1838-1841
First Italian Journey — Letters to Miss Haworth — Mr. John Kenyon — ’Sordello’ — Letter to Miss Flower — ’Pippa Passes’ — ’Bells and Pomegranates’.
Mr. Browning sailed from London with Captain Davidson of the ‘Norham Castle’, a merchant vessel bound for Trieste, on which he found himself the only passenger. A striking experience of the voyage, and some characteristic personal details, are given in the following letter to Miss Haworth. It is dated 1838, and was probably written before that year’s summer had closed.
Tuesday Evening.
Dear Miss Haworth, — Do look at a fuchsia in full bloom and notice the clear little honey-drop depending from every flower. I have just found it out to my no small satisfaction, — a bee’s breakfast. I only answer for the long-blossomed sort, though, — indeed, for this plant in my room. Taste and be Titania; you can, that is. All this while I forget that you will perhaps never guess the good of the discovery: I have, you are to know, such a love for flowers and leaves — some leaves — that I every now and then, in an impatience at being able to possess myself of them thoroughly, to see them quite, satiate myself with their scent, — bite them to bits — so there will be some sense in that. How I remember the flowers — even grasses — of places I have seen! Some one flower or weed, I should say, that gets some strangehow connected with them.
Snowdrops and Tilsit in Prussia go together; cowslips and Windsor Park, for instance; flowering palm and some place or other in Holland.
Now to answer what can be answered in the letter I was happy to receive last week. I am quite well. I did not expect you would write, — for none of your written reasons, however. You will see ‘Sordello’ in a trice, if the fagging fit holds. I did not write six lines while absent (except a scene in a play, jotted down as we sailed thro’ the Straits of Gibraltar) — but I did hammer out some four, two of which are addressed to you, two to the Queen* — the whole to go in Book III — perhaps. I called you ‘Eyebright’ — meaning a simple and sad sort of translation of “Euphrasia” into my own language: folks would know who Euphrasia, or Fanny, was — and I should not know Ianthe or Clemanthe. Not that there is anything in them to care for, good or bad. Shall I say ‘Eyebright’?
* I know no lines directly addressed to the Queen.
I was disappointed in one thing, Canova.
What companions should I have?
The story of the ship must have reached you ‘with a difference’ as Ophelia says; my sister told it to a Mr. Dow, who delivered it to Forster, I suppose, who furnished Macready with it, who made it over &c., &c., &c. — As short as I can tell, this way it happened: the captain woke me one bright Sunday morning to say there was a ship floating keel uppermost half a mile off; they lowered a boat, made ropes fast to some floating canvas, and towed her towards our vessel. Both met halfway, and the little air that had risen an hour or two before, sank at once. Our men made the wreck fast in high glee at having ‘new trousers out of the sails,’ and quite sure she was a French boat, broken from her moorings at Algiers, close by. Ropes were next hove (hang this sea-talk!) round her stanchions, and after a quarter of an hour’s pushing at the capstan, the vessel righted suddenly, one dead body floating out; five more were in the forecastle, and had probably been there a month under a blazing African sun — don’t imagine the wretched state of things. They were, these six, the ‘watch below’ — (I give you the result of the day’s observation) — the rest, some eight or ten, had been washed overboard at first. One or two were Algerines, the rest Spaniards. The vessel was a smuggler bound for Gibraltar; there were two stupidly disproportionate guns, taking up the whole deck, which was convex and — nay, look you! (a rough pen-and-ink sketch of the different parts of the wreck is here introduced) these are the gun-rings, and the black square the place where the bodies lay. (All the ‘bulwarks’ or sides of the top, carried away by the waves.) Well, the sailors covered up the hatchway, broke up the aft-deck, hauled up tobacco and cigars, such heaps of them, and then bale after bale of prints and chintz, don’t you call it, till the captain was half-frightened — he would get at the ship’s papers, he said; so these poor fellows were pulled up, piecemeal, and pitched into the sea, the very sailors calling to each other to ‘cover the faces’, — no papers of importance were found, however, but fifteen swords, powder and ball enough for a dozen such boats, and bundles of cotton, &c., that would have taken a day to get out, but the captain vowed that after five o’clock she should be cut adrift: accordingly she was cast loose, not a third of her cargo having been touched; and you hardly can conceive the strange sight when the battered hulk turned round, actually, and looked at us, and then reeled off, like a mutilated creature from some scoundrel French surgeon’s lecture-table, into the most gorgeous and lavish sunset in the world: there; only thank me for not taking you at your word, and giving you the whole ‘story’. — ’What I did?’ I went to Trieste, then Venice — then through Treviso and Bassano to the mountains, delicious Asolo, all my places and castles, you will see. Then to Vicenza, Padua, and Venice again. Then to Verona, Trent, Innspruck (the Tyrol), Munich, Salzburg in Franconia, Frankfort and Mayence; down the Rhine to Cologne, then to Aix-la-Chapelle, Liege and Antwerp — then home. Shall you come to town, anywhere near town, soon? I shall be off again as soon as my book is out, whenever that will be.
