I want the reward.
First, let me imagine what might soon be true, The game is set, and it's about to be Loo; Everyone's smiling, cheerful, and full of excitement, And eyeing the stakes fixed in the center. The cards go round and round while I silently curse 5 For never once getting a visit from Pam. I place my bet, acting cool on the outside, While the greedy ones around me pocket the pool. I'm anxious inside, but cautious and sly, I hope all my friends will be bolder than I: 10 Yet they all sit cozy, not one will take a shot At risking their money to chase after fame. It's useless to scold them for their stingy caution, It's useless to flatter the brave and the bold: Everyone plays their own way, and they think I'm a fool— 15 'What about Mrs. Bunbury?' 'Me, Sir? I pass.' 'What about Miss Horneck? Come on, be brave,'— 'Who, me? Let me think, Sir, I guess I'll pass too.' Mr. Bunbury's frustrated, and I’m stewing like mad, Watching them all play it safe, lucky, and polite. 20 Yet I sit tight, continuing to sigh, Until my losses make me as bold as a lion, I go all in—while my greed considers The whole pot as mine—'Come on, give me five cards.' 'Well done!' shout the ladies; 'Ah, Doctor, that's good! 25 The pot's really rich—ah! the Doctor is loo'd!' Thus, defeated in courage and puzzled on all sides, I seek advice from the lady next to me: 'Please, Ma'am, could you give me your advice; Don’t you think the best move is to try it for twice?' 30 'I suggest,' says the lady, 'you give it a go. Ah! the Doctor is loo'd! Come on, Doctor, place your bet.' So, playing and playing, I grow more eager, And the bolder I get, I end up a desperate beggar. Now, ladies, I ask you, if you're skilled in legal matters, 35 Whether crimes like yours should be brought before Fielding? For giving advice that isn't worth a dime Could easily be called theft under the law; And stealing, which I now accuse you of, Is, according to the law of Elizabeth, punishable by death without pardon. 40 What justice is there, when both are brought to trial! By the gods, I’ll relish the thought! They’re both placed at the bar with all proper decorum, With bunches of fennel and nosegays before them; Both hiding their faces with hoods and all that; 45 But the judge angrily tells them to remove their hats. When uncovered, a buzz of questions goes around— 'What are their crimes?'—'They’ve been stealing, I hear.' 'But who exactly did they steal from?'—'A doctor, it seems.' 'What, that solemn-looking, odd man standing there?' 50 'Yes, that's him.'—'What a shame! How surprising! I've never seen two more attractive culprits!' Then their friends gather around me, groveling and grinning, Trying to appeal to my pity and soften my anger. First, Sir Charles steps forward with well-crafted phrases, 55 'Consider, dear Doctor, the girls are quite young.' 'The younger, the worse,' I reply, 'It shows their bad habits are deeply ingrained.' 'But they’re so pretty, it tugs at your heart.' 'What does it matter if they’re pretty, when they’re thieves?' 60 'But where is your sense of justice? Their situations are tough.' 'What does justice matter? I want the reward.'
There’s the parish of Edmonton offers forty pounds; there’s the parish of St. Leonard, Shoreditch, offers forty pounds; there’s the parish of Tyburn, from the Hog-in-the-Pound to St. Giles’s watchhouse, offers forty pounds,—I shall have all that if I convict them!’—
There’s the parish of Edmonton offering forty pounds; there’s the parish of St. Leonard, Shoreditch, offering forty pounds; there’s the parish of Tyburn, from the Hog-in-the-Pound to St. Giles’s watchhouse, offering forty pounds—I’ll get all that if I convict them!’—
‘But consider their case,—it may yet be your own! And see how they kneel! Is your heart made of stone?’ This moves:—so at last I agree to relent, 65 For ten pounds in hand, and ten pounds to be spent.
‘But think about their situation—it could easily be yours! And look at how they kneel! Is your heart made of stone?’ This touches me: so finally, I decide to soften, for ten pounds now, and ten pounds to be used.
I challenge you all to answer this: I tell you, you cannot. It cuts deep;—but now for the rest of the letter: and next— but I want room—so I believe I shall battle the rest out at Barton some day next week.
I challenge all of you to answer this: I tell you, you can't. It hurts;—but now for the rest of the letter: and next— but I need space—so I think I’ll work through the rest at Barton sometime next week.
I don’t value you all!
O. G.
I don’t value any of you!
O. G.
VIDA’S GAME OF CHESS
TRANSLATED
ARMIES of box that sportively engage And mimic real battles in their rage, Pleased I recount; how, smit with glory’s charms, Two mighty Monarchs met in adverse arms, Sable and white; assist me to explore, 5 Ye Serian Nymphs, what ne’er was sung before. No path appears: yet resolute I stray Where youth undaunted bids me force my way. O’er rocks and cliffs while I the task pursue, Guide me, ye Nymphs, with your unerring clue. 10 For you the rise of this diversion know, You first were pleased in Italy to show This studious sport; from Scacchis was its name, The pleasing record of your Sister’s fame. When Jove through Ethiopia’s parch’d extent 15 To grace the nuptials of old Ocean went, Each god was there; and mirth and joy around To shores remote diffused their happy sound. Then when their hunger and their thirst no more Claim’d their attention, and the feast was o’er; 20 Ocean with pastime to divert the thought, Commands a painted table to be brought. Sixty-four spaces fill the chequer’d square; Eight in each rank eight equal limits share. Alike their form, but different are their dyes, 25 They fade alternate, and alternate rise, White after black; such various stains as those The shelving backs of tortoises disclose. Then to the gods that mute and wondering sate, You see (says he) the field prepared for fate. 30 Here will the little armies please your sight, With adverse colours hurrying to the fight: On which so oft, with silent sweet surprise, The Nymphs and Nereids used to feast their eyes, And all the neighbours of the hoary deep, 35 When calm the sea, and winds were lull’d asleep But see, the mimic heroes tread the board; He said, and straightway from an urn he pour’d The sculptured box, that neatly seem’d to ape The graceful figure of a human shape:— 40 Equal the strength and number of each foe, Sixteen appear’d like jet, sixteen like snow. As their shape varies various is the name, Different their posts, nor is their strength the same. There might you see two Kings with equal pride 45 Gird on their arms, their Consorts by their side; Here the Foot-warriors glowing after fame, There prancing Knights and dexterous Archers came And Elephants, that on their backs sustain Vast towers of war, and fill and shake the plain. 50 And now both hosts, preparing for the storm Of adverse battle, their encampments form. In the fourth space, and on the farthest line, Directly opposite the Monarchs shine; The swarthy on white ground, on sable stands 55 The silver King; and then they send commands. Nearest to these the Queens exert their might; One the left side, and t’other guards the right: Where each, by her respective armour known. Chooses the colour that is like her own. 60 Then the young Archers, two that snowy-white Bend the tough yew, and two as black as night; (Greece call’d them Mars’s favourites heretofore, From their delight in war, and thirst of gore). These on each side the Monarch and his Queen 65 Surround obedient; next to these are seen The crested Knights in golden armour gay; Their steeds by turns curvet, or snort or neigh. In either army on each distant wing Two mighty Elephants their castles bring, 70 Bulwarks immense! and then at last combine Eight of the Foot to form the second line, The vanguard to the King and Queen; from far Prepared to open all the fate of war. So moved the boxen hosts, each double-lined, 75 Their different colours floating in the wind: As if an army of the Gauls should go, With their white standards, o’er the Alpine snow To meet in rigid fight on scorching sands The sun-burnt Moors and Memnon’s swarthy bands. 80 Then Father Ocean thus; you see them here, Celestial powers, what troops, what camps appear. Learn now the sev’ral orders of the fray, For e’en these arms their stated laws obey. To lead the fight, the Kings from all their bands 85 Choose whom they please to bear their great commands. Should a black hero first to battle go, | Instant a white one guards against the blow; | But only one at once can charge or shun the foe. | Their gen’ral purpose on one scheme is bent, 90 So to besiege the King within the tent, That there remains no place by subtle flight From danger free; and that decides the fight. Meanwhile, howe’er, the sooner to destroy Th’ imperial Prince, remorseless they employ 95 Their swords in blood; and whosoever dare Oppose their vengeance, in the ruin share. Fate thins their camp; the parti-coloured field Widens apace, as they o’ercome or yield, But the proud victor takes the captive’s post; 100 There fronts the fury of th’ avenging host One single shock: and (should he ward the blow), May then retire at pleasure from the foe. The Foot alone (so their harsh laws ordain) When they proceed can ne’er return again. 105 But neither all rush on alike to prove The terror of their arms: The Foot must move Directly on, and but a single square; Yet may these heroes, when they first prepare To mix in combat on the bloody mead, 110 Double their sally, and two steps proceed; But when they wound, their swords they subtly guide With aim oblique, and slanting pierce his side. But the great Indian beasts, whose backs sustain Vast turrets arm’d, when on the redd’ning plain 115 They join in all the terror of the fight, Forward or backward, to the left or right, Run furious, and impatient of confine Scour through the field, and threat the farthest line. Yet must they ne’er obliquely aim their blows; | 120 That only manner is allow’d to those | Whom Mars has favour’d most, who bend the stubborn bows. | These glancing sidewards in a straight career, Yet each confin’d to their respective sphere, Or white or black, can send th’ unerring dart 125 Wing’d with swift death to pierce through ev’ry part. The fiery steed, regardless of the reins, Comes prancing on; but sullenly disdains The path direct, and boldly wheeling round, | Leaps o’er a double space at ev’ry bound: 130 | And shifts from white or black to diff’rent colour’d ground. | But the fierce Queen, whom dangers ne’er dismay, The strength and terror of the bloody day, In a straight line spreads her destruction wide, To left or right, before, behind, aside. 135 Yet may she never with a circling course Sweep to the battle like the fretful Horse; But unconfin’d may at her pleasure stray, If neither friend nor foe block up the way; For to o’erleap a warrior, ’tis decreed 140 Those only dare who curb the snorting steed. With greater caution and majestic state The warlike Monarchs in the scene of fate Direct their motions, since for these appear Zealous each hope, and anxious ev’ry fear. 145 While the King’s safe, with resolution stern They clasp their arms; but should a sudden turn Make him a captive, instantly they yield, Resolved to share his fortune in the field. He moves on slow; with reverence profound 150 His faithful troops encompass him around, And oft, to break some instant fatal scheme, Rush to their fates, their sov’reign to redeem; While he, unanxious where to wound the foe, Need only shift and guard against a blow. 155 But none, however, can presume t’ appear Within his reach, but must his vengeance fear; For he on ev’ry side his terror throws; But when he changes from his first repose, Moves but one step, most awfully sedate, 160 Or idly roving, or intent on fate. These are the sev’ral and establish’d laws: Now see how each maintains his bloody cause. Here paused the god, but (since whene’er they wage War here on earth the gods themselves engage 165 In mutual battle as they hate or love, And the most stubborn war is oft above), Almighty Jove commands the circling train Of gods from fav’ring either to abstain, And let the fight be silently survey’d; 170 And added solemn threats if disobey’d. Then call’d he Phoebus from among the Powers And subtle Hermes, whom in softer hours Fair Maia bore: youth wanton’d in their face; Both in life’s bloom, both shone with equal grace. 175 Hermes as yet had never wing’d his feet; As yet Apollo in his radiant seat Had never driv’n his chariot through the air, Known by his bow alone and golden hair. These Jove commission’d to attempt the fray, 180 And rule the sportive military day; Bid them agree which party each maintains, And promised a reward that’s worth their pains. The greater took their seats; on either hand Respectful the less gods in order stand, 185 But careful not to interrupt their play, By hinting when t’ advance or run away. Then they examine, who shall first proceed To try their courage, and their army lead. Chance gave it for the White, that he should go 190 First with a brave defiance to the foe. Awhile he ponder’d which of all his train Should bear his first commission o’er the plain; And then determined to begin the scene With him that stood before to guard the Queen. 195 He took a double step: with instant care Does the black Monarch in his turn prepare The adverse champion, and with stern command Bid him repel the charge with equal hand. There front to front, the midst of all the field, 200 With furious threats their shining arms they wield; Yet vain the conflict, neither can prevail While in one path each other they assail. On ev’ry side to their assistance fly Their fellow soldiers, and with strong supply 205 Crowd to the battle, but no bloody stain Tinctures their armour; sportive in the plain Mars plays awhile, and in excursion slight Harmless they sally forth, or wait the fight. But now the swarthy Foot, that first appear’d 210 To front the foe, his pond’rous jav’lin rear’d Leftward aslant, and a pale warrior slays, Spurns him aside, and boldly takes his place. Unhappy youth, his danger not to spy! Instant he fell, and triumph’d but to die. 215 At this the sable King with prudent care Removed his station from the middle square, And slow retiring to the farthest ground, There safely lurk’d, with troops entrench’d around. Then from each quarter to the war advance 220 The furious Knights, and poise the trembling lance: By turns they rush, by turns the victors yield, Heaps of dead Foot choke up the crimson’d field: They fall unable to retreat; around The clang of arms and iron hoofs resound. 225 But while young Phoebus pleased himself to view His furious Knight destroy the vulgar crew, Sly Hermes long’d t’ attempt with secret aim Some noble act of more exalted fame. For this, he inoffensive pass’d along 230 Through ranks of Foot, and midst the trembling throng Sent his left Horse, that free without confine Rov’d o’er the plain, upon some great design Against the King himself. At length he stood, And having fix’d his station as he would, 235 Threaten’d at once with instant fate the King And th’ Indian beast that guarded the right wing. Apollo sigh’d, and hast’ning to relieve The straiten’d Monarch, griev’d that he must leave His martial Elephant expos’d to fate, 240 And view’d with pitying eyes his dang’rous state. First in his thoughts however was his care To save his King, whom to the neighbouring square On the right hand, he snatch’d with trembling flight; At this with fury springs the sable Knight, 245 Drew his keen sword, and rising to the blow, Sent the great Indian brute to shades below. O fatal loss! for none except the Queen Spreads such a terror through the bloody scene. Yet shall you ne’er unpunish’d boast your prize, 250 | The Delian god with stern resentment cries; | And wedg’d him round with Foot, and pour’d in fresh supplies. | Thus close besieg’d trembling he cast his eye Around the plain, but saw no shelter nigh, No way for flight; for here the Queen oppos’d, 255 The Foot in phalanx there the passage clos’d: At length he fell; yet not unpleas’d with fate, Since victim to a Queen’s vindictive hate. With grief and fury burns the whiten’d host, One of their Tow’rs thus immaturely lost. 260 As when a bull has in contention stern Lost his right horn, with double vengeance burn His thoughts for war, with blood he’s cover’d o’er, And the woods echo to his dismal roar, So look’d the flaxen host, when angry fate 265 O’erturn’d the Indian bulwark of their state. Fired at this great success, with double rage Apollo hurries on his troops t’ engage, For blood and havoc wild; and, while he leads His troops thus careless, loses both his steeds: 270 For if some adverse warriors were o’erthrown, He little thought what dangers threat his own. But slyer Hermes with observant eyes March’d slowly cautious, and at distance spies What moves must next succeed, what dangers next arise. 275 Often would he, the stately Queen to snare, The slender Foot to front her arms prepare, And to conceal his scheme he sighs and feigns Such a wrong step would frustrate all his pains. Just then an Archer, from the right-hand view, 280 At the pale Queen his arrow boldly drew, Unseen by Phoebus, who, with studious thought, From the left side a vulgar hero brought. But tender Venus, with a pitying eye, Viewing the sad destruction that was nigh, 285 Wink’d upon Phoebus (for the Goddess sat By chance directly opposite); at that Roused in an instant, young Apollo threw His eyes around the field his troops to view: Perceiv’d the danger, and with sudden fright | 290 Withdrew the Foot that he had sent to fight, | And sav’d his trembling Queen by seasonable flight. | But Maia’s son with shouts fill’d all the coast: The Queen, he cried, the important Queen is lost. Phoebus, howe’er, resolving to maintain 295 What he had done, bespoke the heavenly train. What mighty harm, in sportive mimic flight, Is it to set a little blunder right, When no preliminary rule debarr’d? If you henceforward, Mercury, would guard 300 Against such practice, let us make the law: And whosoe’er shall first to battle draw, Or white, or black, remorseless let him go At all events, and dare the angry foe. He said, and this opinion pleased around: 305 Jove turn’d aside, and on his daughter frown’d, Unmark’d by Hermes, who, with strange surprise, Fretted and foam’d, and roll’d his ferret eyes, And but with great reluctance could refrain From dashing at a blow all off the plain. 310 Then he resolved to interweave deceits,— To carry on the war by tricks and cheats. Instant he call’d an Archer from the throng, And bid him like the courser wheel along: Bounding he springs, and threats the pallid Queen. 315 The fraud, however, was by Phoebus seen; He smiled, and, turning to the Gods, he said: Though, Hermes, you are perfect in your trade, And you can trick and cheat to great surprise, | These little sleights no more shall blind my eyes; | 320 Correct them if you please, the more you thus disguise. | The circle laugh’d aloud; and Maia’s son (As if it had but by mistake been done) Recall’d his Archer, and with motion due, Bid him advance, the combat to renew. 325 But Phoebus watch’d him with a jealous eye, Fearing some trick was ever lurking nigh, For he would oft, with sudden sly design, Send forth at once two combatants to join His warring troops, against the law of arms, 330 Unless the wary foe was ever in alarms. Now the white Archer with his utmost force Bent the tough bow against the sable Horse, And drove him from the Queen, where he had stood Hoping to glut his vengeance with her blood. 335 Then the right Elephant with martial pride Roved here and there, and spread his terrors wide: Glittering in arms from far a courser came, Threaten’d at once the King and Royal Dame; Thought himself safe when he the post had seized, 340 And with the future spoils his fancy pleased. Fired at the danger a young Archer came, Rush’d on the foe, and levell’d sure his aim; (And though a Pawn his sword in vengeance draws, Gladly he’d lose his life in glory’s cause). 345 The whistling arrow to his bowels flew, And the sharp steel his blood profusely drew; He drops the reins, he totters to the ground, And his life issued murm’ring through the wound. Pierced by the Foot, this Archer bit the plain; | 350 The Foot himself was by another slain; | And with inflamed revenge, the battle burns again. | Towers, Archers, Knights, meet on the crimson ground, And the field echoes to the martial sound. Their thoughts are heated, and their courage fired, 355 Thick they rush on with double zeal inspired; Generals and Foot, with different colour’d mien, | Confusedly warring in the camps are seen,— | Valour and fortune meet in one promiscuous scene. | Now these victorious, lord it o’er the field; 360 Now the foe rallies, the triumphant yield: Just as the tide of battle ebbs or flows. As when the conflict more tempestuous grows Between the winds, with strong and boisterous sweep They plough th’ Ionian or Atlantic deep! 365 By turns prevail the mutual blustering roar, And the big waves alternate lash the shore. But in the midst of all the battle raged The snowy Queen, with troops at once engaged; She fell’d an Archer as she sought the plain,— 370 As she retired an Elephant was slain: To right and left her fatal spears she sent, Burst through the ranks, and triumph’d as she went; Through arms and blood she seeks a glorious fate, Pierces the farthest lines, and nobly great 375 Leads on her army with a gallant show, Breaks the battalions, and cuts through the foe. At length the sable King his fears betray’d, And begg’d his military consort’s aid: With cheerful speed she flew to his relief, 380 And met in equal arms the female chief. Who first, great Queen, and who at last did bleed? How many Whites lay gasping on the mead? Half dead, and floating in a bloody tide, Foot, Knights, and Archer lie on every side. 385 Who can recount the slaughter of the day? How many leaders threw their lives away? The chequer’d plain is fill’d with dying box, Havoc ensues, and with tumultuous shocks The different colour’d ranks in blood engage, 390 And Foot and Horse promiscuously rage. With nobler courage and superior might The dreadful Amazons sustain the fight, Resolved alike to mix in glorious strife, Till to imperious fate they yield their life. 395 Meanwhile each Monarch, in a neighbouring cell, Confined the warriors that in battle fell, There watch’d the captives with a jealous eye, Lest, slipping out again, to arms they fly. But Thracian Mars, in stedfast friendship join’d 400 To Hermes, as near Phoebus he reclined, Observed each chance, how all their motions bend, Resolved if possible to serve his friend. He a Foot-soldier and a Knight purloin’d Out from the prison that the dead confined; 405 And slyly push’d ’em forward on the plain; | Th’ enliven’d combatants their arms regain, | Mix in the bloody scene, and boldly war again. | So the foul hag, in screaming wild alarms O’er a dead carcase muttering her charms, 410 (And with her frequent and tremendous yell Forcing great Hecate from out of hell) Shoots in the corpse a new fictitious soul; | With instant glare the supple eyeballs roll, | Again it moves and speaks, and life informs the whole. | 415 Vulcan alone discern’d the subtle cheat; And wisely scorning such a base deceit, Call’d out to Phoebus. Grief and rage assail Phoebus by turns; detected Mars turns pale. Then awful Jove with sullen eye reproved 420 Mars, and the captives order’d to be moved To their dark caves; bid each fictitious spear Be straight recall’d, and all be as they were. And now both Monarchs with redoubled rage Led on their Queens, the mutual war to wage. 425 O’er all the field their thirsty spears they send, Then front to front their Monarchs they defend. But lo! the female White rush’d in unseen, And slew with fatal haste the swarthy Queen; Yet soon, alas! resign’d her royal spoils, 430 Snatch’d by a shaft from her successful toils. Struck at the sight, both hosts in wild surprise Pour’d forth their tears, and fill’d the air with cries; They wept and sigh’d, as pass’d the fun’ral train, As if both armies had at once been slain. 435 And now each troop surrounds its mourning chief, To guard his person, or assuage his grief. One is their common fear; one stormy blast Has equally made havoc as it pass’d. Not all, however, of their youth are slain; 440 Some champions yet the vig’rous war maintain. Three Foot, an Archer, and a stately Tower, For Phoebus still exert their utmost power. Just the same number Mercury can boast, Except the Tower, who lately in his post 445 Unarm’d inglorious fell, in peace profound, Pierced by an Archer with a distant wound; But his right Horse retain’d its mettled pride,— The rest were swept away by war’s strong tide. But fretful Hermes, with despairing moan, 450 Griev’d that so many champions were o’erthrown, Yet reassumes the fight; and summons round The little straggling army that he found,— All that had ’scaped from fierce Apollo’s rage,— Resolved with greater caution to engage 455 In future strife, by subtle wiles (if fate Should give him leave) to save his sinking state. The sable troops advance with prudence slow, Bent on all hazards to distress the foe. More cheerful Phoebus, with unequal pace, 460 Rallies his arms to lessen his disgrace. But what strange havoc everywhere has been! | A straggling champion here and there is seen; | And many are the tents, yet few are left within. | Th’ afflicted Kings bewail their consorts dead, 465 And loathe the thoughts of a deserted bed; And though each monarch studies to improve The tender mem’ry of his former love, Their state requires a second nuptial tie. Hence the pale ruler with a love-sick eye 470 Surveys th’ attendants of his former wife, And offers one of them a royal life. These, when their martial mistress had been slain, Weak and despairing tried their arms in vain; Willing, howe’er, amidst the Black to go, 475 They thirst for speedy vengeance on the foe. Then he resolves to see who merits best, By strength and courage, the imperial vest; Points out the foe, bids each with bold design Pierce through the ranks, and reach the deepest line: 480 For none must hope with monarchs to repose But who can first, through thick surrounding foes, Through arms and wiles, with hazardous essay, Safe to the farthest quarters force their way. Fired at the thought, with sudden, joyful pace 485 They hurry on; but first of all the race Runs the third right-hand warrior for the prize,— The glitt’ring crown already charms her eyes. Her dear associates cheerfully give o’er | The nuptial chase; and swift she flies before, | 490 And Glory lent her wings, and the reward in store. | Nor would the sable King her hopes prevent, For he himself was on a Queen intent, Alternate, therefore, through the field they go. Hermes led on, but by a step too slow, 495 His fourth left Pawn: and now th’ advent’rous White Had march’d through all, and gain’d the wish’d for site. Then the pleased King gives orders to prepare The crown, the sceptre, and the royal chair, And owns her for his Queen: around exult 500 The snowy troops, and o’er the Black insult. Hermes burst into tears,—with fretful roar Fill’d the wide air, and his gay vesture tore. The swarthy Foot had only to advance One single step; but oh! malignant chance! 505 A towered Elephant, with fatal aim, Stood ready to destroy her when she came: He keeps a watchful eye upon the whole, Threatens her entrance, and protects the goal. Meanwhile the royal new-created bride, 510 Pleased with her pomp, spread death and terror wide; Like lightning through the sable troops she flies, Clashes her arms, and seems to threat the skies. The sable troops are sunk in wild affright, And wish th’ earth op’ning snatch’d ’em from her sight. 515 In burst the Queen, with vast impetuous swing: | The trembling foes come swarming round the King, | Where in the midst he stood, and form a valiant ring. | So the poor cows, straggling o’er pasture land, When they perceive the prowling wolf at hand, 520 Crowd close together in a circle full, And beg the succour of the lordly bull; They clash their horns, they low with dreadful sound, And the remotest groves re-echo round. But the bold Queen, victorious, from behind 525 Pierces the foe; yet chiefly she design’d Against the King himself some fatal aim, And full of war to his pavilion came. Now here she rush’d, now there; and had she been But duly prudent, she had slipp’d between, 530 With course oblique, into the fourth white square, And the long toil of war had ended there, The King had fallen, and all his sable state; And vanquish’d Hermes cursed his partial fate. For thence with ease the championess might go, 535 Murder the King, and none could ward the blow. With silence, Hermes, and with panting heart, Perceived the danger, but with subtle art, (Lest he should see the place) spurs on the foe, Confounds his thoughts, and blames his being slow. 540 For shame! move on; would you for ever stay? What sloth is this, what strange perverse delay?— How could you e’er my little pausing blame?— What! you would wait till night shall end the game? Phoebus, thus nettled, with imprudence slew 545 A vulgar Pawn, but lost his nobler view. Young Hermes leap’d, with sudden joy elate; And then, to save the monarch from his fate, Led on his martial Knight, who stepp’d between, Pleased that his charge was to oppose the Queen— 550 Then, pondering how the Indian beast to slay, That stopp’d the Foot from making farther way,— From being made a Queen; with slanting aim An archer struck him; down the monster came, And dying shook the earth: while Phoebus tries 555 Without success the monarch to surprise. The Foot, then uncontroll’d with instant pride, Seized the last spot, and moved a royal bride. And now with equal strength both war again, And bring their second wives upon the plain; 560 Then, though with equal views each hop’d and fear’d, Yet, as if every doubt had disappear’d, As if he had the palm, young Hermes flies Into excess of joy; with deep disguise, Extols his own Black troops, with frequent spite 565 And with invective taunts disdains the White. Whom Phoebus thus reproved with quick return— As yet we cannot the decision learn Of this dispute, and do you triumph now? Then your big words and vauntings I’ll allow, 570 When you the battle shall completely gain; At present I shall make your boasting vain. He said, and forward led the daring Queen; Instant the fury of the bloody scene Rises tumultuous, swift the warriors fly 575 From either side to conquer or to die. They front the storm of war: around ’em Fear, Terror, and Death, perpetually appear. All meet in arms, and man to man oppose, Each from their camp attempts to drive their foes; 580 Each tries by turns to force the hostile lines; Chance and impatience blast their best designs. The sable Queen spread terror as she went Through the mid ranks: with more reserved intent The adverse dame declined the open fray, 585 And to the King in private stole away: Then took the royal guard, and bursting in, With fatal menace close besieged the King. Alarm’d at this, the swarthy Queen, in haste, From all her havoc and destructive waste 590 Broke off, and her contempt of death to show, | Leap’d in between the Monarch and the foe, | To save the King and state from this impending blow. | But Phoebus met a worse misfortune here: For Hermes now led forward, void of fear, 595 His furious Horse into the open plain, That onward chafed, and pranced, and pawed amain. Nor ceased from his attempts until he stood On the long-wished-for spot, from whence he could Slay King or Queen. O’erwhelm’d with sudden fears, 600 Apollo saw, and could not keep from tears. Now all seem’d ready to be overthrown; His strength was wither’d, ev’ry hope was flown. Hermes, exulting at this great surprise, Shouted for joy, and fill’d the air with cries; 605 Instant he sent the Queen to shades below, And of her spoils made a triumphant show. But in return, and in his mid career, Fell his brave Knight, beneath the Monarch’s spear. Phoebus, however, did not yet despair, 610 But still fought on with courage and with care. He had but two poor common men to show, And Mars’s favourite with his iv’ry bow. The thoughts of ruin made ’em dare their best To save their King, so fatally distress’d. 615 But the sad hour required not such an aid; And Hermes breathed revenge where’er he stray’d. Fierce comes the sable Queen with fatal threat, Surrounds the Monarch in his royal seat; Rushed here and there, nor rested till she slew 620 The last remainder of the whiten’d crew. Sole stood the King, the midst of all the plain, Weak and defenceless, his companions slain. As when the ruddy morn ascending high Has chased the twinkling stars from all the sky, 625 Your star, fair Venus, still retains its light, And, loveliest, goes the latest out of sight. No safety’s left, no gleams of hope remain; Yet did he not as vanquish’d quit the plain, But tried to shut himself between the foe,— | 630 Unhurt through swords and spears he hoped to go, | Until no room was left to shun the fatal blow. | For if none threaten’d his immediate fate, And his next move must ruin all his state, All their past toil and labour is in vain, | 635 Vain all the bloody carnage of the plain,— | Neither would triumph then, the laurel neither gain. | Therefore through each void space and desert tent, By different moves his various course he bent: The Black King watch’d him with observant eye, 640 Follow’d him close, but left him room to fly. Then when he saw him take the farthest line, He sent the Queen his motions to confine, And guard the second rank, that he could go No farther now than to that distant row. 645 The sable monarch then with cheerful mien Approach’d, but always with one space between. But as the King stood o’er against him there, Helpless, forlorn, and sunk in his despair, The martial Queen her lucky moment knew, | 650 Seized on the farthest seat with fatal view, | Nor left th’ unhappy King a place to flee unto. | At length in vengeance her keen sword she draws, | Slew him, and ended thus the bloody cause: | And all the gods around approved it with applause. | 655 The victor could not from his insults keep, But laugh’d and sneer’d to see Apollo weep. Jove call’d him near, and gave him in his hand The powerful, happy, and mysterious wand By which the Shades are call’d to purer day, 660 When penal fire has purged their sins away; By which the guilty are condemn’d to dwell In the dark mansions of the deepest hell; By which he gives us sleep, or sleep denies, And closes at the last the dying eyes. 665 Soon after this, the heavenly victor brought The game on earth, and first th’ Italians taught. For (as they say) fair Scacchis he espied Feeding her cygnets in the silver tide, (Sacchis, the loveliest Seriad of the place) 670 And as she stray’d, took her to his embrace. Then, to reward her for her virtue lost, Gave her the men and chequer’d board, emboss’d With gold and silver curiously inlay’d; And taught her how the game was to be play’d. 675 Ev’n now ’tis honour’d with her happy name; And Rome and all the world admire the game. All which the Seriads told me heretofore, When my boy-notes amused the Serian shore.
ARMIES of boxes that playfully engage And mimic real battles in their fury, Pleased, I recount how, captivated by the allure of glory, Two mighty Monarchs met in opposing arms, Black and white; assist me to explore, You Serian Nymphs, what has never been sung before. No path appears: yet resolute, I stray Where youth undaunted urges me to forge my way. Over rocks and cliffs while I pursue the task, Guide me, ye Nymphs, with your unerring hint. For you know the rise of this diversion, You were the first to showcase this studious sport in Italy; Its name derived from Scacchis, The delightful record of your Sister's fame. When Jove traversed Ethiopia's parched expanse To grace the nuptials of old Ocean, Each god was there; and mirth and joy spread Their happy sounds to distant shores. Then, when their hunger and thirst required no more Their attention, and the banquet was done; Ocean commanded that a painted board be brought To entertain them with something new. Sixty-four squares fill the checkered board; Eight in each row share equal boundaries. Their shapes are the same, but their colors differ, They fade alternately, and then rise, White after black; various stains like those Found on the shells of tortoises. Then to the gods, who sat silently, amazed, He said, "You see the field prepared for fate. Here will the little armies delight your sight, With opposing colors rushing into battle: On which so often, with silent sweet surprise, The Nymphs and Nereids used to feast their eyes, And all the neighbors of the hoary deep, When the sea was calm, and the winds were lulled to sleep." But look, the mimic heroes tread the board; He said, and immediately from an urn he poured The sculpted box, that neatly seemed to imitate The graceful shape of a human form:— Equal in strength and number, each foe, Sixteen appeared like jet, sixteen like snow. As their shape varies, their names vary too, Different their positions, their strengths not the same. There might you see two Kings, equally proud, Gearing up for battle, their Consorts at their sides; Here the Foot soldiers, eager for fame, There gallant Knights and skilled Archers came, And Elephants, bearing on their backs Great towers of war, filling and shaking the ground. And now both hosts, preparing for the storm Of opposing battle, set up their camps. In the fourth square, at the farthest line, Directly opposite, the Monarchs shine; The dark one on a white ground, on black stands The silver King; and then they give commands. Nearest to these, the Queens exert their might; One on the left side, and the other guards the right: Where each, by her respective armor known, Chooses the color that matches her own. Then the young Archers, two, dressed in snowy white, Bow the tough yew, and two as black as night; (Greece once called them the favorites of Mars, From their love of war and thirst for blood). These surround the Monarch and his Queen; Next to these are seen the crested Knights in bright golden armor; Their steeds, at times, prance, snort, or neigh. In either army, on each distant wing, Two mighty Elephants bring their castles, Immense bulwarks! and then, at last, combine Eight of the Foot to form the second row, The front line for the King and Queen; from afar Prepared to unveil all the fate of war. So moved the box armies, each double-lined, Their different colors fluttering in the wind: As if an army of Gauls should march, With their white standards, over the Alpine snow To meet in rigid battle on burning sands The sun-baked Moors and Memnon's dark bands. Then Father Ocean said, "You see them here, Celestial powers, what troops, what camps appear. Learn now the various orders of the fray, For even these arms abide by their rules. To lead the fight, the Kings from all their sides Choose whom they please to carry their commands. If a black hero is the first to battle, Immediately a white one guards against the blow; But only one at a time can charge or escape the foe. Their general purpose aims at one scheme, To besiege the King within the tent, So that there remains no place for clever flight From danger free; and that decides the fight. Meanwhile, to destroy the imperial Prince as swiftly as possible, They have no mercy with their swords in blood; And whoever dares to oppose their wrath, Shares in the ruin. Fate thins their camp; the checkered field Widens swiftly, as they overcome or yield, But the proud victor takes the captive's place; There fronts the fury of the avenging host One single clash: and (if he blocks the blow), May then withdraw freely from the foe. The Foot alone (as their harsh laws dictate) When they advance can never retreat again. But not all of them rush in at once to prove The terror of their weapons: The Foot must move Straight ahead, just a single square; Yet these heroes, when they first prepare To engage in combat on the bloody plain, May double their move and advance two spaces; But when they strike, their swords they cleverly guide With an oblique aim, piercing enemy sides. But the great Indian beasts, whose backs bear Vast turrets arm’d, when they join the battle, Whether moving forward or backward, to the left or right, Charge through the field, threatening the distant line. Yet they must not aim their blows obliquely; That method is allowed only to those Whom Mars has favored most, who wield the stubborn bows. These swift shots glide sidewards in a straight path, Yet each constrained to their respective sphere, Whether white or black, can send the unerring dart Winged with swift death to pierce through every part. The fiery steed, disregarding the reins, Comes prancing on; but sullenly disdains The straight path, and boldly turning round, Skips over a double move at every chance: And shifts from white to black to different colored ground. But the fierce Queen, whom dangers never deter, The strength and terror of the bloody day, In a straight line widens her destruction, To left or right, in front, behind, aside. Yet she may never sweep with a circling course To the battle like the restless Horse; But unconstrained may wander at her pleasure, If neither friend nor foe blocks her way; For to leap over a warrior, it’s decreed That only those who command the snorting steed can dare. With greater caution and majestic presence, The warlike Monarchs in the scene of fate Direct their movements, for for them appears Each hope is zealous, and every fear anxious. While the King's safe, with stern resolve They guard their arms; but if a sudden twist Makes him a captive, they instantly yield, Resolved to share his fortune in the field. He moves slowly; with profound reverence His loyal troops surround him, And often, to thwart some instant fatal scheme, Rush to their doom, to save their sovereign; While he, unfazed where to wound the foe, Need only shift and guard against a blow. But none can presume to come Within his reach without fearing his wrath; For he spreads terror on every side; But when he shifts from his first rest, Moves only one step, most gravely composed, Or idly roaming, or intent on fate. These are the various and established laws: Now see how each maintains his deadly cause. Here the god paused, but (since whenever they wage War here on earth, the gods themselves engage, In mutual battle as they hate or love, And stubborn wars often occur above), Almighty Jove commands the circling band Of gods to favor either side no longer, And let the fight proceed in silence; And added solemn threats if disobeyed. Then he called Phoebus from among the Powers, And clever Hermes, who in softer hours Fair Maia bore: youth played in their face; Both in life’s bloom, both shining with equal grace. Hermes had yet to wing his feet; Apollo had yet to drive his chariot through the air, Known only by his bow and golden hair. These Jove commissioned to attempt the combat, And rule the playful military day; He ordered them to agree which party each supports, And promised a reward worth their efforts. The greater took their seats; on either side Respectful, the lesser gods stand in order, Careful not to interrupt the play, By hinting when to advance or withdraw. Then they examined who should first proceed To try their courage, and lead their armies. Chance decreed it for the Whites, that he should go First with a brave challenge to the foe. For a while, he pondered which of all his troop Should bear his first command over the field; And then decided to start the scene With him who stood before to guard the Queen. He took a double step: with instant care The black Monarch prepared the opposing champion, And with stern command Bid him repel the charge with equal force. There face to face, in the middle of the field, With furious threats, they wield their shining arms; Yet the conflict is vain, neither can prevail While they attack each other in one lane. On every side, their fellow soldiers rush To their assistance, supplying strong support, Charging into the battle, but no blood stains Their armor; playfully they dash forth, or await the fight. But now the dark Foot, that first appeared To face the foe, raised his heavy spear Leftward at an angle, and slays a pale warrior, Kicking him aside, boldly taking his place. Unfortunate youth, unaware of the danger! He fell instantly, triumphing only to die. At this, the ebony King, with careful thought, Moved his position from the center square, And slowly retreated to the farthest ground, There safely lurking, with troops entrenched around. Then from each quarter, the furious Knights advanced And balanced their quivering lances: They charged in turns, the victors yield, Heaps of fallen Foot choke the crimson field: They fell unable to retreat; around The clang of arms and iron hooves resound. But while young Phoebus took pleasure in viewing His furious Knight destroy the common crew, Sly Hermes longed to attempt with secret aim Some noble act of more exalted fame. For this, he moved carefully through the ranks of Foot, And among the trembling crowd, Sent his left Horse, that unconfined Roved over the field, on some great design Against the King himself. At last, he stood, And having fixed his position as he desired, Threatened at once with imminent fate the King And the Indian beast guarding the right wing. Apollo sighed, and rushed to rescue The engulfed Monarch, sad that he must leave His martial Elephant exposed to danger, And looked with pitying eyes at his perilous state. First in his thoughts, however, was his care To save his King, whom to the neighboring square On the right, he snatched with trembling flight; At this, with fury sprang the sable Knight, Drew his sharp sword, and rising to the blow, Sent the great Indian beast to shadows below. Oh, fatal loss! for no one but the Queen Spreads such terror throughout the bloody scene. Yet you shall never boast your prize unpunished, The Delian god cries out with stern resentment; And surrounded him with Foot, pouring in fresh troops. Thus closely besieged, trembling, he cast his eyes Around the field, but saw no nearby refuge, No way to flee; for here the Queen blocked, And the Foot in formation closed the passage: At last, he fell; yet not displeased with fate, Since victim to a Queen's vengeful hate. With grief and fury burns the whitened host, One of their Towers thus prematurely lost. As when a bull has lost his right horn in fierce dispute, With double vengeance burns his thoughts for war, Covered in blood, and the woods echo to his dismal roar, So looked the flaxen host, when angry fate Overturned the Indian bulwark of their state. Fueled by this great success, with double rage Apollo hurries on his troops to engage, For blood and havoc wild; and while he leads His troops carelessly, he loses both his steeds: For if some opposing warriors were overthrown, He little thought what dangers threaten his own. But crafty Hermes with observant eyes Marched cautiously, and from a distance, spies What moves must next succeed, what dangers next arise. Often would he prepare to ensnare the stately Queen, The slender Foot to challenge her arms, And to conceal his scheme he sighs and feigns Such a wrong step would spoil all his pains. Just then an Archer, from the right view, Drew his arrow at the pale Queen, Unseen by Phoebus, who with focused thought Brought in from the left a common hero. But tender Venus, with a pitying eye, Viewing the sad destruction on the horizon, Winked at Phoebus (for the Goddess happened to sit Directly opposite); at that Awakened in an instant, young Apollo threw His eyes across the field to spot his troops: Perceived the danger, and with sudden fright Withdrew the Foot he had sent to fight, And saved his trembling Queen by timely flight. But Maia's son with shouts filled all the shore: "The Queen," he cried, "the important Queen is lost." Phoebus, however, resolved to maintain What he had done, addressed the heavenly train: "What great harm in playful mimic flight, Is it to correct a little blunder, When no preliminary rule forbids? If from now on, Mercury, you would guard Against such practice, let us establish a law: And whoever first draws to battle, Or white or black, let him go relentlessly At all events, and dare the angry foe." He said, and this opinion pleased the crowd: Jove turned aside, and frowned upon his daughter, Unnoticed by Hermes, who, with strange surprise, Fretted and foamed, rolling his ferret eyes, And with great reluctance could refrain From dashing everything off the plain. Then he resolved to intermingle deceit— To carry on the war by tricks and cheats. Instantly he called an Archer from the throng, And bid him like the horse wheel around: Bounding, he springs, threatening the pale Queen. The trick, however, was seen by Phoebus; He smiled, and turning to the Gods, he said: "Though, Hermes, you excel in your trade, And you can trick and cheat to great amazement, These little sleights shall no longer blind my eyes; Correct them if you please; the more you disguise." The circle laughed aloud; and Maia's son (As if it had just been a mistake) Called back his Archer and, with proper movement, Ordered him to advance, the fight to renew. But Phoebus watched him with a jealous eye, Fearing some trick was ever lurking near, For he would often, with sudden sly design, Send forth at once two combatants to join His warring troops, against the law of arms, Unless the cautious foe was ever on alert. Now the white Archer with all his might Bent the tough bow against the black Horse, And drove him from the Queen, where he had stood Hoping to sate his vengeance with her blood. Then the right Elephant with martial pride Roved here and there, spreading his terrors wide: Glittering in arms from afar, a horse came, Threatened at once the King and Royal Dame; Thought himself secure when he had seized the post, And with future spoils, his fantasy pleased. Fired at the danger, a young Archer came, Rushed at the foe, and made sure to aim; (And though a Pawn, his sword in vengeance drawn, Gladly he’d lose his life in glory’s name). The whistling arrow flew into his bowels, And the sharp steel drew forth his blood; He drops the reins, he totters to the ground, And his life escaped murmuring through the wound. Pierced by the Foot, this Archer hit the plain; The Foot itself was by another slain; And with inflamed revenge, the battle burns again. Towers, Archers, Knights, meet on the crimson ground, And the field echoes to the martial sound. Their thoughts are heated, and their courage fired, Thick they rush on with double zeal inspired; Generals and Foot, with different colors, Confusedly fighting in the camps are seen— Valor and fortune meet in one chaotic scene. Now these victorious, rule the field; Now the foes rally; the triumphant yield: Just like the tide of battle ebbs or flows. As when the conflict becomes stronger Between the winds, with rapid and boisterous sweep They plow the Ionian or Atlantic deep! By turns prevail the mutual blustering roar, And the great waves alternately lash the shore. But in the midst of all the battle raged The snowy Queen, with troops engaged at once; She felled an Archer as she sought the plain— As she withdrew, an Elephant was slain: To right and left her lethal spears she sent, Burst through the ranks, and triumphed as she went; Through arms and blood she seeks a glorious fate, Pierces the farthest lines, and nobly great Leads on her army with a gallant show, Breaks the battalions, and cuts through the foe. At length, the dark King revealed his fears, And begged his military consort's aid: With cheerful speed, she flew to his relief, And met in equal arms the female chief. Who first, great Queen, and who at last did bleed? How many Whites lay gasping on the mead? Half-dead, and floating in a bloody tide, Foot, Knights, and Archers lie on every side. Who can recount the slaughter of the day? How many leaders lost their lives today? The checkered plain is filled with dying boxes, Havoc ensues, and tumultuous clashes The differently colored ranks engage in blood, And Foot and Horse rage promiscuously. With nobler courage and superior might The dreadful Amazons sustain the fight, Resolved alike to mix in glorious strife, Until they yield their lives to imperious fate. Meanwhile, each Monarch, in a neighboring cell, Confined the warriors who in battle fell, There watch the captives with a jealous eye, Lest, slipping out again, they take up arms. But Thracian Mars, in steadfast friendship joined To Hermes, as near Phoebus he reclined, Observed every chance, how all their motions bend, Resolved if possible to aid his friend. He pilfered a Foot soldier and a Knight From the prison that held the dead confined; And slyly pushed them forward on the field; The enlivened combatants regained their arms, Mixed in the bloody scene, and boldly fought again. So the foul hag, in screaming wild alarms Over a dead carcass, muttering her charms, (And with her frequent and tremendous yell, Forcing great Hecate from out of hell) Shoots in the corpse a new fictitious soul; With instant glare, the supple eyeballs roll, Again it moves and speaks, and life restores the whole. Vulcan alone discerned the subtle cheat; And wisely scorned such a base deceit, Called out to Phoebus. Grief and rage assailed Phoebus by turns; detected Mars went pale. Then awful Jove with a sullen eye reproved Mars, and ordered the captives to be moved To their dark caves; he commanded each fictitious spear Be recalled instantly, and all returned to how they were. And now both Monarchs, with renewed fury, Led on their Queens, to wage mutual war. Over all the field, their thirsty spears they send, Then face to face, their Monarchs they defend. But lo! the female White rushed in unseen, And slew with fatal haste the dark Queen; Yet soon, alas! resigned her royal spoils, Snatched by an arrow from her successful toils. Struck by the sight, both hosts in wild surprise Poured out their tears, and filled the air with cries; They wept and sighed, as passed the funeral train, As if both armies had been slain at once. And now each troop surrounds its grieving chief, To guard his person, or ease his grief. One common fear is theirs; one stormy blast Has equally wrought havoc as it passed. However, not all of their young are dead; Some champions yet maintain the vigorous war. Three Foot, an Archer, and a stately Tower, For Phoebus still exert their utmost power. Just the same number Mercury can boast, Except the Tower, who recently in his post Unarmed, ingloriously fell, in peaceful repose, Pierced by an Archer with a distant wound; But his right Horse retained its spirited pride— The rest were swept away by the tide of war. But fretful Hermes, with despairing moan, Grieved that so many champions were overthrown, Yet reassumes the fight; and summons around The little straggling army that he found, All that had escaped from fierce Apollo’s wrath— Resolved with greater caution to engage In future strife, by subtle wiles (if fate Should grant him leave) to save his sinking state. The dark troops advanced with cautious steps, Determined to distress the foe at all costs. More cheerful Phoebus, at an uneven pace, Rallies his forces to lessen his disgrace. But what strange havoc has spread everywhere! A straggling champion is seen here and there; And many are the tents, yet few are left within. The afflicted Kings mourn their fallen consorts, And loathe the thoughts of an empty bed; And although each monarch strives to cherish The tender memory of his former love, Their state demands a second marriage. Hence the pale ruler, with a love-sick eye, Surveys the attendants of his late wife, And offers one of them a royal life. These, when their martial mistress had been slain, Weak and despairing, tried their arms in vain; Willing, however, to join the Black, They thirst for swift revenge against the enemy. Then he resolves to see who merits most, By strength and courage, the imperial robe; Points out the foe, bids each with bold intent Pierce through the ranks, and reach the deepest line: For none must hope to rest with monarchs But who can first, through thick surrounds, Through arms and tricks, with hazardous effort, Safely to the farthest quarters force their way. Fired by the thought, with sudden, joyful speed They rush on; but first of all the race Runs the third right-hand warrior for the prize— The glittering crown already charms her eyes. Her dear associates cheerfully give up The nuptial chase; and swiftly she flies ahead, And Glory lent her wings, and the reward in view. Nor would the dark King prevent her hopes, For he himself was keen on a Queen, Alternate, therefore, through the field they go. Hermes led on, but by one step too slow, His fourth left Pawn: and now the eager White Had marched through all, and reached the longed-for spot. Then the pleased King issued orders to prepare The crown, the scepter, and the royal chair, And acknowledged her as his Queen: around rejoiced The white troops, and over the Black insulted. Hermes burst into tears—filled the wide air with roar, And tore his vibrant attire. The dark Foot had only to advance One simple step; but oh! malignant chance! A towered Elephant, with fatal aim, Stood ready to destroy her when she came: He kept a watchful eye upon the whole, Threatened her entrance, and guarded the goal. Meanwhile, the newly crowned royal bride, Pleased with her splendor, spread death and terror wide; Like lightning, she flew through the dark troops, Clashes her arms, and seems to threaten the sky. The black troops are engulfed in wild fright, And wish the earth would open and snatch them from her sight. In rushed the Queen, with massive, furious force: The trembling foes swarm around the King, Where he stood, forming a brave circle. So the poor cows, straying over pasture land, When they perceive the prowling wolf nearby, Crowd close together in a complete circle, And beg the help of the lordly bull; They crash their horns, they low with dreadful sound, And the distant groves echo the rounds. But the bold Queen, victorious, from behind Pierces the foe; yet primarily she aimed At the King himself with a fatal intention, And filled with war, she approached his pavilion. Now here she rushed, now there; and had she been Merely prudent, she could have slipped through, With an oblique course, into the fourth white square, And the long struggle of war would have ended there, The King would have fallen, and all his dark state; And defeated Hermes would have cursed his divided fate. For from there, easily, the championess could go, Murder the King, and none could defend the blow. With silence, Hermes, and with panting heart, Perceived the danger, but with sly dispatch, (Lest he should see the location) urged the foe, Confounded his thoughts, and blamed his delay. "For shame! move on; would you forever stay? What laziness is this, what strange perverse holdup?— How could you ever blame my little pause?— What! would you wait till night should end the match? Phoebus, thus irritated, foolishly killed A common Pawn but lost his nobler objective. Young Hermes leaped, with sudden joy elate; And then, to save the monarch from his impending fate, Led on his martial Knight, who stepped in between, Pleased that his charge was to oppose the Queen— Then, pondering how to slay the Indian beast, That blocked the Foot from advancing further, From being made a Queen; with an angled aim An archer struck him; down the monster fell, And dying shook the earth: while Phoebus tried Without success to surprise the monarch. The Foot, then uncontrollable with instant pride, Seized the last spot, and moved a royal bride. And now with equal strength both armies engage, And bring their second wives onto the field; Then, though each with equal goals hopped and feared, Yet, as if every doubt had disappeared, As if he had claimed victory, young Hermes flies Into extreme joy; with deep disguise, Extols his own Black troops, with frequent spite And taunts with disdain the Whites. Whom Phoebus reproached with quick retort— "As yet we cannot determine the outcome Of this dispute, and do you now triumph? Then your bold words and boastings I’ll allow, When you completely win the fight; For now, I shall make your boasting vain." He said, and forward led the daring Queen; Instantly, the fury of the bloody clash Surges tumultuous, swift the warriors fly From either side to conquer or to perish. They face the storm of war: around them Fear, Terror, and Death relentlessly appear. All meet in arms, and man to man oppose, Each from their camp attempts to drive their foes; Each tries by turns to breach the hostile ranks; Chance and impatience ruin their best schemes. The dark Queen spread terror as she went Through the central ranks: with more reserved intent The opposing dame avoided the open fray, And secretly stole away to the King: Then took the royal guard and burst in, With lethal threats, closely besieging the King. Alarmed at this, the dark Queen, in haste, Broke off from all her havoc and destruction To leap between the Monarch and the foe, To save the King and state from this looming blow. But Phoebus faced a worse misfortune here: For Hermes now led forward, fearless, His furious Horse onto the open field, That onward chafed, and pranced, and strode restlessly. He did not cease from his efforts until he stood On the long-desired space, from where he could Slay King or Queen. Overwhelmed with sudden fears, Apollo saw, and could not stop from tears. Now all seemed primed to be taken down; His strength was withered, every hope was gone. Hermes, rejoicing at this great surprise, Shouted with joy and filled the air with cries; He sent the Queen to shades below, And made a triumph of her trophies. But in return, and in his mid career, Fell his brave Knight, beneath the Monarch’s spear. Phoebus, however, did not yet despair, But still fought on with courage and care. He had merely two poor ordinary men remaining, And Mars’s favorite with his ivory bow. The thought of ruin made them dare their utmost To save their King, so fatally distressed. But the grim hour did not need such aid; And Hermes breathed revenge wherever he wandered. Fiercely comes the dark Queen with deadly threat, Surrounds the Monarch in his royal seat; Rushed here and there, nor rested until she slew The last remainder of the whitened crew. Only the King stood, in the center of the plain, Weak and defenseless, his companions slain. As when the rosy dawn ascends high, Chasing the twinkling stars from the sky, Your star, fair Venus, still retains its light, And, loveliest, goes the latest out of sight. No safety remains, no glimmers of hope exist; Yet he didn’t withdraw as vanquished from the plain, But tried to position himself between the foe— Unscathed through swords and spears, he hoped to go, Until no space remained to avoid the fatal strike. For if none threatened his immediate fate, And his next move must ruin all his state, All their past toil and labor is in vain, Vain all the bloody carnage of the plain— Neither would triumph then, no laurels would be gained. Thus through each empty space and deserted tent, By different moves he bent his diverse course: The Black King watched him with careful eyes, Followed him closely, yet left room to flee. Then when he observed him take the farthest line, He sent the Queen to obstruct his motions, And safeguard the second line, so he could go No farther now than to that distant row. The dark monarch then, with cheerful demeanor, Approached, but always kept one space apart. But as the King stood across from him there, Helpless, forlorn, and sunk in despair, The martial Queen recognized her lucky moment, Seized the farthest square with fatal view, Nor allowed the unfortunate King a place to flee to. At last in vengeance, her sharp sword she draws, Slays him, and thus ends the bloody cause: And all the gods around approved it with cheers. The victor could not contain himself from insults, But laughed and sneered to see Apollo weep. Jove called him closer, and handed him the wand The powerful, happy, and mysterious scepter By which the Shades are summoned to purer day, When penal fire has purged their sins away; By which the guilty are condemned to dwell In the dark mansions of the deepest hell; By which he brings us sleep, or denies it, And closes at last the dying eyes. Soon after this, the heavenly victor brought The game onto earth, and first taught the Italians. For (as they say) beautiful Scacchis he spotted Feeding her cygnets in the silver current, (Sacchis, the loveliest Seriad of the area) And as she roamed, took her to his embrace. Then, to reward her for her lost virtue, Gave her the men and checkered board, embossed With gold and silver intricately inlaid; And taught her how the game was to be played. Even now, it’s honored with her happy name; And Rome and all the world admire the game. All this the Seriads told me long ago, When my youthful notes amused the Serian shore.
NOTES
INTRODUCTION
He was born . . . at Pallas. This is the usual account. But it was maintained by the family of the poet’s mother, and has been contended (by Dr. Michael F. Cox in a Lecture on ‘The Country and Kindred of Oliver Goldsmith,’ published in vol. 1, pt. 2, of the Journal of the ‘National Literary Society of Ireland.’ 1900) that his real birth-place was the residence of Mrs. Goldsmith’s parents, Smith-Hill House, Elphin, Roscommon, to which she was in the habit of paying frequent visits. Meanwhile, in 1897, a window was placed to Goldsmith’s memory in Forgney Church, Longford,—the church of which, at the time of his birth, his father was curate.
He was born . . . at Pallas. This is the common story. However, it was supported by the family of the poet’s mother, and Dr. Michael F. Cox argued (in a lecture titled ‘The Country and Kindred of Oliver Goldsmith,’ published in vol. 1, pt. 2, of the Journal of the ‘National Literary Society of Ireland,’ 1900) that his real birthplace was the home of Mrs. Goldsmith’s parents, Smith-Hill House, Elphin, Roscommon, where she often visited. In 1897, a window was dedicated to Goldsmith’s memory in Forgney Church, Longford—the church where his father was the curate at the time of his birth.
his academic career was not a success. ‘Oliver Goldsmith is recorded on two occasions as being remarkably diligent at Morning Lecture; again, as cautioned for bad answering at Morning and Greek Lectures; and finally, as put down into the next class for neglect of his studies’ (Dr. Stubbs’s History of the University of Dublin, 1889, p. 201 n.)
his academic career was not a success. ‘Oliver Goldsmith is noted twice for being very attentive during Morning Lectures; again, he was warned for poor answers at Morning and Greek Lectures; and finally, he was moved to the next class for neglecting his studies’ (Dr. Stubbs’s History of the University of Dublin, 1889, p. 201 n.)
a scratched signature upon a window-pane. This, which is now at Trinity College, Dublin, is here reproduced in facsimile. When the garrets of No. 35, Parliament Square, were pulled down in 1837, it was cut out of the window by the last occupant of the rooms, who broke it in the process. (Dr. J. F. Waller in Cassell’s Works of Goldsmith, [1864–5], pp. xiii-xiv n.)
a scratched signature upon a window-pane. This, which is now at Trinity College, Dublin, is reproduced here as a facsimile. When the attics of No. 35, Parliament Square, were demolished in 1837, the last person living in those rooms cut it out of the window, accidentally breaking it in the process. (Dr. J. F. Waller in Cassell’s Works of Goldsmith, [1864–5], pp. xiii-xiv n.)
a poor physician. Where he obtained his diploma is not known. It was certainly not at Padua (Athenaeum, July 21, 1894). At Leyden and Louvain Prior made inquiries but, in each case, without success. The annals of the University of Louvain were, however, destroyed in the revolutionary wars. (Prior, Life, 1837, i, pp. 171, 178).
a poor physician. It's not clear where he got his diploma. It definitely wasn't from Padua (Athenaeum, July 21, 1894). Prior looked into it at Leyden and Louvain, but didn’t have any luck. Unfortunately, the records of the University of Louvain were destroyed during the revolutionary wars. (Prior, Life, 1837, i, pp. 171, 178).
declared it to be by Goldsmith. Goldsmith’s authorship of this version has now been placed beyond a doubt by the publication in facsimile of his signed receipt to Edward Dilly for third share of ‘my translation,’ such third share amounting to 6 pounds 13s. 4d. The receipt, which belongs to Mr. J. W. Ford of Enfield Old Park, is dated ‘January 11th, 1758.’ (Memoirs of a Protestant, etc., Dent’s edition, 1895, i, pp. xii-xviii.)
declared it to be by Goldsmith. Goldsmith’s authorship of this version has now been confirmed with the publication of a facsimile of his signed receipt to Edward Dilly for a third share of ‘my translation,’ which amounted to 6 pounds 13s. 4d. The receipt, now owned by Mr. J. W. Ford of Enfield Old Park, is dated ‘January 11th, 1758.’ (Memoirs of a Protestant, etc., Dent’s edition, 1895, i, pp. xii-xviii.)
12, Green Arbour Court, Old Bailey. This was a tiny square occupying a site now absorbed by the Holborn Viaduct and Railway Station. No. 12, where Goldsmith lived, was later occupied by Messrs. Smith, Elder & Co. as a printing office. An engraving of the Court forms the frontispiece to the European Magazine for January, 1803.
