In the "Appendix" to the
_Two Foscari_ (first ed.
_Two Foscari_ (first ed.
Byron
_, iii.
238), but the suppressed "Dedication" and certain gibes, which had been
suffered to appear, may be reckoned as the immediate causes of his
anathema.
Southey's _Vision of Judgement_ was published April 11, 1821--an
undivine comedy, in which the apotheosis of George III. , the
beatification of the virtuous, and the bale and damnation of such
egregious spirits as Robespierre, Wilkes, and Junius, are "thrown upon
the screen" of the showman or lecturer. Southey said that the "Vision"
ought to be read aloud, and, if the subject could be forgotten and
ignored, the hexameters might not sound amiss, but the subject and its
treatment are impossible and intolerable. The "Vision" would have "made
sport" for Byron in any case, but, in the Preface, Southey went out of
his way to attack and denounce the anonymous author of _Don Juan_.
"What, then," he asks (ed. 1838, x. 204), "should be said of those for
whom the thoughtlessness and inebriety of wanton youth can no longer be
pleaded, but who have written in sober manhood, and with deliberate
purpose? . . . Men of diseased hearts and depraved imaginations, who,
forming a system of opinions to suit their own unhappy course of
conduct, have rebelled against the holiest ordinances of human society,
and hating that revealed religion which, with all their efforts and
bravadoes, they are unable entirely to disbelieve, labour to make others
as miserable as themselves, by infecting them with a moral virus that
eats into the soul! The school which they have set up may properly be
called the Satanic school; for, though their productions breathe the
spirit of Belial in their lascivious parts, and the spirit of Moloch in
those loathsome images of atrocities and horrors which they delight to
represent, they are more especially characterized by a Satanic pride and
audacious impiety, which still betrays the wretched feeling of
hopelessness wherewith it is allied. "
Byron was not slow to take up the challenge.
In the "Appendix" to the
_Two Foscari_ (first ed. , pp. 325-329), which was written at Ravenna,
June-July, but not published till December 11, 1821, he retaliates on
"Mr. Southey and his 'pious preface'" in many words; but when it comes
to the point, ignores the charge of having "published a lascivious
book," and endeavours by counter-charges to divert the odium and to
cover his adversary with shame and confusion. "Mr. S. ," he says, "with a
cowardly ferocity, exults over the anticipated 'death-bed repentance' of
the objects of his dislike; and indulges himself in a pleasant 'Vision
of Judgment,' in prose as well as verse, full of impious impudence. . . . I
am not ignorant," he adds, "of Mr. Southey's calumnies on a different
occasion, knowing them to be such, which he scattered abroad on his
return from Switzerland against me and others. . . . What _his_ 'death-bed'
may be it is not my province to predicate; let him settle it with his
Maker, as I must do with mine.
238), but the suppressed "Dedication" and certain gibes, which had been
suffered to appear, may be reckoned as the immediate causes of his
anathema.
Southey's _Vision of Judgement_ was published April 11, 1821--an
undivine comedy, in which the apotheosis of George III. , the
beatification of the virtuous, and the bale and damnation of such
egregious spirits as Robespierre, Wilkes, and Junius, are "thrown upon
the screen" of the showman or lecturer. Southey said that the "Vision"
ought to be read aloud, and, if the subject could be forgotten and
ignored, the hexameters might not sound amiss, but the subject and its
treatment are impossible and intolerable. The "Vision" would have "made
sport" for Byron in any case, but, in the Preface, Southey went out of
his way to attack and denounce the anonymous author of _Don Juan_.
"What, then," he asks (ed. 1838, x. 204), "should be said of those for
whom the thoughtlessness and inebriety of wanton youth can no longer be
pleaded, but who have written in sober manhood, and with deliberate
purpose? . . . Men of diseased hearts and depraved imaginations, who,
forming a system of opinions to suit their own unhappy course of
conduct, have rebelled against the holiest ordinances of human society,
and hating that revealed religion which, with all their efforts and
bravadoes, they are unable entirely to disbelieve, labour to make others
as miserable as themselves, by infecting them with a moral virus that
eats into the soul! The school which they have set up may properly be
called the Satanic school; for, though their productions breathe the
spirit of Belial in their lascivious parts, and the spirit of Moloch in
those loathsome images of atrocities and horrors which they delight to
represent, they are more especially characterized by a Satanic pride and
audacious impiety, which still betrays the wretched feeling of
hopelessness wherewith it is allied. "
Byron was not slow to take up the challenge.
In the "Appendix" to the
_Two Foscari_ (first ed. , pp. 325-329), which was written at Ravenna,
June-July, but not published till December 11, 1821, he retaliates on
"Mr. Southey and his 'pious preface'" in many words; but when it comes
to the point, ignores the charge of having "published a lascivious
book," and endeavours by counter-charges to divert the odium and to
cover his adversary with shame and confusion. "Mr. S. ," he says, "with a
cowardly ferocity, exults over the anticipated 'death-bed repentance' of
the objects of his dislike; and indulges himself in a pleasant 'Vision
of Judgment,' in prose as well as verse, full of impious impudence. . . . I
am not ignorant," he adds, "of Mr. Southey's calumnies on a different
occasion, knowing them to be such, which he scattered abroad on his
return from Switzerland against me and others. . . . What _his_ 'death-bed'
may be it is not my province to predicate; let him settle it with his
Maker, as I must do with mine.