I never read that book of Miss Martineau’s, so can’t understand what you mean. Macready is looking well; I just saw him the other day for a minute after the play; his Kitely was Kitely — superb from his flat cap down to his shining shoes. I saw very few Italians, ‘to know’, that is. Those I did see I liked. Your friend Pepoli has been lecturing here, has he not?
I shall be vexed if you don’t write soon, a long Elstree letter. What are you doing, writing — drawing? Ever yours truly R. B. To Miss Haworth, Barham Lodge, Elstree.
Miss Browning’s account of this experience, supplied from memory of her brother’s letters and conversations, contains some vivid supplementary details. The drifting away of the wreck put probably no effective distance between it and the ship; hence the necessity of ‘sailing away’ from it.
‘Of the dead pirates, one had his hands clasped as if praying; another, a severe gash in his head. The captain burnt disinfectants and blew gunpowder, before venturing on board, but even then, he, a powerful man, turned very sick with the smell and sight. They stayed one whole day by the side, but the sailors, in spite of orders, began to plunder the cigars, &c. The captain said privately to Robert, “I cannot restrain my men, and they will bring the plague into our ship, so I mean quietly in the night to sail away.” Robert took two cutlasses and a dagger; they were of the coarsest workmanship, intended for use. At the end of one of the sheaths was a heavy bullet, so that it could be used as a sling. The day after, to their great relief, a heavy rain fell and cleansed the ship. Captain Davidson reported the sight of the wreck and its condition as soon as he arrived at Trieste.’
Miss Browning also relates that the weather was stormy in the Bay of Biscay, and for the first fortnight her brother suffered terribly. The captain supported him on to the deck as they passed through the Straits of Gibraltar, that he might not lose the sight. He recovered, as we know, sufficiently to write ‘How they brought the Good News from Ghent to Aix’; but we can imagine in what revulsion of feeling towards firm land and healthy motion this dream of a headlong gallop was born in him. The poem was pencilled on the cover of Bartoli’s “De’ Simboli trasportati al Morale”, a favourite book and constant companion of his; and, in spite of perfect effacement as far as the sense goes, the pencil dints are still visible. The little poem ‘Home Thoughts from the Sea’ was written at the same time, and in the same manner.
By the time they reached Trieste, the captain, a rough north-countryman, had become so attached to Mr. Browning that he offered him a free passage to Constantinople; and after they had parted, carefully preserved, by way of remembrance, a pair of very old gloves worn by him on deck. Mr. Browning might, on such an occasion, have dispensed with gloves altogether; but it was one of his peculiarities that he could never endure to be out of doors with uncovered hands. The captain also showed his friendly feeling on his return to England by bringing to Miss Browning, whom he had heard of through her brother, a present of six bottles of attar of roses.
The inspirations of Asolo and Venice appear in ‘Pippa Passes’ and ‘In a Gondola’; but the latter poem showed, to Mr. Browning’s subsequent vexation, that Venice had been imperfectly seen; and the magnetism which Asolo was to exercise upon him, only fully asserted itself at a much later time.
A second letter to Miss Haworth is undated, but may have been written at any period of this or the ensuing year.
I have received, a couple of weeks since, a present — an album large and gaping, and as Cibber’s Richard says of the ‘fair Elizabeth’: ‘My heart is empty — she shall fill it’ — so say I (impudently?) of my grand trouble-table, which holds a sketch or two by my fine fellow Monclar, one lithograph — his own face of faces, — ’all the rest was amethyst.’ F. H. everywhere! not a soul beside ‘in the chrystal silence there,’ and it locks, this album; now, don’t shower drawings on M., who has so many advantages over me as it is: or at least don’t bid me of all others say what he is to have.