12, Green Arbour Court, Old Bailey. This was a small square that now falls under the area of the Holborn Viaduct and Railway Station. No. 12, where Goldsmith lived, was later taken over by Messrs. Smith, Elder & Co. as a printing office. An engraving of the Court serves as the frontispiece for the European Magazine for January, 1803.
or some of his imitators. The proximate cause of the Citizen of the World, as the present writer has suggested elsewhere, may have been Horace Walpole’s Letter from XoHo [Soho?], a Chinese Philosopher at London, to his friend Lien Chi, at Peking. This was noticed as ‘in Montesquieu’s manner’ in the May issue of the Monthly Review for 1757, to which Goldsmith was a contributor (Eighteenth Century Vignettes, first series, second edition, 1897, pp. 108–9).
or some of his imitators. The immediate inspiration for the Citizen of the World, as I have mentioned elsewhere, could have been Horace Walpole’s Letter from XoHo [Soho?], a Chinese Philosopher in London, to his friend Lien Chi, in Peking. This was noted as ‘in the style of Montesquieu’ in the May edition of the Monthly Review from 1757, which Goldsmith contributed to (Eighteenth Century Vignettes, first series, second edition, 1897, pp. 108–9).
demonstrable from internal evidence. e.g.—The references to the musical glasses (ch. ix), which were the rage in 1761–2; and to the Auditor (ch. xix) established by Arthur Murphy in June of the latter year. The sale of the ‘Vicar’ is discussed at length in chapter vii of the editor’s Life of Oliver Goldsmith (‘Great Writers’ series), 1888, pp. 110–21.
demonstrable from internal evidence. e.g.—The references to the musical glasses (ch. ix), which were really popular in 1761–2; and to the Auditor (ch. xix) created by Arthur Murphy in June of that year. The sale of the ‘Vicar’ is discussed in detail in chapter vii of the editor’s Life of Oliver Goldsmith (‘Great Writers’ series), 1888, pp. 110–21.
started with a loss. This, which to some critics has seemed unintelliglble, rests upon the following: ‘The first three editions, . . . resulted in a loss, and the fourth, which was not issued until eight [four?] years after the first, started with a balance against it of £2 16s. 6d., and it was not until that fourth edition had been sold that the balance came out on the right side’ (A Bookseller of the Last Century [John Newbery] by Charles Welsh, 1885, p. 61). The writer based his statement upon Collins’s ‘Publishing book, account of books printed and shares therein, No. 3, 1770 to 1785.’
started with a loss. Some critics have found this unintelligible, but it is based on the following: “The first three editions... resulted in a loss, and the fourth edition, which wasn’t released until eight [or four?] years after the first, started with a deficit of £2 16s. 6d. It wasn’t until that fourth edition was sold that the balance finally turned positive” (A Bookseller of the Last Century [John Newbery] by Charles Welsh, 1885, p. 61). The writer's statement relied on Collins’s ‘Publishing book, account of books printed and shares therein, No. 3, 1770 to 1785.’
James’s Powder. This was a famous patent panacea, invented by Johnson’s Lichfield townsman, Dr. Robert James of the Medicinal Dictionary. It was sold by John Newbery, and had an extraordinary vogue. The King dosed Princess Elizabeth with it; Fielding, Gray, and Cowper all swore by it, and Horace Walpole, who wished to try it upon Mme. du Deffand in extremis, said he should use it if the house were on fire. William Hawes, the Strand apothecary who attended Goldsmith, wrote an interesting Account of the late Dr. Goldsmith’s Illness, so far as relates to the Exhibition of Dr. James’s Powders, etc., 1774, which he dedicated to Reynolds and Burke. To Hawes once belonged the poet’s worn old wooden writing-desk, now in the South Kensington Museum, where are also his favourite chair and cane. Another desk-chair, which had descended from his friend, Edmund Bott, was recently for sale at Sotheby’s (July, 1906).
James’s Powder. This was a well-known patent remedy, created by Dr. Robert James from Lichfield, who contributed to the Medicinal Dictionary. It was marketed by John Newbery and became extremely popular. The King gave it to Princess Elizabeth; Fielding, Gray, and Cowper all endorsed it, and Horace Walpole, who wanted to use it on Mme. du Deffand in extremis, claimed he’d use it even if the house were on fire. William Hawes, the apothecary on the Strand who cared for Goldsmith, wrote an interesting Account of the late Dr. Goldsmith’s Illness, so far as relates to the Exhibition of Dr. James’s Powders, etc., 1774, which he dedicated to Reynolds and Burke. Hawes once owned the poet’s worn old wooden writing desk, now in the South Kensington Museum, along with his favorite chair and cane. Another desk chair, passed down from his friend, Edmund Bott, was recently up for auction at Sotheby’s (July, 1906).
![[Illustration: Green Arbour Court, Little Old Bailey.]](images/greenarbor.jpg)
GREEN ARBOUR COURT,
LITTLE OLD BAILEY
(as it appeared in 1803)
GREEN ARBOUR COURT,
LITTLE OLD BAILEY
(as it appeared in 1803)
EDITIONS OF THE POEMS.
No collected edition of Goldsmith’s poetical works appeared until after his death. But, in 1775, W. Griffin, who had published the Essays of ten years earlier, issued a volume entitled The Miscellaneous Works of Oliver Goldsmith, M.B., containing all his Essays and Poems. The ‘poems’ however were confined to ‘The Traveller,’ ‘The Deserted Village,’ ‘Edwin and Angelina,’ ‘The Double Transformation,’ ‘A New Simile,’ and ‘Retaliation,’—an obviously imperfect harvesting. In the following year G. Kearsly printed an eighth edition of Retaliation, with which he included ‘The Hermit’ (‘Edwin and Angelina’), ‘The Gift,’ ‘Madam Blaize,’ and the epilogues to The Sister and She stoops to Conquer;* while to an edition of The Haunch of Venison, also put forth in 1776, he added the ‘Epitaph on Parnell’ and two songs from the oratorio of The Captivity. The next collection appeared in a volume of Poems and Plays published at Dublin in 1777, where it was preceded by a ‘Life,’ written by W. Glover, one of Goldsmith’s ‘Irish clients.’ Then, in 1780, came vol. i of T. Evans’s Poetical and Dramatic Works, etc., now first collected, also having a ‘Memoir,’ and certainly fuller than anything which had gone before. Next followed the long-deferred Miscellaneous Works, etc., of 1801, in four volumes, vol. ii of which comprised the plays and poems. Prefixed to this edition is the important biographical sketch, compiled under the direction of Bishop Percy, and usually described as the Percy Memoir, by which title it is referred to in the ensuing notes. The next memorable edition was that edited for the Aldine Series in 1831, by the Rev. John Mitford. Prior and Wright’s edition in vol. iv of the Miscellaneous Works, etc., of 1837, comes after this; then Bolton Corney’s excellent Poetical Works of 1845; and vol. i of Peter Cunningham’s Works, etc. of 1854. There are other issues of the poems, the latest of which is to be found in vol. ii (1885) of the complete Works, in five volumes, edited for Messrs. George Bell and Sons by J. W. M. Gibbs.
No collected edition of Goldsmith’s poetry was published until after his death. However, in 1775, W. Griffin, who had released the Essays a decade earlier, published a volume titled The Miscellaneous Works of Oliver Goldsmith, M.B., containing all his Essays and Poems. The 'poems,' though, were limited to ‘The Traveller,’ ‘The Deserted Village,’ ‘Edwin and Angelina,’ ‘The Double Transformation,’ ‘A New Simile,’ and ‘Retaliation,’ which was clearly an incomplete selection. The following year, G. Kearsly printed an eighth edition of Retaliation, which included ‘The Hermit’ (‘Edwin and Angelina’), ‘The Gift,’ ‘Madam Blaize,’ and the epilogues to The Sister and She Stoops to Conquer; while in another edition of The Haunch of Venison, also released in 1776, he added the ‘Epitaph on Parnell’ and two songs from the oratorio The Captivity. The next collection was a volume of Poems and Plays published in Dublin in 1777, which included a ‘Life’ written by W. Glover, one of Goldsmith’s ‘Irish clients.’ Then, in 1780, T. Evans released vol. i of Poetical and Dramatic Works, etc., now first collected, which also included a ‘Memoir,’ and was certainly more complete than previous editions. Next came the long-awaited Miscellaneous Works, etc., of 1801, in four volumes, with vol. ii containing the plays and poems. Prefixed to this edition is an important biographical sketch, compiled under the direction of Bishop Percy, usually referred to as the Percy Memoir, which is noted in the following notes. The next significant edition was edited for the Aldine Series in 1831 by Rev. John Mitford. Following this was Prior and Wright’s edition in vol. iv of the Miscellaneous Works, etc., in 1837; then came Bolton Corney’s excellent Poetical Works of 1845; and vol. i of Peter Cunningham’s Works, etc., of 1854. There have been other issues of the poems, the latest of which can be found in vol. ii (1885) of the complete Works, in five volumes, edited for Messrs. George Bell and Sons by J. W. M. Gibbs.
* Some copies of this are dated 1777, and contain The Haunch of Venison and a few minor pieces.
* Some copies of this are dated 1777, and include The Haunch of Venison and a few minor pieces.
Most of the foregoing editions have been consulted for the following notes; but chiefly those of Mitford, Prior, Bolton Corney, and Cunningham. Many of the illustrations and explanations now supplied will not, however, be found in any of the sources indicated. When an elucidatory or parallel passage is cited, an attempt has been made, as far as possible, to give the credit of it to the first discoverer. Thus, some of the illustrations in Cunningham’s notes are here transferred to Prior, some of Prior’s to Mitford, and so forth. As regards the notes themselves, care has been taken to make them full enough to obviate the necessity, except in rare instances, of further investigation. It is the editor’s experience that references to external authorities are, as a general rule, sign-posts to routes which are seldom travelled.*
Most of the earlier editions have been referenced for the following notes; primarily those by Mitford, Prior, Bolton Corney, and Cunningham. However, many of the illustrations and explanations provided here aren’t found in any of the mentioned sources. When a clarifying or similar passage is cited, an effort has been made, as much as possible, to credit the original discoverer. So, some of the illustrations in Cunningham’s notes are credited to Prior, some of Prior’s to Mitford, and so on. Regarding the notes themselves, care has been taken to ensure they are comprehensive enough to eliminate the need for further research, except in rare cases. From the editor's experience, references to outside sources generally serve as signposts to paths that are rarely taken.*
* In this connexion may be recalled the dictum of Hume quoted by Dr. Birkbeck Hill:—‘Every book should be as complete as possible within itself, and should never refer for anything material to other books’ (History of England, 1802, ii. 101).
* In this context, we can remember Hume's saying quoted by Dr. Birkbeck Hill:—‘Every book should be as complete as possible on its own and should never rely on other books for anything important’ (History of England, 1802, ii. 101).
THE TRAVELLER.
It was on those continental wanderings which occupied Goldsmith between February, 1755 and February, 1756 that he conceived his first idea of this, the earliest of his poems to which he prefixed his name; and he probably had in mind Addison’s Letter from Italy to Lord Halifax, a work in which he found ‘a strain of political thinking that was, at that time [1701]. new in our poetry.’ (Beauties of English Poesy, 1767, i. III). From the dedicatory letter to his brother—which says expressly, ‘as a part of this Poem was formerly written to you from Switzerland, the whole can now, with propriety, be only inscribed to you’—it is plain that some portion of it must have been actually composed abroad. It was not, however, actually published until the 19th of December, 1764, and the title-page bore the date of 1765.* The publisher was John Newbery, of St. Paul’s Churchyard, and the price of the book, a quarto of 30 pages, was 1s. 6d. A second, third and fourth edition quickly followed, and a ninth, from which it is here reprinted, was issued in 1774, the year of the author’s death. Between the first and the sixth edition of 1770 there were numerous alterations, the more important of which are indicated in the ensuing notes.
It was during his travels across Europe between February 1755 and February 1756 that Goldsmith came up with the initial idea for this, the first of his poems to which he attached his name. He likely drew inspiration from Addison’s Letter from Italy to Lord Halifax, a work that presented 'a type of political thought that was, at that time [1701], new in our poetry.' (Beauties of English Poesy, 1767, i. III). In the dedicatory letter to his brother, which clearly states, 'since part of this Poem was previously written to you from Switzerland, it is now appropriate for the whole to be dedicated to you,' it’s obvious that some sections of it were actually written abroad. However, it wasn't published until December 19, 1764, and the title page displayed the date of 1765.* The publisher was John Newbery from St. Paul’s Churchyard, and the book, a quarto of 30 pages, was priced at 1s. 6d. A second, third, and fourth edition quickly followed, and a ninth edition, from which this text is reprinted, was released in 1774, the year of the author's death. Between the first and the sixth edition of 1770, there were several changes, with the more significant ones noted in the following notes.
* This is the generally recognized first edition. But the late Mr.
Frederick Locker Lampson, the poet and collector, possessed a quarto copy,
dated 1764, which had no author’s name, and in which the dedication ran as
follows:—‘This poem is inscribed to the Rev. Henry Goldsmith, M.A.
By his most affectionate Brother Oliver Goldsmith.’ It was, in all
probability, unique, though it is alleged that there are octavo copies
which present similar characteristics. It has now gone to America with the
Rowfant Library.
In 1902 an interesting discovery was made by Mr. Bertram Dobell, to
whom the public are indebted for so many important literary ‘finds.’ In a
parcel of pamphlets he came upon a number of loose printed leaves entitled
A Prospect of Society. They obviously belonged to The
Traveller; but seemed to be its ‘formless unarranged material,’ and
contained many variations from the text of the first edition. Mr. Dobell’s
impression was that ‘the author’s manuscript, written on loose leaves, had
fallen into confusion, and was then printed without any attempt at
re-arrangement.’ This was near the mark; but the complete solution of the
riddle was furnished by Mr. Quiller Couch in an article in the Daily
News for March 31, 1902, since recast in his charming volume From
a Cornish Window, 1906, pp. 86–92. He showed conclusively that
The Prospect was ‘merely an early draft of The
Traveller printed backwards in fairly regular sections.’ What had
manifestly happened was this. Goldsmith, turning over each page as
written, had laid it on the top of the preceding page of MS. and forgotten
to rearrange them when done. Thus the series of pages were reversed; and,
so reversed, were set up in type by a matter-of-fact compositor. Mr.
Dobell at once accepted this happy explanation; which—as Mr. Quiller
Couch points out—has the advantage of being a ‘blunder just so
natural to Goldsmith as to be almost postulable.’ One or two of the
variations of Mr. Dobell’s ‘find’—variations, it should be added,
antecedent to the first edition—are noted in their places.
* This is the generally recognized first edition. However, the late Mr. Frederick Locker Lampson, the poet and collector, had a quarto copy from 1764 that didn't have an author’s name, and the dedication read: ‘This poem is inscribed to the Rev. Henry Goldsmith, M.A. By his most affectionate Brother Oliver Goldsmith.’ It was probably unique, although it’s said that there are octavo copies with similar traits. It has now gone to America with the Rowfant Library.
In 1902, Mr. Bertram Dobell made an interesting discovery, and we owe him many important literary ‘finds.’ In a parcel of pamphlets, he found several loose printed leaves titled A Prospect of Society. These clearly belonged to The Traveller; but they seemed to be its ‘formless unarranged material,’ containing many variations from the text of the first edition. Mr. Dobell thought that ‘the author’s manuscript, written on loose leaves, had fallen into confusion and was then printed without any attempt at rearrangement.’ This was close, but the full explanation came from Mr. Quiller Couch in an article in the Daily News on March 31, 1902, which was later included in his lovely book From a Cornish Window, 1906, pp. 86–92. He clearly demonstrated that The Prospect was ‘merely an early draft of The Traveller printed backwards in fairly regular sections.’ What likely happened was that Goldsmith, turning over each page as he wrote, placed it on top of the previous page of the manuscript and forgot to rearrange them when he finished. This caused the sequence of pages to be reversed and, in that order, they were typeset by a practical compositor. Mr. Dobell quickly accepted this fortunate explanation; which—as Mr. Quiller Couch notes—has the appeal of being a ‘blunder just so natural to Goldsmith as to be almost postulable.’ One or two of the variations from Mr. Dobell’s ‘find’—variations, it should be noted, that predate the first edition—are mentioned in their respective places.
The didactic purpose of The Traveller is defined in the concluding paragraph of the Dedication; and, like many of the thoughts which it contains, had been anticipated in a passage of The Citizen of the World, 1762, i. 185:—‘Every mind seems capable of entertaining a certain quantity of happiness, which no institutions can encrease, no circumstances alter, and entirely independent on fortune.’ But the best short description of the poem is Macaulay’s:—‘In the Traveller the execution, though deserving of much praise, is far inferior to the design. No philosophical poem, ancient or modern, has a plan so noble, and at the same time so simple. An English wanderer, seated on a crag among the Alps, near the point where three great countries meet, looks down on the boundless prospect, reviews his long pilgrimage, recalls the varieties of scenery, of climate, of government, of religion, of national character, which he has observed, and comes to the conclusion, just or unjust, that our happiness depends little on political institutions, and much on the temper and regulation of our own minds.’ (Encyclop. Britannica, Goldsmith, February, 1856.)
The teaching goal of The Traveller is laid out in the last paragraph of the Dedication; and, like many ideas it includes, it was hinted at in a section of The Citizen of the World, 1762, i. 185:—‘Every mind seems capable of experiencing a specific amount of happiness, which no systems can increase, no situations can change, and is completely independent of luck.’ However, Macaulay provides the best brief description of the poem:—‘In the Traveller, the execution, although deserving a lot of praise, is far less impressive than the concept. No philosophical poem, old or new, has a plan so great, yet so straightforward. An English traveler, sitting on a cliff in the Alps, where three significant countries come together, gazes down at the endless view, reflects on his long journey, remembers the different landscapes, climates, governments, religions, and national characters he has seen, and comes to the conclusion, whether right or wrong, that our happiness relies little on political systems, and greatly on the mindset and regulation of our own minds.’ (Encyclop. Britannica, Goldsmith, February, 1856.)
The only definite record of payment for The Traveller is ‘Copy of the Traveller, a Poem, 21l,’ in Newbery’s MSS.; but as the same sum occurs in Memoranda of much later date than 1764, it is possible that the success of the book may have prompted some supplementary fee.
The only clear record of payment for The Traveller is ‘Copy of the Traveller, a Poem, 21l,’ in Newbery’s manuscripts; however, since the same amount appears in notes from much later than 1764, it’s possible that the book’s success led to an additional payment.
A Prospect, i.e. ‘a view.’ ‘I went to Putney, and other places on the Thames, to take ‘prospects’ in crayon, to carry into France, where I thought to have them engraved’ (Evelyn, Diary, 20th June, 1649). And Reynolds uses the word of Claude in his Fourth Discourse:—‘His pictures are a composition of the various draughts which he had previously made from various beautiful scenes and prospects’ (Works, by Malone, 1798, i. 105). The word is common on old prints, e.g. An Exact Prospect of the Magnificent Stone Bridge at Westminster, etc., 1751.
A Prospect, meaning ‘a view.’ ‘I went to Putney and other places along the Thames to sketch ‘prospects’ in crayon to take to France, where I planned to have them engraved’ (Evelyn, Diary, 20th June, 1649). And Reynolds references Claude in his Fourth Discourse:—‘His paintings are a combination of the various sketches he made from different beautiful scenes and views’ (Works, by Malone, 1798, i. 105). The term is commonly found in old prints, for example, An Exact Prospect of the Magnificent Stone Bridge at Westminster, etc., 1751.
Dedication. The Rev. Henry Goldsmith, says the Percy Memoir, 1801, p. 3, ‘had distinguished himself both at school and at college, but he unfortunately married at the early age of nineteen; which confined him to a Curacy, and prevented his rising to preferment in the church.’
Dedication. The Rev. Henry Goldsmith, according to the Percy Memoir, 1801, p. 3, "stood out both in school and at college, but he unfortunately got married at the young age of nineteen; which limited him to a Curacy and stopped him from advancing in the church."
with an income of forty pounds a year. Cf. The Deserted Village, ll. 141–2:—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ See The Deserted Village, ll. 141–2:—
A man he was, to all the country dear,
And passing rich with forty pounds a year.
A man he was, loved by everyone in the country,
And pretty well-off with forty pounds a year.
Cf. also Parson Adams in ch. iii of Joseph Andrews, who has twenty-three; and Mr. Rivers, in the Spiritual Quixote, 1772:—‘I do not choose to go into orders to be a curate all my life-time, and work for about fifteen-pence a day, or twenty-five pounds a year’ (bk. vi, ch. xvii). Dr. Primrose’s stipend is thirty-five in the first instance, fifteen in the second (Vicar of Wakefield, chapters ii and iii). But Professor Hales (Longer English Poems, 1885, p. 351) supplies an exact parallel in the case of Churchill, who, he says, when a curate at Rainham, ‘prayed and starved on forty pounds a year.’ The latter words are Churchill’s own, and sound like a quotation; but he was dead long before The Deserted Village appeared in 1770. There is an interesting paper in the Gentleman’s Magazine for November, 1763, on the miseries and hardships of the ‘inferior clergy.’
Cf. also Parson Adams in ch. iii of Joseph Andrews, who has twenty-three; and Mr. Rivers, in the Spiritual Quixote, 1772:—‘I don’t want to become a priest just to be a curate my whole life, working for about fifteen pence a day or twenty-five pounds a year’ (bk. vi, ch. xvii). Dr. Primrose’s salary is thirty-five at first, then fifteen (Vicar of Wakefield, chapters ii and iii). But Professor Hales (Longer English Poems, 1885, p. 351) provides an exact example with Churchill, who, according to him, when he was a curate in Rainham, ‘prayed and starved on forty pounds a year.’ Those last words are Churchill’s own and seem like a quote; however, he was already dead by the time The Deserted Village was published in 1770. There’s an interesting article in the Gentleman’s Magazine from November 1763 discussing the struggles and challenges faced by the ‘inferior clergy.’
But of all kinds of ambition, etc. In the first edition of 1765, p. ii, this passage was as follows:—‘But of all kinds of ambition, as things are now circumstanced, perhaps that which pursues poetical fame, is the wildest. What from the encreased refinement of the times, from the diversity of judgments produced by opposing systems of criticism, and from the more prevalent divisions of opinion influenced by party, the strongest and happiest efforts can expect to please but in a very narrow circle. Though the poet were as sure of his aim as the imperial archer of antiquity, who boasted that he never missed the heart; yet would many of his shafts now fly at random, for the heart is too often in the wrong place.’ In the second edition it was curtailed; in the sixth it took its final form.
But of all kinds of ambition, etc. In the first edition of 1765, p. ii, this passage read:—‘But of all types of ambition, given the current circumstances, perhaps the one chasing poetic fame is the wildest. Due to the increased refinement of the times, the variety of opinions shaped by conflicting critical systems, and the growing divisions of thought driven by political parties, even the strongest and most brilliant efforts can only expect to resonate with a very small audience. Even if the poet were as confident in his aim as the legendary archer of ancient times who claimed he never missed the mark; still, many of his arrows will likely go astray, because the mark is often in the wrong place.’ In the second edition, it was shortened; in the sixth, it reached its final version.
they engross all that favour once shown to her. First version—‘They engross all favour to themselves.’
they engross all that favour once shown to her. First version—‘They attract all the attention to themselves.’
the elder’s birthright. Cunningham here aptly compares Dryden’s epistle To Sir Godfrey Kneller, II. 89–92:—
the elder’s birthright. Cunningham here accurately compares Dryden’s epistle To Sir Godfrey Kneller, II. 89–92:—
Our arts are sisters, though not twins in birth;
For hymns were sung in Eden’s happy earth:
But oh, the painter muse, though last in place,
Has seized the blessing first, like Jacob’s race.
Our arts are like sisters, but not identical twins;
For hymns were sung in Eden’s joyful land:
But oh, the painter muse, though she comes last,
Has grabbed the blessing first, like Jacob’s descendants.
Party=faction. Cf. lines 31–2 on Edmund Burke in Retaliation:—
Party=faction. See lines 31–32 on Edmund Burke in Retaliation:—
Who, born for the Universe, narrow’d his mind,
And to party gave up what was meant for mankind.
Who, born for the Universe, limited his thinking,
And to party sacrificed what was meant for humanity.
Such readers generally admire, etc. ‘I suppose this paragraph to be directed against Paul Whitehead, or Churchill,’ writes Mitford. It was clearly aimed at Churchill, since Prior (Life, 1837, ii. 54) quotes a portion of a contemporary article in the St. James’s Chronicle for February 7–9, 1765, attributed to Bonnell Thornton, which leaves little room for doubt upon the question. ‘The latter part of this paragraph,’ says the writer, referring to the passage now annotated, ‘we cannot help considering as a reflection on the memory of the late Mr. Churchill, whose talents as a poet were so greatly and so deservedly admired, that during his short reign, his merit in great measure eclipsed that of others; and we think it no mean acknowledgment of the excellencies of this poem [The Traveller] to say that, like the stars, they appear the more brilliant now that the sun of our poetry is gone down.’ Churchill died on the 4th of November, 1764, some weeks before the publication of The Traveller. His powers, it may be, were misdirected and misapplied; but his rough vigour and his manly verse deserved a better fate at Goldsmith’s hands.
Such readers generally admire, etc. ‘I think this paragraph is aimed at Paul Whitehead or Churchill,’ writes Mitford. It was clearly directed at Churchill, since Prior (Life, 1837, ii. 54) quotes part of a contemporary article in the St. James’s Chronicle from February 7–9, 1765, attributed to Bonnell Thornton, which leaves little doubt on the matter. ‘The latter part of this paragraph,’ says the writer, referring to the passage now annotated, ‘we cannot help but see as a slight against the memory of the late Mr. Churchill, whose talents as a poet were so highly and justly praised that during his brief time, his merit largely overshadowed that of others; and we think it is no small recognition of the qualities of this poem [The Traveller] to say that, like the stars, they seem brighter now that the sun of our poetry has set.’ Churchill passed away on November 4, 1764, a few weeks before the release of The Traveller. It may be that his abilities were misdirected and misapplied; however, his raw energy and masculine verse deserved a better reception at Goldsmith’s hands.
blank verse. Cf. The Present State of Polite Learning, 1759, p. 150—‘From a desire in the critic of grafting the spirit of ancient languages upon the English, has proceeded of late several disagreeable instances of pedantry. Among the number, I think we may reckon blank verse. Nothing but the greatest sublimity of subject can render such a measure pleasing; however, we now see it used on the most trivial occasions’—by which last remark Goldsmith probably, as Cunningham thinks, intended to refer to the efforts of Akenside, Dyer, and Armstrong. His views upon blank verse were shared by Johnson and Gray. At the date of the present dedication, the latest offender in this way had been Goldsmith’s old colleague on The Monthly Review, Dr. James Grainger, author of The Sugar Cane, which was published in June, 1764. (Cf. also The Bee for 24th November, 1759, ‘An account of the Augustan Age of England.’)
blank verse. Cf. The Present State of Polite Learning, 1759, p. 150—‘Recently, due to a critic's desire to incorporate the essence of ancient languages into English, we've seen some unpleasant displays of pretentiousness. Among these, I would include blank verse. Only the highest level of subject matter can make this form enjoyable; yet, we now see it being used in the most trivial situations’—with this last comment, Goldsmith likely intended to point to the works of Akenside, Dyer, and Armstrong, as Cunningham suggests. Johnson and Gray also shared his views on blank verse. At the time of this dedication, the most recent offender in this category had been Goldsmith's former colleague at The Monthly Review, Dr. James Grainger, the author of The Sugar Cane, published in June 1764. (Cf. also The Bee for November 24, 1759, ‘An account of the Augustan Age of England.’)
and that this principle, etc. In the first edition this read—‘and that this principle in each state, and in our own in particular, may be carried to a mischievous excess.’
and that this principle, etc. In the first edition this read—'and that this principle in each state, and in our own in particular, could be taken too far and cause harm.'
Remote, unfriended, melancholy, slow. Mitford (Aldine edition, 1831, p. 7) compares the following lines from Ovid:—
Remote, unfriended, melancholy, slow. Mitford (Aldine edition, 1831, p. 7) compares the following lines from Ovid:—
Solus, inops, exspes, leto poenaeque relictus.
Metamorphoses, xiv. 217.
Exsul, inops erres, alienaque limina lustres, etc.
Ibis. 113.
Solitary, deprived, hopeless, abandoned by death and punishment.
Metamorphoses, xiv. 217.
Exiled, wandering in emptiness, you wander through foreign doors, etc.
Ibis. 113.
slow. A well-known passage from Boswell must here be reproduced:—‘Chamier once asked him [Goldsmith], what he meant by slow, the last word in the first line of The Traveller,
slow. A well-known passage from Boswell must here be reproduced:—‘Chamier once asked him [Goldsmith], what he meant by slow, the last word in the first line of The Traveller,
Remote, unfriended, melancholy, slow.
Remote, unfriended, sad, slow.
Did he mean tardiness of locomotion? Goldsmith, who would say something without consideration, answered “yes.” I [Johnson] was sitting by, and said, “No, Sir, you do not mean tardiness of locomotion; you mean, that sluggishness of mind which comes upon a man in solitude.” Chamier believed then that I had written the line as much as if he had seen me write it.’ [Birkbeck Hill’s Boswell, 1887, iii. 252–3.) It is quite possible, however, that Goldsmith meant no more than he said.
Did he mean slowness of movement? Goldsmith, who would speak impulsively, replied “yes.” I (Johnson) was sitting nearby and said, “No, Sir, you don’t mean slowness of movement; you mean that mental sluggishness that hits a person when they’re alone.” Chamier then believed that I had written the line as if he had seen me do it. [Birkbeck Hill’s Boswell, 1887, iii. 252–3.] However, it’s quite possible that Goldsmith meant nothing more than what he said.
the rude Carinthian boor. ‘Carinthia,’ says Cunningham, ‘was visited by Goldsmith in 1755, and still (1853) retains its character for inhospitality.’
the rude Carinthian boor. ‘Carinthia,’ Cunningham says, ‘was visited by Goldsmith in 1755, and even now (1853) still has a reputation for being unwelcoming.’
Campania. ‘Intended,’ says Bolton Corney, ‘to denote La campagna di Roma. The portion of it which extends from Rome to Terracina is scarcely habitable.’
Campania. “Intended,” says Bolton Corney, “to signify La campagna di Roma. The part that stretches from Rome to Terracina is hardly livable.”
a lengthening chain. Prior compares Letter iii of The Citizen of the World, 1762, i. 5:—‘The farther I travel I feel the pain of separation with stronger force, those ties that bind me to my native country, and you, are still unbroken. By every remove, I only drag a greater length of chain.’ But, as Mitford points out, Cibber has a similar thought in his Comical Lovers, 1707, Act v:—‘When I am with Florimel, it [my heart] is still your prisoner, it only draws a longer chain after it.’ And earlier still in Dryden’s ‘All for Love’, 1678, Act ii, Sc. 1:—
a lengthening chain. Prior compares Letter iii of The Citizen of the World, 1762, i. 5:—‘The more I travel, the stronger the pain of separation feels; those connections that tie me to my home country and you remain unbroken. With every move, I just pull along a longer chain.’ But as Mitford points out, Cibber expresses a similar idea in his Comical Lovers, 1707, Act v:—‘When I’m with Florimel, my heart is still your prisoner, it just drags a longer chain behind it.’ And even earlier in Dryden’s ‘All for Love’, 1678, Act ii, Sc. 1:—
My life on’t, he still drags a chain along,
That needs must clog his flight.
My life is such that he still drags a chain with him,
Which must slow him down.
with simple plenty crown’d. In the first edition this read ‘where mirth and peace abound.’
with simple plenty crown’d. In the first edition this read 'where joy and peace thrive.'
the luxury of doing good. Prior compares Garth’s Claremont, 1715, where he speaks of the Druids:—
the luxury of doing good. Prior compares Garth’s Claremont, 1715, where he talks about the Druids:—
Hard was their Lodging, homely was their Food,
For all their Luxury was doing Good.
Hard was their lodging, simple was their food,
For all their luxury was doing good.
my prime of life. He was seven-and-twenty when he landed at Dover in February, 1756.
my prime of life. He was twenty-seven when he arrived in Dover in February 1756.
That, like the circle bounding, etc. Cf. Vicar of Wakefield, 1766, ii. 160–1 (ch. x):—‘Death, the only friend of the wretched, for a little while mocks the weary traveller with the view, and like his horizon, still flies before him.’ [Prior.]
That, like the circle bounding, etc. Cf. Vicar of Wakefield, 1766, ii. 160–1 (ch. x):—‘Death, the only friend of the miserable, briefly teases the tired traveler with a glimpse, and like his horizon, always stays just out of reach.’ [Prior.]
And find no spot of all the world my own. Prior compares his namesake’s lines In the Beginning of [Jacques] Robbe’s Geography, 1700:—
And find no spot of all the world my own. Prior compares the lines of his namesake, In the Beginning of [Jacques] Robbe’s Geography, 1700:—
My destin’d Miles I shall have gone,
By THAMES or MAESE, by PO or RHONE,
And found no Foot of Earth my own.
My destined miles I will have traveled,
By Thames or Meuse, by Po or Rhône,
And found no piece of land that belongs to me.
above the storm’s career. Cf. 1. 190 of The Deserted Village.
above the storm’s career. Cf. 1. 190 of The Deserted Village.
should thankless pride repine? First edition, ‘’twere thankless to repine.’
should thankless pride repine? First edition, "It would be ungrateful to complain."
Say, should the philosophic mind, etc. First edition:—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ First edition:—
’Twere affectation all, and school-taught pride,
To spurn the splendid things by heaven supply’d
It was all just pretension and arrogance learned in school,
To reject the wonderful things provided by heaven.
hoard. ‘Sum’ in the first edition.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ 'Sum' in the first release.
Boldly proclaims that happiest spot his own. In the first version this was—
Boldly proclaims that happiest spot his own. In the first version this was—
Boldly asserts that country for his own.
Boldly claims that country as his own.
And yet, perhaps, etc. In the first edition, for this and the following five lines appeared these eight:—
And yet, perhaps, etc. In the first edition, for this and the next five lines, these eight appeared:—
And yet, perhaps, if states with states we scan,
Or estimate their bliss on Reason’s plan,
Though patriots flatter, and though fools contend,
We still shall find uncertainty suspend;
Find that each good, by Art or Nature given,
To these or those, but makes the balance even:
Find that the bliss of all is much the same,
And patriotic boasting reason’s shame!
And yet, maybe if we look at different states,
Or measure their happiness based on reason,
Even though patriots flatter and fools argue,
We’ll still find uncertainty hanging around;
Realize that every good thing, whether created by art or nature,
Only balances things out for some people;
Discover that everyone’s happiness is pretty similar,
And patriotic bragging only brings shame to reason!
On Idra’s cliffs. Bolton Corney conjectures that Goldsmith meant ‘Idria, a town in Carniola, noted for its mines.’ ‘Goldsmith in his “History of Animated Nature” makes mention of the mines, and spells the name in the same way as here.’ (Mr. J. H. Lobban’s Select Poems of Goldsmith, 1900, p. 87). Lines 84–5, it may be added, are not in the first edition.
On Idra’s cliffs. Bolton Corney suggests that Goldsmith was referring to ‘Idria, a town in Carniola, known for its mines.’ ‘Goldsmith mentions the mines in his “History of Animated Nature” and spells the name the same way as here.’ (Mr. J. H. Lobban’s Select Poems of Goldsmith, 1900, p. 87). It's worth noting that lines 84–5 are not included in the first edition.
And though the rocky-crested summits frown. In the first edition:—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ In the first edition:—
And though rough rocks or gloomy summits frown.
And even though jagged rocks or dark peaks are intimidating.
lines 91–2. are not in the first editions.
lines 91–2. are not in the first editions.
peculiar, i.e. ‘proper,’ ‘appropriate.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ i.e. ‘right,’ ‘suitable.’
winnow, i.e. ‘waft,’ ‘disperse.’ John Evelyn refers to these ‘sea-born gales’ in the ‘Dedication’ of his Fumifugium, 1661:— ‘Those who take notice of the scent of the orange-flowers from the rivage of Genoa, and St. Pietro dell’ Arena; the blossomes of the rosemary from the Coasts of Spain, many leagues off at sea; or the manifest, and odoriferous wafts which flow from Fontenay and Vaugirard, even to Paris in the season of roses, with the contrary effect of those less pleasing smells from other accidents, will easily consent to what I suggest [i.e. the planting of sweet-smelling trees].’ (Miscellaneous Writings, 1825, p. 208.)
winnow, i.e. ‘waft,’ ‘disperse.’ John Evelyn mentions these ‘sea-born winds’ in the ‘Dedication’ of his Fumifugium, 1661:— ‘Those who notice the scent of orange blossoms from the shores of Genoa and St. Pietro dell’ Arena; the flowers of rosemary from the coasts of Spain, many miles out at sea; or the unmistakable, fragrant breezes that come from Fontenay and Vaugirard, all the way to Paris during the rose season, compared to the less pleasant smells from other sources, will easily agree with what I suggest [i.e. the planting of sweet-smelling trees].’ (Miscellaneous Writings, 1825, p. 208.)
Till, more unsteady, etc. In the first edition:—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ In the first edition:—
But, more unsteady than the southern gale,
Soon Commerce turn’d on other shores her sail.
But, more unpredictable than the southern wind,
Soon Commerce set her sail for different shores.
There is a certain resemblance between this passage and one of the later paradoxes of Smollett’s Lismahago;—‘He affirmed, the nature of commerce was such, that it could not be fixed or perpetuated, but, having flowed to a certain height, would immediately begin to ebb, and so continue till the channels should be left almost dry; but there was no instance of the tide’s rising a second time to any considerable influx in the same nation’ (Humphry Clinker, 1771, ii. 192. Letter of Mr. Bramble to Dr. Lewis).
There is a certain similarity between this passage and one of the later paradoxes from Smollett’s Lismahago;—‘He claimed that the nature of commerce is such that it can't be fixed or sustained. After it rises to a certain level, it will start to decline, and keep going down until the channels are nearly empty; but there is no case of the tide rising again significantly in the same nation’ (Humphry Clinker, 1771, ii. 192. Letter of Mr. Bramble to Dr. Lewis).
lines 141–2. are not in the first edition.
lines 141–2. are not in the first edition.
Its former strength was but plethoric ill. Cf. The Citizen of the World, 1762, i. 98:—‘In short, the state resembled one of those bodies bloated with disease, whose bulk is only a symptom of its wretchedness.’ [Mitford.]
Its former strength was but plethoric ill. Cf. The Citizen of the World, 1762, i. 98:—‘In short, the state looked like one of those bodies swollen with illness, whose size is just a sign of its misery.’ [Mitford.]
Yet still the loss, etc. In the first edition:—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ In the first edition:—
Yet, though to fortune lost, here still abide
Some splendid arts, the wrecks of former pride.
Yet, even though fortune has faded, some amazing skills still remain here, remnants of past glory.
The paste-board triumph and the cavalcade. ‘Happy Country [he is speaking of Italy], where the pastoral age begins to revive! Where the wits even of Rome are united into a rural groupe of nymphs and swains, under the appellation of modern Arcadians [i.e. the Bolognese Academy of the Arcadi]. Where in the midst of porticos, processions, and cavalcades, abbes turn’d into shepherds, and shepherdesses without sheep, indulge their innocent divertimenti.’ (Present State of Polite Learning, 1759, pp. 50–1.) Some of the ‘paste-board triumphs’ may be studied in the plates of Jacques Callot.
The paste-board triumph and the cavalcade. ‘Happy Country [he is talking about Italy], where the pastoral age is starting to come back! Where the clever minds of Rome gather as a rural group of nymphs and shepherds, under the name of modern Arcadians [i.e. the Bolognese Academy of the Arcadi]. Where in the middle of porticos, processions, and parades, abbés have become shepherds, and shepherdesses without sheep, enjoy their innocent divertimenti.’ (Present State of Polite Learning, 1759, pp. 50–1.) Some of the ‘paste-board triumphs’ can be seen in the plates of Jacques Callot.
By sports like these, etc. A pretty and well-known story is told with regard to this couplet. Calling once on Goldsmith, Reynolds, having vainly tried to attract attention, entered unannounced. ‘His friend was at his desk, but with hand uplifted, and a look directed to another part of the room; where a little dog sat with difficulty on his haunches, looking imploringly at his teacher, whose rebuke for toppling over he had evidently just received. Reynolds advanced, and looked past Goldsmith’s shoulder at the writing on his desk. It seemed to be some portions of a poem; and looking more closely, he was able to read a couplet which had been that instant written. The ink of the second line was wet:—
By sports like these, etc. There's a charming and well-known story about this couplet. One time, Reynolds visited Goldsmith and, after trying unsuccessfully to get his attention, walked in unannounced. Goldsmith was at his desk, but he had his hand raised and was looking away, toward a little dog that was struggling to sit on its hind legs, gazing up at him with a pleading expression. It was clear he had just been scolded for falling over. Reynolds stepped forward and glanced over Goldsmith's shoulder at the writing on his desk. It appeared to be parts of a poem, and as he looked closer, he could make out a couplet that had just been written. The ink of the second line was still wet:—
By sports like these are all their cares beguil’d;
The sports of children satisfy the child.
Through sports like these, all their worries are charmed away;
The games of children fulfill the child.
(Forster’s Life, 1871, i. pp. 347–8).
(Forster’s Life, 1871, pp. 347–8).
The sports of children. This line, in the first edition, was followed by:—
The sports of children. This line, in the first edition, was followed by:—
At sports like these, while foreign arms advance,
In passive ease they leave the world to chance.
At events like these, while foreign forces move forward,
They sit back and let the world take its course.
Each nobler aim, etc. The first edition reads:—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ The first edition says:—
When struggling Virtue sinks by long controul,
She leaves at last, or feebly mans the soul.
When struggling, Virtue eventually gives in to prolonged control,
She ultimately departs or weakly keeps the soul afloat.
This was changed in the second, third, fourth, and fifth editions to:—
This was changed in the second, third, fourth, and fifth editions to:—
When noble aims have suffer’d long controul,
They sink at last, or feebly man the soul.
When noble goals have endured long oppression,
They eventually fade, or weakly occupy the soul.
No product here, etc. The Swiss mercenaries, here referred to, were long famous in European warfare.
No product here, etc. The Swiss mercenaries mentioned here were well-known in European warfare for a long time.
They parted with a thousand kisses,
And fight e’er since for pay, like Swisses.
Gay’s Aye and No, a Fable.
They said goodbye with a thousand kisses,
And have been fighting for pay ever since, like the Swiss.
Gay’s Aye and No, a Fable.
breasts This fine use of ‘breasts’—as Cunningham points out—is given by Johnson as an example in his Dictionary.
breasts This clever use of ‘breasts’—as Cunningham notes—is provided by Johnson as an example in his Dictionary.
With patient angle, trolls the finny deep. ‘Troll,’ i.e. as for pike. Goldsmith uses ‘finny prey’ in The Citizen of the World, 1762, ii. 99:—‘The best manner to draw up the finny prey.’ Cf. also ‘warbling grove,’ Deserted Village, l. 361, as a parallel to ‘finny deep.’
With patient angle, trolls the finny deep. ‘Troll,’ i.e. referring to pike. Goldsmith uses ‘finny prey’ in The Citizen of the World, 1762, ii. 99:—‘The best way to catch the finny prey.’ See also ‘warbling grove,’ Deserted Village, l. 361, as a parallel to ‘finny deep.’
the struggling savage, i.e. wolf or bear. Mitford compares the following:—‘He is a beast of prey, and the laws should make use of as many stratagems and as much force to drive the reluctant savage into the toils, as the Indians when they hunt the hyena or the rhinoceros.’ (Citizen of the World, 1762, i. 112.) See also Pope’s Iliad, Bk. xvii:—
the struggling savage, like a wolf or bear. Mitford compares this: "He is a predator, and the laws should employ as many strategies and as much force to trap the unwilling savage as the Indians do when they hunt the hyena or the rhinoceros." (Citizen of the World, 1762, i. 112.) See also Pope’s Iliad, Bk. xvii:—
But if the savage turns his glaring eye,
They howl aloof, and round the forest fly.
But if the wild guy turns his intense gaze,
They scream from a distance and circle the woods.
lines 201–2 are not in the first edition.
lines 201–2 are not in the first edition.
For every want, etc. Mitford quotes a parallel passage in Animated Nature, 1774, ii. 123:—‘Every want thus becomes a means of pleasure, in the redressing.’
For every want, etc. Mitford quotes a similar passage from Animated Nature, 1774, ii. 123:—‘Every need thus turns into a source of enjoyment, in the correcting.’
Their morals, like their pleasures, are but low. Probably Goldsmith only uses ‘low’ here in its primitive sense, and not in that which, in his own day, gave so much umbrage to so many eighteenth-century students of humanity in the rough. Cf. Fielding, Tom Jones, 1749, iii. 6:— ‘Some of the Author’s Friends cry’d—“Look’e, Gentlemen, the Man is a Villain; but it is Nature for all that.” And all the young Critics of the Age, the Clerks, Apprentices, etc., called it Low and fell a Groaning.’ See also Tom Jones, iv. 94, and 226–30. ‘There’s nothing comes out but the ‘most lowest’ stuff in nature’—says Lady Blarney in ch. xi of the Vicar, whose author is eloquent on this topic in The Present State of Polite Learning, 1759, pp. 154–6, and in She Stoops to Conquer, 1773 (Act i); while Graves (Spiritual Quixote, 1772, bk. i, ch. vi) gives the fashion the scientific appellation of tapino-phoby, which he defines as ‘a dread of everything that is low, either in writing or in conversation.’ To Goldsmith, if we may trust George Colman’s Prologue to Miss Lee’s Chapter of Accidents, 1780, belongs the credit of exorcising this particular form of depreciation:—
Their morals, like their pleasures, are but low. Goldsmith probably uses 'low' here in its original sense, not in the way that offended many 18th-century thinkers who were exploring humanity in its raw form. For example, in Fielding’s Tom Jones, 1749, iii. 6:— "Some of the Author's Friends said—'Look, Gentlemen, the Man is a Villain; but it is Nature all the same.'" And all the young critics of the time, including clerks and apprentices, labeled it Low and groaned about it. See also Tom Jones, iv. 94, and 226–30. Lady Blarney mentions in chapter xi of the Vicar that "nothing comes out but the 'most lowest' stuff in nature," while the author discusses this issue passionately in The Present State of Polite Learning, 1759, pp. 154–6, and in She Stoops to Conquer, 1773 (Act i). Meanwhile, Graves (in Spiritual Quixote, 1772, bk. i, ch. vi) gives this trend the scientific term tapino-phoby, which he defines as 'a fear of everything that is low, either in writing or conversation.' According to George Colman’s Prologue to Miss Lee’s Chapter of Accidents, 1780, Goldsmith deserves credit for dispelling this particular kind of disdain:—
When Fielding, Humour’s fav’rite child, appear’d,
Low was the word—a word each author fear’d!
Till chas’d at length, by pleasantry’s bright ray,
Nature and mirth resum’d their legal sway;
And Goldsmith’s genius bask’d in open day.
When Fielding, Humor’s favorite child, showed up,
Low was the term—a term every writer dreaded!
But finally, chased away by the glow of humor,
Nature and joy reclaimed their rightful place;
And Goldsmith’s talent shone brightly in the light.
According to Borrow’s Lavengro, ch. xli, Lord Chesterfield considered that the speeches of Homer’s heroes were frequently ‘exceedingly low.’
According to Borrow’s Lavengro, ch. xli, Lord Chesterfield thought that the speeches of Homer’s heroes were often ‘really low.’
How often, etc. This and the lines which immediately follow are autobiographical. Cf. George Primrose’s story in The Vicar of Wakefield, 1766, ii. 24–5 (ch. i):—‘I passed among the harmless peasants of Flanders, and among such of the French as were poor enough to be very merry; for I ever found them sprightly in proportion to their wants. Whenever I approached a peasant’s house towards night-fall, I played one of my most merry tunes, and that procured me not only a lodging, but subsistence for the next day.’
How often, etc. This and the lines that follow are autobiographical. See George Primrose’s story in The Vicar of Wakefield, 1766, ii. 24–5 (ch. i):—‘I moved among the innocent peasants of Flanders, and among those French who were poor enough to be quite cheerful; I always found them lively in proportion to their needs. Whenever I approached a peasant’s house in the evening, I played one of my happiest tunes, and that not only got me a place to stay but also food for the next day.’
gestic lore, i.e. traditional gestures or motions. Scott uses the word ‘gestic’ in Peveril of the Peak, ch. xxx, where King Charles the Second witnesses the dancing of Fenella:—‘He bore time to her motions with the movement of his foot—applauded with head and with hand—and seemed, like herself, carried away by the enthusiasm of the gestic art.’ [Hales.]
gestic lore, i.e. traditional gestures or motions. Scott uses the word ‘gestic’ in Peveril of the Peak, ch. xxx, where King Charles the Second watches Fenella dance:—‘He kept time to her movements with his foot—clapped along with his head and hands—and seemed, like her, swept away by the excitement of the gestic art.’ [Hales.]
Thus idly busy rolls their world away. Pope has ‘Life’s idle business’ (Unfortunate Lady, l. 81), and—
Thus idly busy rolls their world away. Pope has ‘Life’s idle business’ (Unfortunate Lady, l. 81), and—
The busy, idle blockheads of the ball.
Donne’s Satires, iv. l. 203.
The busy, lazy fools of the ball.
Donne’s Satires, iv. l. 203.
And all are taught an avarice of praise. Professor Hales (Longer English Poems) compares Horace of the Greeks:—
And all are taught an avarice of praise. Professor Hales (Longer English Poems) compares Horace to the Greeks:—
Praeter laudem, nullius avaris.
Ars Poetica, l. 324.
Praeter laudem, nullius avaris.
Ars Poetica, l. 324.
copper lace. ‘St Martin’s lace,’ for which, in Strype’s day, Blowbladder St. was famous. Cf. the actress’s ‘copper tail’ in Citizen of the World, 1762, ii. 60.
copper lace. ‘St. Martin’s lace,’ for which, during Strype’s time, Blowbladder St. was well-known. See the actress’s ‘copper tail’ in Citizen of the World, 1762, ii. 60.
To men of other minds, etc. Prior compares with the description that follows a passage in vol. i. p. 276 of Animated Nature, 1774:—‘But we need scarce mention these, when we find that the whole kingdom of Holland seems to be a conquest upon the sea, and in a manner rescued from its bosom. The surface of the earth, in this country, is below the level of the bed of the sea; and I remember, upon approaching the coast, to have looked down upon it from the sea, as into a valley.’
To men of other minds, etc. Prior compares with the description that follows a passage in vol. i. p. 276 of Animated Nature, 1774:—‘But we barely need to mention these, when we see that the entire kingdom of Holland appears to be a conquest over the sea, essentially reclaimed from its depths. The land in this country is below sea level; I remember, as I approached the coast, looking down at it from the sea, as if peering into a valley.’
Where the broad ocean leans against the land. Cf. Dryden in Annus Mirabilis, 1666, st. clxiv. l. 654:—
Where the broad ocean leans against the land. Cf. Dryden in Annus Mirabilis, 1666, st. clxiv. l. 654:—
And view the ocean leaning on the sky.
And look at the ocean resting against the sky.
the tall rampire’s, i.e. rampart’s (Old French, rempart, rempar). Cf. Timon of Athens, Act v. Sc. 4:—‘Our rampir’d gates.’
the tall rampire’s, i.e. rampart's (Old French, rempart, rempar). Cf. Timon of Athens, Act v. Sc. 4:—‘Our rampir’d gates.’
bosom reign in the first edition was ‘breast obtain.’
bosom reign in the first edition was ‘breast obtain.’
Even liberty itself is barter’d here. ‘Slavery,’ says Mitford, ‘was permitted in Holland; children were sold by their parents for a certain number of years.’
Even liberty itself is barter’d here. ‘Slavery,’ says Mitford, ‘was allowed in Holland; parents sold their children for a set number of years.’
A land of tyrants, and a den of slaves. Goldsmith uses this very line as prose in Letter xxxiv of The Citizen of the World, 1762, i. 147.
A land of tyrants, and a den of slaves. Goldsmith uses this same line as prose in Letter xxxiv of The Citizen of the World, 1762, i. 147.
dishonourable graves. Julius Caesar, Act i. Sc. 2.
dishonourable graves. Julius Caesar, Act i. Sc. 2.
Heavens! how unlike, etc. Prior compares a passage from a manuscript Introduction to the History of the Seven Years’ War:—‘How unlike the brave peasants their ancestors, who spread terror into either India, and always declared themselves the allies of those who drew the sword in defence of freedom.’*
Heavens! how unlike, etc. Prior compares a passage from a manuscript Introduction to the History of the Seven Years’ War:—‘How different from their brave ancestors, the peasants who instilled fear in both India, always declaring themselves the allies of those who took up arms to defend freedom.’*
* J. W. M. Gibbs (Works, v. 9) discovered that parts of this History, hitherto supposed to have been written in 1761, were published in the Literary Magazine, 1757–8.
* J. W. M. Gibbs (Works, v. 9) found out that sections of this History, previously thought to have been written in 1761, were actually published in the Literary Magazine, 1757–8.
famed Hydaspes, i.e. the fabulosus Hydaspes of Horace, Bk. i. Ode xxii, and the Medus Hydaspes of Virgil, Georg, iv. 211, of which so many stores were told. It is now known as the Jhilum, one of the five rivers which give the Punjaub its name.
famed Hydaspes, i.e. the fabulous Hydaspes of Horace, Bk. i. Ode xxii, and the Medus Hydaspes of Virgil, Georg, iv. 211, of which so many stories were told. It is now known as the Jhilum, one of the five rivers that give the Punjab its name.
Pride in their port, etc. In the first edition these two lines were inverted.
Pride in their port, etc. In the first edition, these two lines were switched.
Here by the bonds of nature feebly held. In the first edition—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ In the first edition—
See, though by circling deeps together held.
See, even though we are held together by deep circles.
Nature’s ties was ‘social bonds’ in the first edition.
Nature’s ties was ‘social bonds’ in the first edition.
Where kings have toil’d, and poets wrote for fame. In the first edition this line read:—
Where kings have toil’d, and poets wrote for fame. In the first edition, this line said:—
And monarchs toil, and poets pant for fame.
And kings work hard, and poets strive for recognition.
Yet think not, etc. ‘In the things I have hitherto written I have neither allured the vanity of the great by flattery, nor satisfied the malignity of the vulgar by scandal, but I have endeavoured to get an honest reputation by liberal pursuits.’ (Preface to English History.) [Mitford.]
Yet think not, etc. ‘In what I’ve written so far, I haven’t flattered the powerful to cater to their vanity, nor have I indulged the malice of the masses with gossip. Instead, I’ve tried to earn a good reputation through generous and meaningful work.’ (Preface to English History.) [Mitford.]
Ye powers of truth, etc. The first version has:—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ The initial version includes:—
Perish the wish; for, inly satisfy’d,
Above their pomps I hold my ragged pride.
Perish the wish; for, inwardly satisfied,
Above their shows, I value my rough pride.
Mr. Forster thinks (Life, 1871, i. 375) that Goldsmith altered this (i.e. ‘ragged pride’) because, like the omitted Haud inexpertus loquor of the Enquiry, it involved an undignified admission.
Mr. Forster believes (Life, 1871, i. 375) that Goldsmith changed this (i.e. ‘ragged pride’) because, similar to the excluded Haud inexpertus loquor from the Enquiry, it was an undignified acknowledgment.
lines 365–80 are not in the first edition.
lines 365–80 are not in the first edition.
Contracting regal power to stretch their own. ‘It is the interest of the great, therefore, to diminish kingly power as much as possible; because whatever they take from it is naturally restored to themselves; and all they have to do in a state, is to undermine the single tyrant, by which they resume their primaeval authority.’ (Vicar of Wakefield, 1766, i. 202, ch. xix.)
Contracting regal power to stretch their own. ‘It’s in the interest of the wealthy to reduce kingly power as much as they can because whatever they take from it naturally comes back to them. All they need to do in a state is to weaken the single tyrant, allowing them to reclaim their original authority.’ (Vicar of Wakefield, 1766, i. 202, ch. xix.)
When I behold, etc. Prior compares a passage in Letter xlix of The Citizen of the World, 1762, i. 218, where the Roman senators are spoken of as still flattering the people ‘with a shew of freedom, while themselves only were free.’
When I behold, etc. Prior compares a passage in Letter 49 of The Citizen of the World, 1762, i. 218, where the Roman senators are described as still flattering the people ‘with a show of freedom, while they themselves were the only ones truly free.’
Laws grind the poor, and rich men rule the law. Prior notes a corresponding utterance in The Vicar of Wakefield, 1766, i. 206, ch. xix:—‘What they may then expect, may be seen by turning our eyes to Holland, Genoa, or Venice, where the laws govern the poor, and the rich govern the law.’
Laws grind the poor, and rich men rule the law. Prior notes a similar statement in The Vicar of Wakefield, 1766, i. 206, ch. xix:—‘What they can expect is evident by looking at Holland, Genoa, or Venice, where the laws rule the poor and the rich rule the laws.’
I fly from petty tyrants to the throne. Cf. Dr. Primrose, ut supra, p. 201:—‘The generality of mankind also are of my way of thinking, and have unanimously created one king, whose election at once diminishes the number of tyrants, and puts tyranny at the greatest distance from the greatest number of people.’ Cf. also Churchill, The Farewell, ll. 363–4 and 369–70:—
I fly from petty tyrants to the throne. Cf. Dr. Primrose, as above, p. 201:—‘Most people think like I do, and together they have chosen one king, which not only reduces the number of tyrants but also keeps tyranny far away from the majority of people.’ Cf. also Churchill, The Farewell, ll. 363–4 and 369–70:—
Let not a Mob of Tyrants seize the helm,
Nor titled upstarts league to rob the realm...
Let us, some comfort in our griefs to bring,
Be slaves to one, and be that one a King.
Don't let a mob of tyrants take control,
Nor let privileged upstarts conspire to rob the land...
Let us, to find some comfort in our sorrows,
Serve one master, and let that master be a King.
lines 393–4. Goldsmith’s first thought was—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Goldsmith’s first thought was—
Yes, my lov’d brother, cursed be that hour
When first ambition toil’d for foreign power,—
Yes, my dear brother, cursed be that hour
When ambition first drove us to seek foreign power,—
an entirely different couplet to that in the text, and certainly more logical. (Dobell’s Prospect of Society, 1902, pp. xi, 2, and Notes, v, vi). Mr. Dobell plausibly suggests that this Tory substitution is due to Johnson.
an entirely different couplet from that in the text, and definitely more logical. (Dobell’s Prospect of Society, 1902, pp. xi, 2, and Notes, v, vi). Mr. Dobell reasonably suggests that this Tory change is due to Johnson.
Have we not seen, etc. These lines contain the first idea of the subsequent poem of The Deserted Village (q.v.).
Have we not seen, etc. These lines express the initial concept of the following poem from The Deserted Village (q.v.).
Where wild Oswego spreads her swamps around. The Oswego is a river which runs between Lakes Oneida and Ontario. In the Threnodia Augustalis, 1772, Goldsmith writes:—
Where wild Oswego spreads her swamps around. The Oswego is a river that flows between Oneida Lake and Lake Ontario. In the Threnodia Augustalis, 1772, Goldsmith writes:—
Oswego’s dreary shores shall be my grave.
Oswego's gloomy shores will be my resting place.
The ‘desarts of Oswego’ were familiar to the eighteenth-century reader in connexion with General Braddock’s ill-fated expedition of 1755, an account of which Goldsmith had just given in An History of England, in a Series of Letters from a Nobleman to his Son, 1764, ii. 202–4.
The "deserts of Oswego" were known to 18th-century readers in connection with General Braddock's unsuccessful expedition of 1755, which Goldsmith had just described in An History of England, in a Series of Letters from a Nobleman to his Son, 1764, ii. 202–4.
marks with murderous aim. In the first edition ‘takes a deadly aim.’
marks with murderous aim. In the first edition ‘takes a deadly aim.’
pensive exile. This, in the version mentioned in the next note, was ‘famish’d exile.’
pensive exile. In the version referenced in the next note, it was 'starving exile.'
To stop too fearful, and too faint to go. This line, upon Boswell’s authority, is claimed for Johnson (Birkbeck Hill’s Boswell, 1887, ii. 6). Goldsmith’s original ran:—
To stop too fearful, and too faint to go. This line, based on Boswell’s account, is attributed to Johnson (Birkbeck Hill’s Boswell, 1887, ii. 6). Goldsmith’s original was:—
And faintly fainter, fainter seems to go.
And more and more faint, it seems to fade away.
(Dobell’s Prospect of Society, 1902, p. 3).
(Dobell’s Prospect of Society, 1902, p. 3).
How small, of all, etc. Johnson wrote these concluding ten lines with the exception of the penultimate couplet. They and line 420 were all—he told Boswell—of which he could be sure (Birkbeck Hill’s Boswell, ut supra). Like Goldsmith, he sometimes worked his prose ideas into his verse. The first couplet is apparently a reminiscence of a passage in his own Rasselas, 1759, ii. 112, where the astronomer speaks of ‘the task of a king . . . who has the care only of a few millions, to whom he cannot do much good or harm.’ (Grant’s Johnson, 1887, p. 89.) ‘I would not give half a guinea to live under one form of government rather than another,’ he told that ‘vile Whig,’ Sir Adam Fergusson, in 1772. ‘It is of no moment to the happiness of an individual’ (Birkbeck Hill’s Boswell, 1887, ii. 170).
How small, of all, etc. Johnson wrote these final ten lines except for the second-to-last couplet. He told Boswell that these and line 420 were the only ones he was certain about (Birkbeck Hill’s Boswell, ut supra). Like Goldsmith, he sometimes incorporated his prose ideas into his poetry. The first couplet seems to reference a passage in his own Rasselas, 1759, ii. 112, where the astronomer mentions ‘the task of a king . . . who has the care only of a few millions, to whom he cannot do much good or harm.’ (Grant’s Johnson, 1887, p. 89.) ‘I wouldn't pay half a guinea to live under one type of government over another,’ he told that ‘vile Whig,’ Sir Adam Fergusson, in 1772. ‘It doesn’t matter for the happiness of an individual’ (Birkbeck Hill’s Boswell, 1887, ii. 170).
The lifted axe. Mitford here recalls Blackmore’s
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Mitford reminisces about Blackmore’s
Some the sharp axe, and some the painful wheel.
Some with the sharp axe, and some with the painful wheel.
The ‘lifted axe’ he also traces to Young and Blackmore, with both of whom Goldsmith seems to have been familiar; but it is surely not necessary to assume that he borrowed from either in this instance.
The “lifted axe” he also links to Young and Blackmore, with whom Goldsmith seems to have been familiar; but it’s surely not necessary to assume that he borrowed from either in this case.
Luke’s iron crown. George and Luke Dosa, or Doscha, headed a rebellion in Hungary in 1513. The former was proclaimed king by the peasants; and, in consequence suffered, among other things, the torture of the red-hot iron crown. Such a punishment took place at Bordeaux when Montaigne was seventeen (Morley’s Florio’s Montaigne, 1886, p. xvi). Much ink has been shed over Goldsmith’s lapse of ‘Luke’ for George. In the book which he cited as his authority, the family name of the brothers was given as Zeck,—hence Bolton Corney, in his edition of the Poetical Works, 1845, p. 36, corrected the line to—
Luke’s iron crown. George and Luke Dosa, or Doscha, led a rebellion in Hungary in 1513. The former was made king by the peasants, and as a result, he endured, among other things, the torture of the red-hot iron crown. This punishment occurred in Bordeaux when Montaigne was seventeen (Morley’s Florio’s Montaigne, 1886, p. xvi). A lot of discussion has taken place about Goldsmith’s mistake of saying 'Luke' instead of George. In the book he referenced as his source, the family name of the brothers was listed as Zeck, which is why Bolton Corney, in his edition of the Poetical Works, 1845, p. 36, corrected the line to—
Zeck’s iron crown, etc.,
Zeck's iron crown, etc.,
an alteration which has been adopted by other editors. (See also Forster’s Life, 1871, i. 370.)
an alteration that has been adopted by other editors. (See also Forster’s Life, 1871, i. 370.)
Damien’s bed of steel. Robert-Francois Damiens, 1714–57. Goldsmith writes ‘Damien’s.’ In the Gentlemen’s Magazine for 1757, vol. xxvii. pp. 87 and 151, where there is an account of this poor half-witted wretch’s torture and execution for attempting to assassinate Louis XV, the name is thus spelled, as also in other contemporary records and caricatures. The following passage explains the ‘bed of steel’:—‘Being conducted to the Conciergerie, an ‘iron bed’, which likewise served for a chair, was prepared for him, and to this he was fastened with chains. The torture was again applied, and a physician ordered to attend to see what degree of pain he could support,’ etc. (Smollett’s History of England, 1823, bk. iii, ch. 7, § xxv.) Goldsmith’s own explanation—according to Tom Davies, the bookseller—was that he meant the rack. But Davies may have misunderstood him, or Goldsmith himself may have forgotten the facts. (See Forster’s Life, 1871, i. 370.) At pp. 57–78 of the Monthly Review for July, 1757 (upon which Goldsmith was at this date employed), is a summary, ‘from our correspondent at Paris,’ of the official record of the Damiens’ Trial, 4 vols. 12 mo.; and his deed and tragedy make a graphic chapter in the remarkable Strange Adventures of Captain Dangerous, by George Augustus Sala, 1863, iii. pp. 154–180.
Damien’s bed of steel. Robert-Francois Damiens, 1714–57. Goldsmith writes ‘Damien’s.’ In the Gentlemen’s Magazine for 1757, vol. xxvii. pp. 87 and 151, there’s an account of this unfortunate half-witted man’s torture and execution for attempting to assassinate Louis XV, and the name is spelled this way, as well as in other contemporary records and caricatures. The following passage explains the ‘bed of steel’:—‘Being taken to the Conciergerie, an ‘iron bed’, which also served as a chair, was set up for him, and he was fastened to this with chains. The torture was applied again, and a doctor was ordered to attend to see how much pain he could endure,’ etc. (Smollett’s History of England, 1823, bk. iii, ch. 7, § xxv.) Goldsmith’s own explanation—according to Tom Davies, the bookseller—was that he meant the rack. But Davies might have misunderstood him, or Goldsmith himself might have forgotten the details. (See Forster’s Life, 1871, i. 370.) At pp. 57–78 of the Monthly Review for July, 1757 (which Goldsmith was working on at the time), is a summary, ‘from our correspondent at Paris,’ of the official record of the Damiens’ Trial, 4 vols. 12 mo.; and his actions and tragedy make a vivid chapter in the remarkable Strange Adventures of Captain Dangerous, by George Augustus Sala, 1863, iii. pp. 154–180.
line 438. In the first edition of ‘The Traveller’ there are only 416 lines.
line 438. In the first edition of ‘The Traveller’ there are only 416 lines.
THE DESERTED VILLAGE.
After having been for some time announced as in preparation, The Deserted Village made its first appearance on May 26, 1770.* It was received with great enthusiasm. In June a second, third, and fourth edition followed, and in August a fifth was published. The text here given is that of the fourth edition, which was considerably revised. Johnson, we are told, thought The Deserted Village inferior to The Traveller: but ‘time,’ to use Mr. Forster’s words, ‘has not confirmed that judgment.’ Its germ is perhaps to be found in ll. 397–402 of the earlier poem.
After being announced for a while as in preparation, The Deserted Village made its debut on May 26, 1770.* It received a warm welcome. In June, second, third, and fourth editions were released, and a fifth came out in August. The text presented here is from the fourth edition, which underwent significant revisions. Johnson, as we are told, considered The Deserted Village to be less impressive than The Traveller: but ‘time,’ in the words of Mr. Forster, ‘has not confirmed that judgment.’ Its roots may be found in lines 397–402 of the earlier poem.
* In the American Bookman for February, 1901, pp. 563–7, Mr. Luther S. Livingston gives an account (with facsimile title-pages) of three octavo (or rather duodecimo) editions all dated 1770; and ostensibly printed for ‘W. Griffin, at Garrick’s Head, in Catherine-street, Strand.’ He rightly describes their existence as ‘a bibliographical puzzle.’ They afford no important variations; are not mentioned by the early editors; and are certainly not in the form in which the poem was first advertised and reviewed, as this was a quarto. But they are naturally of interest to the collector; and the late Colonel Francis Grant, a good Goldsmith scholar, described one of them in the Athenaeum for June 20, 1896 (No. 3582).
* In the American Bookman from February 1901, pp. 563–7, Mr. Luther S. Livingston provides an overview (with facsimile title pages) of three octavo (or more accurately, duodecimo) editions, all dated 1770, supposedly printed for ‘W. Griffin, at Garrick’s Head, in Catherine Street, Strand.’ He accurately describes their existence as ‘a bibliographical puzzle.’ They do not present any significant variations, aren’t mentioned by early editors, and certainly aren’t in the format in which the poem was initially advertised and reviewed, as that was a quarto. However, they are naturally interesting to collectors; and the late Colonel Francis Grant, a knowledgeable Goldsmith scholar, discussed one of them in the Athenaeum on June 20, 1896 (No. 3582).
Much research has been expended in the endeavour to identify the scene with Lissoy, the home of the poet’s youth (see Introduction, p. ix); but the result has only been partially successful. The truth seems that Goldsmith, living in England, recalled in a poem that was English in its conception many of the memories and accessories of his early life in Ireland, without intending or even caring to draw an exact picture. Hence, as Lord Macaulay has observed, in a much criticized and characteristic passage, ‘it is made up of incongruous parts. The village in its happy days is a true English village. The village in its decay is an Irish village. The felicity and the misery which Goldsmith has brought close together belong to two different countries, and to two different stages in the progress of society. He had assuredly never seen in his native island such a rural paradise, such a seat of plenty, content, and tranquillity, as his “Auburn.” He had assuredly never seen in England all the inhabitants of such a paradise turned out of their homes in one day and forced to emigrate in a body to America. The hamlet he had probably seen in Kent; the ejectment he had probably seen in Munster; but, by joining the two, he has produced something which never was and never will be seen in any part of the world.’ (Encyclop. Britannica, 1856.) It is obvious also that in some of his theories—the depopulation of the kingdom, for example—Goldsmith was mistaken. But it was not for its didactic qualities then, nor is it for them now, that The Deserted Village’ delighted and delights. It maintains its popularity by its charming genre-pictures, its sweet and tender passages, its simplicity, its sympathetic hold upon the enduring in human nature. To test it solely with a view to establish its topographical accuracy, or to insist too much upon the value of its ethical teaching, is to mistake its real mission as a work of art.
A lot of research has gone into identifying the setting as Lissoy, the poet’s childhood home (see Introduction, p. ix); but the findings have only been partially successful. The reality is that Goldsmith, living in England, would recall in a poem that was inherently English many of the memories and elements of his early life in Ireland, without aiming or even caring to create an exact depiction. Thus, as Lord Macaulay noted in a famously criticized but characteristic observation, “it is made up of incongruous parts. The village in its happy days is a true English village. The village in its decline is an Irish village. The joy and the sorrow that Goldsmith juxtaposes belong to two different countries and two different stages of societal development. He surely never experienced in his native land such a rural paradise, such a place of abundance, contentment, and peace as his ‘Auburn.’ He definitely never witnessed in England all the residents of such a paradise being turned out of their homes in one day and forced to emigrate en masse to America. The village he likely saw in Kent; the evictions he probably saw in Munster; but by merging the two, he has created something that never existed and never will exist anywhere in the world.” (Encyclop. Britannica, 1856.) It’s also clear that in some of his ideas—like the depopulation of the kingdom—Goldsmith was wrong. However, it’s not for its instructional qualities, now or then, that The Deserted Village is cherished. It continues to be popular due to its delightful genre scenes, its sweet and tender moments, its simplicity, and its deep connection to the enduring aspects of human nature. Evaluating it solely for its geographical accuracy or overemphasizing its ethical lessons misses its true purpose as a work of art.
Dedication. I am ignorant of that art in which you are said to excel. This modest confession did not prevent Goldsmith from making fun of the contemporary connoisseur. See the letter from the young virtuoso in The Citizen of the World, 1762, i. 145, announcing that a famous ‘torse’ has been discovered to be not ‘a Cleopatra bathing’ but ‘a Hercules spinning’; and Charles Primrose’s experiences at Paris (Vicar of Wakefield, 1766, ii. 27–8).
Dedication. I am ignorant of that art in which you are said to excel. This humble admission didn’t stop Goldsmith from poking fun at the art critics of his time. Check out the letter from the young expert in The Citizen of the World, 1762, i. 145, stating that a well-known ‘torse’ has been identified not as ‘a Cleopatra bathing’ but as ‘a Hercules spinning’; and Charles Primrose’s adventures in Paris (Vicar of Wakefield, 1766, ii. 27–8).
He is since dead. Henry Goldsmith died in May, 1768, at the age of forty-five, being then curate of Kilkenny West. (See note, p. 164.)
He is since dead. Henry Goldsmith passed away in May, 1768, at the age of forty-five, while serving as the curate of Kilkenny West. (See note, p. 164.)
a long poem. ‘I might dwell upon such thoughts . . . were I not afraid of making this preface too tedious; especially since I shall want all the patience of the reader, for having enlarged it with the following verses.’ (Tickell’s Preface to Addison’s Works, at end.)
a long poem. ‘I might think about such things . . . if I weren't worried about making this introduction too long; especially since I will need all the reader's patience, having added to it with the following verses.’ (Tickell’s Preface to Addison’s Works, at end.)
the increase of our luxuries. The evil of luxury was a ‘common topick’ with Goldsmith. (Birkbeck Hill’s Boswell, 1887, ii. 217–8.) Smollett also, speaking with the voice of Lismahago, and continuing the quotation on p. 169, was of the opinion that ‘the sudden affluence occasioned by trade, forced open all the sluices of luxury, and overflowed the land with every species of profligacy and corruption.’ (Humphry Clinker, 1771, ii. 192.—Letter of Mr. Bramble to Dr. Lewis.)
the increase of our luxuries. The problem with luxury was a 'common topic' for Goldsmith. (Birkbeck Hill’s Boswell, 1887, ii. 217–8.) Smollett also, speaking through the character Lismahago, and continuing the quote on p. 169, believed that 'the sudden wealth from trade opened all the gates of luxury and flooded the land with every kind of vice and corruption.' (Humphry Clinker, 1771, ii. 192.—Letter from Mr. Bramble to Dr. Lewis.)
Sweet AUBURN. Forster, Life, 1871, ii. 206, says that Goldsmith obtained this name from Bennet Langton. There is an Aldbourn or Auburn in Wiltshire, not far from Marlborough, which Prior thinks may have furnished the suggestion.
Sweet AUBURN. Forster, Life, 1871, ii. 206, says that Goldsmith got this name from Bennet Langton. There’s an Aldbourn or Auburn in Wiltshire, not far from Marlborough, which Prior thinks might have inspired the idea.
Seats of my youth. This alone would imply that Goldsmith had in mind the environment of his Irish home.
Seats of my youth. This alone suggests that Goldsmith was thinking about the setting of his Irish home.
The decent church that topp’d the neighbouring hill. This corresponds with the church of Kilkenny West as seen from the house at Lissoy.
The decent church that topp’d the neighbouring hill. This matches the church of Kilkenny West as viewed from the house at Lissoy.
The hawthorn bush. The Rev. Annesley Strean, Henry Goldsmith’s successor at Kilkenny West, well remembered the hawthorn bush in front of the village ale-house. It had originally three trunks; but when he wrote in 1807 only one remained, ‘the other two having been cut, from time to time, by persons carrying pieces of it away to be made into toys, etc., in honour of the bard, and of the celebrity of his poem.’ (Essay on Light Reading, by the Rev. Edward Mangin, M.A., 1808, 142–3.) Its remains were enclosed by a Captain Hogan previously to 1819; but nevertheless when Prior visited the place in 1830, nothing was apparent but ‘a very tender shoot [which] had again forced its way to the surface.’ (Prior, Life, 1837, ii. 264.) An engraving of the tree by S. Alken, from a sketch made in 1806–9, is to be found at p. 41 of Goldsmith’s Poetical Works, R. H. Newell’s edition, 1811, and is reproduced in the present volume.
The hawthorn bush. The Rev. Annesley Strean, Henry Goldsmith’s successor at Kilkenny West, clearly remembered the hawthorn bush in front of the village pub. It originally had three trunks; however, when he wrote in 1807, only one remained, as ‘the other two had been cut down over time by people taking pieces to make toys, etc., in honor of the bard and the fame of his poem.’ (Essay on Light Reading, by the Rev. Edward Mangin, M.A., 1808, 142–3.) Its remains were enclosed by Captain Hogan before 1819; still, when Prior visited the site in 1830, all that was visible was ‘a very tender shoot [which] had again forced its way to the surface.’ (Prior, Life, 1837, ii. 264.) An engraving of the tree by S. Alken, based on a sketch made between 1806 and 1809, can be found on p. 41 of Goldsmith’s Poetical Works, R. H. Newell’s edition, 1811, and is reproduced in this volume.
How often have I bless’d the coming day. Prior, Life, 1837, ii. 261, finds in this an allusion ‘to the Sundays or numerous holidays, usually kept in Roman Catholic countries.’
How often have I bless’d the coming day. Prior, Life, 1837, ii. 261, sees this as a reference ‘to the Sundays or various holidays, typically observed in Roman Catholic countries.’
Amidst thy bowers the tyrant’s hand is seen. Strean’s explanation (Mangin, ut supra, pp. 140–1) of this is as follows:—‘The poem of The Deserted Village, took its origin from the circumstance of general Robert Napper [Napier or Naper], (the grandfather of the gentleman who now [1807] lives in the house, within half a mile of Lissoy, and built by the general) having purchased an extensive tract of the country surrounding Lissoy, or Auburn; in consequence of which many families, here called cottiers, were removed, to make room for the intended improvements of what was now to become the wide domain of a rich man, warm with the idea of changing the face of his new acquisition; and were forced, “with fainting steps,” to go in search of “torrid tracts” and “distant climes.”’
Amidst thy bowers the tyrant’s hand is seen. Strean’s explanation (Mangin, ut supra, pp. 140–1) of this is as follows:—‘The poem The Deserted Village originated from the fact that General Robert Napper [Napier or Naper], (the grandfather of the man who now [1807] lives in the house, which is within half a mile of Lissoy and was built by the general) bought a large area of land around Lissoy, or Auburn; as a result, many families, referred to here as cottiers, were removed to make way for the intended improvements for what was about to become the vast estate of a wealthy man, eager to change the appearance of his new property; and they were forced, “with fainting steps,” to look for “torrid tracts” and “distant climes.”’
Prior (Life, 1837, i. 40–3) points out that Goldsmith was not the first to give poetical expression to the wrongs of the dispossessed Irish peasantry; and he quotes a long extract from the Works (1741) of a Westmeath poet, Lawrence Whyte, which contains such passages as these:—
Prior (Life, 1837, i. 40–3) notes that Goldsmith was not the first to poetically express the injustices faced by the dispossessed Irish peasantry; he quotes a lengthy excerpt from the Works (1741) of a Westmeath poet, Lawrence Whyte, which includes passages like these:—
Their native soil were forced to quit,
So Irish landlords thought it fit;
Who without ceremony or rout,
For their improvements turn’d them out ...
How many villages they razed,
How many parishes laid waste ...
Whole colonies, to shun the fate
Of being oppress’d at such a rate,
By tyrants who still raise their rent,
Sail’d to the Western Continent.
Their home ground they were made to leave,
So Irish landlords thought it was right;
Who without any fuss or ceremony,
For their so-called improvements turned them out ...
How many villages they destroyed,
How many parishes left in ruin ...
Entire communities, to escape the fate
Of being oppressed to such a degree,
By tyrants who keep raising their rent,
Sailed to the Western Continent.
The hollow-sounding bittern guards its nest. ‘Of all those sounds,’ says Goldsmith, speaking of the cries of waterfowl, ‘there is none so dismally hollow as the booming of the bittern.’ . . . ‘I remember in the place where I was a boy with what terror this bird’s note affected the whole village; they considered it as the presage of some sad event; and generally found or made one to succeed it.’ (Animated Nature, 1774, vi. 1–2, 4.)
The hollow-sounding bittern guards its nest. ‘Of all those sounds,’ Goldsmith says, referring to the calls of waterfowl, ‘none is as haunting and hollow as the booming of the bittern.’ . . . ‘I remember how, in the place where I grew up, this bird's call terrified the entire village; they considered it a sign of some unfortunate event and usually found, or created, one that followed it.’ (Animated Nature, 1774, vi. 1–2, 4.)
Bewick, who may be trusted to speak of a bird which he has drawn with such exquisite fidelity, refers (Water Birds, 1847, p. 49) to ‘the hollow booming noise which the bittern makes during the night, in the breeding season, from its swampy retreats.’ Cf. also that close observer Crabbe (The Borough, Letter xxii, ll. 197–8):—
Bewick, who can be relied upon to talk about a bird he has depicted with such incredible accuracy, mentions (Water Birds, 1847, p. 49) ‘the deep booming sound that the bittern creates at night during the breeding season from its swampy hideouts.’ Also see that sharp observer Crabbe (The Borough, Letter xxii, ll. 197–8):—
And the loud bittern, from the bull-rush home,
Gave from the salt-ditch side the bellowing boom.
And the loud bittern, from the cattail home,
Boomed from the salty ditch side with a deep roar.
Mitford compares Confessio Amantis, fol. 152:—
Mitford compares Confessio Amantis, fol. 152:—
A kynge may make a lorde a knave,
And of a knave a lord also;
A king can turn a lord into a servant,
And a servant into a lord as well;
and Professor Hales recalls Burns’s later line in the Cotter’s Saturday Night, 1785:—
and Professor Hales remembers Burns’s later line in the Cotter’s Saturday Night, 1785:—
Princes and lords are but the breath of kings.
Princes and lords are just the voice of kings.
But Prior finds the exact equivalent of the second line in the verses of an old French poet, De. Caux, upon an hour-glass:—
But Prior finds the exact equivalent of the second line in the verses of an old French poet, De Caux, about an hourglass:—
C’est un verre qui luit,
Qu’un souffle peut détruire, et qu’un souffle a
produit.
C'est un verre qui brille,
Qu'un souffle peut casser, et qu'un souffle a
créé.
A time there was, ere England’s griefs began. Here wherever the locality of Auburn, the author had clearly England in mind. A caustic commentator has observed that the ‘time’ indicated must have been a long while ago.
A time there was, ere England’s griefs began. Here wherever the location of Auburn, the author clearly had England in mind. A sharp commentator has noted that the "time" mentioned must have been a long time ago.
opulence. In the first edition the word is ‘luxury.’
opulence. In the first edition, the word is ‘luxury.’
And, many a year elapsed, return to view. ‘It is strongly contended at Lishoy, that “the Poet,” as he is usually called there, after his pedestrian tour upon the Continent of Europe, returned to and resided in the village some time. . . . It is moreover believed, that the havock which had been made in his absence among those favourite scenes of his youth, affected his mind so deeply, that he actually composed great part of the Deserted Village ‘at’ Lishoy.’ (Poetical Works, with Remarks, etc., by the Rev. R. H. Newell, 1811, p. 74.)
And, many a year elapsed, return to view. "It's widely believed in Lishoy that 'the Poet,' as he is commonly referred to there, returned to and lived in the village for a while after his travels across Europe. It's also believed that the destruction that occurred in his absence among those cherished places from his youth impacted him so profoundly that he actually wrote a significant portion of the Deserted Village 'at' Lishoy." (Poetical Works, with Remarks, etc., by the Rev. R. H. Newell, 1811, p. 74.)
Notwithstanding the above, there is no evidence that Goldsmith ever returned to his native island. In a letter to his brother-in-law, Daniel Hodson, written in 1758, he spoke of hoping to do so ‘in five or six years.’ (Percy Memoir, 1801, i. 49). But in another letter, written towards the close of his life, it is still a thing to come. ‘I am again,’ he says, ‘just setting out for Bath, and I honestly say I had much rather it had been for Ireland with my nephew, but that pleasure I hope to have before I die.’ (Letter to Daniel Hodson, no date, in possession of the late Frederick Locker Lampson.)
Despite the above, there’s no evidence that Goldsmith ever returned to his native island. In a letter to his brother-in-law, Daniel Hodson, written in 1758, he mentioned hoping to go back “in five or six years.” (Percy Memoir, 1801, i. 49). But in another letter, written towards the end of his life, it’s still something he looks forward to. “I am again,” he says, “just about to set off for Bath, and I honestly wish it were for Ireland with my nephew, but I hope to enjoy that pleasure before I die.” (Letter to Daniel Hodson, no date, in possession of the late Frederick Locker Lampson.)
Where once the cottage stood, the hawthorn grew. Here followed, in the first edition:—
Where once the cottage stood, the hawthorn grew. Here followed, in the first edition:—
Here, as with doubtful, pensive steps I range,
Trace every scene, and wonder at the change,
Remembrance, etc.
Here, as I walk cautiously and thoughtfully,
I examine every scene and marvel at the change,
Remembrance, etc.
In all my griefs—and God has given my share. Prior notes a slight similarity here to a line of Collins:—
In all my griefs—and God has given my share. Prior points out a slight similarity to a line from Collins:—
Ye mute companions of my toils, that bear,
In all my griefs, a more than equal share!
Hassan; or, The Camel Driver.
You silent partners in my struggles, who carry,
In all my sorrows, an even greater burden!
Hassan; or, The Camel Driver.
In The Present State of Polite Learning, 1759, p. 143, Goldsmith refers feelingly to ‘the neglected author of the Persian eclogues, which, however inaccurate, excel any in our language.’ He included four of them in The Beauties of English Poesy, 1767, i. pp. 239–53.
In The Present State of Polite Learning, 1759, p. 143, Goldsmith expresses fondly about ‘the overlooked author of the Persian eclogues, which, even if not perfect, are better than anything in our language.’ He included four of them in The Beauties of English Poesy, 1767, i. pp. 239–53.
To husband out, etc. In the first edition this ran:—
To husband out, etc. In the first edition this ran:—
My anxious day to husband near the close,
And keep life’s flame from wasting by repose.
My anxious day to be close to my husband,
And keep life's flame from fading through rest.
Here to return—and die at home at last. Forster compares a passage in The Citizen of the World, 1762, ii. 153:—‘There is something so seducing in that spot in which we first had existence, that nothing but it can please; whatever vicissitudes we experience in life, however we toil, or wheresoever we wander, our fatigued wishes still recur to home for tranquillity, we long to die in that spot which gave us birth, and in that pleasing expectation opiate every calamity.’ The poet Waller too—he adds—wished to die ‘like the stag where he was roused.’ (Life, 1871, ii. 202.)
Here to return—and die at home at last. Forster compares a passage in The Citizen of the World, 1762, ii. 153:—‘There’s something so alluring about the place where we first came into existence that nothing else can satisfy us; no matter what ups and downs we face in life, no matter how hard we work or where we go, our tired hearts always long for home for peace. We want to die in the place where we were born, and that comforting thought helps us deal with every hardship.’ The poet Waller also—he adds—wished to die ‘like the stag where he was startled.’ (Life, 1871, ii. 202.)
How happy he. ‘How blest is he’ in the first edition.
How happy he. 'How blessed is he' in the first edition.
And, since ’tis hard to combat, learns to fly. Mitford compares The Bee for October 13, 1759, p. 56:—‘By struggling with misfortunes, we are sure to receive some wounds in the conflict. The only method to come off victorious, is by running away.’
And, since ’tis hard to combat, learns to fly. Mitford compares The Bee for October 13, 1759, p. 56:—‘By facing challenges, we’re bound to get hurt along the way. The only way to win is to escape.’
surly porter. Mr. J. M. Lobban compares the Citizen of the World, 1762, i. 123:—‘I never see a nobleman’s door half opened that some surly porter or footman does not stand full in the breach.’ (Select Poems of Goldsmith, 1900, p. 98.)
surly porter. Mr. J. M. Lobban compares the Citizen of the World, 1762, i. 123:—‘I never see a nobleman's door half open without some grumpy doorman or footman blocking the way.’ (Select Poems of Goldsmith, 1900, p. 98.)
Bends. ‘Sinks’ in the first edition. unperceived decay. Cf. Johnson, Vanity of Human Wishes, 1749, l. 292:—
Bends. ‘Sinks’ in the first edition. unnoticed decay. Cf. Johnson, Vanity of Human Wishes, 1749, l. 292:—
An age that melts with unperceiv’d decay,
And glides in modest innocence away;
A time that fades with unnoticed decline,
And slips away in quiet innocence;
and Irene, Act ii, Sc. 7:—
and Irene, Act 2, Scene 7:—
And varied life steal unperceiv’d away.
And a diverse life gradually slips away without being noticed.
While Resignation, etc. In 1771 Sir Joshua exhibited a picture of ‘An Old Man,’ studied from the beggar who was his model for Ugolino. When it was engraved by Thomas Watson in 1772, he called it ‘Resignation,’ and inscribed the print to Goldsmith in the following words:—‘This attempt to express a Character in The Deserted Village, is dedicated to Dr. Goldsmith, by his sincere Friend and admirer, JOSHUA REYNOLDS.’
While Resignation, etc. In 1771, Sir Joshua showcased a painting called ‘An Old Man,’ based on the beggar who modeled for Ugolino. When Thomas Watson engraved it in 1772, he titled it ‘Resignation’ and dedicated the print to Goldsmith with the following inscription:—‘This attempt to express a character in The Deserted Village is dedicated to Dr. Goldsmith by his sincere friend and admirer, JOSHUA REYNOLDS.’
Up yonder hill. It has been suggested that Goldsmith was here thinking of the little hill of Knockaruadh (Red Hill) in front of Lissoy parsonage, of which there is a sketch in Newell’s Poetical Works, 1811. When Newell wrote, it was already known as ‘Goldsmith’s mount’; and the poet himself refers to it in a letter to his brother-in-law Hodson, dated Dec. 27, 1757:—‘I had rather be placed on the little mount before Lishoy gate, and there take in, to me, the most pleasing horizon in nature.’ (Percy Memoir, 1801, p. 43.)
Up yonder hill. It has been suggested that Goldsmith was thinking of the small hill of Knockaruadh (Red Hill) in front of the Lissoy parsonage, which is sketched in Newell’s Poetical Works, 1811. By the time Newell wrote, it was already known as ‘Goldsmith’s mount’; and the poet himself mentions it in a letter to his brother-in-law Hodson, dated Dec. 27, 1757:—‘I would rather be on the little mount by Lishoy gate, and there take in, for me, the most pleasing horizon in nature.’ (Percy Memoir, 1801, p. 43.)
And fill’d each pause the nightingale had made. In Animated Nature, 1774, v. 328, Goldsmith says:—‘The nightingale’s pausing song would be the proper epithet for this bird’s music.’ [Mitford.]
And fill’d each pause the nightingale had made. In Animated Nature, 1774, v. 328, Goldsmith says:—‘The nightingale’s pausing song would be the perfect way to describe this bird’s music.’ [Mitford.]
No cheerful murmurs fluctuate in the gale. (Cf. Goldsmith’s Essay on Metaphors (British Magazine):—‘Armstrong has used the word ‘fluctuate’ with admirable efficacy, in his philosophical poem entitled The Art of Preserving Health.
No cheerful murmurs fluctuate in the gale. (Cf. Goldsmith’s Essay on Metaphors (British Magazine):—‘Armstrong has effectively used the word ‘fluctuate’ in his philosophical poem titled The Art of Preserving Health.
Oh! when the growling winds contend, and all
The sounding forest ‘fluctuates’ in the storm,
To sink in warm repose, and hear the din
Howl o’er the steady battlements.
Oh! when the growling winds clash, and all
The noisy forest shakes in the storm,
To relax in warm comfort, and hear the chaos
Howl over the solid walls.
The sad historian of the pensive plain. Strean (see note to l. 13) identified the old watercress gatherer as a certain Catherine Giraghty (or Geraghty). Her children (he said) were still living in the neighbourhood of Lissoy in 1807. (Mangin’s Essay on Light Reading, 1808, p. 142.)
The sad historian of the pensive plain. Strean (see note to l. 13) identified the old watercress gatherer as a woman named Catherine Giraghty (or Geraghty). Her children (he mentioned) were still living in the Lissoy area in 1807. (Mangin’s Essay on Light Reading, 1808, p. 142.)
The village preacher’s modest mansion rose. ‘The Rev. Charles Goldsmith is allowed by all that knew him, to have been faithfully represented by his son in the character of the Village Preacher.’ So writes his daughter, Catharine Hodson (Percy Memoir, 1801, p. 3). Others, relying perhaps upon the ‘forty pounds a year’ of the Dedication to The Traveller, make the poet’s brother Henry the original; others, again, incline to kindly Uncle Contarine (vide Introduction). But as Prior justly says (Life, 1837, ii. 249), ‘the fact perhaps is that he fixed upon no one individual, but borrowing like all good poets and painters a little from each, drew the character by their combination.’
The village preacher’s modest mansion rose. “The Rev. Charles Goldsmith is acknowledged by everyone who knew him to be accurately depicted by his son as the Village Preacher.” This is written by his daughter, Catharine Hodson (Percy Memoir, 1801, p. 3). Some people, perhaps influenced by the “forty pounds a year” mentioned in the Dedication to The Traveller, think that the poet’s brother Henry is the inspiration; others lean towards kind Uncle Contarine (vide Introduction). But as Prior rightly notes (Life, 1837, ii. 249), “the truth might be that he didn’t base the character on any one person but, like all great poets and artists, took a bit from everyone and created the character through their mix.”
with forty pounds a year. Cf. Dedication to The Traveller, p. 3, l. 14.
with forty pounds a year. See Dedication to The Traveller, p. 3, l. 14.
Unpractis’d. ‘Unskilful’ in the first edition.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ 'Novice' in the first edition.
More skilled. ‘More bent’ in the first edition.
More skilled. 'More bent' in the first edition.
The long remember’d beggar. ‘The same persons,’ says Prior, commenting upon this passage, ‘are seen for a series of years to traverse the same tract of country at certain intervals, intrude into every house which is not defended by the usual outworks of wealth, a gate and a porter’s lodge, exact their portion of the food of the family, and even find an occasional resting-place for the night, or from severe weather, in the chimney-corner of respectable farmers.’ (Life, 1837, ii. 269.) Cf. Scott on the Scottish mendicants in the ‘Advertisement’ to The Antiquary, 1816, and Leland’s Hist. of Ireland, 1773, i. 35.
The long remember’d beggar. ‘The same people,’ says Prior, commenting on this passage, ‘are seen over a number of years traveling the same areas at certain intervals, entering every home that isn’t protected by the usual barriers of wealth, like a gate and a porter’s lodge, demanding their share of the household’s food, and sometimes even finding a place to stay for the night, or to escape bad weather, in the corner of the fireplace of respectable farmers.’ (Life, 1837, ii. 269.) Cf. Scott on the Scottish beggars in the ‘Advertisement’ to The Antiquary, 1816, and Leland’s Hist. of Ireland, 1773, i. 35.
The broken soldier. The disbanded soldier let loose upon the country at the conclusion of the ‘Seven Years’ War’ was a familiar figure at this period. Bewick, in his Memoir (‘Memorial Edition’), 1887, pp. 44–5, describes some of these ancient campaigners with their battered old uniforms and their endless stories of Minden and Quebec; and a picture of two of them by T. S. Good of Berwick belonged to the late Mr. Locker Lampson. Edie Ochiltree (Antiquary)—it may be remembered—had fought at Fontenoy.
The broken soldier. The retired soldier roaming the country after the end of the 'Seven Years' War' was a common sight during this time. Bewick, in his Memoir ('Memorial Edition', 1887, pp. 44–5), describes some of these old campaigners with their worn-out uniforms and their endless tales of Minden and Quebec; and a painting of two of them by T. S. Good of Berwick belonged to the late Mr. Locker Lampson. Edie Ochiltree (Antiquary)—as you may recall—had fought at Fontenoy.
Allur’d to brighter worlds. Cf. Tickell on Addison—‘Saints who taught and led the way to Heaven.’
Allur’d to brighter worlds. See Tickell on Addison—‘Saints who taught and guided the way to Heaven.’
And fools, who came to scoff, remained to pray. Prior compares the opening lines of Dryden’s Britannia Rediviva:—
And fools, who came to scoff, remained to pray. Prior compares the opening lines of Dryden’s Britannia Rediviva:—
Our vows are heard betimes, and heaven takes care
To grant, before we can conclude the prayer;
Preventing angels met it half the way,
And sent us back to praise, who came to pray.
Our vows are heard early, and heaven makes sure
To grant them before we even finish the prayer;
Angels who watch over us met it halfway,
And sent us back to give thanks, who came to ask.
As some tall cliff, etc. Lucan, Statius, and Claudian have been supposed to have helped Goldsmith to this fine and deservedly popular simile. But, considering his obvious familiarity with French literature, and the rarity of his ‘obligations to the ancients,’ it is not unlikely that, as suggested by a writer in the Academy for Oct. 30, 1886, his source of suggestion is to be found in the following passage of an Ode addressed by Chapelain (1595–1674) to Richelieu:—
As some tall cliff, etc. Lucan, Statius, and Claudian are thought to have influenced Goldsmith in crafting this excellent and widely appreciated simile. However, given his clear knowledge of French literature and the infrequency of his ‘references to the ancients,’ it’s quite possible, as pointed out by a writer in the Academy on Oct. 30, 1886, that his inspiration came from the following lines of an ode written by Chapelain (1595–1674) to Richelieu:—
Dans un paisible mouvement
Tu t’élèves au firmament,
Et laisses contre toi murmurer cette terre;
Ainsi le haut Olympe, à son pied sablonneux,
Laisse fumer la foudre et gronder le tonnerre,
Et garde son sommet tranquille et lumineux.
Dans un mouvement tranquille
Tu t’élèves au ciel,
Et laisses murmurer cette terre à tes côtés;
Ainsi le haut Olympe, sur son sol sablonneux,
Laisse jaillir la foudre et gronder le tonnerre,
Et garde son sommet calme et lumineux.
Or another French model—indicated by Mr. Forster (Life, 1871, ii. 115–16) by the late Lord Lytton—may have been these lines from a poem by the Abbé de Chaulieu (1639–1720):—
Or another French model—pointed out by Mr. Forster (Life, 1871, ii. 115–16) by the late Lord Lytton—might be these lines from a poem by the Abbé de Chaulieu (1639–1720):—
Au milieu cependant de ces peines cruelles
De notre triste hiver, compagnes trop fidèles,
Je suis tranquille et gai. Quel bien plus précieux
Puis-je espérer jamais de la bonté des dieux!
Tel qu’un rocher dont la tête,
Égalant le Mont Athos,
Voit à ses pieds la tempête
Troubler le calme des flots,
La mer autour bruit et gronde;
Malgré ses emotions,
Sur son front élevé règne une paix profonde,
Que tant d’agitations
Et que ses fureurs de l’onde
Respectent à l’égal du nid des alcyons.
In the midst of these cruel pains
Of our sad winter, far too faithful companions,
I remain calm and cheerful. What greater good
Could I ever hope for from the kindness of the gods!
Just like a rock whose peak,
Matching Mount Athos,
Sees at its feet the storm
Disturbing the calm of the waves,
The sea rumbles and roars around;
Despite its emotions,
A deep peace reigns on its high forehead,
That so many disturbances
And the tempests of the waves
Respect equally to the nest of the kingfisher.
On the other hand, Goldsmith may have gone no further than Young’s Complaint: Night the Second, 1742, p. 42, where, as Mitford points out, occur these lines:—
On the other hand, Goldsmith might not have gone beyond Young’s Complaint: Night the Second, 1742, p. 42, where, as Mitford notes, these lines appear:—
As some tall Tow’r, or lofty Mountain’s Brow,
Detains the Sun, Illustrious from its Height,
While rising Vapours, and descending Shades,
With Damps, and Darkness drown the Spatious Vale:
Undampt by Doubt, Undarken’d by Despair,
Philander, thus, augustly rears his Head.
As a tall tower or the peak of a high mountain holds back the glorious sun with its height, while rising mist and falling shadows, with dampness and darkness, engulf the vast valley: Unfazed by doubt, unclouded by despair, Philander proudly lifts his head.
Prior also (Life, 1837, ii. 252) prints a passage from Animated Nature, 1774, i. 145, derived from Ulloa, which perhaps served as the raw material of the simile.
Prior also (Life, 1837, ii. 252) prints a passage from Animated Nature, 1774, i. 145, taken from Ulloa, which may have provided the basis for the simile.
Full well they laugh’d, etc. Steele, in Spectator, No. 49 (for April 26, 1711) has a somewhat similar thought:—‘Eubulus has so great an Authority in his little Diurnal Audience, that when he shakes his Head at any Piece of publick News, they all of them appear dejected; and, on the contrary, go home to their Dinners with a good Stomach and chearful Aspect, when Eubulus seems to intimate that Things go well.’
Full well they laugh’d, etc. Steele, in Spectator, No. 49 (for April 26, 1711) has a somewhat similar thought:—‘Eubulus has so much influence over his small daily audience that when he shakes his head at any piece of public news, everyone looks downcast; and on the other hand, they leave for dinner in a good mood and cheerful when Eubulus suggests that things are going well.’
Yet he was kind, etc. For the rhyme of ‘fault’ and ‘aught’ in this couplet Prior cites the precedent of Pope:—
Yet he was kind, etc. For the rhyme of ‘fault’ and ‘aught’ in this couplet, Prior references Pope's earlier work:—
Before his sacred name flies ev’ry fault,
And each exalted stanza teems with thought!
Before his holy name, every flaw disappears,
And each lofty verse is full of ideas!
(Essay on Criticism, l. 422). He might also have cited Waller, who elides the ‘l’:—
(Essay on Criticism, l. 422). He could have also mentioned Waller, who drops the ‘l’:—
Were we but less indulgent to our fau’ts,
And patience had to cultivate our thoughts.
Were we only less lenient towards our mistakes,
And had the patience to nurture our thoughts.
But mine the sorrow, mine the fault,
And well my life shall pay;
I’ll seek the solitude he sought,
And stretch me where he lay.
But I take the sorrow, I take the blame,
And I’ll pay for it with my life;
I’ll look for the solitude he looked for,
And rest where he rested.
Cf. also Retaliation, ll. 73–4. Perhaps—as indeed Prior suggests—he pronounced ‘fault’ in this fashion.
Cf. also Retaliation, ll. 73–4. Maybe—as Prior suggests—he pronounced ‘fault’ like this.
That one small head could carry all he knew. Some of the traits of this portrait are said to be borrowed from Goldsmith’s own master at Lissoy:—‘He was instructed in reading, writing, and arithmetic’—says his sister Catherine, Mrs. Hodson—‘by a schoolmaster in his father’s village, who had been a quartermaster in the army in Queen Anne’s wars, in that detachment which was sent to Spain: having travelled over a considerable part of Europe and being of a very romantic turn, he used to entertain Oliver with his adventures; and the impressions these made on his scholar were believed by the family to have given him that wandering and unsettled turn which so much appeared in his future life.’ (Percy Memoir, 1801, pp. 3–4.) The name of this worthy, according to Strean, was Burn (Byrne). (Mangin’s Essay on Light Reading, 1808, p. 142.)
That one small head could carry all he knew. Some of the characteristics of this portrait are said to be inspired by Goldsmith's own teacher at Lissoy:—‘He learned to read, write, and do math’—says his sister Catherine, Mrs. Hodson—‘from a schoolmaster in his father’s village, who had been a quartermaster in the army during Queen Anne’s wars, in that group sent to Spain: having traveled quite a bit around Europe and being very romantic, he used to share his adventures with Oliver; and the impact these stories had on his student was thought by the family to have given him that restless and wandering nature that was so evident in his later life.’ (Percy Memoir, 1801, pp. 3–4.) According to Strean, this notable figure was named Burn (Byrne). (Mangin’s Essay on Light Reading, 1808, p. 142.)
Near yonder thorn. See note to l. 13.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ See note for l. 13.
The chest contriv’d a double debt to pay. Cf. the Description of an Author’s Bedchamber, p. 48, l. ult.:—
The chest contriv’d a double debt to pay. See the Description of an Author’s Bedchamber, p. 48, last line:—
A cap by night—a stocking all the day!
A hat at night—a beanie all day!
The twelve good rules. ‘A constant one’ (i.e. picture) ‘in every house was “King Charles’ Twelve Good Rules.”’ (Bewick’s Memoir, ‘Memorial Edition,’ 1887, p. 262.) This old broadside, surmounted by a rude woodcut of the King’s execution, is still prized by collectors. The rules, as ‘found in the study of King Charles the First, of Blessed Memory,’ are as follow:— ‘1. Urge no healths; 2. Profane no divine ordinances; 3. Touch no state matters; 4. Reveal no secrets; 5. Pick no quarrels; 6. Make no comparisons; 7. Maintain no ill opinions; 8. Keep no bad company; 9. Encourage no vice; 10. Make no long meals; 11. Repeat no grievances; 12. Lay no Wagers.’ Prior, Misc. Works, 1837, iv. 63, points out that Crabbe also makes the ‘Twelve Good Rules’ conspicuous in the Parish Register (ll. 51–2):—
The twelve good rules. ‘A constant one’ (i.e. picture) ‘in every house was “King Charles’ Twelve Good Rules.”’ (Bewick’s Memoir, ‘Memorial Edition,’ 1887, p. 262.) This old broadside, topped with a rough woodcut of the King’s execution, is still valued by collectors. The rules, as ‘found in the study of King Charles the First, of Blessed Memory,’ are as follows:— ‘1. Don’t toast to anyone’s health; 2. Don’t disrespect sacred ordinances; 3. Don’t discuss political matters; 4. Don’t reveal secrets; 5. Don’t start fights; 6. Don’t make comparisons; 7. Don’t hold onto bad opinions; 8. Don’t associate with bad company; 9. Don’t encourage wrongdoing; 10. Don’t have long meals; 11. Don’t dwell on grievances; 12. Don’t gamble.’ Prior, Misc. Works, 1837, iv. 63, points out that Crabbe also highlights the ‘Twelve Good Rules’ in the Parish Register (ll. 51–2):—
There is King Charles, and all his Golden Rules,
Who proved Misfortune’s was the best of schools.
There’s King Charles, with all his Golden Rules,
Who showed that Misfortune is the best teacher.
Her late Majesty, Queen Victoria, kept a copy of these rules in the servants’ hall at Windsor Castle.
Her late Majesty, Queen Victoria, had a copy of these rules in the servants' hall at Windsor Castle.
the royal game of goose. The ‘Royal and Entertaining Game of the Goose’ is described at length in Strutt’s Sports and Pastimes, bk. iv, ch. 2 (xxv). It may be briefly defined as a game of compartments with different titles through which the player progresses according to the numbers he throws with the dice. At every fourth or fifth compartment is depicted a goose, and if the player’s cast falls upon one of these, he moves forward double the number of his throw.
the royal game of goose. The ‘Royal and Entertaining Game of the Goose’ is detailed in Strutt’s Sports and Pastimes, bk. iv, ch. 2 (xxv). It can be simply defined as a game with different sections where the player progresses based on the numbers rolled on the dice. Every fourth or fifth section features a goose, and if the player lands on one of these, they move forward double the amount they rolled.
While broken tea-cups. Cf. the Description of an Author’s Bedchamber, p. 48, l. 18:—
While broken tea-cups. Cf. the Description of an Author’s Bedchamber, p. 48, l. 18:—
And five crack’d teacups dress’d the chimney board.
And five cracked teacups decorated the top of the fireplace.
Mr. Hogan, who repaired or rebuilt the ale-house at Lissoy, did not forget, besides restoring the ‘Royal Game of Goose’ and the ‘Twelve Good Rules,’ to add the broken teacups, ‘which for better security in the frail tenure of an Irish publican, or the doubtful decorum of his guests, were embedded in the mortar.’ (Prior, Life, 1837, ii. 265.)
Mr. Hogan, who fixed up or rebuilt the pub at Lissoy, didn’t just restore the ‘Royal Game of Goose’ and the ‘Twelve Good Rules,’ but he also included the broken teacups, ‘which for better security in the fragile hold of an Irish pub owner, or the questionable decorum of his guests, were embedded in the mortar.’ (Prior, Life, 1837, ii. 265.)
Shall kiss the cup. Cf. Scott’s Lochinvar:—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ See Scott’s Lochinvar:—
The bride kissed the goblet: the knight took it up,
He quaff’d off the wine and he threw down the cup.
The bride kissed the cup: the knight picked it up,
He drank the wine and tossed the cup away.
Cf. also The History of Miss Stanton (British Magazine, July, 1760).—‘The earthen mug went round. Miss touched the cup, the stranger pledged the parson,’ etc.
Cf. also The History of Miss Stanton (British Magazine, July, 1760).—‘The clay mug was passed around. Miss touched the cup, the stranger toasted the parson,’ etc.
Between a splendid and a happy land. Prior compares The Citizen of the World, 1762, i. 98:—‘Too much commerce may injure a nation as well as too little; and . . . there is a wide difference between a conquering and a flourishing empire.’
Between a splendid and a happy land. Prior compares The Citizen of the World, 1762, i. 98:—‘Having too much trade can hurt a nation just like having too little; and . . . there's a big difference between a conquering empire and a thriving one.’
To see profusion that he must not share. Cf. Animated Nature, iv. p. 43:—‘He only guards those luxuries he is not fated to share.’ [Mitford.]
To see profusion that he must not share. Cf. Animated Nature, iv. p. 43:—‘He only protects those luxuries he isn’t destined to share.’ [Mitford.]
To see those joys. Up to the third edition the words were each joy.
To see those joys. Up to the third edition, the words were each joy.
There the black gibbet glooms beside the way. The gallows, under the savage penal laws of the eighteenth century, by which horse-stealing, forgery, shop-lifting, and even the cutting of a hop-bind in a plantation were punishable with death, was a common object in the landscape. Cf. Vicar of Wakefield, 1706, ii. 122:—‘Our possessions are paled up with new edicts every day, and hung round with gibbets to scare every invader’; and Citizen of the World, 1762, ii. 63–7. Johnson, who wrote eloquently on capital punishment in The Rambler for April 20, 1751, No. 114, also refers to the ceaseless executions in his London, 1738, ll. 238–43:—
There the black gibbet glooms beside the way. The gallows, under the brutal laws of the eighteenth century, where horse theft, forgery, shoplifting, and even cutting a hop vine in a field were punishable by death, was a common sight in the landscape. Cf. Vicar of Wakefield, 1706, ii. 122:—‘Our possessions are surrounded by new laws every day and adorned with gallows to intimidate any intruders’; and Citizen of the World, 1762, ii. 63–7. Johnson, who wrote passionately about capital punishment in The Rambler on April 20, 1751, No. 114, also mentions the continuous executions in his London, 1738, ll. 238–43:—
Scarce can our fields, such crowds at Tyburn die,
With hemp the gallows and the fleet supply.
Propose your schemes, ye senatorian band,
Whose ways and means support the sinking land:
Lest ropes be wanting in the tempting spring,
To rig another convoy for the king.
Scarce can our fields, so many crowds die at Tyburn,
With hemp for the gallows and the fleet covered.
Suggest your plans, you group of senators,
Whose strategies keep the struggling land afloat:
Unless ropes are lacking in the tempting spring,
To set up another convoy for the king.
Where the poor houseless shivering female lies. Mitford compares Letter cxiv of The Citizen of the World, 1762, ii. 211:—‘These poor shivering females have once seen happier days, and been flattered into beauty. They have been prostituted to the gay luxurious villain, and are now turned out to meet the severity of winter. Perhaps now lying at the doors of their betrayers, they sue to wretches whose hearts are insensible, or debauchees who may curse, but will not relieve them.’ The same passage occurs in The Bee, 1759, p. 126 (A City Night-Piece).
Where the poor houseless shivering female lies. Mitford compares Letter cxiv of The Citizen of the World, 1762, ii. 211:—‘These poor shivering women have once seen better days and been made to feel beautiful. They have been used by the charming, luxurious villain, and are now cast out to face the harshness of winter. Perhaps now lying at the doors of their betrayers, they plead with wretches whose hearts are apathetic, or debauchees who may curse, but won’t help them.’ The same passage appears in The Bee, 1759, p. 126 (A City Night-Piece).
Near her betrayer’s door, etc. Cf. the foregoing quotation.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ etc. See the quote above.
wild Altama, i.e. the Alatamaha, a river in Georgia, North America. Goldsmith may have been familiar with this name in connexion with his friend Oglethorpe’s expedition of 1733.
wild Altama, i.e. the Alatamaha, a river in Georgia, North America. Goldsmith might have recognized this name in relation to his friend Oglethorpe’s expedition in 1733.
crouching tigers, a poetical licence, as there are no tigers in the locality named. But Mr. J. H. Lobban calls attention to a passage from Animated Nature [1774, iii. 244], in which Goldsmith seems to defend himself:—‘There is an animal of America, which is usually called the Red Tiger, but Mr. Buffon calls it the Cougar, which, no doubt, is very different from the tiger of the east. Some, however, have thought proper to rank both together, and I will take leave to follow their example.’
crouching tigers, a poetical license, since there are no tigers in the area mentioned. However, Mr. J. H. Lobban points out a passage from Animated Nature [1774, iii. 244], where Goldsmith seems to defend himself:—‘There is an animal in America, commonly known as the Red Tiger, but Mr. Buffon refers to it as the Cougar, which, for sure, is quite different from the eastern tiger. Still, some have deemed it appropriate to classify both together, and I will take the liberty to follow their lead.’
The good old sire. Cf. Threnodia Augustalis, ll. 16–17:—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Cf. Threnodia Augustalis, ll. 16–17:—
The good old sire, unconscious of decay,
The modest matron, clad in homespun gray
The good old dad, unaware of aging,
The humble mother, dressed in simple gray
a father’s. ‘Her father’s’ in the first edition.
a father’s. 'Her father’s' in the first edition.
silent. ‘Decent’ in the first edition.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ 'Good' in the original edition.
On Torno’s cliffs, or Pambamarca’s side. ‘Torno’=Tornea, a river which falls into the Gulf of Bothnia; Pambamarca is a mountain near Quito, South America. ‘The author’—says Bolton Corney—‘bears in memory the operations of the French philosophers in the arctic and equatorial regions, as described in the celebrated narratives of M. Maupertuis and Don Antonio de Ulloa.’
On Torno’s cliffs, or Pambamarca’s side. ‘Torno’=Tornea, a river that flows into the Gulf of Bothnia; Pambamarca is a mountain near Quito, South America. ‘The author’—says Bolton Corney—‘remembers the work of the French philosophers in the Arctic and equatorial regions, as described in the famous accounts of M. Maupertuis and Don Antonio de Ulloa.’
That trade’s proud empire, etc. These last four lines are attributed to Johnson on Boswell’s authority:—‘Dr. Johnson . . . favoured me by marking the lines which he furnished to Goldsmith’s Deserted Village, which are only the ‘last four’.’ (Birkbeck Hill’s Boswell, 1887, ii. 7.)
That trade’s proud empire, etc. These last four lines are attributed to Johnson based on Boswell’s account:—‘Dr. Johnson . . . helped me by identifying the lines he provided for Goldsmith’s Deserted Village, which are just the ‘last four’.’ (Birkbeck Hill’s Boswell, 1887, ii. 7.)
PROLOGUE OF LABERIUS.
This translation, or rather imitation, was first published at pp. 176–7 of An Enquiry into the Present State of Polite Learning in Europe, 1759 (Chap. xii, ‘Of the Stage’), where it is prefaced as follows:— ‘MACROBIUS has preserved a prologue, spoken and written by the poet [Decimus] Laberius, a Roman knight, whom Caesar forced upon the stage, written with great elegance and spirit, which shews what opinion the Romans in general entertained of the profession of an actor.’ In the second edition of 1774 the prologue was omitted. The original lines, one of which Goldsmith quotes, are to found in the Saturnalia of Macrobius, lib. ii, cap. vii (Opera, London, 1694). He seems to have confined himself to imitating the first fifteen:—
This translation, or rather imitation, was first published on pages 176–7 of An Enquiry into the Present State of Polite Learning in Europe, 1759 (Chap. xii, ‘Of the Stage’), where it is introduced as follows:— ‘MACROBIUS has preserved a prologue, spoken and written by the poet [Decimus] Laberius, a Roman knight, whom Caesar forced onto the stage, written with great elegance and spirit, which shows what opinion the Romans generally had of the profession of an actor.’ In the second edition of 1774, the prologue was removed. The original lines, one of which Goldsmith quotes, can be found in the Saturnalia of Macrobius, lib. ii, cap. vii (Opera, London, 1694). He seems to have limited himself to imitating the first fifteen:—
Necessitas, cujus cursus transversi impetum
Voluerunt multi effugere, pauci potuerunt,
Quo me detrusit paene extremis sensibus?
Quem nulla ambitio, nulla umquam largitio,
Nullus timor, vis nulla, nulla auctoritas
Movere potuit in juventa de statu;
Ecce in senecta ut facile labefecit loco
Viri Excellentis mente clemente edita
Submissa placide blandiloquens oratio!
Etenim ipsi di negare cui nihil potuerunt,
Hominem me denegare quis posset pati?
Ergo bis tricenis annis actis sine tota
Eques Romanus Lare egressus meo
Domum revertar mimus. nimirum hoc die
Uno plus vixi mihi quam vivendum fuit.
Necessity, whose course many wanted to escape but few could,
Where has it dragged me, almost to the limits of my senses?
No ambition, no generosity ever moved me,
No fear, no force, no authority
Could change me in my youth;
Look how easily it has shaken my place
In old age, with the gentle mind of the Excellent Man,
Calmly speaking soothing words!
Indeed, who could deny what the gods themselves could not deny?
Who could allow themselves to reject me?
So, after thirty years spent entirely
As a Roman knight, leaving my home,
I will return home today.
Certainly, on this day I have lived longer than I was meant to.
Rollin gives a French translation of this prologue in his Traité des Études. It is quoted by Bolton Corney in his Poetical Works of Oliver Goldsmith, 1845, pp. 203–4. In his Aldine edition of 1831, p. 114, Mitford completed Goldsmith’s version as follows:—
Rollin provides a French translation of this prologue in his Traité des Études. Bolton Corney quotes it in his Poetical Works of Oliver Goldsmith, 1845, pp. 203–4. In his Aldine edition from 1831, p. 114, Mitford finished Goldsmith’s version like this:—
Too lavish still in good, or evil hour,
To show to man the empire of thy power,
If fortune, at thy wild impetuous sway,
The blossoms of my fame must drop away,
Then was the time the obedient plant to strain
When life was warm in every vigorous vein,
To mould young nature to thy plastic skill,
And bend my pliant boyhood to thy will.
So might I hope applauding crowds to hear,
Catch the quick smile, and HIS attentive ear.
But ah! for what has thou reserv’d my age?
Say, how can I expect the approving stage;
Fled is the bloom of youth—the manly air—
The vigorous mind that spurn’d at toil and care;
Gone is the voice, whose clear and silver tone
The enraptur’d theatre would love to own.
As clasping ivy chokes the encumber’d tree,
So age with foul embrace has ruined me.
Thou, and the tomb, Laberius, art the same,
Empty within, what hast thou but a name?
Still too extravagant in both good and bad times,
To show humanity the extent of your power,
If fate, under your wild and reckless control,
Causes the flowers of my fame to fall away,
Then was the time to shape the obedient plant
When life pulsed vibrant in every energetic vein,
To mold young talent to your creative skill,
And bend my flexible youth to your will.
This way, I might hope to hear the applause of crowds,
Catch a quick smile, and gain HIS attentive ear.
But alas! What have you set aside for my old age?
Tell me, how can I expect the stage’s approval;
The bloom of youth has faded—the manly presence—
The strong mind that rejected work and worry;
Gone is the voice, whose clear and silvery tone
The captivated theater would have loved to claim.
Just as ivy chokes the burdened tree,
So age with its ugly grip has ruined me.
You and the grave, Laberius, are one and the same,
Empty within, what do you have but a name?
Macrobius, it may be remembered, was the author, with a quotation from whom Johnson, after a long silence, electrified the company upon his first arrival at Pembroke College, thus giving (says Boswell) ‘the first impression of that more extensive reading in which he had indulged himself’ (Birkbeck Hill’s Boswell, 1887, i. 59). If the study of Macrobius is to be regarded as a test of ‘more extensive reading’ that praise must therefore be accorded to Goldsmith, who cites him in his first book.