The ‘Master’ is somebody you don’t know, W. J. Fox, a magnificent and poetical nature, who used to write in reviews when I was a boy, and to whom my verses, a bookful, written at the ripe age of twelve and thirteen, were shown: which verses he praised not a little; which praise comforted me not a little. Then I lost sight of him for years and years; then I published anonymously a little poem — which he, to my inexpressible delight, praised and expounded in a gallant article in a magazine of which he was the editor; then I found him out again; he got a publisher for ‘Paracelsus’ (I read it to him in manuscript) and is in short ‘my literary father’. Pretty nearly the same thing did he for Miss Martineau, as she has said somewhere. God knows I forget what the ‘talk’, table-talk was about — I think she must have told you the results of the whole day we spent tete-a-tete at Ascot, and that day’s, the dinner-day’s morning at Elstree and St. Albans. She is to give me advice about my worldly concerns, and not before I need it!
I cannot say or sing the pleasure your way of writing gives me — do go on, and tell me all sorts of things, ‘the story’ for a beginning; but your moralisings on ‘your age’ and the rest, are — now what are they? not to be reasoned on, disputed, laughed at, grieved about: they are ‘Fanny’s crotchets’. I thank thee, Jew (lia), for teaching me that word.
I don’t know that I shall leave town for a month: my friend Monclar looks piteous when I talk of such an event. I can’t bear to leave him; he is to take my portrait to-day (a famous one he has taken!) and very like he engages it shall be. I am going to town for the purpose… .
Now, then, do something for me, and see if I’ll ask Miss M — — to help you! I am going to begin the finishing ‘Sordello’ — and to begin thinking a Tragedy (an Historical one, so I shall want heaps of criticisms on ‘Strafford’) and I want to have another tragedy in prospect, I write best so provided: I had chosen a splendid subject for it, when I learned that a magazine for next, this, month, will have a scene founded on my story; vulgarizing or doing no good to it: and I accordingly throw it up. I want a subject of the most wild and passionate love, to contrast with the one I mean to have ready in a short time. I have many half-conceptions, floating fancies: give me your notion of a thorough self-devotement, self-forgetting; should it be a woman who loves thus, or a man? What circumstances will best draw out, set forth this feeling? …
The tragedies in question were to be ‘King Victor and King Charles’, and ‘The Return of the Druses’.
This letter affords a curious insight into Mr. Browning’s mode of work; it is also very significant of the small place which love had hitherto occupied in his life. It was evident, from his appeal to Miss Haworth’s ‘notion’ on the subject, that he had as yet no experience, even imaginary, of a genuine passion, whether in woman or man. The experience was still distant from him in point of time. In circumstance he was nearer to it than he knew; for it was in 1839 that he became acquainted with Mr. Kenyon.
When dining one day at Serjeant Talfourd’s, he was accosted by a pleasant elderly man, who, having, we conclude, heard who he was, asked leave to address to him a few questions: ‘Was his father’s name Robert? had he gone to school at the Rev. Mr. Bell’s at Cheshunt, and was he still alive?’ On receiving affirmative answers, he went on to say that Mr. Browning and he had been great chums at school, and though they had lost sight of each other in after-life, he had never forgotten his old playmate, but even alluded to him in a little book which he had published a few years before.*
* The volume is entitled ‘Rhymed Plea for Tolerance’ (1833), and contains a reference to Mr. Kenyon’s schooldays, and to the classic fights which Mr. Browning had instituted.
The next morning the poet asked his father if he remembered a schoolfellow named John Kenyon. He replied, ‘Certainly! This is his face,’ and sketched a boy’s head, in which his son at once recognized that of the grown man. The acquaintance was renewed, and Mr. Kenyon proved ever afterwards a warm friend. Mr. Browning wrote of him, in a letter to Professor Knight of St. Andrews, Jan. 10, 1884: ‘He was one of the best of human beings, with a general sympathy for excellence of every kind. He enjoyed the friendship of Wordsworth, of Southey, of Landor, and, in later days, was intimate with most of my contemporaries of eminence.’ It was at Mr. Kenyon’s house that the poet saw most of Wordsworth, who always stayed there when he came to town.
In 1840 ‘Sordello’ appeared. It was, relatively to its length, by far the slowest in preparation of Mr. Browning’s poems. This seemed, indeed, a condition of its peculiar character. It had lain much deeper in the author’s mind than the various slighter works which were thrown off in the course of its inception. We know from the preface to ‘Strafford’ that it must have been begun soon after ‘Paracelsus’. Its plan may have belonged to a still earlier date; for it connects itself with ‘Pauline’ as the history of a poetic soul; with both the earlier poems, as the manifestation of the self-conscious spiritual ambitions which were involved in that history. This first imaginative mood was also outgrowing itself in the very act of self-expression; for the tragedies written before the conclusion of ‘Sordello’ impress us as the product of a different mental state — as the work of a more balanced imagination and a more mature mind.
It would be interesting to learn how Mr. Browning’s typical poet became embodied in this mediaeval form: whether the half-mythical character of the real Sordello presented him as a fitting subject for imaginative psychological treatment, or whether the circumstances among which he moved seemed the best adapted to the development of the intended type. The inspiration may have come through the study of Dante, and his testimony to the creative influence of Sordello on their mother-tongue. That period of Italian history must also have assumed, if it did not already possess, a great charm for Mr. Browning’s fancy, since he studied no less than thirty works upon it, which were to contribute little more to his dramatic picture than what he calls ‘decoration’, or ‘background’. But the one guide which he has given us to the reading of the poem is his assertion that its historical circumstance is only to be regarded as background; and the extent to which he identified himself with the figure of Sordello has been proved by his continued belief that its prominence was throughout maintained. He could still declare, so late as 1863, in his preface to the reprint of the work, that his ‘stress’ in writing it had lain ‘on the incidents in the development of a soul, little else’ being to his mind ‘worth study’. I cannot therefore help thinking that recent investigations of the life and character of the actual poet, however in themselves praiseworthy and interesting, have been often in some degree a mistake; because, directly or indirectly, they referred Mr. Browning’s Sordello to an historical reality, which his author had grasped, as far as was then possible, but to which he was never intended to conform.
Sordello’s story does exhibit the development of a soul; or rather, the sudden awakening of a self-regarding nature to the claims of other men — the sudden, though slowly prepared, expansion of the narrower into the larger self, the selfish into the sympathetic existence; and this takes place in accordance with Mr. Browning’s here expressed belief that poetry is the appointed vehicle for all lasting truths; that the true poet must be their exponent. The work is thus obviously, in point of moral utterance, an advance on ‘Pauline’. Its metaphysics are, also, more distinctly formulated than those of either ‘Pauline’ or ‘Paracelsus’; and the frequent use of the term Will in its metaphysical sense so strongly points to German associations that it is difficult to realize their absence, then and always, from Mr. Browning’s mind. But he was emphatic in his assurance that he knew neither the German philosophers nor their reflection in Coleridge, who would have seemed a likely medium between them and him. Miss Martineau once said to him that he had no need to study German thought, since his mind was German enough — by which she possibly meant too German — already.
The poem also impresses us by a Gothic richness of detail,* the picturesque counterpart of its intricacy of thought, and, perhaps for this very reason, never so fully displayed in any subsequent work. Mr. Browning’s genuinely modest attitude towards it could not preclude the consciousness of the many imaginative beauties which its unpopular character had served to conceal; and he was glad to find, some years ago, that ‘Sordello’ was represented in a collection of descriptive passages which a friend of his was proposing to make. ‘There is a great deal of that in it,’ he said, ‘and it has always been overlooked.’
* The term Gothic has been applied to Mr. Browning’s work, I believe, by Mr. James Thomson, in writing of ‘The Ring and the Book’, and I do not like to use it without saying so. But it is one of those which must have spontaneously suggested themselves to many other of Mr. Browning’s readers.
It was unfortunate that new difficulties of style should have added themselves on this occasion to those of subject and treatment; and the reason of it is not generally known. Mr. John Sterling had made some comments on the wording of ‘Paracelsus’; and Miss Caroline Fox, then quite a young woman, repeated them, with additions, to Miss Haworth, who, in her turn, communicated them to Mr. Browning, but without making quite clear to him the source from which they sprang. He took the criticism much more seriously than it deserved, and condensed the language of this his next important publication into what was nearly its present form.
In leaving ‘Sordello’ we emerge from the self-conscious stage of Mr. Browning’s imagination, and his work ceases to be autobiographic in the sense in which, perhaps erroneously, we have hitherto felt it to be. ‘Festus’ and ‘Salinguerra’ have already given promise of the world of ‘Men and Women’ into which he will now conduct us. They will be inspired by every variety of conscious motive, but never again by the old (real or imagined) self-centred, self-directing Will. We have, indeed, already lost the sense of disparity between the man and the poet; for the Browning of ‘Sordello’ was growing older, while the defects of the poem were in many respects those of youth. In ‘Pippa Passes’, published one year later, the poet and the man show themselves full-grown. Each has entered on the inheritance of the other.