Macrobius, as you might recall, was the author, and a quote from him is what Johnson used to shock the group when he first showed up at Pembroke College, giving (according to Boswell) ‘the first impression of that broader reading he had engaged in’ (Birkbeck Hill’s Boswell, 1887, i. 59). If studying Macrobius is considered a sign of ‘broader reading,’ then Goldsmith deserves similar recognition since he references him in his first book.
ON A BEAUTIFUL YOUTH STRUCK BLIND WITH LIGHTNING.
This quatrain, the original of which does not appear to have been traced, was first published in The Bee for Saturday, the 6th of October, 1759, p. 8. It is there succeeded by the following Latin epigram, ‘in the same spirit’:—
This quatrain, which seems to have no known original source, was first published in The Bee on Saturday, October 6, 1759, p. 8. It is followed there by the next Latin epigram, 'in the same spirit':—
LUMINE Acon dextro capta est Leonida sinistro
Et poterat forma vincere uterque Deos.
Parve puer lumen quod habes concede puellae
Sic tu caecus amor sic erit illa Venus.
LUMINE Acon, taken with the right, Leonida with the left
And each could conquer the gods with their form.
Little boy, grant the light you have to the girl
So that your blind love will be like that of Venus.
There are several variations of this in the Gentleman’s Magazine for 1745, pp. 104, 159, 213, 327, one of which is said to be ‘By a monk of Winchester,’ with a reference to ‘Cambden’s Remains, p. 413.’ None of these corresponds exactly with Goldsmith’s text; and the lady’s name is uniformly given as ‘Leonilla.’ A writer in the Quarterly Review, vol. 171, p. 296, prints the ‘original’ thus—
There are several versions of this in the Gentleman’s Magazine from 1745, pp. 104, 159, 213, 327, one of which is attributed to ‘A monk of Winchester,’ with a reference to ‘Cambden’s Remains, p. 413.’ None of these exactly matches Goldsmith’s text; and the lady’s name is consistently given as ‘Leonilla.’ A writer in the Quarterly Review, vol. 171, p. 296, presents the ‘original’ as—
Lumine Acon dextro, capta est Leonilla sinistro,
Et potis est forma vincere uterque Deos.
Blande puer, lumen quod habes concede sorori;
Sic tu caecus Amor, sic erit illa Venus;
Lumine Acon dextro, capta est Leonilla sinistro,
Et potis est forma vincere uterque Deos.
Blande puer, lumen quod habes concede sorori;
Sic tu caecus Amor, sic erit illa Venus;
and says ‘it was written by Girolamo Amalteo, and will be found in any of the editions of the Trium Fratrum Amaltheorum Carmina, under the title of ‘De gemellis, fratre et sorore, luscis.’ According to Byron on Bowles (Works, 1836, vi. p. 390), the persons referred to are the Princess of Eboli, mistress of Philip II of Spain, and Maugiron, minion of Henry III of France, who had each of them lost an eye. But for this the reviewer above quoted had found no authority.
and says ‘it was written by Girolamo Amalteo and can be found in any edition of the Trium Fratrum Amaltheorum Carmina, under the title ‘De gemellis, fratre et sorore, luscis.’ According to Byron on Bowles (Works, 1836, vi. p. 390), the people being talked about are the Princess of Eboli, the mistress of Philip II of Spain, and Maugiron, a favorite of Henry III of France, who both lost an eye. However, the reviewer mentioned above found no evidence to support this.
THE GIFT.
This little trifle, in which a French levity is wedded to the language of Prior, was first printed in The Bee, for Saturday, the 13th of October, 1759. Its original, which is as follows, is to be found where Goldsmith found it, namely in Part iii of the Ménagiana, (ed. 1729, iii, 397), and not far from the ditty of le fameux la Galisse. (See An Elegy on Mrs. Mary Blaize, infra, p. 198):—
This little piece, where a light French style meets the language of Prior, was first published in The Bee on Saturday, October 13, 1759. Its original version, which is as follows, can be found where Goldsmith discovered it, specifically in Part iii of the Ménagiana, (ed. 1729, iii, 397), not far from the song of le fameux la Galisse. (See An Elegy on Mrs. Mary Blaize, infra, p. 198):—
ETRENE A IRIS.
ETRENE A IRIS.
Pour témoigner de ma flame,
Iris, du meilleur de mon ame
Je vous donne à ce nouvel an
Non pas dentelle ni ruban,
Non pas essence, ni pommade,
Quelques boites de marmelade,
Un manchon, des gans, un bouquet,
Non pas heures, ni chapelet.
Quoi donc? Attendez, je vous donne
O fille plus belle que bonne ...
Je vous donne: Ah! le puis-je dire?
Oui, c’est trop souffrir le martyre,
Il est tems de s’émanciper,
Patience va m’échaper,
Fussiez-vous cent fois plus aimable,
Belle Iris, je vous donne ... au Diable.
To show my passion,
Iris, with all my heart
I give you this new year
Not lace or ribbon,
Not perfume or cream,
A few jars of marmalade,
A muff, some gloves, a bouquet,
Not hours, or a rosary.
So what? Wait, I’m giving you
Oh, daughter more beautiful than good ...
I give you: Ah! can I really say it?
Yes, it’s too much to suffer the torture,
It’s time to break free,
Patience is slipping away from me,
Even if you were a hundred times more lovely,
Beautiful Iris, I give you ... to hell.
In Bolton Corney’s edition of Goldsmith’s Poetical Works, 1845, p. 77, note, these lines are attributed to Bernard de la Monnoye (1641–1728), who is said to have included them in a collection of Étrennes en vers, published in 1715.
In Bolton Corney’s edition of Goldsmith’s Poetical Works, 1845, p. 77, note, these lines are credited to Bernard de la Monnoye (1641–1728), who supposedly included them in a collection of Étrennes en vers, published in 1715.
I’ll give thee. See an anecdote à propos of this anticlimax in Trevelyan’s Life and Letters of Lord Macaulay, ed. 1889, p. 600:—‘There was much laughing about Mrs. Beecher Stowe [then (16th March, 1853) expected in England], and what we were to give her. I referred the ladies to Goldsmith’s poems for what I should give. Nobody but Hannah understood me; but some of them have since been thumbing Goldsmith to make out the riddle.’
I’ll give thee. See an anecdote about this anticlimax in Trevelyan’s Life and Letters of Lord Macaulay, ed. 1889, p. 600:—‘There was a lot of laughing about Mrs. Beecher Stowe [then (16th March, 1853) expected in England], and what we should give her. I referred the ladies to Goldsmith’s poems for what I would give. Only Hannah understood me; but some of them have since been looking up Goldsmith to figure out the riddle.’
THE LOGICIANS REFUTED.
These lines, which have often, and even of late years, been included among Swift’s works, were first printed as Goldsmith’s by T. Evans at vol. i. pp. 115–17 of The Poetical and Dramatic Works of Oliver Goldsmith, M.B., 1780. They originally appeared in The Busy Body for Thursday, October the 18th, 1759 (No. v), having this notification above the title: ‘The following Poem written by DR. SWIFT, is communicated to the Public by the BUSY BODY, to whom it was presented by a Nobleman of distinguished Learning and Taste.’ In No. ii they had already been advertised as forthcoming. The sub-title, ‘In imitation of Dean Swift,’ seems to have been added by Evans. The text here followed is that of the first issue.
These lines, which have often, and even recently, been included among Swift’s works, were first published as Goldsmith’s by T. Evans in volume i, pages 115–17 of The Poetical and Dramatic Works of Oliver Goldsmith, M.B., 1780. They originally appeared in The Busy Body on Thursday, October 18, 1759 (No. v), with this notice above the title: ‘The following Poem written by DR. SWIFT, is shared with the Public by the BUSY BODY, to whom it was presented by a Nobleman of distinguished Learning and Taste.’ In No. ii, they had already been announced as coming soon. The sub-title, ‘In imitation of Dean Swift,’ seems to have been added by Evans. The text here is from the first issue.
Wise Aristotle and Smiglecius. Cf. The Life of Parnell, 1770, p. 3:—‘His imagination might have been too warm to relish the cold logic of Burgersdicius, or the dreary subtleties of Smiglesius; but it is certain that as a classical scholar, few could equal him.’ Martin Smiglesius or Smigletius, a Polish Jesuit, theologian and logician, who died in 1618, appears to have been a special bête noire to Goldsmith; and the reference to him here would support the ascription of the poem to Goldsmith’s pen, were it not that Swift seems also to have cherished a like antipathy:—‘He told me that he had made many efforts, upon his entering the College [i.e. Trinity College, Dublin], to read some of the old treatises on logic writ by Smeglesius, Keckermannus, Burgersdicius, etc., and that he never had patience to go through three pages of any of them, he was so disgusted at the stupidity of the work.’ (Sheridan’s Life of Swift, 2nd ed., 1787, p. 4.)
Wise Aristotle and Smiglecius. Cf. The Life of Parnell, 1770, p. 3:—‘His imagination might have been too lively to appreciate the cold logic of Burgersdicius, or the dull subtleties of Smiglesius; but it’s clear that as a classical scholar, few could match him.’ Martin Smiglesius or Smigletius, a Polish Jesuit, theologian, and logician who died in 1618, seems to have been a particular bête noire for Goldsmith; and the mention of him here would support attributing the poem to Goldsmith, if it weren't for the fact that Swift also seemed to have held a similar distaste:—‘He told me that he had made many attempts, when he started at Trinity College, Dublin, to read some of the old logic treatises written by Smeglesius, Keckermannus, Burgersdicius, etc., and that he never had the patience to get through three pages of any of them, as he was so frustrated by the stupidity of the work.’ (Sheridan’s Life of Swift, 2nd ed., 1787, p. 4.)
Than reason-boasting mortal’s pride. So in The Busy Body. Some editors—Mitford, for example—print the line:—
Than reason-boasting mortal’s pride. So in The Busy Body. Some editors—like Mitford, for instance—print the line:—
Than reason,—boasting mortals’ pride.
Than reason—boasting human pride.
Deus est anima brutorum. Cf. Addison in Spectator, No. 121 (July 19, 1711): ‘A modern Philosopher, quoted by Monsieur Bale in his Learned Dissertation on the Souls of Brutes delivers the same Opinion [i.e.—That Instinct is the immediate direction of Providence], tho’ in a bolder form of words where he says Deus est Anima Brutorum, God himself is the Soul of Brutes.’ There is much in ‘Monsieur Bayle’ on this theme. Probably Addison had in mind the following passage of the Dict. Hist. et Critique (3rd ed., 1720, 2481b.) which Bayle cites from M. Bernard:—‘Il me semble d’avoir lu quelque part cette Thèse, Deus est anima brutorum: l’expression est un peu dure; mais elle peut recevoir un fort bon sens.’
Deus est anima brutorum. Cf. Addison in Spectator, No. 121 (July 19, 1711): ‘A modern philosopher, quoted by Monsieur Bayle in his learned dissertation on the souls of animals, shares the same opinion [i.e.—That instinct is the immediate guidance of Providence], though expressed more boldly when he says Deus est anima brutorum, God himself is the soul of animals.’ There is a lot by ‘Monsieur Bayle’ on this subject. Addison likely had in mind the following passage from the Dict. Hist. et Critique (3rd ed., 1720, 2481b.) which Bayle cites from M. Bernard:—‘I seem to recall having read somewhere this thesis, Deus est anima brutorum: the phrase is a bit harsh; but it can carry a very good meaning.’
B—b=Bob, i.e. Sir Robert Walpole, the Prime Minister, for whom many venal ‘quills were drawn’ circa 1715–42. Cf. Pope’s Epilogue to the Satires, 1738, Dialogue i, ll. 27–32:—
B—b=Bob, aka Sir Robert Walpole, the Prime Minister, for whom many corrupt “quills were drawn” around 1715–42. See Pope’s Epilogue to the Satires, 1738, Dialogue i, ll. 27–32:—
Go see Sir ROBERT—
P. See Sir ROBERT!—hum—
And never laugh—for all my life to come?
Seen him I have, but in his happier hour
Of Social Pleasure, ill-exchang’d for Pow’r;
Seen him, uncumber’d with the Venal tribe,
Smile without Art, and win without a Bribe.
Go see Sir ROBERT—
P. See Sir ROBERT!—um—
And never laugh—for all the days of my life?
I have seen him, but in his happier moments
Of Social Pleasure, poorly traded for Power;
I’ve seen him, free from the corrupt crowd,
Smile naturally, and win without any bribe.
A courtier any ape surpasses. Cf. Gay’s Fables, passim. Indeed there is more of Gay than Swift in this and the lines that follow. Gay’s life was wasted in fruitless expectations of court patronage, and his disappointment often betrays itself in his writings.
A courtier any ape surpasses. Cf. Gay’s Fables, passim. In fact, there’s more of Gay than Swift in this and the following lines. Gay wasted his life hoping for favors from the court, and his disappointment often shows in his writings.
And footmen, lords and dukes can act. Cf. Gil Blas, 1715–35, liv. iii, chap. iv:—‘Il falloit voir comme nous nous portions des santés à tous moments, en nous donnant les uns aux autres les surnoms de nos maîtres. Le valet de don Antonio appeloit Gamb celuiet nous nous enivrions peu à peu sous ces noms empruntés, tout aussi bien que les seigneurs qui les portoient véritablement.’ But Steele had already touched this subject in Spectator, No. 88, for June 11, 1711, ‘On the Misbehaviour of Servants,’ a paper supposed to have afforded the hint for Townley’s farce of High Life below Stairs, which, about a fortnight after The Logicians Refuted appeared, was played for the first time at Drury Lane, not much to the gratification of the gentlemen’s gentlemen in the upper gallery. Goldsmith himself wrote ‘A Word or two on the late Farce, called High Life below Stairs,’ in The Bee for November 3, 1759, pp. 154–7.
And footmen, lords and dukes can act. Cf. Gil Blas, 1715–35, liv. iii, chap. iv:—‘You should see how we toasted each other all the time, calling each other by the names of our masters. Don Antonio’s servant used to call Gamb by that name, and we gradually got drunk under those borrowed names, just like the nobles who actually carried them.’ But Steele had already explored this topic in Spectator, No. 88, for June 11, 1711, ‘On the Misbehaviour of Servants,’ an article believed to have inspired Townley’s farce High Life below Stairs, which, about two weeks after The Logicians Refuted was published, was performed for the first time at Drury Lane, not much to the enjoyment of the gentlemen’s gentlemen in the upper gallery. Goldsmith himself wrote ‘A Word or two on the late Farce, called High Life below Stairs,’ in The Bee for November 3, 1759, pp. 154–7.
A SONNET.
This little piece first appears in The Bee for October 20, 1759 (No. iii). It is there called ‘A Sonnet,’ a title which is only accurate in so far as it is ‘a little song.’ Bolton Corney affirms that it is imitated from the French of Saint-Pavin (i.e. Denis Sanguin de Saint-Pavin, d. 1670), whose works were edited in 1759, the year in which Goldsmith published the collection of essays and verses in which it is to be found. The text here followed is that of the ‘new edition’ of The Bee, published by W. Lane, Leadenhall Street, no date, p. 94. Neither by its motive nor its literary merits—it should be added—did the original call urgently for translation; and the poem is here included solely because, being Goldsmith’s, it cannot be omitted from his complete works.
This short piece first appeared in The Bee on October 20, 1759 (No. iii). It is referred to as ‘A Sonnet,’ a title that is accurate only to the extent that it is ‘a little song.’ Bolton Corney states that it is inspired by the French work of Saint-Pavin (i.e., Denis Sanguin de Saint-Pavin, d. 1670), whose writings were published in 1759, the same year Goldsmith released the collection of essays and poems in which it can be found. The version followed here is from the ‘new edition’ of The Bee, published by W. Lane, Leadenhall Street, no date, p. 94. It's important to note that neither its theme nor its literary qualities—as should be added—demanded immediate translation; and this poem is included here solely because it’s Goldsmith’s work, and therefore cannot be left out of his complete works.
This and the following line in the first version run:—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ in the first version run:—
Yet, why this killing soft dejection?
Why dim thy beauty with a tear?
Yet, why this gentle sadness?
Why cloud your beauty with a tear?
STANZAS ON THE TAKING OF QUEBEC.
Quebec was taken on the 13th September, 1759. Wolfe was wounded pretty early in the action, while leading the advance of the Louisbourg grenadiers. ‘A shot shattered his wrist. He wrapped his handkerchief about it and kept on. Another shot struck him, and he still advanced, when a third lodged in his breast. He staggered, and sat on the ground. Lieutenant Brown, of the grenadiers, one Henderson, a volunteer in the same company, and a private soldier, aided by an officer of artillery who ran to join them, carried him in their arms to the rear. He begged them to lay him down. They did so, and asked if he would have a surgeon. “There’s no need,” he answered; “it’s all over with me.” A moment after, one of them cried out, “They run; see how they run!” “Who run?” Wolfe demanded, like a man roused from sleep. “The enemy, sir. They give way everywhere!” “Go, one of you, to Colonel Burton,” returned the dying man; “tell him to march Webb’s regiment down to Charles River, to cut off their retreat from the bridge.” Then, turning on his side, he murmured, “Now, God be praised, I will die in peace!” and in a few moments his gallant soul had fled.’ (Parkman’s Montcalm and Wolfe, 1885, ii. 296–7.) In his History of England in a Series of Letters, 1764, ii. 241, Goldsmith says of this event:—‘Perhaps the loss of such a man was greater to the nation than the conquering of all Canada was advantageous; but it is the misfortune of humanity, that we can never know true greatness till the moment when we are going to lose it.’* The present stanzas were first published in The Busy Body (No. vii) for Tuesday, the 22nd October, 1759, a week after the news of Wolfe’s death had reached this country (Tuesday the 16th). According to Prior (Life, 1837, i. 6), Goldsmith claimed to be related to Wolfe by the father’s side, the maiden name of the General’s mother being Henrietta Goldsmith. It may be noted that Benjamin West’s popular rendering of Wolfe’s death (1771)—a rendering which Nelson never passed in a print shop without being stopped by it—was said to be based upon the descriptions of an eye-witness. It was engraved by Woollett and Ryland in 1776. A key to the names of those appearing in the picture was published in the Army and Navy Gazette of January 20, 1893.
Quebec was captured on September 13, 1759. Wolfe was injured early on while leading the Louisbourg grenadiers. A shot shattered his wrist. He wrapped his handkerchief around it and continued. Another shot hit him, yet he pressed on, when a third one struck his chest. He staggered and sat down on the ground. Lieutenant Brown, of the grenadiers, a volunteer named Henderson from the same company, and a private soldier, assisted by an artillery officer who rushed to help, carried him to the back. He asked them to lay him down, and when they did, they asked if he wanted a surgeon. “No need,” he replied; “I’m done for.” Moments later, one of them shouted, “They’re running; look how they’re running!” “Who’s running?” Wolfe asked, like someone awakening from a dream. “The enemy, sir. They’re retreating everywhere!” “One of you go to Colonel Burton,” said the dying man; “tell him to march Webb’s regiment down to Charles River to cut off their retreat from the bridge.” Then, turning on his side, he whispered, “Now, God be praised, I will die in peace!” and in a few moments, his brave soul departed. (Parkman’s Montcalm and Wolfe, 1885, ii. 296–7.) In his History of England in a Series of Letters, 1764, ii. 241, Goldsmith reflects on this event: “Perhaps the loss of such a man was greater for the nation than the gain of all Canada; but it’s the tragedy of humanity that we seldom recognize true greatness until we’re about to lose it.”* The stanzas were first published in The Busy Body (No. vii) on Tuesday, October 22, 1759, a week after news of Wolfe’s death reached this country (Tuesday the 16th). According to Prior (Life, 1837, i. 6), Goldsmith claimed to be related to Wolfe through his father, as the maiden name of the General’s mother was Henrietta Goldsmith. Notably, Benjamin West’s popular depiction of Wolfe’s death (1771)—which Nelson never walked past in a print shop without stopping to admire—was said to be inspired by eyewitness accounts. It was engraved by Woollett and Ryland in 1776. A guide to the names of those depicted in the artwork was published in the Army and Navy Gazette on January 20, 1893.
* He repeats this sentiment, in different words, in the later History of England of 1771, iv. 400.
* He expresses this idea again, in different words, in the later History of England from 1771, iv. 400.
AN ELEGY ON MRS. MARY BLAIZE.
The publication in February, 1751, of Gray’s Elegy Wrote in a Country Church Yard had set a fashion in poetry which long continued. Goldsmith, who considered that work ‘a very fine poem, but overloaded with epithet’ (Beauties of English Poesy, 1767, i. 53), and once proposed to amend it ‘by leaving out an idle word in every line’ [!] (Cradock’s Memoirs, 1826, i. 230), resented these endless imitations, and his antipathy to them frequently reveals itself. Only a few months before the appearance of Mrs. Blaize in The Bee for October 27, 1759, he had written in the Critical Review, vii. 263, when noticing Langhorne’s Death of Adonis, as follows:—‘It is not thus that many of our moderns have composed what they call elegies; they seem scarcely to have known its real character. If an hero or a poet happens to die with us, the whole band of elegiac poets raise the dismal chorus, adorn his herse with all the paltry escutcheons of flattery, rise into bombast, paint him at the head of his thundering legions, or reining Pegasus in his most rapid career; they are sure to strew cypress enough upon the bier, dress up all the muses in mourning, and look themselves every whit as dismal and sorrowful as an undertaker’s shop.’ He returned to the subject in a Chinese Letter of March 4, 1761, in the Public Ledger (afterwards Letter ciii of The Citizen of the World, 1762, ii. 162–5), which contains the lines On the Death of the Right Honourable ***; and again, in The Vicar of Wakefield, 1766, i. 174, à propos of the Elegy on the Death of a Mad Dog, he makes Dr. Primrose say, ‘I have wept so much at all sorts of elegies of late, that without an enlivening glass I am sure this will overcome me.’
The release of Gray’s Elegy Wrote in a Country Church Yard in February 1751 started a trend in poetry that lasted for a long time. Goldsmith, who thought that poem was ‘very fine, but too full of unnecessary words’ (Beauties of English Poesy, 1767, i. 53), even suggested that it could be improved ‘by cutting out a pointless word in each line’ [!] (Cradock’s Memoirs, 1826, i. 230), got annoyed by the endless imitations, and his dislike often showed. Just a few months before the publication of Mrs. Blaize in The Bee on October 27, 1759, he wrote in the Critical Review, vii. 263, while reviewing Langhorne’s Death of Adonis: ‘This isn’t how many of our modern writers create what they call elegies; they hardly seem to understand its true nature. If a hero or a poet dies among us, all the elegiac poets come together to sing a sad song, decorate his coffin with cheap flattering symbols, exaggerate things, depict him leading his roaring armies, or holding back Pegasus in its fastest flight; they always make sure to sprinkle enough cypress on the grave, dress all the muses in black, and look just as gloomy and sorrowful as a funeral home.’ He revisited the topic in a Chinese Letter on March 4, 1761, in the Public Ledger (later Letter ciii of The Citizen of the World, 1762, ii. 162–5), which includes the lines On the Death of the Right Honourable ***; and again, in The Vicar of Wakefield, 1766, i. 174, when talking about the Elegy on the Death of a Mad Dog, he makes Dr. Primrose say, ‘I’ve cried so much at all kinds of elegies lately, that without a comforting drink, I’m sure this one will finish me off.’
The model for An Elegy on Mrs. Mary Blaize is to be found in the old French popular song of Monsieur de la Palisse or Palice, about fifty verses of which are printed in Larousse’s Grand Dictionnaire Universel du XIX me Siècle, x. p. 179. It is there stated to have originated in some dozen stanzas suggested to la Monnoye (v. supra, p. 193) by the extreme artlessness of a military quatrain dating from the battle of Pavia, and the death upon that occasion of the famous French captain, Jacques de Chabannes, seigneur de la Palice:—
The model for An Elegy on Mrs. Mary Blaize can be found in the old French folk song about Monsieur de la Palisse, which has about fifty verses published in Larousse’s Grand Dictionnaire Universel du XIX me Siècle, x. p. 179. It mentions that this originated from a few stanzas inspired by the simplicity of a military quatrain dating back to the Battle of Pavia, and the death at that time of the notable French captain, Jacques de Chabannes, seigneur de la Palice:—
Monsieur d’La Palice est mort,
Mort devant Pavie;
Un quart d’heure avant sa mort,
Il était encore en vie.
Monsieur d’La Palice is dead,
Dead in Pavia;
A quarter of an hour before his death,
He was still alive.
The remaining verses, i.e. in addition to those of la Monnoye, are the contributions of successive generations. Goldsmith probably had in mind the version in Part iii of the Ménagiana, (ed. 1729, iii, 384–391) where apparently by a typographical error, the hero is called ‘le fameux la Galisse, homme imaginaire.’ The verses he imitated most closely are reproduced below. It may be added that this poem supplied one of its last inspirations to the pencil of Randolph Caldecott, who published it as a picture-book in October, 1885. (See also An Elegy on the Death of a Mad Dog, p. 212.)
The remaining verses, besides those by la Monnoye, come from various generations. Goldsmith likely referenced the version in Part III of the Ménagiana, (ed. 1729, iii, 384–391) where, due to a typographical error, the hero is referred to as ‘le fameux la Galisse, homme imaginaire.’ The verses he closely imitated are shown below. Additionally, it's worth noting that this poem inspired one of Randolph Caldecott's last works, which he published as a picture book in October 1885. (See also An Elegy on the Death of a Mad Dog, p. 212.)
Who left a pledge behind. Caldecott cleverly converted this line into the keynote of the poem, by making the heroine a pawnbroker.
Who left a pledge behind. Caldecott skillfully transformed this line into the main theme of the poem by making the heroine a pawnbroker.
When she has walk’d before. Cf. the French:—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ See the French:—
On dit que dans ses amours
Il fut caresse des belles,
Qui le suivirent toujours,
Tant qu’il marcha devant elles.
On says that in his loves
He was cherished by beautiful women,
Who always followed him,
As long as he walked in front of them.
Her last disorder mortal. Cf. the French:—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ See the French:—
Il fut par un triste sort
Blesse d’une main cruelle.
On croit, puis qu’il en est mort,
Que la plaie étoit mortelle.
Il a été frappé par un destin tragique
Blessé par une main cruelle.
On pense, puisqu'il en est mort,
Que la blessure était mortelle.
Kent Street, Southwark, ‘chiefly inhabited,’ said Strype, ‘by Broom Men and Mumpers’; and Evelyn tells us (Diary 5th December, 1683) that he assisted at the marriage, to her fifth husband, of a Mrs. Castle, who was ‘the daughter of one Burton, a broom-man . . . in Kent Street’ who had become not only rich, but Sheriff of Surrey. It was a poor neighbourhood corresponding to the present ‘old Kent-road, from Kent to Southwark and old London Bridge’ (Cunningham’s London).* Goldsmith himself refers to it in The Bee for October 20, 1759, being the number immediately preceding that in which Madam Blaize first appeared:—‘You then, O ye beggars of my acquaintance, whether in rags or lace; whether in Kent-street or the Mall; whether at the Smyrna or St. Giles’s, might I advise as a friend, never seem in want of the favour which you solicit’ (p. 72). Three years earlier he had practised as ‘a physician, in a humble way’ in Bankside, Southwark, and was probably well acquainted with the humours of Kent Street.
Kent Street, Southwark, “mainly lived in,” according to Strype, “by Broom Men and Mumpers”; and Evelyn mentions in his Diary on December 5, 1683, that he attended the wedding of Mrs. Castle to her fifth husband, who was “the daughter of one Burton, a broom-man… in Kent Street,” who had become not only wealthy but also the Sheriff of Surrey. It was a poor neighborhood reflecting today’s “old Kent road, from Kent to Southwark and old London Bridge” (Cunningham’s London).* Goldsmith himself refers to it in The Bee on October 20, 1759, the issue right before the one where Madam Blaize first appeared:—“You then, O ye beggars I know, whether in rags or lace; whether in Kent-street or the Mall; whether at the Smyrna or St. Giles’s, might I advise you as a friend, never act like you’re in need of the favor you’re asking for” (p. 72). Three years earlier, he had practiced as “a physician, in a humble way” on Bankside, Southwark, and was likely well familiar with the quirks of Kent Street.
* In contemporary maps Kent (now Tabard) Street is shown extending between the present New Kent Road and Blackman Street.
* In modern maps, Kent (now Tabard) Street is shown running between the current New Kent Road and Blackman Street.
DESCRIPTION OF AN AUTHOR’S BEDCHAMBER.
In a letter written to the Rev. Henry Goldsmith in 1759 (Percy Memoir, 1801, pp. 53–9), Goldsmith thus refers to the first form of these verses:—‘Your last letter, I repeat it, was too short; you should have given me your opinion of the design of the heroicomical poem which I sent you: you remember I intended to introduce the hero of the poem, as lying in a paltry alehouse. You may take the following specimen of the manner, which I flatter myself is quite original. The room in which he lies, may be described somewhat this way:—
In a letter written to Rev. Henry Goldsmith in 1759 (Percy Memoir, 1801, pp. 53–9), Goldsmith mentions the first version of these verses: “Your last letter, I have to say, was too short; you should have shared your thoughts on the concept of the heroicomical poem I sent you. You remember I planned to portray the hero of the poem as lying in a shabby pub. Here is a sample of the style, which I hope is quite original. The room where he lies can be described somewhat like this:—
The window, patch’d with paper, lent a ray,
That feebly shew’d the state in which he lay.
The sanded floor, that grits beneath the tread:
The humid wall with paltry pictures spread;
The game of goose was there expos’d to view
And the twelve rules the royal martyr drew:
The seasons, fram’d with listing, found a place,
And Prussia’s monarch shew’d his lamp-black face
The morn was cold; he views with keen desire,
A rusty grate unconscious of a fire.
An unpaid reck’ning on the frieze was scor’d,
And five crack’d tea-cups dress’d the chimney board.
The window, patched with paper, let in a ray,
That weakly showed the state he was in.
The sandy floor crunched beneath his feet:
The damp wall decorated with cheap pictures;
The game of goose was out for everyone to see
And the twelve rules the royal martyr wrote:
The seasons, framed with fabric, found a spot,
And Prussia’s king displayed his sooty face.
The morning was cold; he looked on with keen desire,
At a rusty grate, oblivious to the lack of fire.
An unpaid bill was scored on the frieze,
And five chipped tea cups decorated the mantel.
And now imagine after his soliloquy, the landlord to make his appearance, in order to dun him for the reckoning:—
And now picture the landlord showing up after his speech, ready to collect the bill:—
Not with that face, so servile and so gay,
That welcomes every stranger that can pay,
With sulky eye he smoak’d the patient man,
Then pull’d his breeches tight, and thus began, etc.
Not with that face, so eager to please and so cheerful,
That greets every visitor willing to pay,
With a sulky look he eyed the patient man,
Then adjusted his pants and began, etc.
All this is taken, you see, from nature. It is a good remark of Montaign[e]’s, that the wisest men often have friends, with whom they do not care how much they play the fool. Take my present follies as instances of regard. Poetry is a much easier, and more agreeable species of composition than prose, and could a man live by it, it were no unpleasant employment to be a poet.’
All of this comes from nature, as you can see. Montaigne wisely noted that the smartest people often have friends with whom they don't mind acting silly. Consider my current foolishness as a sign of affection. Poetry is a much easier and more enjoyable type of writing than prose, and if someone could make a living from it, being a poet wouldn't be an unpleasant job.
In Letter xxix of The Citizen of the World, 1762, i. 119–22, which first appeared in The Public Ledger for May 2, 1760, they have a different setting. They are read at a club of authors by a ‘poet, in shabby finery,’ who asserts that he has composed them the day before. After some preliminary difficulties, arising from the fact that the laws of the club do not permit any author to inflict his own works upon the assembly without a money payment, he introduces them as follows:—‘Gentlemen, says he, the present piece is not one of your common epic poems, which come from the press like paper kites in summer; there are none of your Turnuses or Dido’s in it; it is an heroical description of nature. I only beg you’ll endeavour to make your souls unison* with mine, and hear with the same enthusiasm with which I have written. The poem begins with the description of an author’s bedchamber: the picture was sketched in my own apartment; for you must know, gentlemen, that I am myself the heroe. Then putting himself into the attitude of an orator, with all the emphasis of voice and action, he proceeded.
In Letter xxix of The Citizen of the World, 1762, i. 119–22, which first appeared in The Public Ledger for May 2, 1760, they have a different setting. They are read at a club of authors by a ‘poet, in shabby finery,’ who claims he wrote them the day before. After some initial challenges, since the club's rules don’t allow any author to present their own work without paying, he starts off by saying: “Gentlemen, the piece I’m presenting isn’t your typical epic poem, which comes off the press like paper kites in summer; there are no Turnuses or Didos in this. It’s a heroic description of nature. I just ask that you try to sync your souls with mine and listen with the same enthusiasm I had while writing. The poem opens with a description of an author’s bedroom: the image was drawn from my own space; you must know, gentlemen, that I am the hero myself.” Then, striking an orator's pose and using all the emphasis in his voice and gestures, he continued.
Where the Red Lion, etc.’
Where the Red Lion, etc.
* i.e. accord, conform.
* i.e. agree, align.
The verses then follow as they are printed in this volume; but he is unable to induce his audience to submit to a further sample. In a slightly different form, some of them were afterwards worked into The Deserted Village, 1770. (See ll. 227–36.)
The verses then follow as they are printed in this volume; but he can't get his audience to agree to hear more. In a slightly different form, some of them were later incorporated into The Deserted Village, 1770. (See ll. 227–36.)
Where Calvert’s butt, and Parsons’ black champagne. The Calverts and Humphrey Parsons were noted brewers of ‘entire butt beer’ or porter, also known familiarly as ‘British Burgundy’ and ‘black Champagne.’ Calvert’s ‘Best Butt Beer’ figures on the sign in Hogarth’s Beer Street, 1751.
Where Calvert’s butt, and Parsons’ black champagne. The Calverts and Humphrey Parsons were well-known brewers of ‘entire butt beer’ or porter, commonly referred to as ‘British Burgundy’ and ‘black Champagne.’ Calvert’s ‘Best Butt Beer’ is featured on the sign in Hogarth’s Beer Street, 1751.
The humid wall with paltry pictures spread. Bewick gives the names of some of these popular, if paltry, decorations:—‘In cottages everywhere were to be seen the “Sailor’s Farewell” and his “Happy Return,” “Youthful Sports,” and the “Feats of Manhood,” “The Bold Archers Shooting at a Mark,” “The Four Seasons,” etc.’ (Memoir, ‘Memorial Edition,’ 1887, p. 263.)
The humid wall with paltry pictures spread. Bewick lists some of these popular, though insignificant, decorations:—‘In cottages everywhere, you could see the “Sailor’s Farewell” and his “Happy Return,” “Youthful Sports,” and the “Feats of Manhood,” “The Bold Archers Shooting at a Mark,” “The Four Seasons,” etc.’ (Memoir, ‘Memorial Edition,’ 1887, p. 263.)
The royal game of goose was there in view. (See note, p. 188.)
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ (See note, __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_1__)
And the twelve rules the royal martyr drew. (See note, p. 187.)
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ (See note, __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_1__)
The Seasons, fram’d with listing. See note to l. 10 above, as to ‘The Seasons.’ Listing, ribbon, braid, or tape is still used as a primitive encadrement. In a letter dated August 15, 1758, to his cousin, Mrs. Lawder (Jane Contarine), Goldsmith again refers to this device. Speaking of some ‘maxims of frugality’ with which he intends to adorn his room, he adds—‘my landlady’s daughter shall frame them with the parings of my black waistcoat.’ (Prior, Life, 1837, i. 271.)
The Seasons, fram’d with listing. See note to l. 10 above, regarding ‘The Seasons.’ Listing, ribbon, braid, or tape is still used as a basic frame. In a letter dated August 15, 1758, to his cousin, Mrs. Lawder (Jane Contarine), Goldsmith again mentions this technique. Talking about some ‘maxims of frugality’ that he plans to decorate his room with, he adds—‘my landlady’s daughter will frame them with the scraps of my black waistcoat.’ (Prior, Life, 1837, i. 271.)
And brave Prince William. William Augustus, Duke of Cumberland, 1721–65. The ‘lamp-black face’ would seem to imply that the portrait was a silhouette. In the letter quoted on p. 200 it is ‘Prussia’s monarch’ (i.e. Frederick the Great).
And brave Prince William. William Augustus, Duke of Cumberland, 1721–65. The ‘lamp-black face’ suggests that the portrait was a silhouette. In the letter mentioned on p. 200, it refers to ‘Prussia’s monarch’ (i.e., Frederick the Great).
With beer and milk arrears. See the lines relative to the landlord in Goldsmith’s above-quoted letter to his brother. In another letter of August 14, 1758, to Robert Bryanton, he describes himself as ‘in a garret writing for bread, and expecting to be dunned for a milk score.’ Hogarth’s Distrest Poet, 1736, it will be remembered, has already realized this expectation.
With beer and milk arrears. Check out the lines about the landlord in Goldsmith’s letter to his brother mentioned earlier. In another letter from August 14, 1758, addressed to Robert Bryanton, he describes himself as “in an attic writing for a living and waiting to be chased for a milk debt.” Hogarth’s Distrest Poet, from 1736, already captured this situation.
A cap by night—a stocking all the day. ‘With this last line,’ says The Citizen of the World, 1762, i. 121, ‘he [the author] seemed so much elated, that he was unable to proceed: “There gentlemen, cries he, there is a description for you; Rab[e]lais’s bed-chamber is but a fool to it:
A cap by night—a stocking all the day. ‘With this last line,’ says The Citizen of the World, 1762, i. 121, ‘he [the author] seemed so excited that he couldn’t continue: “There, gentlemen,” he exclaims, “there is a description for you; Rabelais’s bedroom pales in comparison to it:
A cap by night—a stocking all the day!
A hat at night—a beanie all day!
There is sound and sense, and truth, and nature in the trifling compass of ten little syllables.”’ (Letter xxix.) Cf. also The Deserted Village, l. 230:—
There is meaning, logic, truth, and nature in the small range of ten little syllables.” (Letter xxix.) See also The Deserted Village, l. 230:—
A bed by night, a chest of drawers by day.
A bed at night, a dresser during the day.
If Goldsmith’s lines did not belong to 1759, one might suppose he had in mind the later Pauvre Diable of his favourite Voltaire. (See also APPENDIX B.)
If Goldsmith's lines weren't from 1759, you might think he was inspired by the later Pauvre Diable from his favorite Voltaire. (See also APPENDIX B.)
ON SEEING MRS. ** PERFORM IN THE CHARACTER OF ****.
These verses, intended for a specimen of the newspaper Muse, are from Letter lxxxii of The Citizen of the World, 1762, ii. 87, first printed in The Public Ledger, October 21, 1760.
These verses, meant for a sample of the newspaper Muse, are from Letter 82 of The Citizen of the World, 1762, ii. 87, first published in The Public Ledger, October 21, 1760.
ON THE DEATH OF THE RIGHT HON. ***
From Letter ciii of The Citizen of the World, 1762, ii. 164, first printed in The Public Ledger, March 4, 1761. The verses are given as a ‘specimen of a poem on the decease of a great man.’ Goldsmith had already used the trick of the final line of the quatrain in An Elegy on Mrs. Mary Blaize, ante, p. 198.
From Letter ciii of The Citizen of the World, 1762, ii. 164, first printed in The Public Ledger, March 4, 1761. The verses are given as a ‘specimen of a poem on the death of a great man.’ Goldsmith had already used the trick of the final line of the quatrain in An Elegy on Mrs. Mary Blaize, ante, p. 198.
AN EPIGRAM.
From Letter cx of The Citizen of the World, 1762, ii. 193, first printed in The Public Ledger, April 14, 1761. It had, however, already been printed in the ‘Ledger’, ten days before. Goldsmith’s animosity to Churchill (cf. note to l. 41 of the dedication to The Traveller) was notorious; but this is one of his doubtful pieces.
From Letter cx of The Citizen of the World, 1762, ii. 193, first printed in The Public Ledger, April 14, 1761. It had, however, already been printed in the ‘Ledger’, ten days earlier. Goldsmith’s hostility toward Churchill (see note to l. 41 of the dedication to The Traveller) was well-known; but this is one of his questionable works.
virtue. ‘Charity’ (Author’s note).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ ‘Charity’ (Author’s note).
bounty. ‘Settled at One Shilling—the Price of the Poem’ (Author’s note).
bounty. ‘Agreed upon at One Shilling—the Cost of the Poem’ (Author’s note).
TO G. C. AND R. L.
From the same letter as the preceding. George Colman and Robert Lloyd of the St. James’s Magazine were supposed to have helped Churchill in The Rosciad, the ‘it’ of the epigram.
From the same letter as the one before. George Colman and Robert Lloyd of the St. James’s Magazine were thought to have assisted Churchill in The Rosciad, the 'it' of the epigram.
TRANSLATION OF A SOUTH AMERICAN ODE.
From Letter cxiii of The Citizen of the World, 1762, ii. 209, first printed in The Public Ledger, May 13, 1761.
From Letter cxiii of The Citizen of the World, 1762, ii. 209, first printed in The Public Ledger, May 13, 1761.
THE DOUBLE TRANSFORMATION.
The Double Transformation first appeared in Essays: By Mr. Goldsmith, 1765, where it figures as Essay xxvi, occupying pp. 229–33. It was revised for the second edition of 1766, becoming Essay xxviii, pp. 241–45. This is the text here followed. The poem is an obvious imitation of what its author calls (Letters from a Nobleman to his Son, 1764, ii. 140) that ‘French elegant easy manner of telling a story,’ which Prior had caught from La Fontaine. But the inherent simplicity of Goldsmith’s style is curiously evidenced by the absence of those illustrations and ingenious allusions which are Prior’s chief characteristic. And although Goldsmith included The Ladle and Hans Carvel in his Beauties of English Poesy, 1767, he refrained wisely from copying the licence of his model.
The Double Transformation first appeared in Essays: By Mr. Goldsmith, 1765, where it is listed as Essay xxvi, spanning pages 229–33. It was revised for the second edition in 1766, becoming Essay xxviii, pages 241–45. This is the version we are following. The poem is clearly influenced by what its author describes as the ‘French elegant easy manner of telling a story’ (from Letters from a Nobleman to his Son, 1764, ii. 140), which Prior learned from La Fontaine. However, the natural simplicity of Goldsmith’s style is notably shown by the lack of the illustrations and clever allusions that are characteristic of Prior. Even though Goldsmith included The Ladle and Hans Carvel in his Beauties of English Poesy, 1767, he wisely chose not to imitate his model’s liberties.
Jack Book-worm led a college life. The version of 1765 reads ‘liv’d’ for ‘led’.
Jack Book-worm led a college life. The 1765 version says ‘liv’d’ instead of ‘led’.
And freshmen wonder’d as he spoke. The earlier version adds here—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ The previous version adds here—
Without politeness aim’d at breeding,
And laugh’d at pedantry and reading.
Without politeness aimed at refinement,
And mocked pedantry and studying.
Her presence banish’d all his peace. Here in the first version the paragraph closes, and a fresh one is commenced as follows:—
Her presence banish’d all his peace. In this first version, the paragraph ends, and a new one begins as follows:—
Our alter’d Parson now began
To be a perfect ladies’ man;
Made sonnets, lisp’d his sermons o’er,
And told the tales he told before,
Of bailiffs pump’d, and proctors bit,
At college how he shew’d his wit;
And, as the fair one still approv’d,
He fell in love—or thought he lov’d.
So with decorum, etc.
Our changed Parson now started
To be a total ladies’ man;
He wrote sonnets, whispered his sermons,
And shared the same stories he told before,
About bailiffs pumped up, and proctors bitten,
At college, how he showed off his wit;
And, as the lovely lady kept approving,
He fell in love—or thought he loved.
So with decorum, etc.
The fifth line was probably a reminiscence of the college riot in which Goldsmith was involved in May, 1747, and for his part in which he was publicly admonished. (See Introduction, p. xi, l. 3.)
The fifth line likely recalls the college riot that Goldsmith participated in during May 1747, for which he was publicly reprimanded. (See Introduction, p. xi, l. 3.)
usage. This word, perhaps by a printer’s error, is ‘visage’ in the first version.
usage. This word, possibly due to a printer’s mistake, is ‘visage’ in the first edition.
Skill’d in no other arts was she. Cf. Prior:—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ See also:—
For in all Visits who but She,
To Argue, or to Repartee.
For in all visits, who but she,
To argue, or to banter?
Five greasy nightcaps wrapp’d her head. Cf. Spectator, No. 494— ‘At length the Head of the Colledge came out to him, from an inner Room, with half a Dozen Night-Caps upon his Head.’ See also Goldsmith’s essay on the Coronation (Essays, 1766, p. 238), where Mr. Grogan speaks of his wife as habitually ‘mobbed up in flannel night caps, and trembling at a breath of air.’
Five greasy nightcaps wrapp’d her head. Cf. Spectator, No. 494— ‘Finally, the Head of the College came out to him from an inner room, wearing half a dozen nightcaps on his head.’ Also see Goldsmith’s essay on the Coronation (Essays, 1766, p. 238), where Mr. Grogan describes his wife as typically ‘dressed up in flannel nightcaps, and shivering at a gust of wind.’
By day, ’twas gadding or coquetting. The first version after ‘coquetting’ begins a fresh paragraph with—
By day, ’twas gadding or coquetting. The first version after 'flirting' starts a new paragraph with—
Now tawdry madam kept, etc.
Now a shady lady kept, etc.
A sigh in suffocating smoke. Here in the first version follows:—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Here’s the first version:—
She, in her turn, became perplexing,
And found substantial bliss in vexing.
Thus every hour was pass’d, etc.
She, in turn, became confusing,
And found real joy in annoying.
Thus every hour passed, etc.
Thus as her faults each day were known. First version: ‘Each day, the more her faults,’ etc.
Thus as her faults each day were known. First version: ‘Every day, her flaws become more apparent,’ etc.
Now, to perplex. The first version has ‘Thus.’ But the alteration in line 61 made a change necessary.
Now, to perplex. The first version has 'So.' But the change in line 61 made an adjustment necessary.
paste. First version ‘pastes.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ First version 'copies.'
condemn’d to hack, i.e. to hackney, to plod.
condemn’d to hack, meaning to travel by horse-drawn carriage, to move slowly.
A NEW SIMILE.
The New Simile first appears in Essays: By Mr. Goldsmith, 1765, pp. 234–6, where it forms Essay xxvii. In the second edition of 1766 it occupies pp. 246–8 and forms Essay xix. The text here followed is that of the second edition, which varies slightly from the first. In both cases the poem is followed by the enigmatical initials ‘*J. B.,’ which, however, as suggested by Gibbs, may simply stand for ‘Jack Bookworm’ of The Double Transformation. (See p. 204.)
The New Simile first appears in Essays: By Mr. Goldsmith, 1765, pp. 234–6, where it is Essay xxvii. In the second edition of 1766, it appears on pp. 246–8 and is Essay xix. The text presented here is from the second edition, which differs slightly from the first. In both instances, the poem is followed by the mysterious initials ‘*J. B.,’ which, as suggested by Gibbs, may simply refer to ‘Jack Bookworm’ from The Double Transformation. (See p. 204.)
Long had I sought in vain to find. The text of 1765 reads—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ The text from 1765 says—
‘I long had rack’d my brains to find.’
‘I had thought hard to come up with.’
Tooke’s Pantheon. Andrew Tooke (1673–1732) was first usher and then Master at the Charterhouse. In the latter capacity he succeeded Thomas Walker, the master of Addison and Steele. His Pantheon, a revised translation from the Latin of the Jesuit, Francis Pomey, was a popular school-book of mythology, with copper-plates.
Tooke’s Pantheon. Andrew Tooke (1673–1732) was initially an usher and later the Master at the Charterhouse. In this role, he took over from Thomas Walker, who had been the master of Addison and Steele. His Pantheon, a revised translation from the Latin by the Jesuit Francis Pomey, became a popular school textbook on mythology, complete with copper plates.
Wings upon either side—mark that. The petasus of Mercury, like his sandals (l. 24), is winged.
Wings upon either side—mark that. Mercury's petasus, just like his sandals (l. 24), has wings.
No poppy-water half so good. Poppy-water, made by boiling the heads of the white, black, or red poppy, was a favourite eighteenth-century soporific:—‘Juno shall give her peacock poppy-water, that he may fold his ogling tail.’ (Congreve’s Love for Love, 1695, iv. 3.)
No poppy-water half so good. Poppy water, created by boiling the heads of white, black, or red poppies, was a popular sleep aid in the eighteenth century:—‘Juno shall give her peacock poppy-water, that he may fold his ogling tail.’ (Congreve’s Love for Love, 1695, iv. 3.)
Tu....
....virgaque levem coerces
Aurea turbam.—Hor. Od. i. 10.
Tu....
....you control the light staff
with your golden crowd.—Hor. Od. i. 10.
Te canam....
Callidum, quidquid placuit, iocoso
Condere furto.—Hor. Od. i. 10.
Te canam....
I'll sing to you, whatever pleases me, in a playful
Hidden way.—Hor. Od. i. 10.
Goldsmith, it will be observed, rhymes ‘failing’ and ‘stealing.’ But Pope does much the same:—
Goldsmith, as you’ll notice, rhymes ‘failing’ and ‘stealing.’ But Pope does something similar:—
That Jelly’s rich, this Malmsey healing,
Pray dip your Whiskers and your tail in.
(Imitation of Horace, Bk. ii, Sat. vi.)
That Jelly’s rich, this Malmsey healing,
Please dip your whiskers and your tail in.
(Imitation of Horace, Bk. ii, Sat. vi.)
Unless this is to be explained by poetical licence, one of these words must have been pronounced in the eighteenth century as it is not pronounced now.
Unless this is explained by poetic license, one of these words must have been pronounced in the eighteenth century differently than it is today.
In which all modern bards agree. The text of 1765 reads ‘our scribling bards.’
In which all modern bards agree. The text of 1765 reads ‘our scribbling poets.’
EDWIN AND ANGELINA.
This ballad, usually known as The Hermit, was written in or before 1765, and printed privately in that year ‘for the amusement of the Countess of Northumberland,’ whose acquaintance Goldsmith had recently made through Mr. Nugent. (See the prefatory note to The Haunch of Venison.) Its title was ‘Edwin and Angelina. A Ballad. By Mr. Goldsmith.’ It was first published in The Vicar of Wakefield, 1766, where it appears at pp. 70–7, vol. i. In July, 1767, Goldsmith was accused [by Dr. Kenrick] in the St. James’s Chronicle of having taken it from Percy’s Friar of Orders Gray. Thereupon he addressed a letter to the paper, of which the following is the material portion:—‘Another Correspondent of yours accuses me of having taken a Ballad, I published some Time ago, from one by the ingenious Mr. Percy. I do not think there is any great Resemblance between the two Pieces in Question. If there be any, his Ballad is taken from mine. I read it to Mr. Percy some Years ago, and he (as we both considered these Things as Trifles at best) told me, with his usual Good Humour, the next Time I saw him, that he had taken my Plan to form the fragments of Shakespeare into a Ballad of his own. He then read me his little Cento, if I may so call it, and I highly approved it. Such petty Anecdotes as these are scarce worth printing, and were it not for the busy Disposition of some of your Correspondents, the Publick should never have known that he owes me the Hint of his Ballad, or that I am obliged to his Friendship and Learning for Communications of a much more important Nature.—I am, Sir, your’s etc. OLIVER GOLDSMITH.’ (St. James’s Chronicle, July 23–5, 1767.) No contradiction of this statement appears to have been offered by Percy; but in re-editing his Reliques of Ancient English Poetry in 1775, shortly after Goldsmith’s death, he affixed this note to The Friar of Orders Gray:—‘As the foregoing song has been thought to have suggested to our late excellent poet, Dr. Goldsmith, the plan of his beautiful ballad of Edwin and Emma [Angelina], first printed [published?] in his Vicar of Wakefield, it is but justice to his memory to declare, that his poem was written first, and that if there is any imitation in the case, they will be found both to be indebted to the beautiful old ballad, Gentle Herdsman, etc., printed in the second volume of this work, which the doctor had much admired in manuscript, and has finely improved’ (vol. i. p. 250). The same story is told, in slightly different terms, at pp. 74–5 of the Memoir of Goldsmith drawn up under Percy’s superintendence for the Miscellaneous Works of 1801, and a few stanzas of Gentle Herdsman, which Goldsmith is supposed to have had specially in mind, are there reproduced. References to them will be found in the ensuing notes. The text here adopted (with exception of ll. 117–20) is that of the fifth edition of The Vicar of Wakefield, 1773[4], i. pp. 78–85; but the variations of the earlier version of 1765 are duly chronicled, together with certain hitherto neglected differences between the first and later editions of the novel. The poem was also printed in the Poems for Young Ladies, 1767, pp. 91–8.* The author himself, it may be added, thought highly of it. ‘As to my “Hermit,” that poem,’ he is reported to have said, ‘cannot be amended.’ (Cradock’s Memoirs, 1828, iv. 286.)
This ballad, usually known as The Hermit, was written in or before 1765 and privately printed in that year ‘for the amusement of the Countess of Northumberland,’ whose acquaintance Goldsmith had recently made through Mr. Nugent. (See the prefatory note to The Haunch of Venison.) Its title was ‘Edwin and Angelina. A Ballad. By Mr. Goldsmith.’ It was first published in The Vicar of Wakefield, 1766, where it appears on pages 70–77, volume i. In July 1767, Goldsmith was accused [by Dr. Kenrick] in the St. James’s Chronicle of having taken it from Percy’s Friar of Orders Gray. In response, he wrote a letter to the paper, of which the following is the main part:—‘Another Correspondent of yours accuses me of having taken a Ballad I published some time ago from one by the talented Mr. Percy. I don’t think there is much similarity between the two pieces in question. If there is any resemblance, it’s his Ballad that was inspired by mine. I read it to Mr. Percy a few years ago, and he (since we both viewed these things as trifles at best) told me, with his usual good humor, the next time I saw him, that he had taken my concept to create his own version of Shakespeare’s fragments as a Ballad. He then read me his little Cento, if I may call it that, and I thought it was great. Such trivial anecdotes are hardly worth printing, and if it weren’t for the eager nature of some of your Correspondents, the public would never have known that he owes me the idea for his Ballad, or that I am grateful to his friendship and knowledge for much more significant insights.—I am, Sir, yours etc. OLIVER GOLDSMITH.’ (St. James’s Chronicle, July 23–25, 1767.) No disagreement with this statement seems to have been made by Percy; but when he re-edited his Reliques of Ancient English Poetry in 1775, shortly after Goldsmith’s death, he added this note to The Friar of Orders Gray:—‘As the previous song has been thought to have inspired our late excellent poet, Dr. Goldsmith, with the idea of his beautiful ballad Edwin and Emma [Angelina], first published in his Vicar of Wakefield, it’s only fair to honor his memory by declaring that his poem was written first, and that if there is any imitation, both will be found to be indebted to the beautiful old ballad Gentle Herdsman, etc., printed in the second volume of this work, which the doctor had much admired in manuscript and has greatly improved’ (vol. i. p. 250). The same story is recounted, in slightly different words, on pages 74–75 of the Memoir of Goldsmith written under Percy’s supervision for the Miscellaneous Works of 1801, and a few stanzas of Gentle Herdsman, which Goldsmith is thought to have particularly considered, are included there. References to them will be found in the following notes. The text here used (except for lines 117–120) is from the fifth edition of The Vicar of Wakefield, 1773[4], i. pp. 78–85; but the variations of the earlier version from 1765 are duly noted, along with certain previously neglected differences between the first and later editions of the novel. The poem was also printed in Poems for Young Ladies, 1767, pp. 91–98.* The author himself, it may be noted, thought very highly of it. ‘As for my “Hermit,” that poem,’ he is reported to have said, ‘cannot be improved.’ (Cradock’s Memoirs, 1828, iv. 286.)
* This version differs considerably from the others, often following that of 1765; but it has not been considered necessary to record the variations here. That Goldsmith unceasingly revised the piece is sufficiently established.
* This version is quite different from the others, often aligning with the one from 1765; however, it hasn't been deemed necessary to list the differences here. It's well established that Goldsmith constantly revised the piece.
Turn, etc. The first version has—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ The initial version has—
Deign saint-like tenant of the dale,
To guide my nightly way,
To yonder fire, that cheers the vale
With hospitable ray.
Please, saintly presence of the valley,
Guide me on my way tonight,
To that fire, which brightens the vale
With its welcoming light.
For yonder faithless phantom flies. The Vicar of Wakefield, first edition, has—
For yonder faithless phantom flies. The Vicar of Wakefield, first edition, has—
‘For yonder phantom only flies.’
‘For that ghost only flies.’
Man wants but little here below. Cf. Young’s Complaint, 1743, Night iv. 9, of which this and the next line are a recollection. According to Prior (Life, 1837, ii. 83), they were printed as a quotation in the version of 1765. Young’s line is—
Man wants but little here below. Cf. Young’s Complaint, 1743, Night iv. 9, which this and the next line reference. According to Prior (Life, 1837, ii. 83), they were published as a quotation in the 1765 version. Young’s line is—
Man wants but Little; nor that Little, long.
Man wants very little; and not for long either.
modest. Vicar of Wakefield, first edition, ‘grateful.’
modest. Vicar of Wakefield, first edition, ‘thankful.’
Far in a wilderness obscure. First version, and Vicar of Wakefield, first edition:—
Far in a wilderness obscure. First version, and Vicar of Wakefield, first edition:—
Far shelter’d in a glade obscure
The modest mansion lay.
Far tucked away in a hidden glade
The humble house rested.
The wicket, opening with a latch. First version, and Vicar of Wakefield, first edition:—
The wicket, opening with a latch. First version, and Vicar of Wakefield, first edition:—
The door just opening with a latch.
The door just opened with a latch.
And now, when busy crowds retire. First version, and Vicar of Wakefield, first edition:—
And now, when busy crowds retire. First version, and Vicar of Wakefield, first edition:—
And now, when worldly crowds retire
To revels or to rest.
And now, when the crowds head out
For parties or to relax.
But nothing, etc. In the first version this stanza runs as follows:—
But nothing, etc. In the first version, this stanza goes like this:—
But nothing mirthful could assuage
The pensive stranger’s woe;
For grief had seized his early age,
And tears would often flow.
But nothing cheerful could ease
The thoughtful stranger’s sorrow;
For grief had taken hold of his youth,
And tears would often fall.
modern. Vicar of Wakefield, first edition, reads ‘haughty.’
modern. Vicar of Wakefield, first edition, reads ‘haughty.’
His love-lorn guest betray’d. First version, and Vicar of Wakefield, first edition:—
His love-lorn guest betray’d. First version, and Vicar of Wakefield, first edition:—
The bashful guest betray’d.
The shy guest revealed.
Surpris’d, he sees, etc. First version, and Vicar of Wakefield, first edition:—
Surpris’d, he sees, etc. First version, and Vicar of Wakefield, first edition:—
He sees unnumber’d beauties rise,
Expanding to the view;
Like clouds that deck the morning skies,
As bright, as transient too.
He sees countless beauties appear,
Growing in front of him;
Like clouds that adorn the morning sky,
Just as bright, just as fleeting too.
The bashful look, the rising breast. First version, and Vicar of Wakefield, first edition:—
The bashful look, the rising breast. First version, and Vicar of Wakefield, first edition:—
Her looks, her lips, her panting breast.
Her appearance, her lips, her heaving chest.
But let a maid, etc. For this, and the next two stanzas, the first version substitutes:—
But let a maid, etc. For this, and the next two stanzas, the first version replaces:—
Forgive, and let thy pious care
A heart’s distress allay;
That seeks repose, but finds despair
Companion of the way.
My father liv’d, of high degree,
Remote beside the Tyne;
And as he had but only me,
Whate’er he had was mine.
To win me from his tender arms,
Unnumber’d suitors came;
Their chief pretence my flatter’d charms,
My wealth perhaps their aim.
Forgive and let your caring heart
Ease the pain inside;
That seeks peace but finds only despair
As a constant companion.
My father lived in high status,
Far away by the Tyne;
And since I was his only child,
Whatever he had was mine.
To pull me away from his loving arms,
Countless suitors came;
Their main reason, my flattered looks,
Maybe my wealth was their aim.
a mercenary crowd. Vicar of Wakefield, first edition, has:—‘the gay phantastic crowd.’
a mercenary crowd. Vicar of Wakefield, first edition, has:—‘the lively, imaginative crowd.’
Amongst the rest young Edwin bow’d. First version:—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ First edition:—
Among the rest young Edwin bow’d,
Who offer’d only love.
Among the others, young Edwin bowed,
Who offered only love.
Wisdom and worth, etc. First version, and Vicar of Wakefield, first edition:—
Wisdom and worth, etc. First version, and Vicar of Wakefield, first edition:—
A constant heart was all he had,
But that was all to me.
A steady heart was all he had,
But that was everything to me.
And when beside me, etc. For this ‘additional stanza,’ says the Percy Memoir, p. 76, ‘the reader is indebted to Richard Archdal, Esq., late a member of the Irish Parliament, to whom it was presented by the author himself.’ It was first printed in the Miscellaneous Works, 1801, ii. 25. In Prior’s edition of the Miscellaneous Works, 1837, iv. 41, it is said to have been ‘written some years after the rest of the poem.’
And when beside me, etc. For this ‘additional stanza,’ the Percy Memoir, p. 76, states that ‘the reader is indebted to Richard Archdal, Esq., who was a member of the Irish Parliament and received it directly from the author.’ It was first published in the Miscellaneous Works, 1801, ii. 25. In Prior’s edition of the Miscellaneous Works, 1837, iv. 41, it notes that it was ‘written some years after the rest of the poem.’
The blossom opening to the day, etc. For this and the next two stanzas the first version substitutes:—
The blossom opening to the day, etc. For this and the next two stanzas, the first version replaces:—
Whene’er he spoke amidst the train,
How would my heart attend!
And till delighted even to pain,
How sigh for such a friend!
And when a little rest I sought
In Sleep’s refreshing arms,
How have I mended what he taught,
And lent him fancied charms!
Yet still (and woe betide the hour!)
I spurn’d him from my side,
And still with ill-dissembled power
Repaid his love with pride.
Whenever he spoke among the group,
How my heart would listen!
And until I was delighted even to the point of pain,
How I longed for such a friend!
And when I sought a bit of rest
In Sleep’s refreshing embrace,
How I edited what he taught,
And imagined him with charm!
Yet still (and woe to the hour!)
I pushed him away,
And still with poorly concealed power
I repaid his love with pride.
For still I tried each fickle art, etc. Percy finds the prototype of this in the following stanza of Gentle Herdsman:—
For still I tried each fickle art, etc. Percy finds the prototype of this in the following stanza of Gentle Herdsman:—
And grew soe coy and nice to please,
As women’s lookes are often soe,
He might not kisse, nor hand forsoothe,
Unlesse I willed him soe to doe.
And became so shy and delicate to please,
As women's looks often are,
He could not kiss, nor hold my hand,
Unless I wanted him to do so.
Till quite dejected with my scorn, etc. The first edition reads this stanza and the first two lines of the next thus:—
Till quite dejected with my scorn, etc. The first edition presents this stanza and the first two lines of the next like this:—
Till quite dejected by my scorn,
He left me to deplore;
And sought a solitude forlorn,
And ne’er was heard of more.
Then since he perish’d by my fault,
This pilgrimage I pay, etc.
Until he was quite heartbroken by my rejection,
He left me to mourn;
And sought a lonely place,
And was never heard from again.
Since he perished because of me,
This journey is what I undertake, etc.
And sought a solitude forlorn. Cf. Gentle Herdsman:—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Cf. Gentle Herdsman:—
He gott him to a secrett place,
And there he dyed without releeffe.
He took him to a hidden place,
And there he died without relief.
And there forlorn, despairing, hid, etc. The first edition for this and the next two stanzas substitutes the following:—
And there forlorn, despairing, hid, etc. The first edition for this and the next two stanzas replaces the following:—
And there in shelt’ring thickets hid,
I’ll linger till I die;
’Twas thus for me my lover did,
And so for him will I.
‘Thou shalt not thus,’ the Hermit cried,
And clasp’d her to his breast;
The astonish’d fair one turned to chide,—
’Twas Edwin’s self that prest.
For now no longer could he hide,
What first to hide he strove;
His looks resume their youthful pride,
And flush with honest love.
And there in the sheltering bushes hidden,
I’ll wait until I die;
That’s how my lover treated me,
And I’ll do the same for him.
‘You can’t do this,’ the Hermit shouted,
And pulled her to his chest;
The surprised woman turned to scold,—
It was Edwin himself who pressed.
For now he could no longer hide,
What he once tried to conceal;
His expression regained its youthful pride,
And glowed with genuine love.
’Twas so for me, etc. Cf. Gentle Herdsman:—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ See Gentle Herdsman:—
Thus every day I fast and pray,
And ever will doe till I dye;
And gett me to some secret place,
For soe did hee, and soe will I.
Thus every day I fast and pray,
And I always will until I die;
And I go to some private place,
For so did he, and so will I.
Forbid it, Heaven. Vicar of Wakefield, first edition, like the version of 1765, has ‘Thou shalt not thus.’
Forbid it, Heaven. Vicar of Wakefield, first edition, just like the 1765 version, has ‘You shall not do this.’
My life. Vicar of Wakefield, first edition, has ‘O thou.’
My life. Vicar of Wakefield, first edition, has ‘Oh you.’
No, never from this hour, etc. The first edition reads:—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ The first edition says:—
No, never, from this hour to part,
Our love shall still be new;
And the last sigh that rends thy heart,
Shall break thy Edwin’s too.
No, never, from this moment on,
Our love will always feel fresh;
And the last breath that breaks your heart,
Will break your Edwin's too.
The poem then concluded thus:—
The poem then concluded like this:—
Here amidst sylvan bowers we’ll rove,
From lawn to woodland stray;
Blest as the songsters of the grove,
And innocent as they.
To all that want, and all that wail,
Our pity shall be given,
And when this life of love shall fail,
We’ll love again in heaven.
Here among the forest groves we’ll wander,
From meadows to woods we’ll roam;
Blessed like the birds singing in the trees,
And pure like they are.
To everyone in need and those who suffer,
We’ll show our compassion,
And when this life of love comes to an end,
We’ll love again in heaven.
These couplets, with certain alterations in the first and last lines, are to be found in the version printed in Poems for Young Ladies, 1767, p. 98.
These couplets, with some changes in the first and last lines, can be found in the edition printed in Poems for Young Ladies, 1767, p. 98.
AN ELEGY ON THE DEATH OF A MAD DOG.
This poem was first published in The Vicar of Wakefield, 1766, i. 175–6, where it is sung by one of the little boys. In common with the Elegy on Mrs. Mary Blaize (p. 47) it owes something of its origin to Goldsmith’s antipathy to fashionable elegiacs, something also to the story of M. de la Palisse. As regards mad dogs, its author seems to have been more reasonable than many of his contemporaries, since he ridiculed, with much common sense, their exaggerated fears on this subject (v. Chinese Letter in The Public Ledger for August 29, 1760, afterwards Letter lxvi of The Citizen of the World, 1762, ii. 15). But it is ill jesting with hydrophobia. Like Madam Blaize, these verses have been illustrated by Randolph Caldecott.
This poem was first published in The Vicar of Wakefield, 1766, i. 175–6, where it is sung by one of the little boys. Similar to the Elegy on Mrs. Mary Blaize (p. 47), it draws some of its inspiration from Goldsmith’s dislike of trendy elegiacs and also from the story of M. de la Palisse. When it comes to mad dogs, the author seems to have been more rational than many of his peers, as he made fun of their exaggerated fears on this topic with a good dose of common sense (v. Chinese Letter in The Public Ledger for August 29, 1760, later Letter lxvi of The Citizen of the World, 1762, ii. 15). However, it's not a good idea to joke about hydrophobia. Like Madam Blaize, these verses have been illustrated by Randolph Caldecott.
In Islington there was a man. Goldsmith had lodgings at Mrs. Elizabeth Fleming’s in Islington (or ‘Isling town’ as the earlier editions have it) in 1763–4; and the choice of the locality may have been determined by this circumstance. But the date of the composition of the poem is involved in the general obscurity which hangs over the Vicar in its unprinted state. (See Introduction, pp. xviii-xix.)
In Islington there was a man. Goldsmith lived at Mrs. Elizabeth Fleming’s place in Islington (or ‘Isling town’ as earlier editions put it) in 1763–4; and his choice of location might have been influenced by this factor. However, the exact timing of the poem's writing remains unclear, shrouded in the overall mystery surrounding the Vicar in its unpublished form. (See Introduction, pp. xviii-xix.)
The dog, to gain some private ends. The first edition reads ‘his private ends.’
The dog, to gain some private ends. The first edition says ‘his personal interests.’
The dog it was that died. This catastrophe suggests the couplet from the Greek Anthology, ed. Jacobs, 1813–7, ii. 387:—
The dog it was that died. This disaster points to the couplet from the Greek Anthology, ed. Jacobs, 1813–7, ii. 387:—
Kappadoken pot exidna kake daken alla kai aute
katthane, geusamene aimatos iobolou.
Kappadoken pot exidna kake daken alla kai aute
katthane, geusamene aimatos iobolou.
Goldsmith, however, probably went no farther back than Voltaire on Fréron:—
Goldsmith likely didn't go back further than Voltaire on Fréron:—
L’autre jour, au fond d’un vallon,
Un serpent mordit Jean Fréron.
Devinez ce qu’il arriva?
Ce fut le serpent qui creva.
L’autre jour, au fond d’un vallon,
Un serpent mordit Jean Fréron.
Devinez ce qu’il arriva?
Ce fut le serpent qui creva.
This again, according to M. Edouard Fournier (L’Esprit des Autres, sixth edition, 1881, p. 288), is simply the readjustment of an earlier quatrain, based upon a Latin distich in the Epigrammatum delectus, 1659:—
This, according to M. Edouard Fournier (L’Esprit des Autres, sixth edition, 1881, p. 288), is just a reworking of an earlier quatrain, based on a Latin distich in the Epigrammatum delectus, 1659:—
Un gros serpent mordit Aurelle.
Que croyez-vous qu’il arriva?
Qu’Aurelle en mourut?—Bagatelle!
Ce fut le serpent qui creva.
Un gros serpent mordit Aurelle.
Que croyez-vous qu’il arriva?
Qu’Aurelle en mourut?—Pas du tout!
Ce fut le serpent qui explosa.
SONG
FROM ‘THE VICAR OF WAKEFIELD.’
First published in The Vicar of Wakefield, 1766, ii. 78 (chap. v). It is there sung by Olivia Primrose, after her return home with her father. ‘Do, my pretty Olivia,’ says Mrs. Primrose, let us have that little melancholy air your pappa was so fond of, your sister Sophy has already obliged us. Do child, it will please your old father.’ ‘She complied in a manner so exquisitely pathetic,’ continues Dr. Primrose, ‘as moved me.’ The charm of the words, and the graceful way in which they are introduced, seem to have blinded criticism to the impropriety, and even inhumanity, of requiring poor Olivia to sing a song so completely applicable to her own case. No source has been named for this piece; and its perfect conformity with the text would appear to indicate that Goldsmith was not indebted to any earlier writer for his idea.
First published in The Vicar of Wakefield, 1766, ii. 78 (chap. v). It is sung there by Olivia Primrose after she returns home with her father. “Come on, my dear Olivia,” says Mrs. Primrose, “let’s hear that little sad song your papa loved so much; your sister Sophy has already sung for us. Please, child, it will make your old father happy.” “She sang it in such a beautifully moving way,” Dr. Primrose continues, “that it truly touched me.” The appeal of the words, along with the elegant way they are presented, seems to have made critics overlook the inappropriateness, and even the insensitivity, of asking poor Olivia to sing a song that reflects her own situation so perfectly. No source has been identified for this piece, and its complete alignment with the text suggests that Goldsmith didn’t borrow his idea from any earlier writer.
His well-known obligations to French sources seem, however, to have suggested that, if a French original could not be discovered for the foregoing lyric, it might be desirable to invent one. A clever paragraphist in the St. James’s Gazette for January 28th, 1889, accordingly reproduced the following stanzas, which he alleged, were to be found in the poems of Segur, ‘printed in Paris in 1719’:—
His well-known reliance on French sources seems to have led him to think that if a French original for the previous lyric couldn't be found, it might be a good idea to create one. A witty writer in the St. James’s Gazette on January 28th, 1889, therefore shared the following stanzas, claiming they were from the poems of Segur, ‘published in Paris in 1719’:—
Lorsqu’une femme, après trop de tendresse,
D’un homme sent la trahison,
Comment, pour cette si douce foiblesse
Peut-elle trouver une guérison?
Le seul remède qu’elle peut ressentir,
La seul revanche pour son tort,
Pour faire trop tard l’amant repentir,
Helas! trop tard—est la mort.
When a woman, after too much affection,
Feels the betrayal of a man,
How can she find a cure
For such a sweet weakness?
The only remedy she can feel,
The only revenge for her pain,
To make the lover regret too late,
Alas! Too late—it’s death.
As a correspondent was not slow to point out, Goldsmith, if a copyist, at all events considerably improved his model (see in particular lines 7 and 8 of the French). On the 30th of the month the late Sir William Fraser gave it as his opinion, that, until the volume of 1719 should be produced, the ‘very inferior verses quoted’ must be classed with the fabrications of ‘Father Prout,’ and he instanced that very version of the Burial of Sir John Moore (Les Funérailles de Beaumanoir) which has recently (August 1906) been going the round of the papers once again. No Ségur volume of 1719 was, of course, forthcoming.
As a correspondent was quick to point out, Goldsmith, if he was a copier, definitely improved on his source (see especially lines 7 and 8 of the French). On the 30th of the month, the late Sir William Fraser expressed his opinion that, until the 1719 volume was presented, the "very inferior verses quoted" had to be grouped with the forgeries of "Father Prout," and he referenced that very version of the Burial of Sir John Moore (Les Funérailles de Beaumanoir) which has recently (August 1906) been circulating in the newspapers once again. Of course, no Ségur volume from 1719 was provided.
Kenrick, as we have already seen, had in 1767 accused Goldsmith of taking Edwin and Angelina from Percy (p. 206). Thirty years later, the charge of plagiarism was revived in a different way when Raimond and Angéline, a French translation of the same poem, appeared, as Goldsmith’s original, in a collection of Essays called The Quiz, 1797. It was eventually discovered to be a translation ‘from’ Goldsmith by a French poet named Léonard, who had included it in a volume dated 1792, entitled Lettres de deux Amans, Habitans de Lyon (Prior’s Life, 1837, ii. 89–94). It may be added that, according to the Biographie Universelle, 1847, vol. 18 (Art. ‘Goldsmith’), there were then no fewer than at least three French imitations of The Hermit besides Léonard’s.
Kenrick, as we've already noted, accused Goldsmith in 1767 of taking Edwin and Angelina from Percy (p. 206). Thirty years later, the plagiarism accusation came up again in a different form when Raimond and Angéline, a French translation of the same poem, was published as Goldsmith's original in a collection of essays called The Quiz, 1797. It was later revealed that it was actually a translation 'from' Goldsmith by a French poet named Léonard, who included it in a book dated 1792 titled Lettres de deux Amans, Habitans de Lyon (Prior’s Life, 1837, ii. 89–94). Additionally, according to the Biographie Universelle, 1847, vol. 18 (Art. ‘Goldsmith’), there were at least three other French imitations of The Hermit aside from Léonard’s.
EPILOGUE TO ‘THE GOOD NATUR’D MAN.’
Goldsmith’s comedy of The Good Natur’d Man was produced by Colman, at Covent Garden, on Friday, January 29, 1768. The following note was appended to the Epilogue when printed:—‘The Author, in expectation of an Epilogue from a friend at Oxford, deferred writing one himself till the very last hour. What is here offered, owes all its success to the graceful manner of the Actress who spoke it.’ It was spoken by Mrs. Bulkley, the ‘Miss Richland’ of the piece. In its first form it is to be found in The Public Advertiser for February 3. Two days later the play was published, with the version here followed.
Goldsmith’s comedy The Good-Natur'd Man was produced by Colman at Covent Garden on Friday, January 29, 1768. The following note was included in the printed Epilogue:—‘The Author, expecting an Epilogue from a friend at Oxford, put off writing one himself until the very last minute. What is offered here owes all its success to the charming way the Actress delivered it.’ It was performed by Mrs. Bulkley, who played ‘Miss Richland’ in the show. The original version can be found in The Public Advertiser from February 3. Two days later, the play was published, following the version presented here.
As puffing quacks. Goldsmith had devoted a Chinese letter to this subject. See Citizen of the World, 1762, ii. 10 (Letter lxv).
As puffing quacks. Goldsmith wrote a Chinese letter about this topic. See Citizen of the World, 1762, ii. 10 (Letter lxv).
No, no: I’ve other contests, etc. This couplet is not in the first version. The old building of the College of Physicians was in Warwick Lane; and the reference is to the long-pending dispute, occasionally enlivened by personal collision, between the Fellows and Licentiates respecting the exclusion of certain of the latter from Fellowships. On this theme Bonnell Thornton, himself an M.B. like Goldsmith, wrote a satiric additional canto to Garth’s Dispensary, entitled The Battle of the Wigs, long extracts from which are printed in The Gentleman’s Magazine for March, 1768, p. 132. The same number also reviews The Siege of the Castle of Æsculapius, an heroic Comedy, as it is acted in Warwick-Lane. Goldsmith’s couplet is, however, best illustrated by the title of one of Sayer’s caricatures, The March of the Medical Militants to the Siege of Warwick-Lane-Castle in the Year 1767. The quarrel was finally settled in favour of the college in June, 1771.
No, no: I’ve other contests, etc. This couplet isn't in the original version. The old building of the College of Physicians was located on Warwick Lane, and the reference is to the long-running dispute, sometimes heated by personal conflicts, between the Fellows and Licentiates over the exclusion of some of the latter from Fellowships. On this topic, Bonnell Thornton, who was also an M.B. like Goldsmith, wrote a satirical additional canto to Garth’s Dispensary, called The Battle of the Wigs, with long excerpts published in The Gentleman’s Magazine for March 1768, p. 132. The same issue also reviews The Siege of the Castle of Æsculapius, an Heroic Comedy, as it is acted in Warwick-Lane. However, Goldsmith’s couplet is best illustrated by the title of one of Sayer’s caricatures, The March of the Medical Militants to the Siege of Warwick-Lane-Castle in the Year 1767. The dispute was finally resolved in favor of the college in June 1771.
Go, ask your manager. Colman, the manager of Covent Garden, was not a prolific, although he was a happy writer of prologues and epilogues.
Go, ask your manager. Colman, the manager of Covent Garden, was not a prolific writer, but he was a joyful one when it came to prologues and epilogues.
The quotation is from King Lear, Act iii, Sc. 4.
The quotation is from King Lear, Act iii, Sc. 4.
In the first version the last line runs:—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ the final line runs:—
And view with favour, the ‘Good-natur’d Man.’
And look kindly on the 'Good-Natured Man.'
EPILOGUE TO ‘THE SISTER.’
The Sister, produced at Covent Garden February 18, 1769, was a comedy by Mrs. Charlotte Lenox or Lennox, ‘an ingenious lady,’ says The Gentleman’s Magazine for April in the same year, ‘well known in the literary world by her excellent writings, particularly the Female Quixote, and Shakespeare illustrated. . . . The audience expressed their disapprobation of it with so much clamour and appearance of prejudice, that she would not suffer an attempt to exhibit it a second time (p. 199).’ According to the same authority it was based upon one of the writer’s own novels, Henrietta, published in 1758. Though tainted with the prevailing sentimentalism, The Sister is described by Forster as ‘both amusing and interesting’; and it is probable that it was not fairly treated when it was acted. Mrs. Lenox (1720–1804), daughter of Colonel Ramsay, Lieut.-Governor of New York, was a favourite with the literary magnates of her day. Johnson was half suspected of having helped her in her book on Shakespeare; Richardson admitted her to his readings at Parson’s Green; Fielding, who knew her, calls her, in the Journal of a Voyage to Lisbon, 1755, p. 35 (first version), ‘the inimitable author of the Female Quixote’; and Goldsmith, though he had no kindness for genteel comedy (see post, p. 228), wrote her this lively epilogue, which was spoken by Mrs. Bulkley, who personated the ‘Miss Autumn’ of the piece. Mrs. Lenox died in extremely reduced circumstances, and was buried by the Right Hon. George Ross, who had befriended her later years. There are several references to her in Boswell’s Life of Johnson. (See also Hawkins’ Life, 2nd ed. 1787, pp. 285–7.)
The Sister, performed at Covent Garden on February 18, 1769, was a comedy by Mrs. Charlotte Lenox, described as "an ingenious lady," according to The Gentleman’s Magazine in April of the same year. She was "well known in the literary world for her excellent writings, particularly the Female Quixote and Shakespeare Illustrated. . . . The audience expressed their disapproval so loudly and with such visible bias that she wouldn't allow it to be performed again." According to the same source, it was based on one of her own novels, Henrietta, published in 1758. Although it reflects the prevailing sentimentalism of the time, The Sister is described by Forster as "both amusing and interesting," and it's likely that it wasn’t treated fairly during its performances. Mrs. Lenox (1720–1804), the daughter of Colonel Ramsay, Lieut.-Governor of New York, was favored by the literary elites of her time. Johnson was suspected of having assisted her with her book on Shakespeare; Richardson invited her to his readings at Parson’s Green; Fielding, who knew her, referred to her as "the inimitable author of the Female Quixote" in the Journal of a Voyage to Lisbon, 1755; and Goldsmith, despite his lack of fondness for genteel comedy, wrote her a lively epilogue that was delivered by Mrs. Bulkley, who played the character “Miss Autumn” in the play. Mrs. Lenox died in very poor circumstances and was buried by the Right Hon. George Ross, who supported her in her later years. There are several mentions of her in Boswell’s Life of Johnson. (See also Hawkins’ Life, 2nd ed. 1787, pp. 285–7.)
PROLOGUE TO ‘ZOBEIDE.’
Zobeide, a play by Joseph Cradock (1742–1826), of Gumley, in Leicestershire, was produced by Colman at Covent Garden on Dec. 11, 1771. It was a translation from three acts of Les Scythes, an unfinished tragedy by Voltaire. Goldsmith was applied to, through the Yates’s, for a prologue, and sent that here printed to the author of the play with the following note:—‘Mr. Goldsmith presents his best respects to Mr. Cradock, has sent him the Prologue, such as it is. He cannot take time to make it better. He begs he will give Mr. Yates the proper instructions; and so, even so, commits him to fortune and the publick.’ (Cradock’s Memoirs, 1826, i. 224.) Yates, to the acting of whose wife in the character of the heroine the success of the piece, which ran for thirteen nights, was mainly attributable, was to have spoken the prologue, but it ultimately fell to Quick, later the ‘Tony Lumpkin’ of She Stoops to Conquer, who delivered it in the character of a sailor. Cradock seems subsequently to have sent a copy of Zobeide to Voltaire, who replied in English as follows:—
Zobeide, a play by Joseph Cradock (1742–1826), from Gumley, Leicestershire, premiered at Covent Garden on December 11, 1771, produced by Colman. It was a translation of three acts from Les Scythes, an unfinished tragedy by Voltaire. Goldsmith was contacted through the Yates family for a prologue and sent the version printed here to the play’s author along with the following note:—‘Mr. Goldsmith sends his best regards to Mr. Cradock and has provided the Prologue, as it is. He does not have time to improve it. He asks that Mr. Yates receive the necessary instructions; and so, reluctantly, he leaves it to fate and the public.’ (Cradock’s Memoirs, 1826, i. 224.) Yates, whose wife’s performance as the heroine was key to the play's success—which ran for thirteen nights—was set to deliver the prologue. However, it ultimately went to Quick, who later became known as ‘Tony Lumpkin’ in She Stoops to Conquer, and he performed it as a sailor. Cradock seems to have later sent a copy of Zobeide to Voltaire, who replied in English as follows:—
9e. 8bre. 1773. à ferney.
9e. 8bre. 1773. at Ferney.
Sr.
Thanks to yr muse a foreign copper shines
Turn’d in to gold, and coin’d in sterling lines.
You have done to much honour to an old sick man of eighty.
Sr.
Thanks to your inspiration, a foreign coin shines,
Turned into gold and crafted into beautiful lines.
You've given too much honor to an old, sick man of eighty.
I am with the most sincere esteem and gratitude
Sr.
Yr. obdt. Servt. Voltaire.
A Monsieur Monsieur J. Cradock.
I am here with the deepest respect and appreciation,
Sir,
Your obedient servant, Voltaire.
To Mr. J. Cradock.
The text of the prologue is here given as printed in Cradock’s Memoirs, 1828, iii. 8–9. It is unnecessary to specify the variations between this and the earlier issue of 1771.
The text of the prologue is provided here as it appeared in Cradock’s Memoirs, 1828, iii. 8–9. There’s no need to point out the differences between this and the earlier version from 1771.
In these bold times, etc. The reference is to Cook, who, on June 12, 1771, had returned to England in the Endeavour, after three years’ absence, having gone to Otaheite to observe the transit of Venus (l. 4).
In these bold times, etc. The reference is to Cook, who returned to England on June 12, 1771, in the Endeavour, after being away for three years to observe the transit of Venus in Otaheite (l. 4).
Botanists. Mr. (afterward Sir Joseph) Banks and Dr. Solander, of the British Museum, accompanied Cook.
Botanists. Mr. (later Sir Joseph) Banks and Dr. Solander from the British Museum joined Cook.
go simpling, i.e. gathering simples, or herbs. Cf. Merry Wives of Windsor, Act iii, Sc. 3:—
go simpling, that is, collecting simple plants or herbs. See Merry Wives of Windsor, Act iii, Sc. 3:—
‘—These lisping hawthorn buds that ... smell like Bucklersbury in simple-time.’
‘—These lisping hawthorn buds that ... smell like Bucklersbury in simple-time.’
In the caricatures of the day Solander figured as ‘The simpling Macaroni.’ (See note, p. 247, l. 31.)
In the cartoons of the time, Solander was portrayed as ‘The simpling Macaroni.’ (See note, p. 247, l. 31.)
With Scythian stores. The scene of the play was laid in Scythia (v. supra).
With Scythian stores. The setting of the play was in Scythia (v. supra).
to make palaver, to hold a parley, generally with the intention of cajoling. Two of Goldsmith’s notes to Garrick in 1773 are endorsed by the actor—‘Goldsmith’s parlaver.’ (Forster’s Life, 1871, ii. 397.)
to make palaver, to have a discussion, usually with the goal of persuading. Two of Goldsmith’s notes to Garrick in 1773 are marked by the actor—‘Goldsmith’s talk.’ (Forster’s Life, 1871, ii. 397.)
mercenary. Cradock gave the profits of Zobeide to Mrs. Yates. ‘I mentioned the disappointment it would be to you’—she says in a letter to him dated April 26, 1771—‘as you had generously given the emoluments of the piece to me.’ (Memoirs, 1828, iv. 211.)
mercenary. Cradock donated the profits from Zobeide to Mrs. Yates. ‘I told you it would be disappointing’—she writes in a letter to him dated April 26, 1771—‘since you had kindly given the earnings from the piece to me.’ (Memoirs, 1828, iv. 211.)
THRENODIA AUGUSTALIS.
Augusta, widow of Frederick, Prince of Wales, and mother of George the Third, died at Carlton House, February 8, 1772. This piece was spoken and sung in Mrs. Teresa Cornelys’s Great Room in Soho Square, on the Thursday following (the 20th), being sold at the door as a small quarto pamphlet, printed by William Woodfall. The author’s name was not given; but it was prefaced by this ‘advertisement,’ etc.:—
Augusta, the widow of Frederick, Prince of Wales, and mother of George III, died at Carlton House on February 8, 1772. This piece was performed and sung in Mrs. Teresa Cornelys’s Great Room in Soho Square on the following Thursday (the 20th) and was sold at the door as a small quarto pamphlet, printed by William Woodfall. The author's name was not mentioned; however, it was introduced by this ‘advertisement,’ etc.:—
‘The following may more properly be termed a compilation than a poem. It was prepared for the composer in little more than two days: and may be considered therefore rather as an industrious effort of gratitude than of genius. In justice to the composer it may likewise be right to inform the public, that the music was adapted in a period of time equally short.
‘The following is more accurately described as a collection rather than a poem. It was put together for the composer in just over two days, so it should be seen more as a diligent expression of thanks than an act of creativity. To be fair to the composer, it’s also worth noting that the music was arranged in a similarly brief period of time.
SPEAKERS.
Mr. Lee and Mrs. Bellamy.
SINGERS.
SPEAKERS.
Mr. Lee and Mrs. Bellamy.
SINGERS.
Mr. Champnes, Mr. Dine, and Miss Jameson; with twelve chorus singers. The music prepared and adapted by Signor Vento.
Mr. Champnes, Mr. Dine, and Miss Jameson; with twelve chorus singers. The music was arranged and adapted by Signor Vento.
It is—as Cunningham calls it—a ‘hurried and unworthy off-spring of the muse of Goldsmith.’
It is—as Cunningham puts it—a ‘rushed and unworthy offspring of Goldsmith's muse.’
(Part I).
Celestial-like her bounty fell. The
Princess’s benefactions are not exaggerated. ‘She had paid off the whole
of her husband’s debts, and she had given munificent sums in charity. More
than 10,000 pounds a year were given away by her in pensions to
individuals whom she judged deserving, very few of whom were aware, until
her death, whence the bounty came. The whole of her income she spent in
England, and very little on herself’ (Augusta: Princess of Wales,
by W. H. Wilkins, Nineteenth Century, October, 1903, p.
675).
(Part I).
Celestial-like her bounty fell. The Princess’s generosity is not overstated. ‘She had cleared all of her husband's debts and donated substantial amounts to charity. She gave away more than 10,000 pounds each year in pensions to people she deemed deserving, most of whom didn’t know where the support came from until her death. She spent all of her income in England, keeping very little for herself’ (Augusta: Princess of Wales, by W. H. Wilkins, Nineteenth Century, October, 1903, p. 675).
There faith shall come. This, and the three lines that follow, are borrowed from Collins’s Ode written in the beginning of the year 1746.
There faith shall come. This, and the three lines that follow, are taken from Collins’s Ode written in the beginning of the year 1746.
(Part II).
The towers of Kew. ‘The
embellishments of Kew palace and gardens, under the direction of [Sir
William] Chambers, and others, was the favourite object of her [Royal Highness’s]
widowhood’ (Bolton Corney).
(Part II).
The towers of Kew. ‘The decorations of Kew Palace and gardens, led by [Sir William] Chambers and others, became the main focus of her [Royal Highness’s] time as a widow’ (Bolton Corney).
Along the billow’d main. Cf. The Captivity, Act ii, l. 18.
Along the billow’d main. See The Captivity, Act ii, l. 18.
Oswego’s dreary shores. Cf. The Traveller, l. 411.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Cf. The Traveler, l. 411.
And with the avenging fight. Varied from Collins’s Ode on the Death of Colonel Charles Ross at Fontenoy.
And with the avenging fight. Differed from Collins’s Ode on the Death of Colonel Charles Ross at Fontenoy.
Its earliest bloom. Cf. Collins’s Dirge in Cymbeline.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ See Collins’s Dirge in Cymbeline.
SONG
FROM ‘SHE STOOPS TO CONQUER.’
This thoroughly characteristic song, for a parallel to which one must go to Congreve, or to the ‘Here’s to the maiden of bashful fifteen’ of The School for Scandal, has one grave defect,—it is too good to have been composed by Tony Lumpkin, who, despite his inability to read anything but ‘print-hand,’ declares, in Act i. Sc. 2 of She Stoops to Conquer, 1773, that he himself made it upon the ale-house (‘The Three Pigeons’) in which he sings it, and where it is followed by the annexed comments, directed by the author against the sentimentalists, who, in The Good Natur’d Man of five years before, had insisted upon the omission of the Bailiff scene:—
This very distinctive song, for which you can only find a comparison in Congreve, or in the line ‘Here’s to the maiden of bashful fifteen’ from The School for Scandal, has one major flaw—it’s too good to have been written by Tony Lumpkin. Even though he can only read ‘print-hand,’ he claims in Act i. Sc. 2 of She Stoops to Conquer, 1773, that he created it in the pub (‘The Three Pigeons’) where he performs it, and where it is followed by the author’s remarks aimed at the sentimentalists who, in The Good Natur’d Man from five years earlier, had pushed for the Bailiff scene to be removed:—
‘OMNES.
‘OMNES.
Bravo, bravo!
Awesome, awesome!
First FELLOW.
First Fellow.
The ’Squire has got spunk in him.
The ’Squire has a lot of guts in him.
Second FELLOW.
Second Fellow.
I loves to hear him sing, bekeays he never gives us nothing that’s low . . .
I love to hear him sing because he never gives us anything that’s low . . .
Fourth FELLOW.
Fourth Fellow.
The genteel thing is the genteel thing at any time. If so be that a gentleman bees in a concatenation accordingly.
The refined thing is the refined thing at all times. If a gentleman finds himself in such a situation, then so be it.
Third FELLOW.
Third Fellow.
I like the maxum of it, Master Muggins. What, tho’ I am obligated to dance a bear, a man may be a gentleman for all that. May this be my poison if my bear ever dances but to the very genteelest of tunes. Water Parted,* or the minuet in Ariadne.’
I like the maxim of it, Master Muggins. Even though I have to perform with a bear, a man can still be a gentleman despite that. Let this be my downfall if my bear ever dances to anything but the most refined tunes. Water Parted,* or the minuet in Ariadne.
* i.e. Arne’s Water Parted from the Sea,—the song of Arbaces in the opera of Artaxerxes 1762. The minuet in Ariadne was by Handel. It came at the end of the overture, and is said to have been the best thing in the opera.
* i.e. Arne’s Water Parted from the Sea,—the song of Arbaces in the opera of Artaxerxes 1762. The minuet in Ariadne was by Handel. It came at the end of the overture and is said to have been the best part of the opera.
When Methodist preachers, etc. Tony Lumpkin’s utterance accurately represents the view of this sect taken by some of his contemporaries. While moderate and just spectators of the Johnson type could recognize the sincerity of men, who, like Wesley, travelled ‘nine hundred miles in a month, and preached twelve times a week’ for no ostensibly adequate reward, there were others who saw in Methodism, and especially in the extravagancies of its camp followers, nothing but cant and duplicity. It was this which prompted on the stage Foote’s Minor (1760) and Bickerstaffe’s Hypocrite (1768); in art the Credulity, Superstition, and Fanaticism of Hogarth (1762); and in literature the New Bath Guide of Anstey (1766), the Spiritual Quixote of Graves, 1772, and the sarcasms of Sterne, Smollett and Walpole.
When Methodist preachers, etc. Tony Lumpkin’s statement accurately reflects the perspective of this group held by some of his peers. While reasonable and fair-minded observers of the Johnson kind could appreciate the dedication of men who, like Wesley, traveled ‘nine hundred miles in a month, and preached twelve times a week’ with no obvious substantial reward, there were others who viewed Methodism, particularly the excesses of its supporters, as nothing but insincerity and deceit. This led to Foote’s Minor (1760) and Bickerstaffe’s Hypocrite (1768) on stage; in art the Credulity, Superstition, and Fanaticism of Hogarth (1762); and in literature the New Bath Guide by Anstey (1766), the Spiritual Quixote by Graves, 1772, and the criticisms of Sterne, Smollett, and Walpole.
It is notable that the most generous contemporary portrait of these much satirised sectaries came from one of the originals of the Retaliation gallery. Scott highly praises the character of Ezekiel Daw in Cumberland’s Henry, 1795, adding, in his large impartial fashion, with reference to the general practice of representing Methodists either as idiots or hypocrites, ‘A very different feeling is due to many, perhaps to most, of this enthusiastic sect; nor is it rashly to be inferred, that he who makes religion the general object of his life, is for that sole reason to be held either a fool or an impostor.’ (Scott’s Miscellaneous Prose Works, 1834, iii. 222.)
It’s interesting that the most generous modern portrayal of these often mocked sect members came from one of the original figures in the Retaliation collection. Scott praises the character of Ezekiel Daw in Cumberland’s Henry, 1795, adding, in his broad and fair way, regarding the typical practice of depicting Methodists as either fools or hypocrites, ‘A very different sentiment is owed to many, perhaps most, of this enthusiastic group; nor should it be rashly concluded that someone who makes religion the main focus of their life is, for that reason alone, to be seen as either foolish or deceitful.’ (Scott’s Miscellaneous Prose Works, 1834, iii. 222.)
But of all the birds in the air. Hypercriticism may object that ‘the hare’ is not a bird. But exigence of rhyme has to answer for many things. Some editors needlessly read ‘the gay birds’ to lengthen the line. There is no sanction for this in the earlier editions.
But of all the birds in the air. Some critics might argue that ‘the hare’ isn’t a bird. But the need for rhyme justifies a lot of choices. Some editors unnecessarily change it to ‘the gay birds’ to make the line longer. This isn’t supported by earlier editions.
EPILOGUE TO ‘SHE STOOPS TO CONQUER.’
This epilogue was spoken by Mrs. Bulkley in the character of Miss Hardcastle. It is probably the epilogue described by Goldsmith to Cradock, in the letter quoted at p. 246, as ‘a very mawkish thing,’ a phrase not so incontestable as Bolton Corney’s remark that it is ‘an obvious imitation of Shakespere.’
This epilogue was delivered by Mrs. Bulkley in the role of Miss Hardcastle. It's likely the epilogue mentioned by Goldsmith to Cradock, in the letter referenced on p. 246, as ‘a very sentimental thing,’ a term not as undeniable as Bolton Corney’s comment that it is ‘a clear imitation of Shakespeare.’
That pretty Bar-maids have done execution. Cf. The Vicar of Wakefield, 1766, i. 7:—‘Sophia’s features were not so striking at first; but often did more certain execution.’
That pretty Bar-maids have done execution. Cf. The Vicar of Wakefield, 1766, i. 7:—‘Sophia’s looks weren’t that impressive at first; but they often had a more definite impact.’
coquets the guests. Johnson explains this word ‘to entertain with compliments and amorous tattle,’ and quotes the following illustration from Swift, ‘You are coquetting a maid of honour, my lord looking on to see how the gamesters play, and I railing at you both.’
coquets the guests. Johnson explains this word ‘to entertain with compliments and romantic chatter,’ and quotes the following example from Swift, ‘You are flirting with a maid of honour, my lord watching to see how the players engage, and I complaining about you both.’
Nancy Dawson. Nancy Dawson was a famous ‘toast’ and horn-pipe dancer, who died at Haverstock Hill, May 27, 1767, and was buried behind the Foundling, in the burial-ground of St. George the Martyr. She first appeared at Sadler’s Wells, and speedily passed to the stage of Covent Garden, where she danced in the Beggar’s Opera. There is a portrait of her in the Garrick Club, and there are several contemporary prints. She was the heroine of a popular song, here referred to, beginning:—
Nancy Dawson. Nancy Dawson was a famous "toast" and hornpipe dancer who died at Haverstock Hill on May 27, 1767, and was buried behind the Foundling in the cemetery of St. George the Martyr. She first appeared at Sadler’s Wells and quickly moved to the stage of Covent Garden, where she danced in the Beggar’s Opera. There's a portrait of her in the Garrick Club, along with several contemporary prints. She was the inspiration for a popular song, mentioned here, that begins:—
Of all the girls in our town,
The black, the fair, the red, the brown,
Who dance and prance it up and down,
There’s none like Nancy Dawson:
Her easy mien, her shape so neat,
She foots, she trips, she looks so sweet,
Her ev’ry motion is complete;
I die for Nancy Dawson.
Of all the girls in our town,
The black, the fair, the red, the brown,
Who dance and show off all around,
There’s no one like Nancy Dawson:
Her relaxed style, her figure so fine,
She dances, she skips, she looks so sweet,
Every move she makes is divine;
I’m crazy for Nancy Dawson.
Its tune—says J. T. Smith (Book for a Rainy Day, Whitten’s ed., 1905, p. 10) was ‘as lively as that of “Sir Roger de Coverley.”’
Its tune—says J. T. Smith (Book for a Rainy Day, Whitten’s ed., 1905, p. 10) was ‘as lively as that of “Sir Roger de Coverley.”’
Che farò, i.e. Che farò senza Euridice, the lovely lament from Glück’s Orfeo, 1764.
Che farò, i.e. What will I do without Euridice, the beautiful lament from Glück’s Orfeo, 1764.
the Heinel of Cheapside. The reference is to Mademoiselle Anna-Frederica Heinel, 1752–1808, a beautiful Prussian, subsequently the wife of Gaetano Apollino Balthazar Vestris, called ‘Vestris the First.’ After extraordinary success as a danseuse at Stuttgard and Paris, where Walpole saw her in 1771 (Letter to the Earl of Strafford 25th August), she had come to London; and, at this date, was the darling of the Macaronies (cf. the note on p. 247, l. 31), who, from their club, added a regallo (present) of six hundred pounds to the salary allowed her at the Haymarket. On April 1, 1773, Metastasio’s Artaserse was performed for her benefit, when she was announced to dance a minuet with Monsieur Fierville, and ‘Tickets were to be hand, at her house in Piccadilly, two doors from Air Street.’
the Heinel of Cheapside. The reference is to Mademoiselle Anna-Frederica Heinel, 1752–1808, a beautiful Prussian who later became the wife of Gaetano Apollino Balthazar Vestris, known as ‘Vestris the First.’ After achieving remarkable success as a danseuse in Stuttgart and Paris, where Walpole saw her in 1771 (Letter to the Earl of Strafford 25th August), she had come to London. At this time, she was the favorite of the Macaronies (see the note on p. 247, l. 31), who, from their club, added a regallo (present) of six hundred pounds to her salary at the Haymarket. On April 1, 1773, Metastasio’s Artaserse was performed for her benefit, where she was set to dance a minuet with Monsieur Fierville, and 'Tickets were to be had at her house in Piccadilly, two doors from Air Street.'
spadille, i.e. the ace of spades, the first trump in the game of Ombre. Cf. Swift’s Journal of a Modern Lady in a Letter to a Person of Quality, 1728:—
spadille, meaning the ace of spades, the top trump in the game of Ombre. See Swift’s Journal of a Modern Lady in a Letter to a Person of Quality, 1728:—
She draws up card by card, to find
Good fortune peeping from behind;
With panting heart, and earnest eyes,
In hope to see spadillo rise;
In vain, alas! her hope is fed;
She draws an ace, and sees it red.
She pulls one card after another, to uncover
Good luck hiding behind;
With a racing heart and eager eyes,
Hoping to see spadillo appear;
But sadly, her hopes are unfounded;
She draws an ace and sees it's red.
Bayes. The chief character in Buckingham’s Rehearsal, 1672, and intended for John Dryden. Here the name is put for the ‘poet’ or ‘dramatist.’ Cf. Murphy’s Epilogue to Cradock’s Zobeide, 1771:—
Bayes. The main character in Buckingham’s Rehearsal, 1672, which was meant for John Dryden. Here, the name stands for the ‘poet’ or ‘dramatist.’ See Murphy’s Epilogue to Cradock’s Zobeide, 1771:—
Not e’en poor ‘Bayes’ within must hope to be
Free from the lash:—His Play he writ for me
’Tis true—and now my gratitude you’ll see;
Not even poor 'Bayes' inside can hope to be
Free from the whip:—His play he wrote for me
It’s true—and now you’ll see my gratitude;
and Colman’s Epilogue to The School for Scandal, 1777:—
and Colman’s Epilogue to The School for Scandal, 1777:—
So wills our virtuous bard—the motley Bayes
Of crying epilogues and laughing plays!
So declares our noble poet—the colorful Bayes
Of emotional endings and humorous shows!
RETALIATION.
Retaliation: A Poem. By Doctor Goldsmith. Including Epitaphs on the Most Distinguished Wits of this Metropolis, was first published by G. Kearsly in April, 1774, as a 4to pamphlet of 24 pp. On the title-page is a vignette head of the author, etched by James Basire, after Reynolds’s portrait; and the verses are prefaced by an anonymous letter to the publisher, concluding as follows:—‘Dr. Goldsmith belonged to a Club of Beaux Esprits, where Wit sparkled sometimes at the Expence of Good-nature.It was proposed to write Epitaphs on the Doctor; his Country, Dialect and Person, furnished Subjects of Witticism.—The Doctor was called on for’ Retaliation, ‘and at their next Meeting produced the following Poem, which I think adds one Leaf to his immortal Wreath. This account seems to have sufficed for Evans, Percy, and the earlier editors. But in vol. i. p. 78 of his edition of Goldsmith’s Works, 1854, Mr. Peter Cunningham published for the first time a fuller version of the circumstances, derived from a manuscript lent to him by Mr. George Daniel of Islington; and (says Mr. Cunningham) ‘evidently designed as a preface to a collected edition of the poems which grew out of Goldsmith’s trying his epigrammatic powers with Garrick.’ It is signed ‘D. Garrick.’ ‘At a meeting’—says the writer—‘of a company of gentlemen, who were well known to each other, and diverting themselves, among many other things, with the peculiar oddities of Dr. Goldsmith, who would never allow a superior in any art, from writing poetry down to dancing a horn-pipe, the Dr. with great eagerness insisted upon trying his epigrammatic powers with Mr. Garrick, and each of them was to write the other’s epitaph. Mr. Garrick immediately said that his epitaph was finished, and spoke the following distich extempore:—
Retaliation: A Poem. By Doctor Goldsmith. Including Epitaphs on the Most Distinguished Wits of this Metropolis, was first published by G. Kearsly in April, 1774, as a 4to pamphlet of 24 pp. The title page features a vignette head of the author, etched by James Basire, based on Reynolds's portrait; and the verses are introduced by an anonymous letter to the publisher, which ends with:—‘Dr. Goldsmith was part of a Club of Beaux Esprits, where Wit sometimes shone at the Expense of Good-nature. It was suggested to write Epitaphs on the Doctor; his Country, Dialect, and Person inspired Subjects of Wit.—The Doctor was called on for’ Retaliation, ‘and at their next Meeting, he presented the following Poem, which I believe adds another Leaf to his immortal Wreath. This account seems to have satisfied Evans, Percy, and the earlier editors. However, in vol. i. p. 78 of his edition of Goldsmith’s Works, 1854, Mr. Peter Cunningham published for the first time a more complete version of the circumstances, taken from a manuscript lent to him by Mr. George Daniel of Islington; and (Mr. Cunningham notes) ‘clearly intended as a preface to a collected edition of the poems that resulted from Goldsmith’s attempt to test his epigrammatic skills with Garrick.’ It is signed ‘D. Garrick.’ ‘At a meeting’—the writer states—‘of a group of gentlemen, who were familiar with each other and entertaining themselves, among other topics, with the peculiar quirks of Dr. Goldsmith, who never acknowledged anyone as superior in any craft, from writing poetry to dancing a hornpipe, the Doctor eagerly pushed to try his epigrammatic skills with Mr. Garrick, and each was to write the other’s epitaph. Mr. Garrick quickly claimed that his epitaph was ready and delivered the following couplet spontaneously:—
Here lies NOLLY Goldsmith, for shortness call’d Noll,
Who wrote like an angel, but talk’d like poor Poll.
Here lies NOLLY Goldsmith, also known as Noll,
Who wrote beautifully, but spoke like a parrot.
Goldsmith, upon the company’s laughing very heartily, grew very thoughtful, and either would not, or could not, write anything at that time: however, he went to work, and some weeks after produced the following printed poem called Retaliation, which has been much admired, and gone through several editions.’ This account, though obviously from Garrick’s point of view, is now accepted as canonical, and has superseded those of Davies, Cradock, Cumberland, and others, to which some reference is made in the ensuing notes. A few days after the publication of the first edition, which appeared on the 18th or 19th of April, a ‘new’ or second edition was issued, with four pages of ‘Explanatory Notes, Observations, etc.’ At the end came the following announcement:—‘G. Kearsly, the Publisher, thinks it his duty to declare, that Dr. Goldsmith wrote the Poem as it is here printed, a few errors of the press excepted, which are taken notice of at the bottom of this page.’ From this version Retaliation is here reproduced. In the third edition, probably in deference to some wounded susceptibilities, the too comprehensive ‘most Distinguished Wits of the Metropolis’ was qualified into ‘some of the most Distinguished Wits,’ etc., but no further material alteration was made in the text until the suspicious lines on Caleb Whitefoord were added to the fifth edition.
Goldsmith, when the company was laughing heartily, became very thoughtful and either wouldn’t or couldn’t write anything at that moment. However, he got to work and a few weeks later produced the following printed poem called Retaliation, which has been widely admired and has gone through several editions. This account, though clearly from Garrick’s perspective, is now regarded as authoritative and has replaced those from Davies, Cradock, Cumberland, and others, which are referenced in the notes that follow. A few days after the first edition was published, which came out on April 18th or 19th, a ‘new’ or second edition was released with four pages of ‘Explanatory Notes, Observations, etc.’ At the end, there was this announcement:—‘G. Kearsly, the Publisher, feels it is his duty to state that Dr. Goldsmith wrote the Poem as it is printed here, with a few errors of the press noted at the bottom of this page.’ From this version, Retaliation is reproduced here. In the third edition, probably to avoid offending some sensitive feelings, the overly broad phrase ‘most Distinguished Wits of the Metropolis’ was modified to ‘some of the most Distinguished Wits,’ etc., but no further significant changes were made to the text until the questionable lines about Caleb Whitefoord were added in the fifth edition.
With the exception of Garrick’s couplet, and the fragment of Whitefoord referred to at p. 234, none of the original epitaphs upon which Goldsmith was invited to ‘retaliate’ have survived. But the unexpected ability of the retort seems to have prompted a number of ex post facto performances, some of which the writers would probably have been glad to pass off as their first essays. Garrick, for example, produced three short pieces, one of which (‘Here, Hermes! says Jove, who with nectar was mellow’) hits off many of Goldsmith’s contradictions and foibles with considerable skill (v. Davies’s Garrick, 2nd ed., 1780, ii. 157). Cumberland (v. Gent. Mag., Aug. 1778, p. 384) parodied the poorest part of Retaliation, the comparison of the guests to dishes, by likening them to liquors, and Dean Barnard in return rhymed upon Cumberland. He wrote also an apology for his first attack, which is said to have been very severe, and conjured the poet to set his wit at Garrick, who, having fired his first shot, was keeping out of the way:—
With the exception of Garrick’s couplet and the fragment of Whitefoord mentioned on page 234, none of the original epitaphs that Goldsmith was invited to respond to have survived. However, the unexpected skill of the retort seems to have inspired several ex post facto pieces, some of which the authors would probably have been happy to present as their first attempts. For instance, Garrick produced three short works, one of which (“Here, Hermes! says Jove, who with nectar was mellow”) cleverly highlights many of Goldsmith’s contradictions and weaknesses (v. Davies’s Garrick, 2nd ed., 1780, ii. 157). Cumberland (v. Gent. Mag., Aug. 1778, p. 384) parodied the weakest part of Retaliation, comparing the guests to dishes by likening them to drinks, and Dean Barnard responded in verse about Cumberland. He also wrote an apology for his initial criticism, which is said to have been quite harsh, and urged the poet to direct his wit at Garrick, who, after making his first move, was staying out of sight:—
On him let all thy vengeance fall;
On me you but misplace it:
Remember how he called thee Poll—
But, ah! he dares not face it.
On him let all your anger fall;
On me you just misdirect it:
Remember how he called you Poll—
But, ah! he doesn't have the guts to face it.
For these, and other forgotten pieces arising out of Retaliation, Garrick had apparently prepared the above-mentioned introduction. It may be added that the statement, prefixed to the first edition, that Retaliation, as we now have it, was produced at the ‘next meeting’ of the Club, is manifestly incorrect. It was composed and circulated in detached fragments, and Goldsmith was still working at it when he was seized with his last illness.
For these and other overlooked pieces from Retaliation, Garrick had seemingly put together the introduction mentioned above. It should be noted that the claim in the first edition stating that Retaliation, as we know it now, was created at the 'next meeting' of the Club is clearly incorrect. It was written and shared in separate parts, and Goldsmith was still revising it when he fell ill for the last time.
Of old, when Scarron, etc. Paul Scarron (1610–60), the author inter alia of the Roman Comique, 1651–7, upon a translation of which Goldsmith was occupied during the last months of his life. It was published by Griffin in 1776.
Of old, when Scarron, etc. Paul Scarron (1610–60), the author inter alia of the Roman Comique, 1651–7, was the subject of a translation that Goldsmith worked on during the last months of his life. It was published by Griffin in 1776.
Each guest brought his dish. ‘Chez Scarron,’—says his editor, M. Charles Baumet, when speaking of the poet’s entertainments,—‘venait d’ailleurs l’élite des dames, des courtisans & des hommes de lettres. On y dinait joyeusement. Chacun apportait son plat.’ (Œuvres de Scarron, 1877, i. viii.) Scarron’s company must have been as brilliant as Goldsmith’s. Villarceaux, Vivonne, the Maréchal d’Albret, figured in his list of courtiers; while for ladies he had Mesdames Deshoulières, de Scudéry, de la Sablière, and de Sévigné, to say nothing of Ninon de Lenclos and Marion Delorme. (Cf. also Guizot, Corneille et son Temps, 1862, 429–30.)
Each guest brought his dish. ‘At Scarron’s,’ says his editor, M. Charles Baumet, when talking about the poet’s gatherings, ‘the elite of ladies, courtiers, and men of letters would come. Everyone enjoyed dinner together. Everyone brought their own dish.’ (Œuvres de Scarron, 1877, i. viii.) Scarron’s guests must have been as impressive as Goldsmith’s. Villarceaux, Vivonne, and the Maréchal d’Albret were among his courtly guests; for the ladies, he had Mesdames Deshoulières, de Scudéry, de la Sablière, and de Sévigné, not to mention Ninon de Lenclos and Marion Delorme. (Cf. also Guizot, Corneille et son Temps, 1862, 429–30.)
If our landlord. The ‘explanatory note’ to the second edition says—‘The master of the St. James’s coffee-house, where the Doctor, and the friends he has characterized in this Poem, held an occasional club.’ This, it should be stated, was not the famous ‘Literary Club,’ which met at the Turk’s Head Tavern in Gerrard Street. The St. James’s Coffee-house, as familiar to Swift and Addison at the beginning, as it was to Goldsmith and his friends at the end of the eighteenth century, was the last house but one on the south-west corner of St. James’s Street. It now no longer exists. Cradock (Memoirs, 1826, i. 228–30) speaks of dining at the bottom of St. James’s Street with Goldsmith, Percy, the two Burkes (v. infra), Johnson, Garrick, Dean Barnard, and others. ‘We sat very late;’ he adds in conclusion, ‘and the conversation that at last ensued, was the direct cause of my friend Goldsmith’s poem, called “Retaliation.”’
If our landlord. The ‘explanatory note’ to the second edition states—‘The owner of the St. James’s coffee-house, where the Doctor and the friends he described in this Poem, occasionally gathered.’ It should be noted that this was not the famous ‘Literary Club,’ which met at the Turk’s Head Tavern in Gerrard Street. The St. James’s Coffee-house, as well-known to Swift and Addison in the beginning as it was to Goldsmith and his friends by the end of the eighteenth century, was the second-to-last building on the south-west corner of St. James’s Street. It no longer exists. Cradock (Memoirs, 1826, i. 228–30) mentions dining at the bottom of St. James’s Street with Goldsmith, Percy, the two Burkes (v. infra), Johnson, Garrick, Dean Barnard, and others. ‘We sat very late,’ he concludes, ‘and the conversation that finally took place was the direct cause of my friend Goldsmith’s poem, called “Retaliation.”’
Our Dean. Dr. Thomas Barnard, an Irishman, at this time Dean of Derry. He died at Wimbledon in 1806. It was Dr. Barnard who, in reply to a rude sally of Johnson, wrote the charming verses on improvement after the age of forty-five, which end—
Our Dean. Dr. Thomas Barnard, an Irishman, was the Dean of Derry at this time. He passed away in Wimbledon in 1806. Dr. Barnard was the one who, in response to a rude remark from Johnson, wrote the lovely verses about self-improvement after turning forty-five, which conclude—
If I have thoughts, and can’t express them,
Gibbon shall teach me how to dress them,
In terms select and terse;
Jones teach me modesty and Greek,
Smith how to think, Burke how to speak,
And Beauclerk to converse.
Let Johnson teach me how to place
In fairest light, each borrow’d grace,
From him I’ll learn to write;
Copy his clear, familiar style,
And from the roughness of his file
Grow like himself—polite.
If I have thoughts that I can't express,
Gibbon will show me how to dress them,
In chosen words that are brief;
Jones will teach me modesty and Greek,
Smith will help me think, Burke will help me speak,
And Beauclerk will teach me to converse.
Let Johnson teach me how to showcase
In the best light, each borrowed grace,
From him, I’ll learn to write;
I’ll imitate his clear, approachable style,
And from the roughness of his edits
Become like him—polite.
(Northcote’s Life of Reynolds, 2nd ed., 1819, i. 221.) According to Cumberland (Memoirs, 1807, i. 370), ‘The dean also gave him [Goldsmith] an epitaph, and Sir Joshua illuminated the dean’s verses with a sketch of his bust in pen and ink inimitably caricatured.’ What would collectors give for that sketch and epitaph! Unfortunately in Cumberland’s septuagenarian recollections the ‘truth severe’ is mingled with an unusual amount of ‘fairy fiction.’ However Sir Joshua did draw caricatures, for a number of them were exhibited at the Grosvenor Gallery (by the Duke of Devonshire) in the winter of 1883–4.
(Northcote’s Life of Reynolds, 2nd ed., 1819, i. 221.) According to Cumberland (Memoirs, 1807, i. 370), "The dean also gave him [Goldsmith] an epitaph, and Sir Joshua illustrated the dean’s verses with a sketch of his bust in pen and ink, humorously exaggerated." Imagine what collectors would pay for that sketch and epitaph! Unfortunately, in Cumberland’s memories from his seventies, the "harsh truth" is mixed with a fair bit of "fantasy." However, Sir Joshua did create caricatures, as several of them were displayed at the Grosvenor Gallery (by the Duke of Devonshire) in the winter of 1883–4.
Our Burke. The Right Hon. Edmund Burke, 1729–97.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ The Honorable Edmund Burke, 1729–1797.
Our Will. ‘Mr. William Burke, late Secretary to General Conway, and member for Bedwin, Wiltshire’ (Note to second edition). He was a kinsman of Edmund Burke, and one of the supposed authors of Junius’s Letters. He died in 1798. ‘It is said that the notices Goldsmith first wrote of the Burkes were so severe that Hugh Boyd persuaded the poet to alter them, and entirely rewrite the character of William, for he was sure that if the Burkes saw what was originally written of them the peace of the Club would be disturbed.’ (Rev. W. Hunt in Dict. Nat. Biography, Art. ‘William Burke.’)
Our Will. ‘Mr. William Burke, former Secretary to General Conway, and representative for Bedwin, Wiltshire’ (Note to second edition). He was related to Edmund Burke and was one of the supposed authors of Junius’s Letters. He passed away in 1798. ‘It’s said that the reviews Goldsmith first wrote about the Burkes were so harsh that Hugh Boyd convinced the poet to change them and completely rewrite William’s portrayal, as he was certain that if the Burkes read the original comments, it would disturb the peace of the Club.’ (Rev. W. Hunt in Dict. Nat. Biography, Art. ‘William Burke.’)
And Dick. Richard Burke, Edmund Burke’s younger brother. He was for some years Collector to the Customs at Grenada, being on a visit to London when Retaliation was written (Forster’s Life, 1871, ii. 404). He died in 1794, Recorder of Bristol.
And Dick. Richard Burke, the younger brother of Edmund Burke. For several years, he served as the Collector of Customs in Grenada, and was visiting London when Retaliation was written (Forster’s Life, 1871, ii. 404). He passed away in 1794, while he was the Recorder of Bristol.