Neither the imagination nor the passion of what Mr. Gosse so fitly calls this ‘lyrical masque’* gives much scope for tenderness; but the quality of humour is displayed in it for the first time; as also a strongly marked philosophy of life — or more properly, of association — from which its idea and development are derived. In spite, however, of these evidences of general maturity, Mr. Browning was still sometimes boyish in personal intercourse, if we may judge from a letter to Miss Flower written at about the same time.
* These words, and a subsequent paragraph, are quoted from Mr. Gosse’s ‘Personalia’.
Monday night, March 9 (? 1841).
My dear Miss Flower, — I have this moment received your very kind note — of course, I understand your objections. How else? But they are somewhat lightened already (confess — nay ‘confess’ is vile — you will be rejoiced to holla from the housetop) — will go on, or rather go off, lightening, and will be — oh, where will they be half a dozen years hence?
Meantime praise what you can praise, do me all the good you can, you and Mr. Fox (as if you will not!) for I have a head full of projects — mean to song-write, play-write forthwith, — and, believe me, dear Miss Flower, Yours ever faithfully, Robert Browning.
By the way, you speak of ‘Pippa’ — could we not make some arrangement about it? The lyrics want your music — five or six in all — how say you? When these three plays are out I hope to build a huge Ode — but ‘all goeth by God’s Will.’
The loyal Alfred Domett now appears on the scene with a satirical poem, inspired by an impertinent criticism on his friend. I give its first two verses:
On a Certain Critique on ‘Pippa Passes’.
(Query — Passes what? — the critic’s comprehension.)Ho! everyone that by the nose is led,
Automatons of which the world is full,
Ye myriad bodies, each without a head,
That dangle from a critic’s brainless skull,
Come, hearken to a deep discovery made,
A mighty truth now wondrously displayed.A black squat beetle, vigorous for his size,
Pushing tail-first by every road that’s wrong
The dung-ball of his dirty thoughts along
His tiny sphere of grovelling sympathies —
Has knocked himself full-butt, with blundering trouble,
Against a mountain he can neither double
Nor ever hope to scale. So like a free,
Pert, self-conceited scarabaeus, he
Takes it into his horny head to swear
There’s no such thing as any mountain there.
The writer lived to do better things from a literary point of view; but these lines have a fine ring of youthful indignation which must have made them a welcome tribute to friendship.
There seems to have been little respectful criticism of ‘Pippa Passes’; it is less surprising that there should have been very little of ‘Sordello’. Mr. Browning, it is true, retained a limited number of earnest appreciators, foremost of whom was the writer of an admirable notice of these two works, quoted from an ‘Eclectic Review’ of 1847, in Dr. Furnivall’s ‘Bibliography’. I am also told that the series of poems which was next to appear was enthusiastically greeted by some poets and painters of the pre-Raphaelite school; but he was now entering on a period of general neglect, which covered nearly twenty years of his life, and much that has since become most deservedly popular in his work.
‘Pippa Passes’ had appeared as the first instalment of ‘Bells and Pomegranates’, the history of which I give in Mr. Gosse’s words. This poem, and the two tragedies, ‘King Victor and King Charles’ and ‘The Return of the Druses’ — first christened ‘Mansoor, the Hierophant’ — were lying idle in Mr. Browning’s desk. He had not found, perhaps not very vigorously sought, a publisher for them.
‘One day, as the poet was discussing the matter with Mr. Edward Moxon, the publisher, the latter remarked that at that time he was bringing out some editions of the old Elizabethan dramatists in a comparatively cheap form, and that if Mr. Browning would consent to print his poems as pamphlets, using this cheap type, the expense would be very inconsiderable. The poet jumped at the idea, and it was agreed that each poem should form a separate brochure of just one sheet — sixteen pages in double columns — the entire cost of which should not exceed twelve or fifteen pounds. In this fashion began the celebrated series of ‘Bells and Pomegranates’, eight numbers of which, a perfect treasury of fine poetry, came out successively between 1841 and 1846. ‘Pippa Passes’ led the way, and was priced first at sixpence; then, the sale being inconsiderable, at a shilling, which greatly encouraged the sale; and so, slowly, up to half-a-crown, at which the price of each number finally rested.’