Our Cumberland’s sweetbread. Richard Cumberland, the poet, novelist, and dramatist, 1731–1811, author of The West Indian, 1771, The Fashionable Lover, 1772, and many other more or less sentimental plays. In his Memoirs, 1807, i. 369–71, he gives an account of the origin of Retaliation, which adds a few dubious particulars to that of Garrick. But it was written from memory long after the events it records.
Our Cumberland’s sweetbread. Richard Cumberland, the poet, novelist, and playwright, 1731–1811, is known for works like The West Indian, 1771, The Fashionable Lover, 1772, and several other mostly sentimental plays. In his Memoirs, 1807, i. 369–71, he shares the backstory of Retaliation, adding a few questionable details to Garrick's account. However, it was written from memory long after the events it describes.
Douglas. ‘Dr. Douglas, since Bishop of Salisbury,’ says Cumberland. He died in 1807 (v. infra).
Douglas. ‘Dr. Douglas, who was Bishop of Salisbury,’ says Cumberland. He died in 1807 (v. infra).
Ridge. ‘Counsellor John Ridge, a gentleman belonging to the Irish Bar’ (Note to second edition). ‘Burke,’ says Bolton Corney, ‘in 1771, described him as “one of the honestest and best-natured men living, and inferior to none of his profession in ability.”’ (See also note to line 125.)
Ridge. 'Counselor John Ridge, a gentleman from the Irish Bar' (Note to second edition). 'Burke,' says Bolton Corney, 'described him in 1771 as “one of the most honest and good-natured men alive, and equal to none of his profession in skill.”' (See also note to line 125.)
Hickey. The commentator of the second edition of Retaliation calls this gentleman ‘honest Tom Hickey’. His Christian name, however, was Joseph (Letter of Burke, November 8, 1774). He was a jovial, good-natured, over-blunt Irishman, the legal adviser of both Burke and Reynolds. Indeed it was Hickey who drew the conveyance of the land on which Reynolds’s house ‘next to the Star and Garter’ at Richmond (Wick House) was built by Chambers the architect. Hickey died in 1794. Reynolds painted his portrait for Burke, and it was exhibited at the Royal Academy in 1772 (No. 208). In 1833 it belonged to Mr. T. H. Burke. Sir Joshua also painted Miss Hickey in 1769–73. Her father, not much to Goldsmith’s satisfaction, was one of the Paris party in 1770. See also note to l. 125.
Hickey. The commentator of the second edition of Retaliation refers to this man as ‘honest Tom Hickey.’ However, his first name was Joseph (Letter of Burke, November 8, 1774). He was a cheerful, easygoing, and very straightforward Irishman, serving as the legal advisor for both Burke and Reynolds. In fact, it was Hickey who arranged the transfer of the property on which Reynolds’s house ‘next to the Star and Garter’ at Richmond (Wick House) was constructed by the architect Chambers. Hickey passed away in 1794. Reynolds painted his portrait for Burke, which was displayed at the Royal Academy in 1772 (No. 208). In 1833, it was owned by Mr. T. H. Burke. Sir Joshua also painted Miss Hickey between 1769 and 1773. Her father was part of the Paris group in 1770, which did not please Goldsmith. See also note to l. 125.
Magnanimous Goldsmith. According to Malone (Reynolds’s Works, second edition, 1801, i. xc), Goldsmith intended to have concluded with his own character.
Magnanimous Goldsmith. According to Malone (Reynolds’s Works, second edition, 1801, i. xc), Goldsmith planned to finish with his own character.
Tommy Townshend, M.P. for Whitchurch, Hampshire, afterwards first Viscount Sydney. He died in 1800. Junius says Bolton Corney, gives a portrait of him as still life. His presence in Retaliation is accounted for by the fact that he had commented in Parliament upon Johnson’s pension. ‘I am well assured,’ says Boswell, ‘that Mr. Townshend’s attack upon Johnson was the occasion of his “hitching in a rhyme”; for, that in the original copy of Goldsmith’s character of Mr. Burke, in his Retaliation another person’s name stood in the couplet where Mr. Townshend is now introduced.’ (Birkbeck Hill’s Boswell, 1887, iv. 318.)
Tommy Townshend, M.P. for Whitchurch, Hampshire, later known as the first Viscount Sydney. He passed away in 1800. Junius mentions Bolton Corney, who portrays him as still life. His appearance in Retaliation is explained by the fact that he had commented in Parliament about Johnson’s pension. ‘I am quite sure,’ says Boswell, ‘that Mr. Townshend’s criticism of Johnson led to his “hitching in a rhyme”; for, in the original draft of Goldsmith’s portrayal of Mr. Burke in his Retaliation, someone else’s name was listed in the couplet where Mr. Townshend is currently mentioned.’ (Birkbeck Hill’s Boswell, 1887, iv. 318.)
too deep for his hearers. ‘The emotion to which he commonly appealed was that too rare one, the love of wisdom, and he combined his thoughts and knowledge in propositions of wisdom so weighty and strong, that the minds of ordinary hearers were not on the instant prepared for them.’ (Morley’s Burke, 1882, 209–10.)
too deep for his hearers. ‘The emotion he often appealed to was the rather uncommon love of wisdom, and he combined his ideas and knowledge into insights so profound and powerful that the average listener was not immediately ready for them.’ (Morley’s Burke, 1882, 209–10.)
And thought of convincing, while they thought of dining. For the reason given in the previous note, many of Burke’s hearers often took the opportunity of his rising to speak, to retire to dinner. Thus he acquired the nickname of the ‘Dinner Bell.’
And thought of convincing, while they thought of dining. Because of the reason mentioned in the previous note, many of Burke’s audience frequently used his speaking time as an excuse to leave for dinner. As a result, he earned the nickname ‘Dinner Bell.’
To eat mutton cold. There is a certain resemblance between this character and Gray’s lines on himself written in 1761, beginning ‘Too poor for a bribe, and too proud to importune.’ (See Gosse’s Gray’s Works, 1884, i. 127.) But both Gray and Goldsmith may have been thinking of a line in the once popular song of Ally Croaker:—
To eat mutton cold. There’s a certain similarity between this character and Gray’s description of himself written in 1761, starting with ‘Too poor for a bribe, and too proud to beg.’ (See Gosse’s Gray’s Works, 1884, i. 127.) But both Gray and Goldsmith might have been referencing a line from the once popular song of Ally Croaker:—
Too dull for a wit, too grave for a joker.
Too dull for a smartass, too serious for a clown.
honest William, i.e. William Burke (v. supra).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ i.e. William Burke (see above).
Now breaking a jest, and now breaking a limb. A note to the second edition says—‘The above Gentleman [Richard Burke, v. supra] having slightly fractured one of his arms and legs, at different times, the Doctor [i.e. Goldsmith] has rallied him on those accidents, as a kind of retributive justice for breaking his jests on other people.’
Now breaking a jest, and now breaking a limb. A note to the second edition says—‘The gentleman mentioned above [Richard Burke, v. supra] having slightly fractured one of his arms and legs at different times, the doctor [i.e. Goldsmith] has teased him about those accidents, as a sort of retributive justice for making jokes at the expense of others.’
Here Cumberland lies. According to Boaden’s Life of Kemble, 1825, i. 438, Mrs. Piozzi rightly regarded this portrait as wholly ironical; and Bolton Corney, without much expenditure of acumen, discovers it to have been written in a spirit of persiflage. Nevertheless, Cumberland himself (Memoirs, 1807, i. 369) seems to have accepted it in good faith. Speaking of Goldsmith he says—I conclude my account of him with gratitude for the epitaph he bestowed on me in his poem called Retaliation.’ From the further details which he gives of the circumstances, it would appear that his own performance, of which he could recall but one line—
Here Cumberland lies. According to Boaden’s Life of Kemble, 1825, i. 438, Mrs. Piozzi correctly saw this portrait as entirely sarcastic; and Bolton Corney, without much insight, realizes it was written in a spirit of persiflage. However, Cumberland himself (Memoirs, 1807, i. 369) seems to have taken it seriously. Speaking of Goldsmith, he states—“I conclude my account of him with gratitude for the epitaph he gave me in his poem called Retaliation.” From the additional details he provides about the circumstances, it seems that he could only recall one line of his own work—
All mourn the poet, I lament the man—
All mourn the poet; I grieve for the man—
was conceived in a less malicious spirit than those of the others, and had predisposed the sensitive bard in his favour. But no very genuine cordiality could be expected to exist between the rival authors of The West Indian and She Stoops to Conquer.
was conceived in a less hostile spirit than those of the others, and had predisposed the sensitive poet in his favor. But no real warmth could be expected to exist between the competing authors of The West Indian and She Stoops to Conquer.
And Comedy wonders at being so fine. It is instructive here to transcribe Goldsmith’s serious opinion of the kind of work which Cumberland essayed:—‘A new species of Dramatic Composition has been introduced, under the name of Sentimental Comedy, in which the virtues of Private Life are exhibited, rather than the Vices exposed; and the Distresses rather than the Faults of Mankind, make our interest in the piece. . . . In these Plays almost all the Characters are good, and exceedingly generous; they are lavish enough of their Tin Money on the Stage, and though they want Humour, have abundance of Sentiment and Feeling. If they happen to have Faults or Foibles, the Spectator is taught not only to pardon, but to applaud them, in consideration of the goodness of their hearts; so that Folly, instead of being ridiculed, is commended, and the Comedy aims at touching our Passions without the power of being truly pathetic.’ (Westminster Magazine, 1772, i. 5.) Cf. also the Preface to The Good Natur’d Man, where he ‘hopes that too much refinement will not banish humour and character from our’s, as it has already done from the French theatre. Indeed the French comedy is now become so very elevated and sentimental, that it has not only banished humour and Moliere from the stage, but it has banished all spectators too.’
And Comedy wonders at being so fine. It is helpful here to share Goldsmith’s serious opinion on the type of work that Cumberland attempted:—‘A new kind of Dramatic Composition has been introduced, called Sentimental Comedy, in which the virtues of private life are showcased, rather than the vices highlighted; and the distress rather than the faults of humanity creates our interest in the piece. . . . In these plays, almost all the characters are good and very generous; they are quite generous with their Tin money on stage, and although they lack humor, they are full of sentiment and feeling. If they happen to have faults or quirks, the audience is encouraged not only to forgive but to admire them, considering the goodness of their hearts; so that folly, instead of being mocked, is celebrated, and the comedy strives to evoke our emotions without truly being tragic.’ (Westminster Magazine, 1772, i. 5.) See also the Preface to The Good Natur’d Man, where he ‘hopes that excessive refinement will not eliminate humor and character from ours, as it has already done from the French theatre. Indeed, French comedy has become so elevated and sentimental that it has not only pushed humor and Moliere off the stage but has also driven away all the spectators.’
The scourge of impostors, the terror of quacks. Dr. John Douglas (v. supra) distinguished himself by his exposure of two of his countrymen, Archibald Bower, 1686–1766, who, being secretly a member of the Catholic Church, wrote a History of the Popes; and William Lauder 1710–1771, who attempted to prove Milton a plagiarist. Cf. Churchill’s Ghost, Bk. ii:—
The scourge of impostors, the terror of quacks. Dr. John Douglas (v. supra) made a name for himself by revealing the true identities of two of his fellow countrymen: Archibald Bower, 1686–1766, who was secretly a Catholic and wrote a History of the Popes; and William Lauder, 1710–1771, who tried to claim that Milton was a plagiarist. Cf. Churchill’s Ghost, Bk. ii:—
By TRUTH inspir’d when Lauder’s spight
O’er MILTON cast the Veil of Night,
DOUGLAS arose, and thro’ the maze
Of intricate and winding ways,
Came where the subtle Traitor lay,
And dragg’d him trembling to the day.
By the inspiration of TRUTH when Lauder's spite
Cast a shadow over MILTON,
DOUGLAS stood up, and through the maze
Of complex and twisting paths,
Arrived where the sly Traitor was,
And dragged him, shaking, into the light.
‘Lauder on Milton’ is one of the books bound to the trunk-maker’s in Hogarth’s Beer Street, 1751. He imposed on Johnson, who wrote him a ‘Preface’ and was consequently trounced by Churchill (ut supra) as ‘our Letter’d POLYPHEME.’
‘Lauder on Milton’ is one of the books tied to the trunk-maker’s in Hogarth’s Beer Street, 1751. He tricked Johnson into writing a ‘Preface’ for him, and as a result, was criticized by Churchill (ut supra) as ‘our Letter’d POLYPHEME.’
Our Dodds shall be pious. The reference is to the Rev. Dr. William Dodd, who three years after the publication of Retaliation (i.e. June 27, 1777) was hanged at Tyburn for forging the signature of the fifth Earl of Chesterfield, to whom he had been tutor. His life previously had long been scandalous enough to justify Goldsmith’s words. Johnson made strenuous and humane exertions to save Dodd’s life, but without avail. (See Birkbeck Hill’s Boswell, 1887, iii. 139–48.) There is an account of Dodd’s execution at the end of vol. i of Angelo’s Reminiscences, 1830.
Our Dodds shall be pious. This refers to Rev. Dr. William Dodd, who three years after the release of Retaliation (June 27, 1777) was executed at Tyburn for forging the signature of the fifth Earl of Chesterfield, his former student. His life had been scandalous enough to support Goldsmith’s statements. Johnson made significant and compassionate efforts to save Dodd’s life, but he was unsuccessful. (See Birkbeck Hill’s Boswell, 1887, iii. 139–48.) There is a description of Dodd’s execution at the end of volume i of Angelo’s Reminiscences, 1830.
our Kenricks. Dr. William Kenrick—say the earlier annotators—who ‘read lectures at the Devil Tavern, under the Title of “The School of Shakespeare.”’ The lectures began January 19, 1774, and help to fix the date of the poem. Goldsmith had little reason for liking this versatile and unprincipled Ishmaelite of letters, who, only a year before, had penned a scurrilous attack upon him in The London Packet. Kenrick died in 1779.
our Kenricks. Dr. William Kenrick—according to earlier annotators—who ‘gave lectures at the Devil Tavern, titled “The School of Shakespeare.”’ The lectures started on January 19, 1774, which helps to establish the date of the poem. Goldsmith had little reason to like this adaptable and unscrupulous writer, who, just a year earlier, had written a slanderous attack against him in The London Packet. Kenrick passed away in 1779.
Macpherson. ‘David [James] Macpherson, Esq.; who lately, from the mere force of his style, wrote down the first poet of all antiquity.’ (Note to second edition.) This was ‘Ossian’ Macpherson, 1738–96, who, in 1773, had followed up his Erse epics by a prose translation of Homer, which brought him little but opprobrium. ‘Your abilities, since your Homer, are not so formidable,’ says Johnson in the knockdown letter which he addressed to him in 1775. (Birkbeck Hill’s Boswell, 1887, ii. 298.)
Macpherson. ‘David [James] Macpherson, Esq.; who recently, through the sheer force of his style, brought down the greatest poet of all time.’ (Note to second edition.) This was ‘Ossian’ Macpherson, 1738–96, who, in 1773, built on his Erse epics with a prose translation of Homer, which earned him little but criticism. ‘Your skills, since your Homer, are not so impressive,’ Johnson states in the blunt letter he sent to him in 1775. (Birkbeck Hill’s Boswell, 1887, ii. 298.)
Our Townshend. See note to line 34.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ See note for line 34.
New Lauders and Bowers. See note to l. 80.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ See note for l. 80.
And Scotchman meet Scotchman, and cheat in the dark. Mitford compares Farquhar’s Love and a Bottle, 1699, Act iii—
And Scotchman meet Scotchman, and cheat in the dark. Mitford compares Farquhar’s Love and a Bottle, 1699, Act iii—
But gods meet gods and jostle in the dark.
But gods encounter gods and push each other around in the dark.
But Farquhar was quoting from Dryden and Lee’s Oedipus, 1679, Act iv (at end).
But Farquhar was quoting from Dryden and Lee’s Oedipus, 1679, Act iv (at end).
Here lies David Garrick. ‘The sum of all that can be said for and against Mr. Garrick, some people think, may be found in these lines of Goldsmith,’ writes Davies in his Life of Garrick, 2nd ed., 1780, ii. 159. Posterity has been less hesitating in its verdict. ‘The lines on Garrick,’ says Forster, Life of Goldsmith, 1871, ii. 409, ‘are quite perfect writing. Without anger, the satire is finished, keen, and uncompromising; the wit is adorned by most discriminating praise; and the truth is only the more unsparing for its exquisite good manners and good taste.’
Here lies David Garrick. ‘The total of everything positive and negative that can be said about Mr. Garrick, some believe, is captured in these lines by Goldsmith,’ writes Davies in his Life of Garrick, 2nd ed., 1780, ii. 159. Future generations have been more certain in their judgment. ‘The lines about Garrick,’ says Forster, Life of Goldsmith, 1871, ii. 409, ‘are beautifully crafted writing. Without any bitterness, the satire is complete, sharp, and direct; the humor is complemented by very discerning praise; and the truth is all the more unyielding for its remarkable politeness and taste.’
Ye Kenricks. See note to line 86.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ See note for line 86.
ye Kellys. Hugh Kelly (1739–1777), an Irishman, the author of False Delicacy, 1768; A Word to the Wise, 1770; The School for Wives, 1774, and other sentimental dramas, is here referred to. His first play, which is described in Garrick’s prologue as a ‘Sermon,’ ‘preach’d in Acts,’ was produced at Drury Lane just six days before Goldsmith’s comedy of The Good Natur’d Man appeared at Covent Garden, and obtained a success which it ill deserved. False Delicacy—said Johnson truly (Birkbeck Hill’s Boswell, 1887, ii. 48)—‘was totally void of character,’—a crushing accusation to make against a drama. But Garrick, for his private ends, had taken up Kelly as a rival to Goldsmith; and the comédie sérieuse or larmoyante of La Chaussée, Sedaine, and Diderot had already found votaries in England. False Delicacy, weak, washy, and invertebrate as it was, completed the transformation of ‘genteel’ into ‘sentimental’ comedy, and establishing that genre for the next few years, effectually retarded the wholesome reaction towards humour and character which Goldsmith had tried to promote by The Good Natur’d Man. (See note to l. 66.)
ye Kellys. Hugh Kelly (1739–1777), an Irishman and the author of False Delicacy (1768), A Word to the Wise (1770), The School for Wives (1774), and other sentimental dramas, is being referred to here. His first play, which Garrick described in his prologue as a ‘Sermon’ ‘preach’d in Acts,’ was produced at Drury Lane just six days before Goldsmith’s comedy The Good Natur’d Man debuted at Covent Garden, and it achieved a success that it did not deserve. False Delicacy—as Johnson accurately stated (Birkbeck Hill’s Boswell, 1887, ii. 48)—‘was totally void of character,’ which is a harsh critique to level at a play. However, Garrick, for his own reasons, promoted Kelly as a competitor to Goldsmith, and the comédie sérieuse or larmoyante style of La Chaussée, Sedaine, and Diderot had already gained followers in England. Despite being weak, bland, and lifeless, False Delicacy solidified the shift from ‘genteel’ to ‘sentimental’ comedy and established that genre for the next few years, effectively hindering the healthy movement towards humor and character that Goldsmith sought to encourage with The Good Natur’d Man. (See note to l. 66.)
Woodfalls. ‘William Woodfall’—says Bolton Corney—‘successively editor of The London Packet and The Morning Chronicle, was matchless as a reporter of speeches, and an able theatrical critic. He made lofty pretensions to editorial impartiality—but the actor [i.e. Garrick] was not always satisfied.’ He died in 1803. He must not be confounded with Henry Sampson Woodfall, the editor of Junius’s Letters. (See note to l. 162.)
Woodfalls. ‘William Woodfall’—says Bolton Corney—‘was the editor of The London Packet and The Morning Chronicle, and he was unmatched as a reporter of speeches and a skilled theater critic. He claimed to be completely neutral in his editorials—but the actor [i.e. Garrick] was not always pleased.’ He died in 1803. He should not be confused with Henry Sampson Woodfall, the editor of Junius’s Letters. (See note to l. 162.)
To act as an angel. There is a sub-ironic touch in this phrase which should not be overlooked. Cf. l. 102.
To act as an angel. There’s a subtly ironic tone in this phrase that shouldn’t be ignored. See line 102.
Here Hickey reclines. See note to l. 15. In Cumberland’s Poetical Epistle to Dr. Goldsmith; or Supplement to his Retaliation (Gentleman’s Magazine, Aug. 1778, p. 384) Hickey’s genial qualities are thus referred to:—
Here Hickey reclines. See note to l. 15. In Cumberland’s Poetical Epistle to Dr. Goldsmith; or Supplement to his Retaliation (Gentleman’s Magazine, Aug. 1778, p. 384) Hickey’s friendly qualities are mentioned like this:—
Give RIDGE and HICKY, generous souls!
Of WHISKEY PUNCH convivial bowls.
Give RIDGE and HICKY, generous souls!
Of WHISKEY PUNCH friendly bowls.
a special attorney. A special attorney was merely an attorney who practised in one court only. The species is now said to be extinct.
a special attorney. A special attorney was just an attorney who worked in one specific court. This type is now considered extinct.
burn ye. The annotator of the second edition, apologizing for this ‘forced’ rhyme to ‘attorney,’ informs the English reader that the phrase of ‘burn ye’ is ‘a familiar method of salutation in Ireland amongst the lower classes of the people.’
burn ye. The annotator of the second edition, apologizing for this 'forced' rhyme to 'attorney,' informs the English reader that the phrase 'burn ye' is 'a common way of greeting in Ireland among the lower classes.'
Here Reynolds is laid. This shares the palm with the admirable epitaphs on Garrick and Burke. But Goldsmith loved Reynolds, and there are no satiric strokes in the picture. If we are to believe Malone (Reynolds’s Works, second edition, 1801, i. xc), ‘these were the last lines the author wrote.’
Here Reynolds is laid. This stands alongside the impressive epitaphs for Garrick and Burke. But Goldsmith had a genuine affection for Reynolds, and there are no mocking elements in the portrait. If we trust Malone (Reynolds’s Works, second edition, 1801, i. xc), ‘these were the final lines the author wrote.’
bland. Malone (ut supra, lxxxix) notes this word as ‘eminently happy, and characteristick of his [Reynolds’s] easy and placid manners.’ Boswell (Dedication of Life of Johnson) refers to his ‘equal and placid temper.’ Cf. also Dean Barnard’s verses (Northcote’s Life of Reynolds, 2nd ed., 1819, i. 220), and Mrs. Piozzi’s lines in her Autobiography, 2nd ed., 1861, ii. 175–6.
bland. Malone (ut supra, lxxxix) describes this word as "extremely happy, and characteristic of his [Reynolds’s] calm and serene demeanor." Boswell (Dedication of Life of Johnson) mentions his "steady and calm temperament." See also Dean Barnard's poems (Northcote's Life of Reynolds, 2nd ed., 1819, i. 220), and Mrs. Piozzi's verses in her Autobiography, 2nd ed., 1861, ii. 175–6.
He shifted his trumpet. While studying Raphael in the Vatican in 1751, Reynolds caught so severe a cold ‘as to occasion a deafness which obliged him to use an ear-trumpet for the remainder of his life.’ (Taylor and Leslie’s Reynolds, 1865, i. 50.) This instrument figures in a portrait of himself which he painted for Thrale about 1775. See also Zoffany’s picture of the ‘Academicians gathered about the model in the Life School at Somerset House,’ 1772, where he is shown employing it to catch the conversation of Wilton and Chambers.
He shifted his trumpet. While studying Raphael in the Vatican in 1751, Reynolds caught a severe cold that led to a deafness, forcing him to use an ear trumpet for the rest of his life. (Taylor and Leslie’s Reynolds, 1865, i. 50.) This device appears in a self-portrait he painted for Thrale around 1775. Also, check out Zoffany’s painting of the ‘Academicians gathered around the model in the Life School at Somerset House,’ 1772, where he's depicted using it to follow the conversation between Wilton and Chambers.
and only took snuff. Sir Joshua was a great snuff-taker. His snuff-box, described in the Catalogue as the one ‘immortalized in Goldsmith’s Retaliation,’ was exhibited, with his spectacles and other personal relics, at the Grosvenor Gallery in 1883–4. In the early editions this epitaph breaks off abruptly at the word ‘snuff.’ But Malone says that half a line more had been written. Prior gives this half line as ‘By flattery unspoiled—,’ and affirms that among several erasures in the manuscript sketch devoted to Reynolds it ‘remained unaltered.’ (Life, 1837, ii. 499.) See notes to ll. 53, 56, and 91 of The Haunch of Venison.
and only took snuff. Sir Joshua was a big snuff user. His snuff box, mentioned in the Catalogue as the one ‘made famous in Goldsmith’s Retaliation,’ was displayed, along with his glasses and other personal items, at the Grosvenor Gallery in 1883–4. In the early editions, this epitaph stops suddenly at the word ‘snuff.’ However, Malone claims that a half line more was actually written. Prior presents this half line as ‘By flattery unspoiled—,’ and asserts that among several scribbles in the manuscript sketch dedicated to Reynolds it ‘remained unchanged.’ (Life, 1837, ii. 499.) See notes to ll. 53, 56, and 91 of The Haunch of Venison.
Here Whitefoord reclines. The circumstances which led to the insertion of these lines in the fifth edition are detailed in the prefatory words of the publisher given at p. 92. There is more than a suspicion that Whitefoord wrote them himself; but they have too long been accepted as an appendage to the poem to be now displaced. Caleb Whitefoord (born 1734) was a Scotchman, a wine-merchant, and an art connoisseur, to whom J. T. Smith, in his Life of Nollekens, 1828, i. 333–41, devotes several pages. He was one of the party at the St. James’s Coffee-house. He died in 1810. There is a caricature of him in ‘Connoisseurs inspecting a Collection of George Morland,’ November, 16, 1807; and Wilkie’s Letter of Introduction, 1814, was a reminiscence of a visit which, when he first came to London, he paid to Whitefoord. He was also painted by Reynolds and Stuart. Hewins’s Whitefoord Papers, 1898, throw no light upon the story of the epitaph.
Here Whitefoord reclines. The reasons for including these lines in the fifth edition are explained in the publisher's introductory note found on page 92. There's a strong belief that Whitefoord wrote them himself; however, they've been part of the poem for so long that it's too late to remove them now. Caleb Whitefoord (born 1734) was a Scotsman, a wine merchant, and an art enthusiast, who J. T. Smith covers in detail in his Life of Nollekens, 1828, i. 333–41. He was among those who gathered at St. James’s Coffee-house. He passed away in 1810. There's a caricature of him in ‘Connoisseurs inspecting a Collection of George Morland,’ dated November 16, 1807, and Wilkie’s Letter of Introduction, 1814, recalls a visit he made to Whitefoord when he first arrived in London. He was also painted by Reynolds and Stuart. Hewins’s Whitefoord Papers, 1898, do not clarify the story behind the epitaph.
a grave man. Cf. Romeo and Juliet, Act iii, Sc. 1:—‘Ask for me to-morrow, and you shall find me a grave man.’ This Shakespearean recollection is a little like Goldsmith’s way. (See note to The Haunch of Venison, l. 120.)
a grave man. Cf. Romeo and Juliet, Act iii, Sc. 1:—‘Ask for me tomorrow, and you will find me a grave man.’ This reference to Shakespeare is somewhat reminiscent of Goldsmith’s style. (See note to The Haunch of Venison, l. 120.)
and rejoic’d in a pun. ‘Mr. W. is so notorious a punster, that Doctor Goldsmith used to say, it was impossible to keep him company, without being infected with the itch of punning.’ (Note to fifth edition.)
and rejoic’d in a pun. "Mr. W. is such a notorious punster that Doctor Goldsmith used to say it was impossible to spend time with him without catching the 'itch of punning.'" (Note to fifth edition.)
‘if the table he set on a roar.’ Cf. Hamlet, Act v, Sc. I.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ See *Hamlet*, Act 5, Scene 1.
Woodfall, i.e. Henry Sampson Woodfall, printer of The Public Advertiser. He died in 1805. (See note to l. 115.)
Woodfall, i.e. Henry Sampson Woodfall, printer of The Public Advertiser. He passed away in 1805. (See note to l. 115.)
Cross-Readings, Ship-News, and Mistakes of the Press. Over the nom de guerre of ‘Papyrius Cursor,’ a real Roman name, but as happy in its applicability as Thackeray’s ‘Manlius Pennialinus,’ Whitefoord contributed many specimens of this mechanic wit to The Public Advertiser. The ‘Cross Readings’ were obtained by taking two or three columns of a newspaper horizontally and ‘onwards’ instead of ‘vertically’ and downwards, thus:—
Cross-Readings, Ship-News, and Mistakes of the Press. Under the alias ‘Papyrius Cursor,’ a real Roman name, but just as fitting as Thackeray’s ‘Manlius Pennialinus,’ Whitefoord provided many examples of this clever humor to The Public Advertiser. The ‘Cross Readings’ were created by taking two or three columns of a newspaper horizontally and ‘onwards’ instead of ‘vertically’ and downwards, like this:—
Colds caught at this season are
The Companion to the Playhouse.
Colds caught at this time are
The Companion to the Playhouse.
or
or
To be sold to the best Bidder,
My seat in Parliament being vacated.
To be sold to the highest bidder,
My seat in Parliament is now vacant.
A more elaborate example is
A more detailed example is
On Tuesday an address was presented;
it unhappily missed fire and the villain made off,
when the honour of knighthood was conferred on him
to the great joy of that noble family
On Tuesday, a speech was given;
unfortunately, it fell flat and the criminal got away,
just as the title of knight was awarded to him
to the great joy of that distinguished family.
Goldsmith was hugely delighted with Whitefoord’s ‘lucky inventions’ when they first became popular in 1766. ‘He declared, in the heat of his admiration of them, it would have given him more pleasure to have been the author of them than of all the works he had ever published of his own’ (Northcote’s Life of Reynolds, 2nd ed., 1819, i. 217). What is perhaps more remarkable is, that Johnson spoke of Whitefoord’s performances as ‘ingenious and diverting’ (Birkbeck Hill’s Boswell, 1887, iv. 322); and Horace Walpole laughed over them till he cried (Letter to Montagu, December 12, 1766). To use Voltaire’s witticism, he is bien heureux who can laugh now. It may be added that Whitefoord did not, as he claimed, originate the ‘Cross Readings.’ They had been anticipated in No. 49 of Harrison’s spurious Tatler, vol. v [1720].
Goldsmith was incredibly thrilled with Whitefoord’s 'lucky inventions' when they first gained popularity in 1766. He said, in his excitement, it would have brought him more joy to have created them than any of his own published works (Northcote’s Life of Reynolds, 2nd ed., 1819, i. 217). What’s even more surprising is that Johnson referred to Whitefoord’s creations as ‘ingenious and entertaining’ (Birkbeck Hill’s Boswell, 1887, iv. 322); and Horace Walpole laughed about them until he cried (Letter to Montagu, December 12, 1766). To quote Voltaire’s witty remark, he is bien heureux who can laugh now. It should also be noted that Whitefoord did not, as he claimed, come up with the 'Cross Readings.' They had already appeared in No. 49 of Harrison’s questionable Tatler, vol. v [1720].
The fashion of the ‘Ship-News’ was in this wise: ‘August 25 [1765]. We hear that his Majestys Ship Newcastle will soon have a new figurehead, the old one being almost worn out.’ The ‘Mistakes of the Press’ explain themselves. (See also Smith’s Life of Nollekens, 1828, i. 336–7; Debrett’s New Foundling Hospital for Wit, 1784, vol. ii, and Gentleman’s Magazine, 1810, p. 300.)
The style of the ‘Ship-News’ was like this: ‘August 25 [1765]. We hear that His Majesty's Ship Newcastle will soon have a new figurehead, as the old one is almost worn out.’ The ‘Mistakes of the Press’ explain themselves. (See also Smith’s Life of Nollekens, 1828, i. 336–7; Debrett’s New Foundling Hospital for Wit, 1784, vol. ii, and Gentleman’s Magazine, 1810, p. 300.)
That a Scot may have humour, I had almost said wit. Goldsmith,—if he wrote these verses,—must have forgotten that he had already credited Whitefoord with ‘wit’ in l. 153.
That a Scot may have humour, I had almost said wit. Goldsmith—if he wrote these lines—must have forgotten that he had already acknowledged Whitefoord for his 'wit' in l. 153.
Thou best humour’d man with the worst humour’d muse. Cf. Rochester of Lord Buckhurst, afterwards Earl of Dorset:—
Thou best humour’d man with the worst humour’d muse. See Rochester of Lord Buckhurst, later Earl of Dorset:—
The best good man, with the worst-natur’d muse.
The best good person, with the most unpleasant muse.
Whitefoord’s contribution to the epitaphs on Goldsmith is said to have been unusually severe,—so severe that four only of its eight lines are quoted in the Whitefoord Papers, 1898, the rest being ‘unfit for publication’ (p. xxvii). He afterwards addressed a metrical apology to Sir Joshua, which is printed at pp. 217–8 of Northcote’s Life, 2nd ed., 1819. See also Forster’s Goldsmith, 1871, ii. 408–9.
Whitefoord's contribution to the epitaphs about Goldsmith is said to have been unusually harsh—so harsh that only four of its eight lines are quoted in the Whitefoord Papers, 1898, with the rest being deemed ‘unfit for publication’ (p. xxvii). He later wrote a poetic apology to Sir Joshua, which is printed on pp. 217–8 of Northcote’s Life, 2nd ed., 1819. See also Forster’s Goldsmith, 1871, ii. 408–9.
SONG FOR ‘SHE STOOPS TO CONQUER.’
Boswell, to whom we are indebted for the preservation of this lively song, sent it to The London Magazine for June, 1774 (vol. xliii, p. 295), with the following:—
Boswell, to whom we owe thanks for keeping this lively song alive, sent it to The London Magazine for June 1774 (vol. xliii, p. 295), along with the following:—
‘To the Editor of The London Magazine.
‘To the Editor of The London Magazine.
SIR,—I send you a small production of the late Dr. Goldsmith, which has never been published, and which might perhaps have been totally lost had I not secured it. He intended it as a song in the character of Miss Hardcastle, in his admirable comedy, She stoops to conquer; but it was left out, as Mrs. Bulkley who played the part did not sing. He sung it himself in private companies very agreeably. The tune is a pretty Irish air, called The Humours of Balamagairy, to which, he told me, he found it very difficult to adapt words; but he has succeeded happily in these few lines. As I could sing the tune, and was fond of them, he was so good as to give me them about a year ago, just as I was leaving London, and bidding him adieu for that season, little apprehending that it was a last farewell. I preserve this little relick in his own handwriting with an affectionate care.
Sir,—I’m sending you a small work by the late Dr. Goldsmith that has never been published and might have been completely lost if I hadn’t saved it. He meant it to be a song for Miss Hardcastle in his wonderful comedy, She Stoops to Conquer; however, it was left out because Mrs. Bulkley, who played the role, didn’t sing. He performed it himself in private gatherings quite nicely. The tune is a lovely Irish melody called The Humours of Balamagairy, which he mentioned was very challenging to fit with words, but he managed to do so beautifully in these few lines. Since I could sing the tune and liked it, he kindly gave me the lyrics about a year ago as I was leaving London and saying goodbye to him for that season, not realizing it would be our last farewell. I keep this little relic in his own handwriting with great affection.
I am, Sir,
Your humble Servant,
JAMES BOSWELL.’
I'm your humble servant, JAMES BOSWELL.
When, seventeen years later, Boswell published his Life of Samuel Johnson, LL.D., he gave an account of his dining at General Oglethorpe’s in April, 1773, with Johnson and Goldsmith; and he says that the latter sang the Three Jolly Pigeons, and this song, to the ladies in the tea-room. Croker, in a note, adds that the younger Colman more appropriately employed the ‘essentially low comic’ air for Looney Mactwolter in the [Review; or the] Wags of Windsor, 1808 [i.e. in that character’s song beginning—‘Oh, whack! Cupid’s a mannikin’], and that Moore tried to bring it into good company in the ninth number of the Irish Melodies. But Croker did not admire the tune, and thought poorly of Goldsmith’s words. Yet they are certainly fresher than Colman’s or Moore’s:—
When, seventeen years later, Boswell published his Life of Samuel Johnson, LL.D., he recounted dining at General Oglethorpe’s in April 1773, alongside Johnson and Goldsmith. He mentioned that Goldsmith sang the Three Jolly Pigeons, which was performed for the ladies in the tea room. Croker noted that the younger Colman more fittingly used the 'essentially low comic' tune for Looney Mactwolter in the [Review; or the] Wags of Windsor, 1808 [specifically in that character’s song starting—‘Oh, whack! Cupid’s a mannikin’], and that Moore attempted to elevate it in the ninth number of the Irish Melodies. However, Croker didn’t think much of the melody and held a low opinion of Goldsmith’s lyrics. Nonetheless, they certainly feel fresher than Colman’s or Moore’s:—
Sing—sing—Music was given,
To brighten the gay, and kindle the loving;
Souls here, like planets in Heaven,
By harmony’s laws alone are kept moving, etc.
Sing—sing—Music was given,
To brighten the happy and ignite love;
Souls here, like planets in Heaven,
Are kept moving solely by the laws of harmony, etc.
TRANSLATION.
These lines, which appear at p. 312 of vol. V of the History of the Earth and Animated Nature, 1774, are freely translated from some Latin verses by Addison in No 412 of the Spectator, where they are introduced as follows:—‘Thus we see that every different Species of sensible Creatures has its different Notions of Beauty, and that each of them is most affected with the Beauties of its own kind. This is nowhere more remarkable than in Birds of the same Shape and Proportion, where we often see the Male determined in his Courtship by the single Grain or Tincture of a Feather, and never discovering any Charms but in the Colour of its own Species.’ Addison’s lines, of which Goldsmith translated the first fourteen only, are printed from his corrected MS. at p. 4 of Some Portions of Essays contributed to the Spectator by Mr. Joseph Addison [by the late J. Dykes Campbell], 1864.
These lines, which appear on p. 312 of vol. V of the History of the Earth and Animated Nature, 1774, are freely translated from some Latin verses by Addison in No. 412 of the Spectator, where they are introduced as follows:—‘Thus we see that every different species of sensible creatures has its unique ideas of beauty, and that each one is most captivated by the beauties of its own kind. This is especially evident in birds of the same shape and proportions, where we often see the male determined in his courtship by a single grain or tint of a feather, recognizing no charms other than the color of its own species.’ Addison’s lines, of which Goldsmith translated only the first fourteen, are printed from his corrected manuscript on p. 4 of Some Portions of Essays Contributed to the Spectator by Mr. Joseph Addison [by the late J. Dykes Campbell], 1864.
THE HAUNCH OF VENISON.
It is supposed that this poem was written early in 1771, although it was not printed until 1776, when it was published by G. Kearsly and J. Ridley under the title of The Haunch of Venison, a Poetical Epistle to the Lord Clare. By the late Dr. Goldsmith. With a Head of the Author, Drawn by Henry Bunbury, Esq; and Etched by [James] Bretherton. A second edition, the text of which is here followed, appeared in the same year ‘With considerable Additions and Corrections, Taken from the Author’s last Transcript.’ The Lord Clare to whom the verses are addressed was Robert Nugent, of Carlanstown, Westmeath, M.P. for St. Mawes in 1741–54. In 1766 he was created Viscount Clare; in 1776 Earl Nugent. In his youth he had himself been an easy if not very original versifier; and there are several of his performances in the second volume of Dodsley’s Collection of Poems by Several Hands, 4th ed., 1755. One of the Epistles, beginning ‘Clarinda, dearly lov’d, attend The Counsels of a faithful friend,’ seems to have betrayed Goldsmith into the blunder of confusing it, in the Poems for Young Ladies. 1767, p. 114, with Lyttelton’s better-known Advice to a Lady (‘The counsels of a friend, Belinda, hear’), also in Dodsley’s miscellany; while another piece, an Ode to William Pultney, Esq., contains a stanza so good that Gibbon worked it into his character of Brutus:—
It is believed that this poem was written in early 1771, although it wasn’t published until 1776, when G. Kearsly and J. Ridley released it under the title of The Haunch of Venison, a Poetical Epistle to the Lord Clare. By the late Dr. Goldsmith. With a Head of the Author, Drawn by Henry Bunbury, Esq; and Etched by [James] Bretherton. A second edition, which is the text followed here, was released the same year ‘With considerable Additions and Corrections, Taken from the Author’s last Transcript.’ The Lord Clare to whom the verses are addressed was Robert Nugent, from Carlanstown, Westmeath, M.P. for St. Mawes from 1741 to 1754. In 1766, he was made Viscount Clare; in 1776, Earl Nugent. In his youth, he had been an easy if not particularly original poet, with several of his works included in the second volume of Dodsley’s Collection of Poems by Several Hands, 4th ed., 1755. One of the Epistles, starting with ‘Clarinda, dearly lov’d, attend The Counsels of a faithful friend,’ seems to have led Goldsmith to mistakenly confuse it in the Poems for Young Ladies (1767, p. 114) with Lyttelton’s more famous Advice to a Lady (‘The counsels of a friend, Belinda, hear’), also found in Dodsley’s collection; while another piece, an Ode to William Pultney, Esq., includes a stanza so good that Gibbon worked it into his character of Brutus:—
What tho’ the good, the brave, the wise,
With adverse force undaunted rise,
To break th’ eternal doom!
Tho’ CATO liv’d, tho’ TULLY spoke,
Tho’ BRUTUS dealt the godlike stroke,
Yet perish’d fated ROME.
What if the good, the brave, the wise,
With opposing force stood strong,
To break the eternal doom?
Even though CATO lived, even though TULLY spoke,
Even though BRUTUS delivered the godlike blow,
Still, doomed ROME perished.
Detraction, however, has insinuated that Mallet, his step-son’s tutor, was Nugent’s penholder in this instance. ‘Mr. Nugent sure did not write his own Ode,’ says Gray to Walpole (Gray’s Works, by Gosse, 1884, ii. 220). Earl Nugent died in Dublin in October, 1788, and was buried at Gosfield in Essex, a property he had acquired with his second wife. A Memoir of him was written in 1898 by Mr. Claud Nugent. He is described by Cunningham as ‘a big, jovial, voluptuous Irishman, with a loud voice, a strong Irish accent, and a ready though coarse wit.’ According to Percy (Memoir, 1801, p. 66), he had been attracted to Goldsmith by the publication of The Traveller in 1764, and he mentioned him favourably to the Earl of Northumberland, then Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. A note in Forster’s Life, 1871, ii. 329–30, speaks of Goldsmith as a frequent visitor at Gosfield, and at Nugent’s house in Great George Street, Westminster, where he had often for playmate his host’s daughter, Mary, afterwards Marchioness of Buckingham.
Detraction, however, has suggested that Mallet, his stepson's tutor, was Nugent’s ghostwriter in this case. "Mr. Nugent definitely didn’t write his own Ode," Gray tells Walpole (Gray’s Works, by Gosse, 1884, ii. 220). Earl Nugent passed away in Dublin in October 1788 and was buried at Gosfield in Essex, a property he had acquired with his second wife. A Memoir of him was published in 1898 by Mr. Claud Nugent. Cunningham describes him as "a big, jovial, indulgent Irishman, with a loud voice, a strong Irish accent, and a quick but rough wit." Percy notes in his Memoir (1801, p. 66) that he became interested in Goldsmith after the release of The Traveller in 1764, and he spoke highly of him to the Earl of Northumberland, who was then the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. A note in Forster’s Life (1871, ii. 329–30) mentions Goldsmith as a regular visitor at Gosfield and at Nugent’s house on Great George Street, Westminster, where he often played with his host’s daughter, Mary, who later became the Marchioness of Buckingham.
Scott and others regarded The Haunch of Venison as autobiographical. To what extent this is the case, it is difficult to say. That it represents the actual thanks of the poet to Lord Clare for an actual present of venison, part of which he promptly transferred to Reynolds, is probably the fact. But, as the following notes show, it is also clear that Goldsmith borrowed, if not his entire fable, at least some of its details from Boileau’s third satire; and that, in certain of the lines, he had in memory Swift’s Grand Question Debated, the measure of which he adopts. This throws more than a doubt upon the truth of the whole. ‘His genius’ (as Hazlitt says) ‘was a mixture of originality and imitation’; and fact and fiction often mingle inseparably in his work. The author of the bailiff scene in the Good Natur’d Man was quite capable of inventing for the nonce the tragedy of the unbaked pasty, or of selecting from the Pilkingtons and Purdons of his acquaintance such appropriate guests for his Mile End Amphitryon as the writers of the Snarler and the Scourge. It may indeed even be doubted whether, if The Haunch of Venison had been absolute personal history, Goldsmith would ever have retailed it to his noble patron at Gosfield, although it may include enough of real experience to serve as the basis for a jeu d’esprit.
Scott and others saw The Haunch of Venison as autobiographical. It's hard to say how true that is. It likely reflects the poet's genuine thanks to Lord Clare for an actual gift of venison, some of which he quickly passed on to Reynolds. However, as the following notes indicate, Goldsmith clearly borrowed, if not his entire story, at least some details from Boileau’s third satire; and in certain lines, he seemed to recall Swift’s Grand Question Debated, the rhythm of which he adopted. This raises some doubts about the reliability of the whole work. ‘His genius’ (as Hazlitt puts it) ‘was a mix of originality and imitation’; fact and fiction often blend seamlessly in his writing. The creator of the bailiff scene in the Good Natur’d Man was certainly capable of fabricating, even if temporarily, the story of the unbaked pasty, or choosing from the Pilkingtons and Purdons he knew the most fitting guests for his Mile End gathering, like the writers of the Snarler and the Scourge. It could even be questioned whether, if The Haunch of Venison had been purely personal history, Goldsmith would have ever shared it with his noble patron at Gosfield, even though it may contain enough real experiences to serve as the basis for a jeu d’esprit.
The fat was so white, etc. The first version reads—‘The white was so white, and the red was so ruddy.’
The fat was so white, etc. The first version says—‘The white was so bright, and the red was so vivid.’
Though my stomach was sharp, etc. This couplet is not in the first version.
Though my stomach was sharp, etc. This couplet isn't in the first version.
One gammon of bacon. Prior compared a passage from Goldsmith’s Animated Nature, 1774, iii. 9, à propos of a similar practice in Germany, Poland, and Switzerland. ‘A piece of beef,’ he says, ‘hung up there, is considered as an elegant piece of furniture, which, though seldom touched, at least argues the possessor’s opulence and ease.’
One gammon of bacon. Prior compared a passage from Goldsmith’s Animated Nature, 1774, iii. 9, about a similar practice in Germany, Poland, and Switzerland. ‘A piece of beef,’ he says, ‘hung up there, is seen as a stylish piece of decoration, which, although rarely touched, at least indicates the owner's wealth and comfort.’
a bounce, i.e. a braggart falsehood. Steele, in No. 16 of The Lover, 1715, p. 110, says of a manifest piece of brag, ‘But this is supposed to be only a Bounce.’
a bounce, i.e. a bragging lie. Steele, in No. 16 of The Lover, 1715, p. 110, says about a clear act of boasting, ‘But this is thought to be just a Bounce.’
Mr. Byrne, spelled ‘Burn’ in the earlier editions, was a relative of Lord Clare.
Mr. Byrne, spelled ‘Burn’ in the earlier editions, was a relative of Lord Clare.
M—r—’s. MONROE’s in the first version. ‘Dorothy Monroe,’ says Bolton Corney, ‘whose various charms are celebrated in verse by Lord Townshend.’
M—r—’s. MONROE’s in the first version. ‘Dorothy Monroe,’ says Bolton Corney, ‘whose many charms are praised in poetry by Lord Townshend.’
There’s H—d, and C—y, and H—rth, and
H—ff. In the first version—
‘There’s
COLEY, and WILLIAMS, and HOWARD,
and HIFF.’—Hiff was Paul Hiffernan, M.B., 1719–77, a
Grub Street author and practitioner. Bolton Corney hazards some
conjectures as to the others; but Cunningham wisely passes them over.
There’s H—d, and C—y, and H—rth, and
H—ff. In the first version—
‘There’s
COLEY, and WILLIAMS, and HOWARD,
and HIFF.’—Hiff was Paul Hiffernan, M.B., 1719–77, a
Grub Street writer and practitioner. Bolton Corney makes some guesses about the others; but Cunningham wisely skips them.
H—gg—ns. Perhaps, suggests Bolton Corney, this was the Captain Higgins who assisted at Goldsmith’s absurd ‘fracas’ with Evans the bookseller, upon the occasion of Kenrick’s letter in The London Packet for March 24, 1773. Other accounts, however, state that his companion was Captain Horneck (Prior, Life, 1837, ii. 411–12). This couplet is not in the first version.
H—gg—ns. Maybe, Bolton Corney suggests, this was Captain Higgins who helped during Goldsmith’s ridiculous altercation with Evans the bookseller, regarding Kenrick’s letter in The London Packet on March 24, 1773. However, other sources say that his companion was Captain Horneck (Prior, Life, 1837, ii. 411–12). This couplet isn’t in the first version.
Such dainties to them, etc. The first version reads:—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ The initial version
Such dainties to them! It would look like a flirt,
Like sending ’em Ruffles when wanting a Shirt.
Such treats for them! It would seem like flirting,
Like sending them Ruffles when you want a Shirt.
Cunningham quotes a similar idea from T. Brown’s Laconics, Works, 1709, iv. 14. ‘To treat a poor wretch with a bottle of Burgundy, or fill his snuff-box, is like giving a pair of lace ruffles to a man that has never a shirt on his back.’ But Goldsmith, as was his wont, had already himself employed the same figure. ‘Honours to one in my situation,’ he says in a letter to his brother Maurice, in January, 1770, when speaking of his appointment as Professor of Ancient History to the Royal Academy, ‘are something like ruffles to a man that wants a shirt’ (Percy Memoir, 1801, 87–8). His source was probably, not Brown’s Laconics, but those French ‘ana’ he knew so well. According to M. J. J. Jusserand (English Essays from a French Pen, 1895, pp. 160–1), the originator of this conceit was M. Samuel de Sorbieres, the traveller in England who was assailed by Bishop Sprat. Considering himself inadequately rewarded by his patrons, Mazarin, Louis XIV, and Pope Clement IX, he said bitterly—‘They give lace cuffs to a man without a shirt’; a ‘consolatory witticism’ which he afterwards remodelled into, ‘I wish they would send me bread for the butter they kindly provided me with.’ In this form it appears in the Preface to the Sorberiana, Toulouse, 1691.
Cunningham references a similar idea from T. Brown’s Laconics, Works, 1709, iv. 14. ‘Giving a poor person a bottle of Burgundy or filling his snuff-box is like giving lace ruffles to a man without a shirt.’ But Goldsmith, as was his habit, had already used the same example himself. ‘Honors to someone in my position,’ he writes in a letter to his brother Maurice in January 1770, discussing his appointment as Professor of Ancient History at the Royal Academy, ‘are like ruffles for a man who needs a shirt’ (Percy Memoir, 1801, 87–8). His source was likely not Brown’s Laconics, but rather the French ‘ana’ he was familiar with. According to M. J. J. Jusserand (English Essays from a French Pen, 1895, pp. 160–1), the originator of this idea was M. Samuel de Sorbieres, a traveler in England who was criticized by Bishop Sprat. Feeling underappreciated by his patrons, Mazarin, Louis XIV, and Pope Clement IX, he bitterly remarked—‘They give lace cuffs to a man without a shirt’; a ‘consolatory witticism’ that he later changed to, ‘I wish they would send me bread for the butter they kindly provided me with.’ This version appears in the Preface to the Sorberiana, Toulouse, 1691.
a flirt is a jibe or jeer. ‘He would sometimes . . . cast out a jesting flirt at me.’ (Morley’s History of Thomas Ellwood, 1895, p. 104.) Swift also uses the word.
a flirt is a mocking remark or taunt. ‘He would sometimes . . . throw a joking flirt at me.’ (Morley’s History of Thomas Ellwood, 1895, p. 104.) Swift also uses the word.
An under-bred, fine-spoken fellow, etc. The first version reads—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ The initial version says—
A fine-spoken Custom-house Officer he,
Who smil’d as he gaz’d on the Ven’son and me.
A well-spoken customs officer he,
Who smiled as he looked at the venison and me.
but I hate ostentation. Cf. Beau Tibbs:—‘She was bred, but that’s between ourselves, under the inspection of the Countess of All-night.’ (Citizen of the World, 1762, i. 238.)
but I hate ostentation. See Beau Tibbs:—‘She was raised, but that’s just between us, under the watch of the Countess of All-night.’ (Citizen of the World, 1762, i. 238.)
We’ll have Johnson, and Burke. Cf. Boileau, Sat. iii. ll. 25–6, which Goldsmith had in mind:—
We’ll have Johnson, and Burke. Cf. Boileau, Sat. iii. ll. 25–6, which Goldsmith was referencing:—
Molière avec Tartufe y doit jouer son rôle,
Et Lambert, qui plus est, m’a donné sa parole.
Molière has to play his role with Tartuffe,
And Lambert, what's more, has given me his word.
What say you—a pasty? It shall, and it must. The first version reads—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ The initial version states—
I’ll take no denial—you shall, and you must.
I won't take no for an answer—you will, and you have to.
Mr. J. H. Lobban, Goldsmith, Select Poems, 1900, notes a hitherto undetected similarity between this and the ‘It must, and it shall be a barrack, my life’ of Swift’s Grand Question Debated. See also ll. 56 and 91.
Mr. J. H. Lobban, Goldsmith, Select Poems, 1900, points out a previously unnoticed similarity between this and the line ‘It must, and it shall be a barrack, my life’ from Swift’s Grand Question Debated. Also refer to lines 56 and 91.
No stirring, I beg—my dear friend—my dear friend. In the first edition—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ In the first version—
No words, my dear GOLDSMITH! my very good Friend!
No words, my dear GOLDSMITH! my very good friend!
Mr. Lobban compares:—
Mr. Lobban compares:—
‘Good morrow, good captain.’ ‘I’ll wait on you down,’—
‘You shan’t stir a foot.’ ‘You’ll think me a clown.’
‘Good morning, good captain.’ ‘I’ll wait for you downstairs,’—
‘You won’t move a step.’ ‘You’ll think I’m a fool.’
‘And nobody with me at sea but myself.’ This is almost a textual quotation from one of the letters of Henry Frederick, Duke of Cumberland, to Lady Grosvenor, a correspondence which in 1770 gave great delight to contemporary caricaturists and scandal-mongers. Other poets besides Goldsmith seem to have been attracted by this particular lapse of his illiterate Royal Highness, since it is woven into a ballad printed in The Public Advertiser for August 2 in the above year:—
‘And nobody with me at sea but myself.’ This is almost a direct quote from one of the letters of Henry Frederick, Duke of Cumberland, to Lady Grosvenor, a correspondence that in 1770 brought much joy to contemporary caricaturists and gossipers. Other poets besides Goldsmith appear to have been drawn to this specific mistake of his uneducated Royal Highness, as it is included in a ballad published in The Public Advertiser on August 2 of that year:—
The Miser who wakes in a Fright for his Pelf,
And finds no one by him except his own Self, etc.
The miser who wakes up in a panic over his money,
And finds no one with him except himself, etc.
When come to the place, etc. Cf. Boileau, ut supra, ll. 31–4:—
When come to the place, etc. See Boileau, as mentioned above, ll. 31–4:—
A peine étais-je entré, que ravi de me voir,
Mon homme, en m’embrassant, m’est venu recevoir;
Et montrant à mes yeux une allégresse entière,
Nous n’avons, m’a-t-il dit, ni Lambert ni Molière.
A little after I entered, excited to see me,
My man, embracing me, came to greet me;
And showing me complete joy,
He said, we have neither Lambert nor Molière.
Lambert the musician, it may be added, had the special reputation of accepting engagements which he never kept.
Lambert the musician was known for taking gigs that he never showed up for.
and t’other with Thrale. Henry Thrale, the Southwark brewer, and the husband of Mrs. Thrale, afterwards Mrs. Piozzi. Johnson first made his acquaintance in 1765. Strahan complained to Boswell that, by this connexion, Johnson ‘was in a great measure absorbed from the society of his old friends.’ (Birkbeck Hill’s Boswell, 1887, iii. 225.) Line 72 in the first edition reads—
and t’other with Thrale. Henry Thrale, the Southwark brewer and husband of Mrs. Thrale, who later became Mrs. Piozzi. Johnson first met him in 1765. Strahan told Boswell that because of this connection, Johnson was mostly cut off from his old friends. (Birkbeck Hill’s Boswell, 1887, iii. 225.) Line 72 in the first edition reads—
The one at the House, and the other with THRALE.
The one at the House and the other with THRALE.
They both of them merry and authors like you. ‘They’ should apparently be ‘they’re.’ The first version reads—
They both of them merry and authors like you. ‘They’ should clearly be ‘they’re.’ The first version reads—
Who dabble and write in the Papers—like you.
Who mess around and write in the papers—like you.
Some think he writes Cinna—he owns to Panurge. ‘Panurge’ and ‘Cinna’ are signatures which were frequently to be found at the foot of letters addressed to the Public Advertiser in 1770–1 in support of Lord Sandwich and the Government. They are said to have been written by Dr. W. Scott, Vicar of Simonburn, Northumberland, and chaplain of Greenwich Hospital, both of which preferments had been given him by Sandwich. In 1765 he had attacked Lord Bute and his policy over the signature of ‘Anti-Sejanus.’ ‘Sandwich and his parson Anti-Sejanus [are] hooted off the stage’—writes Walpole to Mann, March 21, 1766. According to Prior, it was Scott who visited Goldsmith in his Temple chambers, and invited him to ‘draw a venal quill’ for Lord North’s administration. Goldsmith’s noble answer, as reported by his reverend friend, was—‘I can earn as much as will supply my wants without writing for any party; the assistance therefore you offer is unnecessary to me.’ (Life, 1837, ii. 278.) There is a caricature portrait of Scott at p. 141 of The London Museum for February, 1771, entitled ‘Twitcher’s Advocate,’ ‘Jemmy Twitcher’ being the nickname of Lord Sandwich.
Some think he writes Cinna—he owns to Panurge. 'Panurge' and 'Cinna' were names that often appeared at the bottom of letters sent to the Public Advertiser in 1770–1 supporting Lord Sandwich and the Government. They are believed to have been written by Dr. W. Scott, Vicar of Simonburn in Northumberland and chaplain of Greenwich Hospital, both positions having been given to him by Sandwich. In 1765, he criticized Lord Bute and his policies under the name 'Anti-Sejanus.' 'Sandwich and his parson Anti-Sejanus [are] hooted off the stage'—Walpole wrote to Mann on March 21, 1766. According to Prior, it was Scott who visited Goldsmith in his Temple chambers and asked him to 'draw a venal quill' for Lord North’s administration. Goldsmith’s honorable response, as reported by his reverend friend, was—'I can earn as much as will supply my wants without writing for any party; the assistance therefore you offer is unnecessary to me.' (Life, 1837, ii. 278.) There’s a caricature portrait of Scott on page 141 of The London Museum for February 1771, titled 'Twitcher’s Advocate,' with 'Jemmy Twitcher' being the nickname for Lord Sandwich.
Swinging, great, huge. ‘Bishop Lowth has just finished the Dramas, and sent me word, that although I have paid him the most swinging compliment he ever received, he likes the whole book more than he can say.’ (Memoirs of Hannah More, 1834, i. 236.)
Swinging, great, huge. ‘Bishop Lowth just finished the Dramas and let me know that even though I gave him the biggest compliment he’s ever gotten, he likes the entire book more than he can express.’ (Memoirs of Hannah More, 1834, i. 236.)
pasty. The first version has Ven’son.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ The first version has Ven’son.
So there I sat, etc. This couplet is not in the first version.
So there I sat, etc. This couplet isn't in the first version.
And, ‘Madam,’ quoth he. Mr. Lobban again quotes Swift’s Grand Question Debated:—
And, ‘Madam,’ quoth he. Mr. Lobban again quotes Swift’s Grand Question Debated:—
And ‘Madam,’ says he, ‘if such dinners you give
You’ll ne’er want for parsons as long as you live.’
And "Madam," he says, "if you keep hosting dinners like this,
You’ll never be short of priests as long as you live."
These slight resemblances, coupled with the more obvious likeness of the ‘Raphaels, Correggios, and stuff’ of Retaliation (ll. 145–6) to the Noueds and Bluturks and Omurs and stuff’ (also pointed out by Mr. Lobban) are interesting, because they show plainly that Goldsmith remembered the works of Swift far better than The New Bath Guide, which has sometimes been supposed to have set the tune to the Haunch and Retaliation.
These slight similarities, along with the more obvious resemblance of the ‘Raphaels, Correggios, and stuff’ of Retaliation (ll. 145–6) to the Noueds and Bluturks and Omurs and stuff” (also noted by Mr. Lobban), are interesting because they clearly show that Goldsmith remembered Swift’s works much better than The New Bath Guide, which has sometimes been thought to have inspired the tunes of Haunch and Retaliation.
‘may this bit be my poison.’ The gentleman in She Stoops to Conquer, Act i, who is ‘obligated to dance a bear.’ Uses the same asseveration. Cf. also Squire Thornhill’s somewhat similar formula in chap. vii of The Vicar of Wakefield, 1766, i. 59.
‘may this bit be my poison.’ The man in She Stoops to Conquer, Act I, who is ‘forced to dance a bear,’ uses the same declaration. See also Squire Thornhill’s somewhat similar statement in chapter VII of The Vicar of Wakefield, 1766, i. 59.
‘The tripe,’ quoth the Jew, etc. The first version reads—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ The initial version reads—
‘Your Tripe!’ quoth the Jew, ‘if the truth I may speak,
I could eat of this Tripe seven days in the week.’
‘Your Tripe!’ said the Jew, ‘if I may speak honestly,
I could eat this Tripe seven days a week.’
Re-echoed, i.e. ‘returned’ in the first edition.
Re-echoed, meaning 'returned' in the first edition.
thot. This, probably by a printer’s error, is altered to ‘that’ in the second version. But the first reading is the more in keeping, besides being a better rhyme.
thot. This, likely due to a printer’s mistake, is changed to ‘that’ in the second version. However, the first reading fits better and is also a better rhyme.
Wak’d Priam. Cf. 2 Henry IV, Act I, Sc. 1:—
Wak’d Priam. Cf. 2 Henry IV, Act I, Sc. 1:—
Even such a man, so faint, so spiritless,
So dull, so dead in look, so woe-begone,
Drew Priam’s curtain in the dead of night.
And would have told him half his Troy was burnt.
Even a man like that, so weak, so lifeless,
So dull, so dead in the eyes, so miserable,
Drew Priam’s curtain in the middle of the night.
And would have told him that half of Troy was in flames.
sicken’d over by learning. Cf. Hamlet, Act iii, Sc. 1:
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ See Hamlet, Act 3, Scene 1:
And thus the native hue of resolution
Is sicklied o’er with the pale cast of thought.
And so the natural color of determination
Is washed out by the dullness of overthinking.
Notwithstanding the condemnation of Shakespeare in the Present State of Polite Learning, and elsewhere, Goldsmith frequently weaves Shakespearean recollections into his work. Cf. She Stoops to Conquer, 1773, Act i, p. 13, ‘We wanted no ghost to tell us that’ (Hamlet, Act i, Sc. 5); and Act i, p. 9, where he uses Falstaff’s words (1 Henry IV, Act v, Sc. 1):—
Notwithstanding the criticism of Shakespeare in the Present State of Polite Learning and other works, Goldsmith often incorporates references to Shakespeare in his writing. See She Stoops to Conquer, 1773, Act i, p. 13, ‘We didn’t need a ghost to tell us that’ (Hamlet, Act i, Sc. 5); and Act i, p. 9, where he uses Falstaff’s words (1 Henry IV, Act v, Sc. 1):—
Would it were bed-time and all were well.
Would it were bedtime and everything was okay.
as very well known. The first version has, ‘’tis very well known.’
as very well known. The first version says, "it's very well known."
EPITAPH ON THOMAS PARNELL.
This epitaph, apparently never used, was published with The Haunch of Venison, 1776; and is supposed to have been written about 1770. In that year Goldsmith wrote a Life of Thomas Parnell, D.D., to accompany an edition of his poems, printed for Davies of Russell Street. Parnell was born in 1679, and died at Chester in 1718, on his way to Ireland. He was buried at Trinity Church in that town, on the 24th of October. Goldsmith says that his father and uncle both knew Parnell (Life of Parnell, 1770, p. v), and that he received assistance from the poet’s nephew, Sir John Parnell, the singing gentleman who figures in Hogarth’s Election Entertainment. Why Goldsmith should write an epitaph upon a man who died ten years before his own birth, is not easy to explain. But Johnson also wrote a Latin one, which he gave to Boswell. (Birkbeck Hill’s Life, 1887, iv. 54.)
This epitaph, seemingly never used, was published with The Haunch of Venison, 1776; and is believed to have been written around 1770. In that year, Goldsmith wrote a Life of Thomas Parnell, D.D. to go along with an edition of his poems, printed for Davies of Russell Street. Parnell was born in 1679 and died in Chester in 1718, while traveling to Ireland. He was buried at Trinity Church in that town on October 24th. Goldsmith mentions that his father and uncle both knew Parnell (Life of Parnell, 1770, p. v) and that he got help from the poet’s nephew, Sir John Parnell, the singer featured in Hogarth’s Election Entertainment. It’s not easy to understand why Goldsmith would write an epitaph for someone who died ten years before he was born. However, Johnson also wrote a Latin one, which he shared with Boswell. (Birkbeck Hill’s Life, 1887, iv. 54.)
gentle Parnell’s name. Mitford compares Pope on Parnell [Epistle to Harley, l. iv]:—
gentle Parnell’s name. Mitford compares Pope on Parnell [Epistle to Harley, l. iv]:—
With softest manners, gentlest Arts adorn’d.
With the gentlest manners, the softest skills are enhanced.
Pope published Parnell’s Poems in 1722, and his sending them to Harley, Earl of Oxford, after the latter’s disgrace and retirement, was the occasion of the foregoing epistle, from which the following lines respecting Parnell may also be cited:—
Pope published Parnell’s Poems in 1722, and his sending them to Harley, Earl of Oxford, after Harley’s downfall and retirement, led to the previous letter, from which the following lines about Parnell can also be quoted:—
For him, thou oft hast bid the World attend,
Fond to forget the statesman in the friend;
For SWIFT and him despis’d the farce of state,
The sober follies of the wise and great;
Dext’rous the craving, fawning crowd to quit,
And pleas’d to ’scape from Flattery to Wit.
For him, you often asked the world to pay attention,
Eager to forget the politician in the friend;
For SWIFT and him mocked the farce of politics,
The serious foolishness of the wise and powerful;
Skillfully avoiding the craving, sycophantic crowd,
And glad to escape from Flattery to Wit.
his sweetly-moral lay. Cf. The Hermit, the Hymn to Contentment, the Night Piece on Death—which Goldsmith certainly recalled in his own City Night-Piece. Of the last-named Goldsmith says (Life of Parnell, 1770, p. xxxii), not without an obvious side-stroke at Gray’s too-popular Elegy, that it ‘deserves every praise, and I should suppose with very little amendment, might be made to surpass all those night pieces and church yard scenes that have since appeared.’ This is certainly (as Longfellow sings) to
his sweetly-moral lay. Cf. The Hermit, the Hymn to Contentment, the Night Piece on Death—which Goldsmith definitely recalled in his own City Night-Piece. Regarding the last one, Goldsmith mentions (Life of Parnell, 1770, p. xxxii), with a clear jab at Gray's overly popular Elegy, that it ‘deserves every praise, and I would guess with very few changes, could surpass all those night pieces and cemetery scenes that have come out since.’ This is certainly (as Longfellow sings) to
rustling hear in every breeze
The laurels of Miltiades.
rustling hear in every breeze
The laurels of Miltiades.
Of Parnell, Hume wrote (Essays, 1770, i. 244) that ‘after the fiftieth reading; [he] is as fresh as at the first.’ But Gray (speaking—it should be explained—of a dubious volume of his posthumous works) said: ‘Parnell is the dung-hill of Irish Grub Street’ (Gosse’s Gray’s Works, 1884, ii. 372). Meanwhile, it is his fate to-day to be mainly remembered by three words (not always attributed to him) in a couplet from what Johnson styled ‘perhaps the meanest’ of his performances, the Elegy— to an Old Beauty:—
Of Parnell, Hume wrote (Essays, 1770, i. 244) that ‘after the fiftieth reading; [he] is as fresh as at the first.’ But Gray (it should be noted that he was referring to a questionable collection of Parnell's posthumous works) said: ‘Parnell is the dung-hill of Irish Grub Street’ (Gosse’s Gray’s Works, 1884, ii. 372). Today, he is mainly remembered for three words (not always credited to him) in a couplet from what Johnson called ‘perhaps the meanest’ of his works, the Elegy— to an Old Beauty:—
And all that’s madly wild, or oddly gay,
We call it only pretty Fanny’s way.
And everything that's crazily wild or strangely cheerful,
We just call it pretty Fanny’s way.
THE CLOWN’S REPLY.
This, though dated ‘Edinburgh 1753,’ was first printed in Poems and Plays, 1777, p. 79.
This, though marked ‘Edinburgh 1753,’ was first published in Poems and Plays, 1777, p. 79.
John Trott is a name for a clown or commonplace character. Miss Burney (Diary, 1904, i. 222) says of Dr. Delap:—‘As to his person and appearance, they are much in the John-trot style.’ Foote, Chesterfield, and Walpole use the phrase; Fielding Scotticizes it into ‘John Trott-Plaid, Esq.’; and Bolingbroke employs it as a pseudonym.
John Trott is a term for a clown or ordinary character. Miss Burney (Diary, 1904, i. 222) remarks about Dr. Delap:—‘As for his looks and demeanor, they resemble the John-trot style.’ Foote, Chesterfield, and Walpole use the expression; Fielding turns it into ‘John Trott-Plaid, Esq.’; and Bolingbroke uses it as a pen name.
I shall ne’er see your graces. ‘I shall never see a Goose again without thinking on Mr. Neverout,’—says the ‘brilliant Miss Notable’ in Swift’s Polite Conversation, 1738, p. 156.
I shall ne’er see your graces. ‘I will never look at a Goose again without thinking of Mr. Neverout,’—says the ‘brilliant Miss Notable’ in Swift’s Polite Conversation, 1738, p. 156.
EPITAPH ON EDWARD PURDON.
The occasion of this quatrain, first published as Goldsmith’s* in Poems and Plays, 1777, p. 79, is to be found in Forster’s Life and Times of Oliver Goldsmith, 1871, ii. 60. Purdon died on March 27, 1767 (Gentleman’s Magazine, April, 1767, p. 192). ‘“Dr. Goldsmith made this epitaph,” says William Ballantyne [the author of Mackliniana], “in his way from his chambers in the Temple to the Wednesday evening’s club at the Globe. I think he will never come back, I believe he said. I was sitting by him, and he repeated it more than twice. (I think he will never come back.)”’ Purdon had been at Trinity College, Dublin, with Goldsmith; he had subsequently been a foot soldier; ultimately he became a ‘bookseller’s hack.’ He wrote an anonymous letter to Garrick in 1759, and translated the Henriade of Voltaire. This translation Goldsmith is supposed to have revised, and his own life of Voltaire was to have accompanied it, though finally the Memoir and Translation seem to have appeared separately. (Cf. prefatory note to Memoirs of M. de Voltaire in Gibbs’s Works of Oliver Goldsmith, 1885, iv. 2.)
The occasion of this quatrain, first published as Goldsmith’s in Poems and Plays, 1777, p. 79, is detailed in Forster’s Life and Times of Oliver Goldsmith, 1871, ii. 60. Purdon died on March 27, 1767 (Gentleman’s Magazine, April, 1767, p. 192). “‘Dr. Goldsmith wrote this epitaph,” says William Ballantyne [the author of Mackliniana], “while walking from his chambers in the Temple to the Wednesday evening club at the Globe. I think he will never come back, I believe he said. I was sitting next to him, and he repeated it more than twice. (I think he will never come back.)”’ Purdon had attended Trinity College, Dublin, with Goldsmith; he later became a foot soldier and eventually a ‘bookseller’s hack.’ He wrote an anonymous letter to Garrick in 1759 and translated Voltaire's Henriade. This translation is believed to have been revised by Goldsmith, and his own life of Voltaire was supposed to accompany it, although the Memoir and Translation seem to have been published separately in the end. (Cf. prefatory note to Memoirs of M. de Voltaire in Gibbs’s Works of Oliver Goldsmith, 1885, iv. 2.)
* It had previously appeared as an extempore by a correspondent in the Weekly Magazine, Edin., August 12, 1773 (Notes and Queries, February 14, 1880).
* It had previously appeared as an impromptu piece by a correspondent in the Weekly Magazine, Edin., August 12, 1773 (Notes and Queries, February 14, 1880).
Forster says further, in a note, ‘The original . . . is the epitaph on “La Mort du Sieur Etienne”:—
Forster adds in a note, "The original... is the epitaph on 'La Mort du Sieur Etienne':—"
Il est au bout de ses travaux,
Il a passé, le Sieur Etienne;
En ce monde il eut tant des maux
Qu’on ne croit pas qu’il revienne.
Il est au bout de ses travaux,
Il a passé, le Sieur Etienne;
Dans ce monde, il a connu tant de souffrances
Qu’on ne pense pas qu’il reviendra.
With this perhaps Goldsmith was familiar, and had therefore less scruple in laying felonious hands on the epigram in the Miscellanies (Swift, xiii. 372):—
With this, Goldsmith was probably familiar, and that’s why he felt less hesitation in taking the epigram from the Miscellanies (Swift, xiii. 372):—
Well, then, poor G—— lies underground!
So there’s an end of honest Jack.
So little justice here he found,
’Tis ten to one he’ll ne’er come back.’
Well, then, poor G—— is buried underground!
So that’s the end of honest Jack.
He found so little justice here,
It’s likely he’ll never return.’
Mr. Forster’s ‘felonious hands’ recalls a passage in Goldsmith’s Life of Parnell, 1770, in which, although himself an habitual sinner in this way, he comments gravely upon the practice of plagiarism:—‘It was the fashion with the wits of the last age, to conceal the places from whence they took their hints or their subjects. A trifling acknowledgment would have made that lawful prize, which may now be considered as plunder’ (p. xxxii).
Mr. Forster’s ‘criminal hands’ brings to mind a part in Goldsmith’s Life of Parnell, 1770, where, despite being a regular offender himself, he seriously discusses the issue of plagiarism:—‘In the last century, it was common for clever people to hide the sources of their ideas or topics. A simple acknowledgment would have turned what is now seen as theft into a legitimate prize’ (p. xxxii).
EPILOGUE FOR LEE LEWES’S BENEFIT.
This benefit took place at Covent Garden on May 7, 1773, the pieces performed being Rowe’s Lady Jane Grey, and a popular pantomimic after-piece by Theobald, called Harlequin Sorcerer, Charles Lee Lewes (1740–1803) was the original ‘Young Marlow’ of She Stoops to Conquer. When that part was thrown up by ‘Gentleman’ Smith, Shuter, the ‘Mr. Hardcastle’ of the comedy, suggested Lewes, who was the harlequin of the theatre, as a substitute, and the choice proved an admirable one. Goldsmith was highly pleased with his performance, and in consequence wrote for him this epilogue. It was first printed by Evans, 1780, i. 112–4.
This benefit took place at Covent Garden on May 7, 1773, featuring Rowe’s Lady Jane Grey and a popular pantomime after-piece by Theobald called Harlequin Sorcerer. Charles Lee Lewes (1740–1803) was the original ‘Young Marlow’ in She Stoops to Conquer. When that role was dropped by ‘Gentleman’ Smith, Shuter, the ‘Mr. Hardcastle’ of the comedy, suggested Lewes, who was the harlequin of the theater, as a replacement, and the choice turned out to be excellent. Goldsmith was very pleased with his performance and consequently wrote this epilogue for him. It was first published by Evans, 1780, i. 112–4.
in thy black aspect, i.e. the half-mask of harlequin, in which character the Epilogue was spoken.
in thy black aspect, meaning the half-mask of harlequin, the role in which the Epilogue was delivered.
rosined lightning, stage-lightning, in which rosin is an ingredient.
rosined lightning, stage lightning, which contains rosin as an ingredient.
EPILOGUE INTENDED FOR
‘SHE STOOPS TO CONQUER.’
This epilogue was first printed at pp. 82–6, vol. ii, of the Miscellaneous Works of 1801. Bolton Corney says it had been given to Percy by Goldsmith. It is evidently the ‘quarrelling Epilogue’ referred to in the following letter from Goldsmith to Cradock (Miscellaneous Memoirs, 1826, i. 225–6):—
This epilogue was first printed on pages 82–6, volume ii, of the Miscellaneous Works of 1801. Bolton Corney mentions that it was given to Percy by Goldsmith. It's clearly the ‘quarrelling Epilogue’ mentioned in the following letter from Goldsmith to Cradock (Miscellaneous Memoirs, 1826, i. 225–6):—
‘MY DEAR SIR,
The Play [She
Stoops to Conquer] has met with a success much beyond your
expectations or mine. I thank you sincerely for your Epilogue, which,
however could not be used, but with your permission, shall be printed.*
The story in short is this; Murphy sent me rather the outline of an
Epilogue than an Epilogue, which was to be sung by Mrs. Catley, and which
she approved. Mrs. Bulkley hearing this, insisted on throwing up her part,
unless according to the custom of the theatre, she were permitted to speak
the Epilogue. In this embarrassment I thought of making a quarrelling
Epilogue between Catley and her, debating who should speak the Epilogue,
but then Mrs. Catley refused, after I had taken the trouble of drawing it
out. I was then at a loss indeed; an Epilogue was to be made, and for none
but Mrs. Bulkley. I made one, and Colman thought it too bad to be spoken;
I was obliged therefore to try a fourth time, and I made a very mawkish
thing, as you’ll shortly see. Such is the history of my Stage adventures,
and which I have at last done with. I cannot help saying that I am very
sick of the
stage; and though I believe I shall get three tolerable benefits, yet I
shall upon the whole be a loser, even in a pecuniary light; my ease and
comfort I certainly lost while it was in agitation.
‘My dear sir,
The play [She Stoops to Conquer] has been far more successful than either of us expected. I sincerely thank you for your Epilogue, which, although we couldn't use it, I’d like to print with your permission.* Here’s the situation: Murphy sent me more of an outline for an Epilogue than an actual one, which was supposed to be performed by Mrs. Catley, and she approved it. However, when Mrs. Bulkley heard this, she insisted on quitting her part unless she was allowed to deliver the Epilogue, as is the custom in the theater. Faced with this dilemma, I thought about creating a quarrelsome Epilogue where Catley and Mrs. Bulkley would argue over who gets to deliver it, but then Mrs. Catley backed out after I had already put in the effort to write it. I was truly stuck; I needed an Epilogue and only Mrs. Bulkley could deliver it. I wrote one, but Colman thought it was too terrible to perform; so, I had to try again. The result was a very sentimental piece, which you'll see soon enough. That's the story of my experiences on stage, and thankfully, I'm done with it. I have to say that I’m quite tired of the theater; even though I believe I'll make three decent benefits, I still expect to end up losing money, and I definitely lost my peace and comfort during the whole process.
I am, my dear Cradock,
your obliged, and obedient servant,
OLIVER GOLDSMITH.
I am, my dear Cradock,
your grateful and devoted servant,
OLIVER GOLDSMITH.
P.S.—Present my most humble respects to Mrs. Cradock.’
P.S.—Please send my best regards to Mrs. Cradock.
* It is so printed with the note—‘This came too late to be Spoken.’
* It is printed with the note—‘This came too late to be spoken.’
According to Prior (Miscellaneous Works, 1837, iv. 154), Goldsmith’s friend, Dr. Farr, had a copy of this epilogue which still, when Prior wrote, remained in that gentleman’s family.
According to Prior (Miscellaneous Works, 1837, iv. 154), Goldsmith’s friend, Dr. Farr, had a copy of this epilogue that, at the time Prior was writing, was still in Dr. Farr's family.
Who mump their passion, i.e. grimace their passion.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ i.e. show their passion.
ye macaroni train. The Macaronies were the foplings, fribbles, or beaux of Goldsmith’s day. Walpole refers to them as early as 1764; but their flourishing time was 1770–3, when the print-shops, and especially Matthew Darly’s in the Strand, No. 39, swarmed with satirical designs of which they were the subject. Selwyn, March—many well-known names—are found in their ranks. Richard Cosway figured as ‘The Macaroni Painter’; Angelica Kauffmann as ‘The Paintress of Maccaroni’s’; Thrale as ‘The Southwark Macaroni.’ Another caricature (‘The Fluttering Macaroni’) contains a portrait of Miss Catley, the singing actress of the present epilogue; while Charles Horneck, the brother of ‘The Jessamy Bride’ (see p. 251, l. 14) is twice satirized as ‘The Martial Macaroni’ and ‘The Military Macaroni.’ The name, as may be guessed, comes from the Italian dish first made fashionable by the ‘Macaroni Club,’ being afterwards applied by extension to ‘the younger and gayer part of our nobility and gentry, who, at the same time that they gave in to the luxuries of eating, went equally into the extravagancies of dress.’ (Macaroni and Theatrical Magazine, Oct. 1772.) Cf. Sir Benjamin Backbite’s later epigram in The School for Scandal, 1777, Act ii, Sc. 2:—
ye macaroni train. The Macaronis were the trendy guys, fashionistas, or charming men of Goldsmith’s time. Walpole mentions them as early as 1764, but their peak was from 1770 to 1773, when the print shops, especially Matthew Darly’s on the Strand, No. 39, were filled with satirical artworks featuring them. Selwyn, March—many familiar names—were among them. Richard Cosway was known as ‘The Macaroni Painter’; Angelica Kauffmann as ‘The Paintress of Macaronis’; and Thrale as ‘The Southwark Macaroni.’ Another caricature (‘The Fluttering Macaroni’) includes a portrait of Miss Catley, the singing actress from the current epilogue; while Charles Horneck, brother of ‘The Jessamy Bride’ (see p. 251, l. 14), was satirized twice as ‘The Martial Macaroni’ and ‘The Military Macaroni.’ The name, as you might guess, comes from the Italian dish that first became popular with the ‘Macaroni Club’ and was later used to describe ‘the younger and more flamboyant members of our nobility and gentry, who indulged in both the luxuries of eating and the extravagances of fashion.’ (Macaroni and Theatrical Magazine, Oct. 1772.) Cf. Sir Benjamin Backbite’s later epigram in The School for Scandal, 1777, Act ii, Sc. 2:—
Sure never was seen two such beautiful ponies;
Other horses are clowns, but these macaronies:
To give them this title I’m sure can’t be wrong,
Their legs are so slim and their tails are so long.
Sure, you've never seen two such beautiful ponies;
Other horses are clowns, but these fancy ones:
To call them this title, I'm sure it's not wrong,
Their legs are so slim and their tails are so long.
Their hands are only lent to the Heinel. See note to l. 28, p. 85.
Their hands are only lent to the Heinel. See note to l. 28, p. 85.
EPILOGUE INTENDED FOR
‘SHE STOOPS TO CONQUER.’
This epilogue, given by Goldsmith to Dr. Percy in MS., was first published in the Miscellaneous Works of 1801, ii. 87–8, as An Epilogue intended for Mrs. Bulkley. Percy did not remember for what play it was intended; but it is plainly (see note to l. 40) the second epilogue for She Stoops to Conquer referred to in the letter printed in this volume.
This epilogue, provided by Goldsmith to Dr. Percy in manuscript form, was first published in the Miscellaneous Works of 1801, ii. 87–8, as An Epilogue intended for Mrs. Bulkley. Percy couldn't recall which play it was for, but it is clearly (see note to l. 40) the second epilogue for She Stoops to Conquer mentioned in the letter included in this volume.
There is a place, so Ariosto sings. ‘The poet alludes to the thirty-fourth canto of The Orlando furioso. Ariosto, as translated by Mr. Stewart Rose, observes of the lunar world;
There is a place, so Ariosto sings. ‘The poet references the thirty-fourth canto of The Orlando furioso. Ariosto, as translated by Mr. Stewart Rose, comments on the lunar world;
There thou wilt find, if thou wilt thither post,
Whatever thou on earth beneath hast lost.
There you will find, if you hurry there,
Whatever you have lost on earth below.
Astolpho undertakes the journey; discovers a portion of his own sense; and, in an ample flask, the lost wits of Orlando.’ (Bolton Corney.) Cf. also Rape of the Lock, Canto v, ll. 113–14:
Astolpho goes on the journey, finds a piece of his own understanding, and in a large flask, he discovers Orlando's lost sanity. (Bolton Corney.) Cf. also Rape of the Lock, Canto v, ll. 113–14:
Some thought it mounted to the Lunar sphere,
Since all things lost on earth are treasur’d there.
Some believed it reached the Moon's realm,
Because everything lost on earth is treasured there.
Lord Chesterfield also refers to the ‘happy extravagancy’ of Astolpho’s journey in his Letters, 1774, i. 557.
Lord Chesterfield also mentions the ‘happy extravagance’ of Astolpho’s journey in his Letters, 1774, i. 557.
at Foote’s Alone. ‘Foote’s’ was the Little Theatre in the Haymarket, where, in February, 1773, he brought out what he described as a ‘Primitive Puppet Show,’ based upon the Italian Fantoccini, and presenting a burlesque sentimental Comedy called The Handsome Housemaid; or, Piety in Pattens, which did as much as She Stoops to laugh false sentiment away. Foote warned his audience that they would not discover ‘much wit or humour’ in the piece, since ‘his brother writers had all agreed that it was highly improper, and beneath the dignity of a mixed assembly, to show any signs of joyful satisfaction; and that creating a laugh was forcing the higher order of an audience to a vulgar and mean use of their muscles’—for which reason, he explained, he had, like them, given up the sensual for the sentimental style. And thereupon followed the story of a maid of low degree who, ‘by the mere effects of morality and virtue, raised herself [like Richardson’s Pamela], to riches and honours.’ The public, who for some time had acquiesced in the new order of things under the belief that it tended to the reformation of the stage, and who were beginning to weary of the ‘moral essay thrown into dialogue,’ which had for some time supplanted humorous situation, promptly came round under the influence of Foote’s Aristophanic ridicule, and the comédie larmoyante received an appreciable check. Goldsmith himself had prepared the way in a paper contributed to the Westminster Magazine for December, 1772 (vol. i. p. 4), with the title of ‘An Essay on the Theatre; or, A Comparison between Laughing and Sentimental Comedy.’ The specific reference in the Prologue is to the fact that Foote gave morning performances of The Handsome Housemaid. There was one, for instance, on Saturday, March 6, 1773.
at Foote’s Alone. ‘Foote’s’ was the Little Theatre in the Haymarket, where, in February 1773, he launched what he called a ‘Primitive Puppet Show,’ based on the Italian Fantoccini, featuring a burlesque sentimental comedy titled The Handsome Housemaid; or, Piety in Pattens, which, much like She Stoops, aimed to mock false sentiment. Foote cautioned his audience that they wouldn’t find ‘much wit or humor’ in the piece, as ‘his fellow writers had all agreed it was highly improper, and beneath the dignity of a mixed audience, to show any signs of joyful satisfaction; and that making people laugh was forcing an audience of higher order to a vulgar and base use of their muscles’—which is why, he explained, he too had abandoned the sensual in favor of the sentimental style. The story followed a lowly maid who, ‘by the mere effects of morality and virtue, raised herself [like Richardson’s Pamela] to riches and honors.’ The public, who had accepted the new trend in hopes of reforming the stage, and were starting to tire of the ‘moral essay presented as dialogue’ that had replaced humorous situations, quickly shifted back under Foote’s playful ridicule, which gave a significant setback to the comédie larmoyante. Goldsmith had paved the way in a piece for the Westminster Magazine in December 1772 (vol. i. p. 4), titled ‘An Essay on the Theatre; or, A Comparison between Laughing and Sentimental Comedy.’ The specific mention in the Prologue refers to Foote's morning performances of The Handsome Housemaid. For example, there was one on Saturday, March 6, 1773.
The Mohawk. This particular species of the genus ‘rake’ belongs more to Swift’s than Goldsmith’s time, though the race is eternal. There is an account of the ‘Mohock Club’ in Spectator, No. 324. See also Spectator, No. 347; Gay’s Trivia, 1716, Book iii. p. 74; Swift’s Journal to Stella, March 8 and 26, 1712; and the Wentworth Papers, 1883, pp. 277–8.
The Mohawk. This particular type of 'rake' fits more into Swift's era than Goldsmith's, although the concept is timeless. There's a description of the 'Mohock Club' in Spectator, No. 324. Also, check out Spectator, No. 347; Gay’s Trivia, 1716, Book iii, p. 74; Swift’s Journal to Stella, March 8 and 26, 1712; and the Wentworth Papers, 1883, pp. 277–8.
Still stoops among the low to copy nature. This line, one would think, should have helped to convince Percy that the epilogue was intended for She Stoops to Conquer, and for no other play.
Still stoops among the low to copy nature. This line, one would think, should have helped to convince Percy that the epilogue was meant for She Stoops to Conquer, and for no other play.
THE CAPTIVITY.
The Oratorio of the Captivity was written in 1764; but never set to music. It was first printed in 1820 at pp. 451–70 of vol. ii of the octavo edition of the Miscellaneous Works issued by the trade in that year. Prior reprinted it in 1837 (Works, iv. Pp. 79–95) from the ‘original manuscript’ in Mr. Murray’s possession; and Cunningham again in 1854 (Works, i. pp. 63–76). It is here reproduced from Prior. James Dodsley, who bought the MS. for Newbery and himself, gave Goldsmith ten guineas. Murray’s copy was the one made for Dodsley, October 31, 1764; the one printed in 1820, that made for Newbery. The latter, which once belonged to the autograph collector, William Upcott, was in the market in 1887.
The Oratorio of the Captivity was written in 1764 but was never set to music. It was first published in 1820 on pages 451–70 of volume ii of the octavo edition of the Miscellaneous Works released by the trade that year. Prior reprinted it in 1837 (Works, iv. pp. 79–95) from the ‘original manuscript’ owned by Mr. Murray; and Cunningham reprinted it again in 1854 (Works, i. pp. 63–76). It is reproduced here from Prior. James Dodsley, who bought the manuscript for Newbery and himself, paid Goldsmith ten guineas. Murray’s copy was the one made for Dodsley on October 31, 1764; the one printed in 1820 was made for Newbery. The latter, which once belonged to autograph collector William Upcott, was available on the market in 1887.
AIR. Act i. This song had been published in the first edition of The Haunch of Venison, 1776, with the second stanza varied thus:—
AIR. Act i. This song was published in the first edition of The Haunch of Venison, 1776, with the second stanza changed to:—
Thou, like the world, th’ opprest oppressing,
Thy smiles increase the wretch’s woe’
And he who wants each other blessing,
In thee must ever find a foe.
You, like the world, the oppressed oppressing,
Your smiles increase the wretch’s woes.
And he who wants each other's blessings,
In you must always find an enemy.
AIR. Act ii. This song also had appeared in the first edition of The Haunch of Venison, 1776, in a different form:—
AIR. Act ii. This song also appeared in the first edition of The Haunch of Venison, 1776, in a different form:—
The Wretch condemn’d with life to part,
Still, still on Hope relies;
And ev’ry pang that rends the heart,
Bids Expectation rise.
Hope, like the glim’ring taper’s light,
Adorns and chears the way;
And still, as darker grows the night,
Emits a brighter ray.
The miserable person doomed to live,
Still holds on to Hope;
And every pain that tears the heart,
Makes Expectation grow.
Hope, like the flickering candlelight,
Brightens and lifts the path;
And as the night gets darker,
Shines ever more brightly.
Mitford, who printed The Captivity from Newbery’s version, records a number of ‘first thoughts’ afterwards altered or improved by the author in his MS. Modern editors have not reproduced them, and their example has been followed here. The Captivity is not, in any sense, one of Goldsmith’s important efforts.
Mitford, who published The Captivity based on Newbery’s version, notes several ‘first thoughts’ that the author later changed or enhanced in his manuscript. Modern editors haven't included these, and this approach has been followed here. The Captivity is not, in any way, one of Goldsmith’s significant works.
VERSES IN REPLY TO AN INVITATION TO DINNER.
These were first published in the Miscellaneous Works of 1837, iv. 132–3, having been communicated to the editor by Major-General Sir H. E. Bunbury, Bart., the son of Henry William Bunbury, the well-known comic artist, and husband of Catherine Horneck, the ‘Little Comedy’ to whom Goldsmith refers. Dr. Baker, to whose house the poet was invited, was Dr. (afterwards Sir George) Baker, 1722–1809. He was Sir Joshua’s doctor; and in 1776 became physician to George III, whom he attended during his illness of 1788–9. He is often mentioned by Fanny Burney and Hannah More.
These were first published in the Miscellaneous Works of 1837, iv. 132–3, having been shared with the editor by Major-General Sir H. E. Bunbury, Bart., the son of Henry William Bunbury, the well-known comic artist, and husband of Catherine Horneck, the ‘Little Comedy’ Goldsmith refers to. Dr. Baker, to whose house the poet was invited, was Dr. (later Sir George) Baker, 1722–1809. He was Sir Joshua’s doctor and became physician to George III in 1776, attending him during his illness in 1788–9. He is often mentioned by Fanny Burney and Hannah More.
Horneck, i.e. Mrs. Hannah Horneck—the ‘Plymouth Beauty’—widow of Captain Kane William Horneck, grandson of Dr. Anthony Horneck of the Savoy, mentioned in Evelyn’s Diary, for whose Happy Ascetick, 1724, Hogarth designed a frontispiece. Mrs. Horneck died in 1803. Like Sir Joshua, the Hornecks came from Devonshire; and through him, had made the acquaintance of Goldsmith.
Horneck, i.e. Mrs. Hannah Horneck—the ‘Plymouth Beauty’—was the widow of Captain Kane William Horneck, who was the grandson of Dr. Anthony Horneck of the Savoy, mentioned in Evelyn’s Diary. For Dr. Horneck’s Happy Ascetick, published in 1724, Hogarth created a frontispiece. Mrs. Horneck passed away in 1803. Like Sir Joshua, the Hornecks were from Devonshire and through him, had met Goldsmith.
Nesbitt. Mr. Nesbitt was the husband of one of Mr. Thrale’s handsome sisters. He was a member of the Devonshire Club, and twice (1759–61) sat to Reynolds, with whom he was intimate. He died in 1779, and his widow married a Mr. Scott.
Nesbitt. Mr. Nesbitt was married to one of Mr. Thrale’s attractive sisters. He was part of the Devonshire Club and posed for Reynolds twice (1759–61), with whom he had a close friendship. He passed away in 1779, and his wife later married a Mr. Scott.
Kauffmann. Angelica Kauffmann, the artist, 1741–1807. She had come to London in 1766. At the close of 1767 she had been cajoled into a marriage with an impostor, Count de Horn, and had separated from him in 1768. In 1769 she painted a ‘weak and uncharacteristic’ portrait of Reynolds for Mr. Parker of Saltram (afterwards Baron Boringdon), which is now in the possession of the Earl of Morley. It was exhibited at the Royal Academy in the winter of 1876, and is the portrait referred to at l. 44 below.
Kauffmann. Angelica Kauffmann, the artist, 1741–1807. She moved to London in 1766. By the end of 1767, she had been tricked into marrying a fraud, Count de Horn, and separated from him in 1768. In 1769, she painted a ‘weak and uncharacteristic’ portrait of Reynolds for Mr. Parker of Saltram (later Baron Boringdon), which is now owned by the Earl of Morley. It was displayed at the Royal Academy in the winter of 1876 and is the portrait mentioned at l. 44 below.
the Jessamy Bride. This was Goldsmith’s pet-name for Mary, the elder Miss Horneck. After Goldsmith’s death she married Colonel F. E. Gwyn (1779). She survived until 1840. ‘Her own picture with a turban,’ painted by Reynolds, was left to her in his will (Works by Malone, 2nd ed., 1798, p. cxviii). She was also painted by Romney and Hoppner. ‘Jessamy,’ or ‘jessimy,’ with its suggestion of jasmine flowers, seems in eighteenth-century parlance to have stood for ‘dandified,’ ‘superfine,’ ‘delicate,’ and the whole name was probably coined after the model of some of the titles to Darly’s prints, then common in all the shops.
the Jessamy Bride. This was Goldsmith’s nickname for Mary, the older Miss Horneck. After Goldsmith passed away, she married Colonel F. E. Gwyn (1779). She lived until 1840. ‘Her own picture with a turban,’ painted by Reynolds, was left to her in his will (Works by Malone, 2nd ed., 1798, p. cxviii). She was also painted by Romney and Hoppner. ‘Jessamy,’ or ‘jessimy,’ which suggests jasmine flowers, seems to have meant ‘dressed up,’ ‘elegant,’ ‘delicate’ in the 18th-century language, and the whole name was likely created after the style of some of the titles of Darly’s prints that were popular in all the shops.
The Reynoldses two, i.e. Sir Joshua and his sister, Miss Reynolds.
The Reynoldses two, i.e. Sir Joshua and his sister, Miss Reynolds.
Little Comedy’s face. ‘Little Comedy’ was Goldsmith’s name for the younger Miss Horneck, Catherine, and already engaged to H. W. Bunbury (v. supra), to whom she was married in 1771. She died in 1799, and had also been painted by Reynolds.
Little Comedy’s face. ‘Little Comedy’ was Goldsmith’s nickname for the younger Miss Horneck, Catherine, who was already engaged to H. W. Bunbury (v. supra), and they got married in 1771. She passed away in 1799 and had also been painted by Reynolds.
the Captain in lace. This was Charles Horneck, Mrs. Horneck’s son, an officer in the Foot-guards. He afterwards became a general, and died in 1804. (See note, p. 247, l. 31.)
the Captain in lace. This was Charles Horneck, Mrs. Horneck’s son, an officer in the Foot Guards. He later became a general and passed away in 1804. (See note, p. 247, l. 31.)
to-day’s Advertiser. The lines referred to are said by Prior to have been as follows:—
to-day’s Advertiser. The lines mentioned are said by Prior to be as follows:—
While fair Angelica, with matchless grace,
Paints Conway’s lovely form and Stanhope’s face;
Our hearts to beauty willing homage pay,
We praise, admire, and gaze our souls away.
But when the likeness she hath done for thee,
O Reynolds! with astonishment we see,
Forced to submit, with all our pride we own,
Such strength, such harmony, excell’d by none,
And thou art rivall’d by thyself alone.
While beautiful Angelica, with unmatched grace,
Captures Conway’s lovely figure and Stanhope’s face;
Our hearts willingly pay tribute to beauty,
We praise, admire, and lose ourselves in admiration.
But when she creates your likeness, O Reynolds!
We are filled with astonishment as we behold,
Forced to concede, with all our pride we admit,
Such strength, such harmony, unmatched by anyone,
And you are rivaled only by your own self.
They probably appeared in the newspaper at some date between 1769, when the picture was painted, and August 1771, when ‘Little Comedy’ was married, after which time Goldsmith would scarcely speak of her except as ‘Mrs. Bunbury’ (see p. 132, l. 15).
They likely showed up in the newspaper sometime between 1769, when the painting was created, and August 1771, when 'Little Comedy' got married, after which Goldsmith hardly referred to her as anything other than 'Mrs. Bunbury' (see p. 132, l. 15).
LETTER IN PROSE AND VERSE TO MRS. BUNBURY.
This letter, which contains some of the brightest and easiest of Goldsmith’s familiar verses, was addressed to Mrs. Bunbury (the ‘Little Comedy’ of the Verses in Reply to an Invitation to Dinner, pp. 250–2), in answer to a rhymed summons on her part to spend Christmas at Great Barton in Suffolk, the family seat of the Bunburys. It was first printed by Prior in the Miscellaneous Works of 1837, iv. 148–51, and again in 1838 in Sir Henry Bunbury’s Correspondence of Sir Thomas Hanmer, Bart., pp. 379–83. The text of the latter issue is here followed. When Prior published the verses, they were assigned to the year 1772; in the Hanmer Correspondence it is stated that they were ‘probably written in 1773 or 1774.’
This letter, which features some of Goldsmith’s most well-known and straightforward verses, was sent to Mrs. Bunbury (the ‘Little Comedy’ of the Verses in Reply to an Invitation to Dinner, pp. 250–2) as a response to her rhymed invitation to spend Christmas at Great Barton, the Bunbury family's estate in Suffolk. It was first published by Prior in the Miscellaneous Works of 1837, iv. 148–51, and again in 1838 in Sir Henry Bunbury’s Correspondence of Sir Thomas Hanmer, Bart., pp. 379–83. The text from the latter publication is included here. When Prior released the verses, they were dated to 1772; however, the Hanmer Correspondence mentions that they were ‘probably written in 1773 or 1774.’
your spring velvet coat. Goldsmith’s pronounced taste in dress, and his good-natured simplicity, made his costume a fertile subject for playful raillery,—sometimes, for rather discreditable practical jokes. (See next note.)
your spring velvet coat. Goldsmith's noticeable flair for clothing and his easygoing nature made his outfit a popular target for lighthearted teasing—occasionally, for some pretty embarrassing practical jokes. (See next note.)
a wig, that is modish and gay. ‘He always wore a wig’—said the ‘Jessamy Bride’ in her reminiscences to Prior—‘a peculiarity which those who judge of his appearance only from the fine poetical head of Reynolds, would not suspect; and on one occasion some person contrived to seriously injure this important adjunct to dress. It was the only one he had in the country, and the misfortune seemed irreparable until the services of Mr. Bunbury’s valet were called in, who however performed his functions so indifferently that poor Goldsmith’s appearance became the signal for a general smile’ (Prior’s Life, 1837, ii. 378–9).
a wig, that is modish and gay. “He always wore a wig,” said the “Jessamy Bride” in her memories to Prior. “This was something that those who only know him from Reynolds' beautiful poetic portrait wouldn’t expect. One time, someone managed to seriously damage this important clothing item. It was the only one he had in the country, and it seemed like a disaster until Mr. Bunbury’s valet came to help. However, he did his job so poorly that poor Goldsmith's appearance turned into a reason for everyone to smile.” (Prior’s Life, 1837, ii. 378–9).
Naso contemnere adunco. Cf. Horace, Sat. i. 6. 5:—
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ See Horace, Sat. i. 6. 5:—
naso suspendis adunco
Ignotos,
naso suspendis adunco
Ignotos,
and Martial, Ep. i. 4. 6:—
and Martial, Ep. i. 4. 6:—
Et pueri nasum Rhinocerotis habent.
And the boys have a rhino's nose.
Loo, i.e. Lanctre- or Lanterloo, a popular eighteenth-century game, in which Pam, l. 6, the knave of clubs, is the highest card. Cf. Pope, Rape of the Lock, 1714, iii. 61:—
Loo, i.e. Lanctre- or Lanterloo, a popular eighteenth-century game, in which Pam, l. 6, the knave of clubs, is the highest card. Cf. Pope, Rape of the Lock, 1714, iii. 61:—
Ev’n might Pam, that Kings and Queens o’erthrew,
And mow’d down armies in the fights of Lu;
Ev’n might Pam, that Kings and Queens overthrew,
And mowed down armies in the battles of Lu;
and Colman’s epilogue to The School for Scandal, 1777:—
and Colman’s epilogue to The School for Scandal, 1777:—
And at backgammon mortify my soul,
That pants for loo, or flutters at a vole?
And in backgammon, I feel so defeated,
That longs for loo, or gets excited by a vole?
Miss Horneck. Miss Mary Horneck, the ‘Jessamy Bride’ vide note, p. 251, l. 14).
Miss Horneck. Miss Mary Horneck, the 'Jessamy Bride' see note, p. 251, l. 14).
Fielding. Sir John Fielding, d. 1780, Henry Fielding’s blind half-brother, who succeeded him as a Justice of the Peace for the City and Liberties of Westminster. He was knighted in 1761. There are two portraits of him by Nathaniel Hone.
Fielding. Sir John Fielding, died in 1780, was the blind half-brother of Henry Fielding and took over his role as a Justice of the Peace for the City and Liberties of Westminster. He was knighted in 1761. There are two portraits of him created by Nathaniel Hone.
by quinto Elizabeth, Death without Clergy. Legal authorities affirm that the Act quoted should be 8 Eliz. cap. iv, under which those who stole more than twelvepence ‘privately from a man’s person’ were debarred from benefit of clergy. But ‘quint. Eliz.’ must have offered some special attraction to poets, since Pope also refers to it in the Satires and Epistles, i. 147–8:—
by quinto Elizabeth, Death without Clergy. Legal authorities confirm that the Act referenced should be 8 Eliz. cap. iv, under which those who stole more than twelve pence 'privately from a man’s person' were barred from the benefit of clergy. But 'quint. Eliz.' must have had some special appeal to poets, since Pope also mentions it in the Satires and Epistles, i. 147–8:—
Consult the Statute: quart. I think, it is,
Edwardi sext. or prim. et quint. Eliz.
Consult the Statute: quart. I think it is,
Edward VI. or first and fifth Elizabeth.
With bunches of fennel, and nosegays before ’em. This was a custom dating from the fearful jail fever of 1750, which carried off, not only prisoners, but a judge (Mr. Justice Abney) ‘and many jurymen and witnesses.’ ‘From that time up to this day [i.e. 1855] it has been usual to place sweet-smelling herbs in the prisoner’s dock, to prevent infection.’ (Lawrence’s Life of Henry Fielding, 1855, p. 296.) The close observation of Cruikshank has not neglected this detail in the Old Bailey plate of The Drunkard’s Children, 1848, v.
With bunches of fennel, and nosegays before ’em. This tradition dates back to the terrible jail fever of 1750, which took the lives of not only prisoners but also a judge (Mr. Justice Abney) ‘and many jurymen and witnesses.’ ‘Since that time up to today [i.e. 1855], it has been common to place fragrant herbs in the prisoner’s dock to prevent infection.’ (Lawrence’s Life of Henry Fielding, 1855, p. 296.) Cruikshank's keen observation hasn't missed this detail in the Old Bailey illustration of The Drunkard’s Children, 1848, v.
mobs. The mob was a loose undress or dèshabillè, sometimes a hood. ‘When we poor souls had presented ourselves with a contrition suitable to our worthlessness, some pretty young ladies in mobs, popped in here and there about the church.’ (Guardian, No. 65, May 26, 1713.) Cf. also Addison’s ‘Fine Lady’s Diary’ (Spectator, No. 323); ‘Went in our Mobbs to the Dumb Man’ (Duncan Campbell).
mobs. The mob was a loose outfit or dèshabillè, sometimes just a hood. ‘When we poor souls had shown enough regret for our worthlessness, some pretty young ladies in mobs, appeared here and there in the church.’ (Guardian, No. 65, May 26, 1713.) See also Addison’s ‘Fine Lady’s Diary’ (Spectator, No. 323); ‘Went in our Mobbs to the Dumb Man’ (Duncan Campbell).
yon solemn-faced. Cf. Introduction, p. xxvii. According to the ‘Jessamy Bride,’ Goldsmith sometimes aggravated his plainness by an ‘assumed frown of countenance’ (Prior, Life, 1837, ii. 379).
yon solemn-faced. Cf. Introduction, p. xxvii. According to the ‘Jessamy Bride,’ Goldsmith sometimes made his plainness worse by putting on a ‘fake frown’ (Prior, Life, 1837, ii. 379).
Sir Charles, i.e. Sir Thomas Charles Bunbury, Bart., M. P., Henry Bunbury’s elder brother. He succeeded to the title in 1764, and died without issue in 1821. Goldsmith, it may be observed, makes ‘Charles’ a disyllable. Probably, like many of his countrymen, he so pronounced it. (Cf. Thackeray’s Pendennis, 1850, vol. ii, chap. 5 [or xliii], where this is humorously illustrated in Captain Costigan’s ‘Sir Chorlus, I saw your neem at the Levee.’ Perhaps this accounts for ‘failing’ and ‘stealing,’—‘day on’ and ‘Pantheon,’ in the New Simile. Cooke (European Magazine, October, 1793, p. 259) says that Goldsmith ‘rather cultivated (than endeavoured to get rid of) his brogue.’
Sir Charles, i.e. Sir Thomas Charles Bunbury, Bart., M. P., Henry Bunbury’s older brother. He inherited the title in 1764 and passed away without any children in 1821. Goldsmith notably pronounces ‘Charles’ as a two-syllable word. Likely, like many of his fellow countrymen, he pronounced it that way. (See Thackeray’s Pendennis, 1850, vol. ii, chap. 5 [or xliii], where this is humorously shown in Captain Costigan’s ‘Sir Chorlus, I saw your name at the Levee.’ This might explain the pronunciations of ‘failing’ and ‘stealing,’—‘day on’ and ‘Pantheon,’ in the New Simile. Cooke (European Magazine, October, 1793, p. 259) mentions that Goldsmith ‘rather embraced (than tried to get rid of) his brogue.’
dy’d in grain, i.e. fixed, ineradicable. To ‘dye in grain’ means primarily to colour with the scarlet or purple dye produced by the kermes insect, called granum in Latin, from its similarity to small seeds. Being what is styled a ‘fast’ dye the phrase is used by extension to signify permanence.
dy’d in grain, i.e. fixed, unchangeable. To ‘dye in grain’ primarily means to color with the scarlet or purple dye made from the kermes insect, known as granum in Latin because it resembles small seeds. Since it is considered a ‘fast’ dye, the phrase is also used to indicate permanence.
VIDA’S GAME OF CHESS.
Forster thus describes the MS. of this poem in his Life of Goldsmith:—‘It is a small quarto manuscript of thirty-four pages, containing 679 lines, to which a fly-leaf is appended in which Goldsmith notes the differences of nomenclature between Vida’s chessmen and our own. It has occasional interlineations and corrections, but such as would occur in transcription rather than in a first or original copy. Sometimes indeed choice appears to have been made (as at page 29) between two words equally suitable to the sense and verse, as “to” for “toward”; but the insertions and erasures refer almost wholly to words or lines accidentally omitted and replaced. The triplet is always carefully marked; and seldom as it is found in any other of Goldsmith’s poems. I am disposed to regard its frequent recurrence here as even helping, in some degree, to explain the motive which had led him to the trial of an experiment in rhyme comparatively new to him. If we suppose him, half consciously, it may be, taking up the manner of the great master of translation, Dryden, who was at all times so much a favourite with him, he would at least, in so marked a peculiarity, be less apt to fall short than to err perhaps a little on the side of excess. Though I am far from thinking such to be the result in the present instance. The effect of the whole translation is pleasing to me, and the mock-heroic effect I think not a little assisted by the reiterated use of the triplet and alexandrine. As to any evidence of authorship derivable from the appearance of the manuscript, I will only add another word. The lines in the translation have been carefully counted, and the number is marked in Goldsmith’s hand at the close of his transcription. Such a fact is, of course, only to be taken in aid of other proof; but a man is not generally at the pains of counting, still less, I should say in such a case as Goldsmith’s, of elaborately transcribing, lines which are not his own.’ (Forster’s Goldsmith, 1871, ii. 235–6).
Forster describes the manuscript of this poem in his Life of Goldsmith:—‘It is a small quarto manuscript with thirty-four pages, containing 679 lines, along with a fly-leaf where Goldsmith notes the differences in names between Vida’s chess pieces and our own. It includes occasional notes and corrections, but these are more likely to occur in transcription than in a first or original copy. Sometimes a choice seems to have been made (as on page 29) between two equally suitable words for the sense and verse, such as “to” instead of “toward”; however, the insertions and deletions mainly address words or lines that were accidentally left out and later replaced. The triplet is always carefully indicated and is seldom found in any other of Goldsmith’s poems. I think its frequent appearance here helps to explain the motive behind his attempt at a rhyme that was relatively new to him. If we assume he was unconsciously adopting the style of the great translator Dryden, who was always a favorite of his, he would at least, in such a distinct characteristic, be less likely to fall short and perhaps err a bit on the side of excess. Although I don’t believe that’s the case here. The overall effect of the translation is pleasing to me, and I think the mock-heroic impact is enhanced by the repeated use of the triplet and alexandrine. Regarding any evidence of authorship that can be drawn from the appearance of the manuscript, I will only add one more note. The lines in the translation have been carefully counted, and the total is recorded in Goldsmith’s handwriting at the end of his transcription. This fact, of course, should be considered alongside other evidence; but generally, a person does not go to the trouble of counting, especially in
When Forster wrote the above, the MS. was in the possession of Mr. Bolton Corney, who had not been aware of its existence when he edited Goldsmith’s Poems in 1845. In 1854 it was, with his permission, included in vol. iv of Cunningham’s Works of 1854, and subsequently in the Aldine Poems of 1866.
When Forster wrote this, the manuscript was owned by Mr. Bolton Corney, who didn’t know it existed when he edited Goldsmith’s Poems in 1845. In 1854, with his permission, it was included in volume IV of Cunningham’s Works from 1854, and later in the Aldine Poems of 1866.
Mark Jerome Vida of Cremona, 1490–1566, was Bishop of Alba, and favourite of Leo the Magnificent. Several translators had tried their hand at his Game of Chess before Goldsmith. Lowndes mentions Rowbotham, 1562; Jeffreys, 1736; Erskine, 1736; Pullin, 1750; and Anon. (Eton), 1769 (who may have preceded Goldsmith). But after his (Goldsmith’s) death appeared another Oxford anonymous version, 1778, and one by Arthur Murphy, 1786.
Mark Jerome Vida of Cremona, 1490–1566, was the Bishop of Alba and a favorite of Leo the Magnificent. Several translators had attempted to translate his Game of Chess before Goldsmith. Lowndes mentions Rowbotham, 1562; Jeffreys, 1736; Erskine, 1736; Pullin, 1750; and Anon. (Eton), 1769 (who may have been before Goldsmith). After his death, another anonymous version from Oxford was published in 1778, along with one by Arthur Murphy in 1786.
APPENDIXES
A. PORTRAITS OF GOLDSMITH. |
B. DESCRIPTIONS OF NEWELL’S VIEWS OF LISSOY, ETC. |
C. THE EPITHET ‘SENTIMENTAL.’ |
D. FRAGMENTS OF TRANSLATIONS, ETC. BY GOLDSMITH. |
E. GOLDSMITH ON POETRY UNDER ANNE AND GEORGE THE FIRST. |
F. CRITICISMS FROM GOLDSMITH’S ‘BEAUTIES OF ENGLISH POESY.’ |
APPENDIX A
PORTRAITS OF GOLDSMITH.
PORTRAITS OF GOLDSMITH.
PORTRAITS of Goldsmith are not numerous; and the best known are those of Reynolds and H. W. Bunbury. That by Sir Joshua was painted in 1766–70, and exhibited in the Royal Academy (No. 151) from April 24th to May 28th in the latter year. It represents the poet in a plain white collar, furred mantle open at the neck, and holding a book in his right hand. Its general characteristics are given at p. xxviii of the ‘Introduction.’ It was scraped in mezzotint in 1770 by Reynolds’s Italian pupil, Giuseppe, or Joseph Marchi; and it is dated 1st December.* Bunbury’s portrait first appeared, after Goldsmith’s death, as a frontispiece to the Haunch of Venison; and it was etched in facsimile by James Bretherton. The plate is dated May 24, 1776. In his loyal but despotic Life of Goldsmith (Bk. iv, ch. 6), Mr. John Forster reproduces these portraits side by side; in order, he professes, to show ‘the distinction between truth and a caricature of it.’ Bunbury, it may be, was primarily a caricaturist, and possibly looked at most things from a more or less grotesque point of view; but this sketch—it should be observed—was meant for a likeness, and we have the express testimony of one who, if she was Bunbury’s sister-in-law, was also Goldsmith’s friend, that it rendered Goldsmith accurately. It ‘gives the head with admirable fidelity’—says the ‘Jessamy Bride’ (afterwards Mrs. Gwyn)—‘as he actually lived among us; nothing can exceed its truth’ (Prior’s Life, 1837, ii. 380). In other words, it delineates Goldsmith as his contemporaries saw him, with bulbous forehead, indecisive chin, and long protruding upper lip,—awkward, insignificant, ill at ease,—restlessly burning ‘to get in and shine.’ It enables us moreover to understand how people who knew nothing of his better and more lovable qualities, could speak of him as an ‘inspired idiot,’ as ‘silly Dr. Goldsmith,’ as ‘talking like poor Poll.’ It is, in short, his external, objective presentment. The picture by Sir Joshua, on the contrary, is almost wholly subjective. Draped judiciously in a popular studio costume, which is not that of the sitter’s day, it reveals to us the author of The Deserted Village as Reynolds conceived him to be at his best, serious, dignified, introspective, with his physical defects partly extenuated by art, partly over-mastered by his intellectual power. To quote the ‘Jessamy Bride’ once more—it is ‘a fine poetical head for the admiration of posterity, but as it is divested of his wig and with the shirt collar open, it was not the man as seen in daily life’ (Ib. ii. 380). Had Goldsmith lived in our era of photography, photography would doubtless have given us something which would have been neither the one nor the other, but more like Bunbury than Reynolds. Yet we may be grateful for both. For Bunbury’s sketch and Reynolds’s portrait are alike indispensable to the true comprehension of Goldsmith’s curiously dual personality.**
PORTRAITS of Goldsmith aren’t many; the most well-known are by Reynolds and H. W. Bunbury. Sir Joshua painted his portrait between 1766 and 1770, and it was displayed at the Royal Academy (No. 151) from April 24th to May 28th in 1770. It shows the poet wearing a simple white collar and an open fur-lined cloak, holding a book in his right hand. General details are provided on p. xxviii of the ‘Introduction.’ It was scraped in mezzotint in 1770 by Reynolds’s Italian pupil, Giuseppe, or Joseph Marchi; it is dated December 1st.* Bunbury’s portrait first appeared, after Goldsmith’s death, as a frontispiece to the Haunch of Venison; it was etched in facsimile by James Bretherton. The plate is dated May 24, 1776. In his loyal but somewhat dictatorial Life of Goldsmith (Bk. iv, ch. 6), Mr. John Forster displays these portraits side by side, he claims to highlight ‘the difference between reality and a caricature of it.’ Bunbury was mainly a caricaturist and often viewed things from a rather grotesque angle; however, it’s important to note that this sketch was meant to be a likeness, and we have the direct testimony of someone who, while being Bunbury’s sister-in-law, was also a friend of Goldsmith, that it depicted Goldsmith accurately. It ‘captures the head with remarkable fidelity’—says the ‘Jessamy Bride’ (later Mrs. Gwyn)—‘as he actually lived among us; nothing can surpass its authenticity’ (Prior’s Life, 1837, ii. 380). In other words, it shows Goldsmith as his contemporaries perceived him, with a bulbous forehead, an indecisive chin, and a long protruding upper lip—awkward, unremarkable, uncomfortable—restlessly eager ‘to get in and shine.’ It helps us understand how those who didn’t know his better and more lovable traits could call him an ‘inspired idiot,’ ‘silly Dr. Goldsmith,’ or say he talked ‘like poor Poll.’ In short, it presents his external, objective image. In contrast, the painting by Sir Joshua is mostly subjective. Dressed thoughtfully in a popular studio costume, which isn’t from the sitter’s time, it shows the author of The Deserted Village as Reynolds imagined him at his best: serious, dignified, introspective, with his physical flaws somewhat softened by art and partly overridden by his intellectual strength. To quote the ‘Jessamy Bride’ again—it is ‘a fine poetical head for the admiration of future generations, but as it lacks his wig and has the shirt collar open, it wasn’t the man as seen in everyday life’ (Ib. ii. 380). If Goldsmith had lived in our era of photography, it would likely have captured something that is neither of these but closer to Bunbury than Reynolds. Yet we should be thankful for both. For Bunbury’s sketch and Reynolds’s portrait are both essential for a true understanding of Goldsmith’s intriguingly dual personality.**
* This was the print to which Goldsmith referred in a well-known anecdote. Speaking to his old Peckham pupil, Samuel Bishop, whom, after many years, he met accidentally in London, he asked him eagerly whether he had got an engraving of the new portrait, and finding he had not, ‘said with some emotion, “if your picture had been published, I should not have suffered an hour to elapse without procuring it.”’ But he was speedily ‘appeased by apologies.’ (Prior’s Life, 1837, i. 219–20.)
* This was the print Goldsmith mentioned in a famous story. When he ran into his former student, Samuel Bishop, in London after many years, he excitedly asked if he had gotten an engraving of the new portrait. When he found out he hadn’t, he said with some emotion, “If your picture had been published, I wouldn’t have let an hour go by without getting it.” But he was quickly calmed by Bishop’s apologies. (Prior’s Life, 1837, i. 219–20.)
** There is in existence another undated etching by Bretherton after Bunbury on a larger scale, which comes much nearer to Reynolds; and it is of course possible, though not in our opinion probable, that Mrs. Gwyn may have referred to this. But Forster selected the other for his comparison; it is prefixed to the Haunch of Venison; it is certainly the better known; and (as we believe) cannot ever have been intended for a caricature.
** There is another undated etching by Bretherton after Bunbury that's larger in size and much closer to Reynolds' style. It’s possible, though we don’t think it’s likely, that Mrs. Gwyn referred to this one. But Forster chose the other etching for his comparison; it appears at the beginning of the Haunch of Venison; it’s definitely the better-known piece and (we believe) was never intended to be a caricature.
The portrait by Reynolds, above referred to, was painted for the Thrale Gallery at Streatham, on the dispersion of which, in May, 1816, it was bought for the Duke of Bedford for £133 7s. It is now at Woburn Abbey (Cat. No. 254). At Knole, Lord Sackville possesses another version (Cat. No. 239), which was purchased in 1773 by the Countess Delawarr, and was shown at South Kensington in 1867. Here the dress is a black coat and a brown mantle with fur. The present owner exhibited it at the Guelph Exhibition of 1891. A third version, now in the Irish National Gallery, once belonged to Goldsmith himself, and then to his brother-in-law, Daniel Hodson. Finally there is a copy, by a pupil of Reynolds, in the National Portrait Gallery, to which it was bequeathed in 1890 by Dr. Leifchild, having formerly been the property of Caleb Whitefoord. Caleb Whitefoord also had an ‘admirable miniature’ by Reynolds, which belongs to the Rev. Benjamin Whitefoord, Hon. Canon of Salisbury (Whitefoord Papers, 1898, p. xxvii). A small circular print, based upon Reynolds, and etched by James Basire, figures on the title-page of Retaliation. Some of the plates are dated April 18, 1774.* The National Portrait Gallery has also a silhouette, attributed to Ozias Humphry, R.A., which was presented in 1883 by Sir Theodore Martin, K.C.B. Then there is the portrait by Hogarth shown at South Kensington in 1867 by the late Mr. Studley Martin of Liverpool. It depicts the poet writing at a round table in a black cap, claret-coloured coat and ruffles. Of this there is a wood-cut in the later editions of Forster’s Life (Bk. iii, ch. 14). The same exhibition of 1867 contained a portrait of Goldsmith in a brown coat and red waistcoat, ‘as a young man.’ It was said to be extremely like him in face, and was attributed to Gainsborough. In Evans’s edition of the Poetical and Dramatic Works is another portrait engraved by Cook, said, on some copies, to be ‘from an original drawing’; and there is in the Print Room at the British Museum yet another portrait still, engraved by William Ridley ‘from a painting in the possession of the Rev. Mr. Williams,’ no doubt Goldsmith’s friend, the Rev. David Williams, founder of the Royal Literary Fund. One of these last may have been the work to which the poet refers in a letter to his brother Maurice in January, 1770. ‘I have sent my cousin Jenny [Jane Contarine] a miniature picture of myself . . . The face you well know, is ugly enough, but it is finely painted’ (Misc. Works, 1801, p. 88).
The portrait by Reynolds mentioned earlier was painted for the Thrale Gallery at Streatham. After it was dispersed in May 1816, it was purchased for the Duke of Bedford for £133 7s. It is now housed at Woburn Abbey (Cat. No. 254). At Knole, Lord Sackville owns another version (Cat. No. 239), which was bought in 1773 by the Countess Delawarr and was displayed at South Kensington in 1867. In this version, the subject is dressed in a black coat and a brown fur-trimmed mantle. The current owner showed it at the Guelph Exhibition in 1891. A third version, now in the Irish National Gallery, originally belonged to Goldsmith himself and later to his brother-in-law, Daniel Hodson. Additionally, there is a copy by one of Reynolds' students at the National Portrait Gallery, which was left to them in 1890 by Dr. Leifchild; it was previously owned by Caleb Whitefoord. Caleb Whitefoord also owned an “admirable miniature” by Reynolds, which now belongs to the Rev. Benjamin Whitefoord, Hon. Canon of Salisbury (Whitefoord Papers, 1898, p. xxvii). A small circular print based on Reynolds and etched by James Basire appears on the title page of Retaliation. Some of the plates are dated April 18, 1774. The National Portrait Gallery also holds a silhouette, attributed to Ozias Humphry, R.A., which was donated in 1883 by Sir Theodore Martin, K.C.B. There’s also a portrait by Hogarth that was exhibited at South Kensington in 1867 by the late Mr. Studley Martin of Liverpool. It shows the poet writing at a round table, wearing a black cap, a claret-colored coat, and ruffles. A woodcut of this portrait is included in the later editions of Forster’s Life (Bk. iii, ch. 14). The same exhibition in 1867 featured a portrait of Goldsmith in a brown coat and red waistcoat, “as a young man.” It was described as being very similar to his appearance and was attributed to Gainsborough. Evans’s edition of the Poetical and Dramatic Works includes another portrait engraved by Cook, which is said, in some copies, to be “from an original drawing”; there’s yet another portrait in the Print Room at the British Museum, engraved by William Ridley “from a painting in the possession of the Rev. Mr. Williams,” likely Goldsmith’s friend, the Rev. David Williams, who founded the Royal Literary Fund. One of these last artworks may be what the poet refers to in a letter to his brother Maurice in January 1770: “I have sent my cousin Jenny [Jane Contarine] a miniature picture of myself... The face you know well is ugly enough, but it is finely painted” (Misc. Works, 1801, p. 88).
* There is also a sketch by Reynolds (?) at the British Museum.
* There's also a sketch by Reynolds (?) at the British Museum.
In front of Dublin University is a bronze statue of Goldsmith by J. H. Foley, R.A., erected in 1864.** Of this there is a good engraving by G. Stodart. On the memorial in Westminster Abbey erected in 1776 is a medallion by Joseph Nollekens.
In front of Dublin University, there’s a bronze statue of Goldsmith by J. H. Foley, R.A., put up in 1864.** There's a nice engraving of this by G. Stodart. On the memorial in Westminster Abbey built in 1776, there’s a medallion by Joseph Nollekens.
** Goldsmith’s traditional ill-luck pursued him after death. During some public procession in front of Trinity College, a number of undergraduates climbed on the statue, with the result that the thin metal of the poet’s head was flattened or crushed in, requiring for its readjustment very skilful restorative treatment. The Editor is indebted for this item of information to the kindness of Mr. Percy Fitzgerald, who was present at the subsequent operation.
** Goldsmith's usual bad luck followed him even after he died. During a public event in front of Trinity College, several students climbed onto the statue, which caused the fragile metal of the poet's head to be flattened or crushed. It required very skilled restoration work to fix it. The Editor thanks Mr. Percy Fitzgerald for providing this information, as he was present during the restoration process.
APPENDIX B
DESCRIPTIONS OF NEWELL’S VIEWS OF LISSOY, ETC.
DESCRIPTIONS OF NEWELL’S VIEWS OF LISSOY, ETC.
In 1811, the Rev. R. H. Newell, B.D. and Fellow of St. John’s College, Cambridge, issued an edition of the Poetical Works of Goldsmith. The distinctive feature of this lay in the fact that it was illustrated by a number of aquatints ‘by Mr. Alkin’ (i.e. Samuel Alken), after drawings made by Newell in 1806–9, and was accompanied by a series of ‘Remarks, attempting to ascertain, chiefly from local observation, the actual scene of The Deserted Village.’ Some quotations from these ‘Remarks’ have already been made in the foregoing notes; but as copies of six of the drawings are given in this volume, it may be well, in each case, to reproduce Newell’s ‘descriptions.’
In 1811, Rev. R. H. Newell, B.D. and Fellow of St. John’s College, Cambridge, released an edition of the Poetical Works of Goldsmith. The unique aspect of this edition was that it included several aquatints ‘by Mr. Alkin’ (i.e. Samuel Alken), based on drawings made by Newell between 1806 and 1809, and it came with a series of ‘Remarks, attempting to determine, mainly from local observation, the actual scene of The Deserted Village.’ Some quotes from these ‘Remarks’ have already been included in the previous notes; however, since this volume contains copies of six of the drawings, it might be useful to present Newell’s ‘descriptions’ for each one.
LISHOY, OR LISSOY MILL.
Lishoy or Lissoy Mill.
The west end of it, as seen from a field near the road; to the north the country slopes away in coarsely cultivated enclosures, and the distance eastward is bounded by the Longford hills. The stream ran from the south side of the mill (where it is still of some width though nearly choked up), and fell over the once busy wheel, into a deep channel, now overgrown with weeds. Neglect and poverty appear all around. The farm house and barn-like buildings, which fill up the sketch, seem to have no circumstances of interest attached to them (p. 83).
The west end of it, viewed from a field near the road; to the north, the land slopes down into rough-farmed enclosures, and to the east, you can see the Longford hills in the distance. The stream flowed from the south side of the mill (where it's still somewhat wide, though almost clogged now) and cascaded over the once busy wheel into a deep channel that is now overgrown with weeds. There's a sense of neglect and poverty everywhere. The farmhouse and barn-like structures that fill the scene seem to have no interesting features connected to them (p. 83).
KILKENNY WEST CHURCH.
KILKENNY WEST CHURCH.
This south-west view was taken from the road, which passes by the church, towards Lishoy, and overlooks the adjacent country to the west. The church appears neat, its exterior having been lately repaired. The tree added to the foreground is the only liberty taken with the subject (p. 83).
This southwest view was taken from the road that goes by the church, heading towards Lishoy, and overlooks the surrounding area to the west. The church looks tidy, as its exterior has recently been renovated. The tree added to the foreground is the only change made to the subject (p. 83).
HAWTHORN TREE.
Hawthorn tree.
An east view of the tree, as it stood in August, 1806. The Athlone road occupies the centre of the sketch, winding round the stone wall to the right, into the village, and to the left leading toward the church. The cottage and tree opposite the hawthorn, adjoin the present public-house; the avenue before the parsonage tops the distant eminence (p. 84).
An east view of the tree, as it stood in August 1806. The Athlone road runs through the center of the sketch, winding around the stone wall on the right, leading into the village, while on the left it goes towards the church. The cottage and tree across from the hawthorn are next to the current pub; the avenue in front of the parsonage tops the distant hill (p. 84).
SOUTH VIEW FROM GOLDSMITH’S MOUNT.
South View from Goldsmith's Mount.
In this sketch ‘the decent church,’ at the top of the hill in the distance, is an important object, from its exact correspondence with the situation given it in the poem. Half-way up stands the solitary ruin of Lord Dillon’s castle. The hill in shadow, on the left, is above the village, and is supposed to be alluded to in the line—
In this sketch, ‘the decent church’ at the top of the hill in the distance is a significant feature because it matches exactly with the setting described in the poem. Halfway up is the lonely ruin of Lord Dillon’s castle. The hill in shadow on the left looms over the village and is thought to be referenced in the line—
Up yonder hill the distant murmur rose.
Up on that hill, the distant sound began to rise.
A flat of bogland extends from the narrow lake in the centre to the mount on the right of the foreground (p. 84).
A stretch of marshland stretches from the narrow lake in the center to the hill on the right side of the foreground (p. 84).
THE PARSONAGE.
THE PARSONAGE.
A south view from the Athlone road, which runs parallel with the stone wall, and nearly east and west: the gateway is that mentioned in Goldsmith’s letter,* the mount being directly opposite, in a field contiguous with the road.
A south view from the Athlone road, which runs parallel to the stone wall, almost east and west: the gateway is the one mentioned in Goldsmith’s letter,* and the mount is directly across from it, in a field next to the road.
* See note to l. 114 of The Deserted Village.
* See note to l. 114 of The Deserted Village.
The ruinous stone wall in this and three other sketches, which is a frequent sort of fence in the neighbourhood, gives a characteristic propriety to the line (48)
The crumbling stone wall in this and three other sketches, which is a common type of fence in the area, adds a distinctive charm to the scene (48).
And the long grass o’ertops the mould’ring wall.
And the tall grass grows over the decaying wall.
(pp. 84–5).
(pp. 84–5).
THE SCHOOL-HOUSE.
The schoolhouse.
This cottage is situated, as the poem describes it, by the road-side, just where it forms a sharp angle by branching out from the village eastward: at this point a south-west view was taken (p. 85).
This cottage is located, as the poem describes, by the roadside, right where it makes a sharp angle branching out from the village to the east. At this spot, a southwest view was taken (p. 85).
Newell’s book was reissued in 1820; but no alterations were made in the foregoing descriptions which, it must be borne in mind, refer to 1806–9. His enthusiastic identifications will no doubt be taken by the reader with the needful grain of salt. Goldsmith probably remembered the hawthorn bush, the church upon the hill, the watercress gatherer, and some other familiar objects of the ‘seats of his youth.’ But distance added charm to the regretful retrospect; and in the details his fancy played freely with his memories. It would be unwise, for example, to infer—as Mr. Hogan did—the decorations of the Three Pidgeons at Lissoy from the account of the inn in the poem.* Some twelve years before its publication, when he was living miserably in Green Arbour Court, Goldsmith had submitted to his brother Henry a sample of a heroi-comic poem describing a Grub Street writer in bed in ‘a paltry ale-house.’ In this ‘the sanded floor,’ the ‘twelve good rules’ and the broken tea-cups all played their parts as accessories, and even the double-dealing chest had its prototype in the poet’s night-cap, which was ‘a cap by night—a stocking all the day.’ A year or two later he expanded these lines in the Citizen of the World, and the scene becomes the Red Lion in Drury Lane. From this second version he adapted, or extended again, the description of the inn parlour in The Deserted Village. It follows therefore, either that he borrowed for London the details of a house in Ireland, or that he used for Ireland the details of a house in London. If, on the other hand, it be contended that those details were common to both places, then the identification in these particulars of Auburn with Lissoy falls hopelessly to the ground.
Newell's book was reissued in 1820, but no changes were made to the previous descriptions, which, keep in mind, refer to the years 1806-1809. Readers should take his enthusiastic identifications with a grain of salt. Goldsmith likely remembered the hawthorn bush, the church on the hill, the watercress gatherer, and some other familiar sights from his youth. However, time added a certain charm to his nostalgic reflections, and his imagination freely played with his memories in the details. It would be a mistake, for example, to infer—like Mr. Hogan did—the decorations of the Three Pidgeons at Lissoy from the account of the inn in the poem.* About twelve years before its publication, while living unhappily in Green Arbour Court, Goldsmith had shown his brother Henry a sample of a heroi-comic poem describing a Grub Street writer in bed in “a shabby ale-house.” In this piece, the “sanded floor,” the “twelve good rules,” and the broken tea-cups all served as background details, and even the two-faced chest had its counterpart in the poet’s nightcap, which was “a cap by night—a stocking all the day.” A year or two later, he expanded these lines in the Citizen of the World, and the scene became the Red Lion in Drury Lane. From this second version, he adapted, or further extended, the description of the inn parlour in The Deserted Village. It follows then, either that he borrowed the details for London from a house in Ireland, or that he used the details of a house in London for Ireland. If, however, it is argued that those details were common to both locations, then the identification of Auburn with Lissoy falls apart.
* What follows is taken from the writer’s ‘Introduction’ to Mr. Edwin Abbey’s illustrated edition of The Deserted Village, 1902, p. ix.
* What follows is taken from the author’s ‘Introduction’ to Mr. Edwin Abbey’s illustrated edition of The Deserted Village, 1902, p. ix.
APPENDIX C
THE EPITHET ‘SENTIMENTAL.’
THE TERM 'SENTIMENTAL.'
Goldsmith’s use of ‘sentimental’ in the ‘prologue’ to She Stoops to Conquer (p. 109, l. 36)—the only occasion upon which he seems to have employed it in his Poems—affords an excuse for bringing together one or two dispersed illustrations of the rise and growth of this once highly-popular adjective, not as yet reached in the N. E. D. Johnson, who must often have heard it, ignores it altogether; and in Todd’s edition of his Dictionary (1818) it is expressly marked with a star as one of the modern words which are ‘not’ to be found in the Doctor’s collection. According to Mr. Sidney Lee’s admirable article in the Dictionary of National Biography on Sterne, that author is to be regarded as the ‘only begetter’ of the epithet. Mr. Lee says that it first occurs in a letter of 1740 written by the future author of Tristram Shandy to the Miss Lumley he afterwards married. Here is the precise and characteristic passage:—‘I gave a thousand pensive, penetrating looks at the chair thou hadst so often graced, in those quiet and sentimental repasts—then laid down my knife and fork, and took out my handkerchief, and clapped it across my face, and wept like a child’ (Sterne’s Works by Saintsbury, 1894, v. 25). Nine years later, however circulated, ‘sentimental’ has grown ‘so much in vogue’ that it has reached from London to the provinces. ‘Mrs. Belfour’ (Lady Bradshaigh) writing from Lincolnshire to Richardson says:—‘Pray, Sir, give me leave to ask you . . . what, in your opinion, is the meaning of the word sentimental, so much in vogue amongst the polite, both in town and country? In letters and common conversation, I have asked several who make use of it, and have generally received for answer, it is—it is—sentimental. Every thing clever and agreeable is comprehended in that word; but [I] am convinced a wrong interpretation is given, because it is impossible every thing clever and agreeable can be so common as this word. I am frequently astonished to hear such a one is a sentimental man; we were a sentimental party; I have been taking a sentimental walk. And that I might be reckoned a little in the fashion, and, as I thought, show them the proper use of the word, about six weeks ago, I declared I had just received a sentimental letter. Having often laughed at the word, and found fault with the application of it, and this being the first time I ventured to make use of it, I was loudly congratulated upon the occasion: but I should be glad to know your interpretation of it’ (Richardson’s Correspondence, 1804, iv. pp. 282–3). The reply of the author of Clarissa, which would have been interesting, is not given; but it is clear that by this date (1749) ‘sentimental’ must already have been rather overworked by ‘the polite.’ Eleven years after this we meet with it in the Prologue to Colman’s ‘Dramatick Novel’ of Polly Honeycombe. ‘And then,’ he says, commenting upon the fiction of the period,—
Goldsmith’s use of ‘sentimental’ in the ‘prologue’ to She Stoops to Conquer (p. 109, l. 36)—the only time he seems to have used it in his Poems—provides a reason to gather a few scattered examples of the rise and popularity of this once widely-used adjective. It’s not yet mentioned in the N. E. D. Johnson, who must have often heard it, completely ignores it; and in Todd’s edition of his Dictionary (1818), it is specifically marked with a star as one of the modern words that are ‘not’ included in the Doctor’s collection. According to Mr. Sidney Lee’s excellent article in the Dictionary of National Biography on Sterne, that author is considered the ‘only creator’ of the term. Mr. Lee states that it first appears in a letter from 1740 written by the future author of Tristram Shandy to Miss Lumley, whom he later married. Here’s the exact and distinctive passage:—‘I gave a thousand pensive, penetrating looks at the chair you had so often graced, during those quiet and sentimental meals—then laid down my knife and fork, took out my handkerchief, and covered my face, and cried like a child’ (Sterne’s Works by Saintsbury, 1894, v. 25). Nine years later, however it was shared, ‘sentimental’ has become ‘so much in fashion’ that it has spread from London to the provinces. ‘Mrs. Belfour’ (Lady Bradshaigh) writing from Lincolnshire to Richardson says:—‘Please, Sir, let me ask you . . . what do you think is the meaning of the word sentimental, which is so fashionable among the polite, both in town and country? In letters and everyday conversation, I have asked several who use it, and have generally been told, it is—it is—sentimental. Everything clever and pleasant seems to fit into that word; but I am convinced a wrong interpretation is given, because it’s impossible for everything clever and pleasant to be as common as this word. I'm often surprised to hear someone is a sentimental man; we were a sentimental group; I took a sentimental walk. And so that I could be considered part of the trend, and as I thought, show them the correct use of the word, about six weeks ago, I claimed I’d just received a sentimental letter. Having often laughed at the word, and criticized how it was used, and this being the first time I dared to use it, I was warmly congratulated on the occasion: but I would love to know your interpretation of it’ (Richardson’s Correspondence, 1804, iv. pp. 282–3). The response from the author of Clarissa, which would have been interesting, is not included; but it’s clear that by this date (1749) ‘sentimental’ must have already been quite overused by ‘the polite.’ Eleven years later, we find it again in the Prologue to Colman’s ‘Dramatick Novel’ of Polly Honeycombe. ‘And then,’ he says, commenting on the fiction of the period,—
And then so sentimental is the Stile,
So chaste, yet so bewitching all the while!
Plot, and elopement, passion, rape, and rapture,
The total sum of ev’ry dear—dear—Chapter.
And then, the style is so sentimental,
So pure, yet so captivating at the same time!
Intrigue, running away together, intense feelings, violation, and ecstasy,
The complete essence of every beloved—beloved—chapter.
With February, 1768, came Sterne’s Sentimental Journey upon which Wesley has this comment:—‘I casually took a volume of what is called, “A Sentimental Journey through France and Italy.” Sentimental! what is that? It is not English: he might as well say, Continental [!]. It is not sense. It conveys no determinate idea; yet one fool makes many. And this nonsensical word (who would believe it?) is become a fashionable one!’ (Journal, February 11, 1772). In 1773, Goldsmith puts it in the ‘Dedication’ to She Stoops:—‘The undertaking a comedy, not merely sentimental, was very dangerous;’ and Garrick (forgetting Kelly and False Delicacy) uses it more than once in his ‘Prologue’ to the same play, e.g.—‘Faces are blocks in sentimental scenes.’ Further examples might easily be multiplied, for the word, in spite of Johnson, had now come to stay. Two years subsequently we find Sheridan referring to
With February 1768 came Sterne’s Sentimental Journey, and Wesley had this to say about it: “I casually picked up a volume titled 'A Sentimental Journey through France and Italy.' Sentimental! What does that even mean? It’s not English; he might as well call it Continental [!]. It doesn’t make sense. It doesn’t convey a clear idea; yet one fool inspires many. And this ridiculous word (who would have thought?) has become trendy!” (Journal, February 11, 1772). In 1773, Goldsmith included it in the ‘Dedication’ to She Stoops: “Taking on a comedy, not just sentimental, was quite risky;” and Garrick (forgetting Kelly and False Delicacy) uses it more than once in his ‘Prologue’ to the same play, for example: “Faces are wooden in sentimental scenes.” More examples could easily be found, as the word, despite Johnson, had now become established. Two years later, we find Sheridan referring to
The goddess of the woful countenance,
The sentimental Muse!—
The goddess with the sorrowful face,
The emotional Muse!—
in an occasional ‘Prologue’ to The Rivals. It must already have passed into the vocabulary of the learned. Todd gives examples from Shenstone and Langhorne. Warton has it more than once in his History of English Poetry; and it figures in the Essays of Vicesimus Knox. Thus academically launched, we need no longer follow its fortunes.
in a rare ‘Prologue’ to The Rivals. It must have already entered the vocabulary of scholars. Todd provides examples from Shenstone and Langhorne. Warton mentions it several times in his History of English Poetry; and it appears in the Essays of Vicesimus Knox. With that academic introduction, we no longer need to track its trajectory.
APPENDIX D
FRAGMENTS OF TRANSLATIONS, ETC., BY GOLDSMITH.
FRAGMENTS OF TRANSLATIONS, ETC., BY GOLDSMITH.
To the Aldine edition of 1831, the Rev. John Mitford added several fragments of translation from Goldsmith’s Essays. About a third of these were traced by Bolton Corney in 1845 to the Horace of Francis. He therefore compiled a fresh collection, here given.
To the Aldine edition of 1831, Rev. John Mitford added several fragments of translation from Goldsmith’s Essays. About a third of these were identified by Bolton Corney in 1845 as coming from Francis's Horace. As a result, he put together a new collection, which is provided here.
From a French version of Homer.
From a French version of Homer.
The shouting army cry’d with joy extreme,
He sure must conquer, who himself can tame!
The Bee, 1759, p. 90.
The shouting army cried out with extreme joy,
He must surely conquer, who can tame himself!
The Bee, 1759, p. 90.
The next is also from Homer, and is proposed as an improvement of Pope:—
The next one is also from Homer, and it's suggested as an enhancement of Pope:—
They knew and own’d the monarch of the main:
The sea subsiding spreads a level plain:
The curling waves before his coursers fly:
The parting surface leaves his brazen axle dry.
Miscellaneous Works, 1801, iv. 410.
They knew and owned the king of the sea:
The water calms, creating a flat expanse:
The curling waves rush ahead of his horses:
The parting water leaves his metal axle dry.
Miscellaneous Works, 1801, iv. 410.
From the same source comes number three, a quatrain from Vida’s Eclogues:—
From the same source comes number three, a quatrain from Vida’s Eclogues:—
Say heavenly muse, their youthful frays rehearse;
Begin, ye daughters of immortal verse;
Exulting rocks have crown’d the power of song!
And rivers listen’d as they flow’d along.
Miscellaneous Works, 1801, iv. 427.
Say heavenly muse, recount their youthful battles;
Begin, you daughters of eternal poetry;
Joyful rocks have honored the power of song!
And rivers have listened as they flowed by.
Miscellaneous Works, 1801, iv. 427.
Another is a couplet from Ovid, the fish referred to being the scarus or bream:—
Another is a couplet from Ovid, the fish mentioned being the scarus or bream:—
Of all the fish that graze beneath the flood,
He, only, ruminates his former food.
History of the Earth, etc., 1774, iii. 6.
Of all the fish that feed below the water,
He, only, thinks about what he used to eat.
History of the Earth, etc., 1774, iii. 6.
Bolton Corney also prints the translation from the Spectator, already given in this volume. His last fragment is from the posthumous translation of Scarron’s Roman Comique:—
Bolton Corney also prints the translation from the Spectator, already included in this volume. His final fragment is from the posthumous translation of Scarron’s Roman Comique:—
Thus, when soft love subdues the heart
With smiling hopes and chilling fears,
The soul rejects the aid of art,
And speaks in moments more than years.
The Comic Romance of Monsieur Scarron, 1775, ii. 161.
Thus, when tender love captures the heart
With hopeful smiles and anxious fears,
The soul turns away from clever tricks,
And expresses itself in moments more than years.
The Comic Romance of Monsieur Scarron, 1775, ii. 161.
It is unnecessary to refer to any other of the poems attributed to Goldsmith. Mitford included in his edition a couple of quatrains inserted in the Morning Chronicle for April 3, 1800, which were said to be by the poet; but they do not resemble his manner. Another piece with the title of The Fair Thief was revived in July, 1893, by an anonymous writer in the Daily Chronicle, as being possibly by Goldsmith, to whom it was assigned in an eighteenth-century anthology (1789–80). Its discoverer, however, subsequently found it given in Walpole’s Noble Authors (Park’s edition, 1806) to Charles Wyndham, Earl of Egremont. It has no great merit; and may safely be neglected as an important addition to Goldsmith’s Works, already burdened with much which that critical author would never have reprinted.
It's not necessary to mention any other poems credited to Goldsmith. Mitford included a couple of quatrains published in the Morning Chronicle on April 3, 1800, which were claimed to be by the poet; however, they don't match his style. Another piece titled The Fair Thief was brought back to attention in July 1893 by an anonymous writer in the Daily Chronicle, suggesting it might be by Goldsmith, as it was included in an eighteenth-century anthology (1789–80). However, the person who found it later discovered it listed in Walpole’s Noble Authors (Park’s edition, 1806) under Charles Wyndham, Earl of Egremont. It doesn't hold much value and can be safely overlooked as a significant addition to Goldsmith’s Works, which are already weighed down with many pieces that a discerning author would never have republished.
APPENDIX E
GOLDSMITH ON POETRY UNDER ANNE AND GEORGE THE FIRST.
GOLDSMITH ON POETRY DURING ANNE AND GEORGE THE FIRST.
In Letter xvi, vol. ii. pp.139–41, of An History of England in a Series of Letters from a Nobleman to his Son, 1764, Goldsmith gives the following short account of the state of poetry in the first quarter of the Eighteenth Century.
In Letter xvi, vol. ii. pp.139–41, of An History of England in a Series of Letters from a Nobleman to his Son, 1764, Goldsmith provides the following brief overview of the state of poetry in the early 18th Century.
‘But, of all the other arts, poetry in this age was carried to the greatest perfection. The language, for some ages, had been improving, but now it seemed entirely divested of its roughness and barbarity. Among the poets of this period we may place John Philips, author of several poems, but of none more admired than that humourous one, entitled, The Splendid Shilling; he lived in obscurity, and died just above want. William Congreve deserves also particular notice; his comedies, some of which were but coolly received upon their first appearance, seemed to mend upon repetition; and he is, at present, justly allowed the foremost in that species of dramatic poesy. His wit is ever just and brilliant; his sentiments new and lively; and his elegance equal to his regularity. Next him Vanbrugh is placed, whose humour seems more natural, and characters more new; but he owes too many obligations to the French, entirely to pass for an original; and his total disregard to decency, in a great measure, impairs his merit. Farquhar is still more lively, and, perhaps more entertaining than either; his pieces still continue the favourite performances of the stage, and bear frequent repetition without satiety; but he often mistakes pertness for wit, and seldom strikes his characters with proper force or originality. However, he died very young; and it is remarkable, that he continued to improve as he grew older; his last play, entitled The Beaux’ Strategem, being the best of his productions. Addison, both as a poet and prose writer, deserves the highest regard and imitation. His Campaign, and Letter to Lord Halifax from Italy, are masterpieces in the former, and his Essays published in the Spectator are inimitable specimens of the latter. Whatever he treated of was handled with elegance and precision; and that virtue which was taught in his writings, was enforced by his example. Steele was Addison’s friend and admirer; his comedies are perfectly polite, chaste, and genteel; nor were his other works contemptible; he wrote on several subjects, and yet it is amazing, in the multiplicity of his pursuits, how he found leisure for the discussion of any. Ever persecuted by creditors, whom his profuseness drew upon him, or pursuing impracticable schemes, suggested by ill-grounded ambition. Dean Swift was the professed antagonist both of Addison and him. He perceived that there was a spirit of romance mixed with all the works of the poets who preceded him; or, in other words, that they had drawn nature on the most pleasing side. There still therefore was a place left for him, who, careless of censure, should describe it just as it was, with all its deformities; he therefore owes much of his fame, not so much to the greatness of his genius, as to the boldness of it. He was dry, sarcastic, and severe; and suited his style exactly to the turn of his thought, being concise and nervous. In this period also flourished many of subordinate fame. Prior was the first who adopted the French elegant easy manner of telling a story; but if what he has borrowed from that nation be taken from him, scarce anything will be left upon which he can lay any claim to applause in poetry. Rowe was only outdone by Shakespeare and Otway as a tragic writer; he has fewer absurdities than either; and is, perhaps, as pathetic as they; but his flights are not so bold, nor his characters so strongly marked. Perhaps his coming later than the rest may have contributed to lessen the esteem he deserves. Garth had success as a poet; and, for a time, his fame was even greater than his desert. In his principal work, The Dispensary, his versification is negligent; and his plot is now become tedious; but whatever he may lose as a poet, it would be improper to rob him of the merit he deserves for having written the prose dedication, and preface, to the poem already mentioned; in which he has shown the truest wit, with the most refined elegance. Parnell, though he has written but one poem, namely, The Hermit, yet has found a place among the English first rate poets. Gay, likewise, by his Fables and Pastorals, has acquired an equal reputation. But of all who have added to the stock of English Poetry, Pope, perhaps, deserves the first place. On him, foreigners look as one of the most successful writers of his time; his versification is the most harmonious, and his correctness the most remarkable of all our poets. A noted contemporary of his own calls the English the finest writers on moral topics, and Pope the noblest moral writer of all the English. Mr. Pope has somewhere named himself the last English Muse; and, indeed, since his time, we have seen scarce any production that can justly lay claim to immortality; he carried the language to its highest perfection; and those who have attempted still farther to improve it, instead of ornament, have only caught finery.’
‘But, among all the other arts, poetry during this time was developed to its greatest perfection. The language had been improving for several ages, but now it seemed completely free of its roughness and barbarism. We can include among the poets of this period John Philips, who wrote several poems, but none is more admired than his humorous piece titled, The Splendid Shilling; he lived in obscurity and died just above the poverty line. William Congreve also deserves special mention; his comedies, some of which were received lukewarmly when they first appeared, seemed to get better with each repetition; he is now rightly regarded as the leading figure in that type of dramatic poetry. His wit is always sharp and brilliant; his ideas are fresh and lively; and his elegance matches his structure. Next is Vanbrugh, whose humor feels more natural and his characters more original; however, he owes too much to the French to be considered completely original, and his total disregard for decency somewhat undermines his merit. Farquhar is even livelier and perhaps more entertaining than either; his works remain audience favorites and can be enjoyed repeatedly without becoming tiresome; however, he often confuses impertinence with wit and rarely portrays his characters with the necessary force or originality. Nevertheless, he died very young, and it is noteworthy that he continued to improve as he aged, with his last play, titled The Beaux’ Strategem, being the best of his works. Addison, both as a poet and writer, deserves the highest respect and imitation. His Campaign and Letter to Lord Halifax from Italy are masterpieces in poetry, while his Essays published in the Spectator are exceptional examples of prose. Whatever topic he addressed was treated with elegance and precision; the virtues he taught in his writings were reinforced by his actions. Steele was Addison’s friend and admirer; his comedies are perfectly polite, respectable, and refined; nor were his other works insignificant; he wrote on various subjects, yet it’s remarkable how he found time to discuss any of them amidst his many pursuits. Always pursued by creditors due to his extravagance or chasing impractical schemes fueled by misguided ambition. Dean Swift was the declared opponent of both Addison and Steele. He realized there was a romantic spirit intertwined with the works of the poets who came before him; in other words, they offered a version of nature in its most flattering light. Therefore, there remained an opportunity for him to describe it as it truly was, with all its flaws; much of his fame can be attributed, not just to his genius, but to his boldness. His style was dry, sarcastic, and severe, perfectly matching his thoughts, being concise and impactful. This era also saw the rise of many lesser-known figures. Prior was the first to adopt the French's elegant, easy way of storytelling; however, if we remove what he borrowed from that culture, little remains for which he can claim praise in poetry. Rowe was only surpassed by Shakespeare and Otway as a tragic writer; he has fewer absurdities than either and is possibly as moving as they are; yet his flights are not as daring, nor are his characters as sharply defined. Perhaps his later arrival in the literary scene contributed to a diminished esteem he rightly deserves. Garth found success as a poet, and for a time, his fame was even greater than it warranted. In his main work, The Dispensary, his verse is careless, and his plot has become tedious; however, whatever he may lack as a poet, it would be unfair to deny him credit for the prose dedication and preface he wrote for the aforementioned poem; in which he displayed both true wit and refined elegance. Parnell, although he has written only one poem, namely The Hermit, has secured his place among the top English poets. Gay, too, with his Fables and Pastorals, has earned a similar reputation. But of all who have contributed to the wealth of English poetry, Pope perhaps deserves the foremost spot. Foreigners regard him as one of the most successful writers of his time; his verse is the most harmonious, and his correctness is unmatched among our poets. A well-known contemporary of his even labeled the English as the finest writers on moral issues, with Pope as the greatest moral writer in English. Mr. Pope has referred to himself somewhere as the last English Muse; and indeed, since his time, we have seen hardly any creation that can justly claim immortality; he pushed the language to its highest perfection; and those who have tried to improve it further, instead of offering embellishment, have only adopted superficiality.’
APPENDIX F
CRITICISMS FROM GOLDSMITH’S ‘BEAUTIES OF ENGLISH POESY.’
CRITICISMS FROM GOLDSMITH’S ‘BEAUTIES OF ENGLISH POESY.’
To The Beauties of English Poesy, 2 vols., 1767, Goldsmith prefixed, in each case, ‘short introductory criticisms.’ They are, as he says, ‘rather designed for boys than men’; and aim only at being ‘obvious and sincere’; but they carry his views on the subject somewhat farther than the foregoing account from the History of England.
To The Beauties of English Poesy, 2 vols., 1767, Goldsmith included, in each case, ‘short introductory criticisms.’ He states that they are ‘more suited for boys than men’; and aim to be ‘clear and genuine’; but they express his views on the topic a bit more extensively than the previous discussion from the History of England.
THE RAPE OF THE LOCK.
THE RAPE OF THE LOCK.
This seems to be Mr. Pope’s most finished production, and is, perhaps, the most perfect in our language. It exhibits stronger powers of imagination, more harmony of numbers, and a greater knowledge of the world, than any other of this poet’s works; and it is probable, if our country were called upon to show a specimen of their genius to foreigners, this would be the work here fixed upon.
This appears to be Mr. Pope’s most polished work and is, perhaps, the most perfect in our language. It shows stronger imagination, better rhythm, and a deeper understanding of the world than any of this poet’s other pieces; and it’s likely that if our country were asked to present a sample of their talent to outsiders, this would be the chosen work.
THE HERMIT.
THE HERMIT.
This poem is held in just esteem, the versification being chaste, and tolerably harmonious, and the story told with perspicuity and conciseness. It seems to have cost great labour, both to Mr. Pope and Parnell himself, to bring it to this perfection.* It may not be amiss to observe that the fable is taken from one of Dr. Henry More’s Dialogues.
This poem is highly regarded, with clean verse and decent harmony, and the story is told clearly and concisely. It seems that both Mr. Pope and Parnell put in a lot of effort to achieve this level of perfection.* It's worth noting that the fable is taken from one of Dr. Henry More’s Dialogues.
*Parnell’s Poems, 1770, xxiv.
Parnell’s Poems, 1770, 24.
IL PENSEROSO.
The Pensive One.
I have heard a very judicious critic say, that he had an higher idea of Milton’s style in poetry, from the two following poems [Il Penseroso and l’Allegro], than from his Paradise Lost. It is certain the imagination shown in them is correct and strong. The introduction to both in irregular measure is borrowed from the Italian, and hurts an English ear.
I once heard a very insightful critic say that he has a higher regard for Milton’s style in poetry, based on the two poems [Il Penseroso and l’Allegro], than for his Paradise Lost. It's clear that the imagination displayed in these poems is both accurate and powerful. The irregular meter used in the introductions is taken from the Italian and is off-putting to an English ear.
AN ELEGY, WRITTEN IN A COUNTRY CHURCH YARD.
AN ELEGY, WRITTEN IN A COUNTRY CHURCHYARD.
This is a very fine poem, but overloaded with epithet.† The heroic measure with alternate rhyme is very properly adapted to the solemnity of the subject, as it is the slowest movement that our language admits of. The latter part of the poem is pathetic and interesting.
This is a really great poem, but it's packed with too many descriptive words. The heroic measure with alternating rhyme fits the seriousness of the topic really well, as it’s the slowest rhythm that our language allows. The second half of the poem is touching and engaging.
†This is a strange complaint to come from Goldsmith, whose own Hermit, as was pointed out to the present Editor by the late Mr. Kegan Paul, is certainly open to this impeachment.
†This is a strange complaint to come from Goldsmith, whose own Hermit, as the late Mr. Kegan Paul pointed out to the current Editor, is definitely subject to this criticism.
LONDON. IN IMITATION OF THE THIRD SATIRE
OF JUVENAL.
LONDON. IN IMITATION OF THE THIRD SATIRE
OF JUVENAL.
This poem of Mr. Johnson’s is the best imitation of the original that has appeared in our language, being possessed of all the force and satirical resentment of Juvenal. Imitation gives us a much truer idea of the ancients than even translation could do.
This poem by Mr. Johnson is the best imitation of the original that has appeared in our language, capturing all the power and biting satire of Juvenal. Imitation provides us with a much clearer understanding of the ancients than even translation can offer.
THE SCHOOL-MISTRESS. IN IMITATION OF SPENSER.
THE SCHOOL-MISTRESS. IN IMITATION OF SPENSER.
This poem is one of those happinesses in which a poet excels himself, as there is nothing in all Shenstone which in any way approaches it in merit; and, though I dislike the imitations of our old English poets in general, yet, on this minute subject, the antiquity of the style produces a very ludicrous solemnity.
This poem is one of those moments of happiness where the poet really shines, as there's nothing in all of Shenstone that even comes close to it in quality. And while I typically don't care for the imitations of our old English poets, on this particular topic, the old-fashioned style adds a hilariously serious tone.
COOPER’S HILL.
COOPER'S HILL.
This poem, by Denham, though it may have been exceeded by later attempts in description, yet deserves the highest applause, as it far surpasses all that went before it: the concluding part, though a little too much crowded, is very masterly.
This poem by Denham, while it may have been outdone by later descriptions, still deserves the highest praise, as it greatly surpasses everything that came before it. The ending, although a bit too packed, is very skillful.
ELOISA TO ABELARD.
Eloisa to Abelard.
The harmony of numbers in this poem is very fine. It is rather drawn out to too tedious a length, although the passions vary with great judgement. It may be considered as superior to anything in the epistolary way; and the many translations which have been made of it into the modern languages, are in some measure a proof of this.
The balance of numbers in this poem is really impressive. It does go on for a bit too long, but the emotions are handled with great insight. It can be seen as better than anything in the letter-writing style; the numerous translations that have been made of it into modern languages are somewhat of a testament to this.
AN EPISTLE FROM MR. PHILIPS [Ambrose Philips] TO THE EARL OF DORSET.
AN EPISTLE FROM MR. PHILIPS [Ambrose Philips] TO THE EARL OF DORSET.
The opening of this poem is incomparably fine. The latter part is tedious and trifling.
The beginning of this poem is incredibly good. The second half is boring and pointless.
A LETTER FROM ITALY, TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLECHARLES LORD HALIFAX.
In the Year MDCCI.
A LETTER FROM ITALY, TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE CHARLES LORD HALIFAX.
In the Year 1701.
Few poems have done more honour to English genius than this. There is in it a strain of political thinking that was, at that time, new in our poetry. Had the harmony of this been equal to that of Pope’s versification, it would be incontestably the finest poem in our language; but there is a dryness in the numbers which greatly lessens the pleasure excited both by the poet’s judgement and imagination.*
Few poems have honored English creativity more than this one. It contains a vein of political thought that was, at the time, fresh in our poetry. If the rhythm had matched the elegance of Pope's style, it would undoubtedly be the best poem in our language; however, the dryness in the lines significantly reduces the enjoyment sparked by the poet's judgement and imagination.*
* See introductory note to The Traveller, p. 162.
* See introductory note to The Traveller, p. 162.
ALEXANDER’S FEAST; OR, THE POWER OF MUSIC.
AN ODE, IN HONOUR OF ST. CECILIA’S DAY.
ALEXANDER’S FEAST; OR, THE POWER OF MUSIC.
AN ODE, IN HONOR OF ST. CECILIA’S DAY.
This ode [by Mr. Dryden] has been more applauded, perhaps, than it has been felt, however, it is a very fine one, and gives its beauties rather at a third, or fourth, than at a first perusal.
This ode [by Mr. Dryden] has probably been praised more than it has been truly appreciated; however, it’s really well done and reveals its beauty more on a second or third reading than on the first.
ODE FOR MUSIC ON ST. CECILIA’S DAY.
ODE FOR MUSIC ON ST. CECILIA’S DAY.
This ode [by Mr. Pope] has by many been thought equal to the former. As it is a repetition of Dryden’s manner, it is so far inferior to him. The whole hint of Orpheus, and many of the lines, have been taken from an obscure Ode upon Music, published in Tate’s Miscellanies.*
This ode [by Mr. Pope] has often been considered on par with the previous one. However, since it mimics Dryden’s style, it falls short of his greatness. The entire concept of Orpheus and many of the lines are borrowed from an obscure Ode upon Music, published in Tate’s Miscellanies.*
*A Pindaric Essay upon Musick—says Gibbs—by ‘Mr. Wilson’,’ which appears at p. 401 of Tate’s Collection of 1685.
*A Pindaric Essay upon Musick—says Gibbs—by ‘Mr. Wilson’,’ which appears on page 401 of Tate’s Collection from 1685.
THE SHEPHERD’S WEEK. IN SIX PASTORALS.
THE SHEPHERD’S WEEK. IN SIX PASTORALS.
These are Mr. Gay’s principal performances. They were originally intended, I suppose, as a burlesque on those of [Ambrose] Philips; but, perhaps without designing it, he has hit the true spirit of pastoral poetry. In fact, he more resembles Theocritus than any other English pastoral writer whatsoever. There runs through the whole a strain of rustic pleasantry which should ever distinguish this species of composition; but how far the antiquated expressions used here may contribute to the humour, I will not determine; for my own part, I could wish the simplicity were preserved, without recurring to such obsolete antiquity for the manner of expressing it.
These are Mr. Gay’s main works. They were originally meant, I think, to make fun of those by [Ambrose] Philips; but, maybe without meaning to, he has captured the true essence of pastoral poetry. In fact, he resembles Theocritus more than any other English pastoral writer. There’s a thread of rural humor throughout that should always characterize this type of writing; but I won’t say how much the old-fashioned language here adds to the humor, because personally, I wish the simplicity could be kept without needing to rely on such outdated expressions for it.
MAC FLECKNOE.
MAC FLECKNOE.
The severity of this satire, and the excellence of its versification give it a distinguished rank in this species of composition. At present, an ordinary reader would scarce suppose that Shadwell, who is here meant by Mac Flecknoe, was worth being chastised, and that Dryden’s descending to such game was like an eagle’s stooping to catch flies.† The truth however is, Shadwell, at one time, held divided reputation with this great poet. Every age produces its fashionable dunces, who, by following the transient topic, or humour, of the day, supply talkative ignorance with materials for conversation.
The harshness of this satire and the quality of its verse give it a notable place in this kind of writing. Nowadays, an average reader would hardly believe that Shadwell, who is referred to as Mac Flecknoe, deserved to be punished, and that Dryden stooping to such a level was like an eagle swooping down to catch flies. The truth is, Shadwell once shared a reputation with this great poet. Every era produces its trendy fools, who, by chasing the fleeting topics or fads of the time, provide talkative ignorance with material for conversation.
†‘Aquila non capit muscas’ (Apostolius).
“Aquila non capit muscas” (Apostolius).
ON POETRY. A RHAPSODY.
ON POETRY. A RHAPSODY.
Here follows one of the best versified poems in our language, and the most masterly production of its author. The severity with which Walpole is here treated, was in consequence of that minister having refused to provide for Swift in England, when applied to for that purpose in the year 1725 (if I remember right). The severity of a poet, however, gave Walpole very little uneasiness. A man whose schemes, like this minister’s, seldom extended beyond the exigency of the year, but little regarded the contempt of posterity.
Here’s one of the best poems in our language and the most skillful work of its author. The harsh way Walpole is portrayed here is because that minister didn’t help Swift secure a position in England when he was asked to in 1725 (if I remember correctly). However, Walpole was hardly bothered by the poet's harshness. A man whose plans, like this minister’s, rarely went beyond the needs of the year didn't care much about being looked down upon by future generations.
OF THE USE OF RICHES.
ON USING WEALTH.
This poem, as Mr. Pope tells us himself, cost much attention and labour; and, from the easiness that appears in it, one would be apt to think as much.
This poem, as Mr. Pope himself tells us, took a lot of attention and effort; and because it seems so effortless, one might be inclined to think otherwise.
FROM THE DISPENSARY.
From the pharmacy.
This sixth canto of the Dispensary, by Dr. Garth, has more merit than the whole preceding part of the poem, and, as I am told, in the first edition of this work it is more correct than as here exhibited; but that edition I have not been able to find. The praises bestowed on this poem are more than have been given to any other; but our approbation, at present, is cooler, for it owed part of its fame to party.*
This sixth canto of the Dispensary, by Dr. Garth, is more valuable than the entire earlier part of the poem, and, from what I've heard, it's more accurate in the first edition of this work than it is here; however, I haven’t been able to find that edition. The praise this poem has received is greater than that given to any other, but our current approval is less enthusiastic, as some of its fame came from political affiliations.*
* Cf. Dedication of The Traveller, ll. 34–45.
* Cf. Dedication of The Traveller, ll. 34–45.
ECLOGUE I.
SELIM: OR, THE SHEPHERD’S
MORAL.
ECLOGUE I.
SELIM: OR, THE SHEPHERD’S
MORAL.
The following eclogues,† written by Mr. Collins, are very pretty: the images, it must be owned, are not very local; for the pastoral subject could not well admit of it. The description of Asiatic magnificence, and manners, is a subject as yet unattempted amongst us, and I believe, capable of furnishing a great variety of poetical imagery.
The following eclogues,† written by Mr. Collins, are quite lovely: the images, it must be said, aren't very specific to our area; after all, the pastoral theme doesn't lend itself to that. The portrayal of Asian splendor and customs is a topic that hasn't been explored by us yet, and I believe it can provide a wealth of poetic imagery.
† i.e.—Selim, Hassan, Agib and Secander, and Abra. Goldsmith admired Collins, whom he calls in the Enquiry, 1759, p. 143, ‘the neglected author of the Persian eclogues, which, however inaccurate, excel any in our language.’ He borrowed freely from him in the Threnodia Augustalis, q.v.
† i.e.—Selim, Hassan, Agib, Secander, and Abra. Goldsmith admired Collins, whom he refers to in the Enquiry, 1759, p. 143, ‘the overlooked author of the Persian eclogues, which, although not entirely accurate, surpass anything in our language.’ He freely borrowed from him in the Threnodia Augustalis, q.v.
THE SPLENDID SHILLING.
BY MR.
J. PHILIPS.
THE SPLENDID SHILLING.
BY MR. J. PHILIPS.
This is reckoned the best parody of Milton in our language: it has been an hundred times imitated, without success. The truth is, the first thing in this way must preclude all future attempts; for nothing is so easy as to burlesque any man’s manner, when we are once showed the way.
This is considered the best parody of Milton in our language: it has been copied a hundred times, but never successfully. The reality is, the first example in this style makes it impossible for others to follow; because once we see how it’s done, it’s very easy to mock someone’s style.
A PIPE OF TOBACCO:
IN IMITATION OF
SIX SEVERAL AUTHORS.
A PIPE OF TOBACCO:
IN IMITATION OF
SIX SEVERAL AUTHORS.
Mr. Hawkins Browne, the author of these, as I am told, had no good original manner of his own, yet we see how well he succeeded when he turns an imitator; for the following are rather imitations than ridiculous parodies.
Mr. Hawkins Browne, the author of these, as I’ve heard, didn’t have a particularly original style of his own, yet we can see how well he did when he became an imitator; because what follows are more like imitations than outright ridiculous parodies.
A NIGHT-PIECE ON DEATH.
A Night Piece on Death.
The great fault of this piece, written by Dr. Parnell, is that it is in eight-syllable lines, very improper for the solemnity of the subject; otherwise, the poem is natural, and the reflections just.
The main issue with this piece, written by Dr. Parnell, is that it's in eight-syllable lines, which is not suitable for the seriousness of the topic; otherwise, the poem is down-to-earth, and the thoughts are insightful.
A FAIRY TALE.
BY DR. PARNELL.
A Fairy Tale.
By Dr. Parnell.
Never was the old manner of speaking more happily applied, or a tale better told, than this.
Never has the old way of speaking been used more effectively, or a story been told better, than this.
PALEMON AND LAVINIA.
[From The Seasons.]
PALEMON AND LAVINIA.
[From The Seasons.]
Mr. Thomson, though, in general, a verbose and affected poet, has told this story with unusual simplicity: it is rather given here for being much esteemed by the public, than by the editor.
Mr. Thomson, although generally a wordy and pretentious poet, has told this story with surprising simplicity: it is included here primarily because it is highly valued by the public, rather than by the editor.
THE BASTARD.
THE JERK.
Almost all things written from the heart, as this certainly was, have some merit. The poet here describes sorrows and misfortunes which were by no means imaginary; and, thus, there runs a truth of thinking through this poem, without which it would be of little value, as Savage is, in other respects, but an indifferent poet.
Almost everything written from the heart, like this certainly is, has some value. The poet describes real sorrows and misfortunes, not just made-up ones; therefore, there's a genuine insight in this poem, without which it wouldn't be very valuable, as Savage is, in other ways, just an average poet.
THE POET AND HIS PATRON.
THE POET AND HIS PATRON.
Mr. Mo[o]re was a poet that never had justice done him while living; there are few of the moderns have a more correct taste, or a more pleasing manner of expressing their thoughts. It was upon these fables [Nos. v, vi, and xvi of the Fables for the Ladies] he chiefly founded his reputation; yet they are, by no means, his best production.
Mr. Moore was a poet who never received the recognition he deserved while he was alive; few modern poets have a better taste or a more enjoyable way of expressing their ideas. He primarily built his reputation on these fables [Nos. v, vi, and xvi of the Fables for the Ladies], but they aren't his best work by any means.
AN EPISTLE TO A LADY.
A letter to a lady.
This little poem, by Mr. Nugent [afterwards Lord Clare] is very pleasing. The easiness of the poetry, and the justice of the thoughts, constitute its principal beauty.
This short poem by Mr. Nugent (later Lord Clare) is very pleasing. The simplicity of the poetry and the relevance of the thoughts are its main points of beauty.
HANS CARVEL.
HANS CARVEL.
This bagatelle, for which, by the by, Mr. Prior has got his greatest reputation, was a tale told in all the old Italian collections of jests, and borrowed from thence by Fontaine. It had been translated once or twice before into English, yet was never regarded till it fell into the hands of Mr. Prior. A strong instance how everything is improved in the hands of a man of genius.
This trivial piece, by the way, is what Mr. Prior is most famous for. It’s a story found in all the classic Italian joke collections and borrowed from there by Fontaine. It had been translated into English a couple of times before but never really appreciated until it reached Mr. Prior. It’s a great example of how everything gets better in the hands of a talented person.
BAUCIS AND PHILEMON.
Baucis and Philemon.
This poem [by Swift] is very fine; and though in the same strain with the preceding [Prior’s Ladle] is yet superior.
This poem [by Swift] is really great; and while it's similar in style to the one before it [Prior’s Ladle], it's even better.
TO THE EARL OF WARWICK, ON THE DEATH
OF MR. ADDISON.
TO THE EARL OF WARWICK, ON THE DEATH
OF MR. ADDISON.
This elegy (by Mr. Ticknell) is one of the finest in our language; there is so little new that can be said upon the death of a friend, after the complaints of Ovid and the Latin Italians, in this way, that one is surprised to see so much novelty in this to strike us, and so much interest to affect.
This elegy (by Mr. Ticknell) is one of the best in our language; there’s so little new that can be said about the death of a friend, especially after the laments of Ovid and the Latin Italians, that it’s surprising to find so much freshness in this piece that resonates with us, and so much emotion to touch us.
COLIN AND LUCY.
Colin and Lucy.
Through all Tickell’s works there is a strain of ballad-thinking, if I may so express it; and, in this professed ballad, he seems to have surpassed himself. It is, perhaps, the best in our language in this way.
Through all of Tickell’s works, there’s a thread of ballad-like thinking, if I can put it that way; and in this particular ballad, he seems to have outdone himself. It may be the best of its kind in our language.
THE TEARS OF SCOTLAND.
WRITTEN IN THE YEAR
MDCCXLVI.
THE TEARS OF SCOTLAND.
WRITTEN IN THE YEAR
1746.
This ode, by Dr. Smollett, does rather more honour to the author’s feelings than his taste. The mechanical part, with regard to numbers and language, is not so perfect as so short a work as this requires; but the pathetic it contains, particularly in the last stanza but one, is exquisitely fine.
This ode, by Dr. Smollett, reflects the author's emotions more than his artistic skill. The technical aspects, in terms of rhythm and language, aren’t as polished as you'd expect for such a short piece; however, the emotional depth, especially in the second to last stanza, is incredibly beautiful.
ON THE DEATH OF THE LORD PROTECTOR.
ON THE DEATH OF THE LORD PROTECTOR.
Our poetry was not quite harmonized in Waller’s time; so that this, which would be now looked upon as a slovenly sort of versification, was, with respect to the times in which it was written, almost a prodigy of harmony. A modern reader will chiefly be struck with the strength of thinking, and the turn of the compliments bestowed upon the usurper. Everybody has heard the answer our poet made Charles II; who asked him how his poem upon Cromwell came to be finer than his panegyric upon himself. ‘Your majesty,’ replies Waller, ‘knows, that poets always succeed best in fiction.’
Our poetry wasn't very well refined during Waller's time; so what would now be seen as a sloppy kind of verse was, relative to the era it was written in, almost a marvel of harmony. A modern reader will mainly notice the strength of the ideas and the way the compliments are directed at the usurper. Everyone has heard the response our poet gave to Charles II, who asked him why his poem about Cromwell was better than his praise of the king. 'Your majesty,' Waller replied, 'knows that poets always do better with fiction.'
THE STORY OF PHOEBUS AND DAPHNE APPLIED.
THE STORY OF PHOEBUS AND DAPHNE APPLIED.
The French claim this [by Mr. Waller] as belonging to them. To whomsoever it belongs the thought is finely turned.
The French say this [by Mr. Waller] belongs to them. Whoever it belongs to, the thought is well expressed.
NIGHT THOUGHTS.
BY DR. YOUNG.
NIGHT THOUGHTS.
BY DR. YOUNG.
These seem to be the best of the collection; from whence only the two first are taken. They are spoken of differently, either with exaggerated applause or contempt, as the reader’s disposition is either turned to mirth or melancholy.
These appear to be the highlights of the collection; from which only the first two are taken. They are discussed in various ways, either with excessive praise or disdain, depending on whether the reader is feeling cheerful or gloomy.
SATIRE I.
SATIRE I.
Young’s Satires were in higher reputation when published, than they stand in at present. He seems fonder of dazzling than pleasing; of raising our admiration for his wit, than our dislike of the follies he ridicules.
Young’s Satires had a better reputation when they were first published than they do now. He seems more interested in impressing us than in truly entertaining us; in getting us to admire his wit rather than making us dislike the foolishness he mocks.
A PASTORAL BALLAD.
A pastoral poem.
These ballads of Mr. Shenstone are chiefly commended for the natural simplicity of the thoughts and the harmony of the versification. However, they are not excellent in either.
These ballads by Mr. Shenstone are mainly praised for their natural simplicity of thought and the rhythm of the verses. However, they aren't outstanding in either aspect.
PHOEBE. A PASTORAL.
PHOEBE. A FARMING LIFE.
This, by Dr. Byrom, is a better effort than the preceding [a ballad by Shenstone].
This, by Dr. Byrom, is a stronger effort than the one before it [a ballad by Shenstone].
A SONG.
A track.
This [‘Despairing beside a clear stream’] by Mr. Rowe, is better than anything of the kind in our language.
This [‘Despairing beside a clear stream’] by Mr. Rowe is better than anything like it in our language.
AN ESSAY ON POETRY.
An Essay on Poetry.
This work, by the Duke of Buckingham, is enrolled among our great English productions. The precepts are sensible, the poetry not indifferent, but it has been praised more than it deserves.
This work by the Duke of Buckingham is listed among our significant English productions. The lessons are practical, the poetry is decent, but it has received more praise than it actually deserves.
CADENUS AND VANESSA.
Cadenus and Vanessa.
This is thought one of Dr. Swift’s correctest pieces; its chief merit, indeed, is the elegant ease with which a story, but ill-conceived in itself, is told.
This is considered one of Dr. Swift’s most accurate works; its main strength, in fact, is the graceful simplicity with which a poorly conceived story is narrated.
ALMA: OR, THE PROGRESS OF THE MIND.
ALMA: OR, THE PROGRESS OF THE MIND.
What Prior meant by this poem I can’t understand; by the Greek motto to it one would think it was either to laugh at the subject or the reader. There are some parts of it very fine; and let them save the badness of the rest.
What Prior meant by this poem, I can't grasp; by the Greek motto attached to it, one would assume it was either mocking the subject or the reader. There are some parts of it that are quite good; let those redeem the flaws of the rest.
Download ePUB
If you like this ebook, consider a donation!