Mr. Browning’s hopes and intentions with respect to this series are announced in the following preface to ‘Pippa Passes’, of which, in later editions, only the dedicatory words appear:
‘Two or three years ago I wrote a Play, about which the chief matter I care to recollect at present is, that a Pit-full of goodnatured people applauded it: — ever since, I have been desirous of doing something in the same way that should better reward their attention. What follows I mean for the first of a series of Dramatical Pieces, to come out at intervals, and I amuse myself by fancying that the cheap mode in which they appear will for once help me to a sort of Pit-audience again. Of course, such a work must go on no longer than it is liked; and to provide against a certain and but too possible contingency, let me hasten to say now — what, if I were sure of success, I would try to say circumstantially enough at the close — that I dedicate my best intentions most admiringly to the author of “Ion” — most affectionately to Serjeant Talfourd.’
A necessary explanation of the general title was reserved for the last number: and does something towards justifying the popular impression that Mr. Browning exacted a large measure of literary insight from his readers.
‘Here ends my first series of “Bells and Pomegranates”: and I take the opportunity of explaining, in reply to inquiries, that I only meant by that title to indicate an endeavour towards something like an alternation, or mixture, of music with discoursing, sound with sense, poetry with thought; which looks too ambitious, thus expressed, so the symbol was preferred. It is little to the purpose, that such is actually one of the most familiar of the many Rabbinical (and Patristic) acceptations of the phrase; because I confess that, letting authority alone, I supposed the bare words, in such juxtaposition, would sufficiently convey the desired meaning. “Faith and good works” is another fancy, for instance, and perhaps no easier to arrive at: yet Giotto placed a pomegranate fruit in the hand of Dante, and Raffaelle crowned his Theology (in the ‘Camera della Segnatura’) with blossoms of the same; as if the Bellari and Vasari would be sure to come after, and explain that it was merely “simbolo delle buone opere — il qual Pomogranato fu pero usato nelle vesti del Pontefice appresso gli Ebrei.”‘
The Dramas and Poems contained in the eight numbers of ‘Bells and Pomegranates’ were:
I. Pippa Passes. 1841.
II. King Victor and King Charles. 1842.
III. Dramatic Lyrics. 1842.
Cavalier Tunes; I. Marching Along; II. Give a Rouse;
III. My Wife Gertrude. [‘Boot and Saddle’.]
Italy and France; I. Italy; II. France.
Camp and Cloister; I. Camp (French); II. Cloister (Spanish).
In a Gondola.
Artemis Prologuizes.
Waring; I.; II.
Queen Worship; I. Rudel and The Lady of Tripoli; II. Cristina.
Madhouse Cells; I. [Johannes Agricola.]; II. [Porphyria.]
Through the Metidja to Abd-el-Kadr. 1842.
The Pied Piper of Hamelin; a Child’s Story.
IV. The Return of the Druses. A Tragedy, in Five Acts. 1843.
V. A Blot in the ‘Scutcheon. A Tragedy, in Three Acts. 1843.
[Second Edition, same year.]
VI. Colombe’s Birthday. A Play, in Five Acts. 1844.
VII. Dramatic Romances and Lyrics. 1845.
‘How they brought the Good News from Ghent to Aix. (16 — .)’
Pictor Ignotus. (Florence, 15 — .)
Italy in England.
England in Italy. (Piano di Sorrento.)
The Lost Leader.
The Lost Mistress.
Home Thoughts, from Abroad.
The Tomb at St. Praxed’s: (Rome, 15 — .)
Garden Fancies; I. The Flower’s Name;
II. Sibrandus Schafnaburgensis.
France and Spain; I. The Laboratory (Ancien Regime);
II. Spain — The Confessional.
The Flight of the Duchess.
Earth’s Immortalities.
Song. (‘Nay but you, who do not love her.’)
The Boy and the Angel.
Night and Morning; I. Night; II. Morning.
Claret and Tokay.
Saul. (Part I.)
Time’s Revenges.
The Glove. (Peter Ronsard loquitur.)
VIII. and last. Luria; and A Soul’s Tragedy. 1846.
This publication has seemed entitled to a detailed notice, because it is practically extinct, and because its nature and circumstance confer on it a biographical interest not possessed by any subsequent issue of Mr. Browning’s works. The dramas and poems of which it is composed belong to that more mature period of the author’s life, in which the analysis of his work ceases to form a necessary part of his history. Some few of them, however, are significant to it; and this is notably the case with ‘A Blot in the ‘Scutcheon’.
1852-1855
M. Joseph Milsand — His close Friendship with Mr. Browning; Mrs. Browning’s Impression of him — New Edition of Mr. Browning’s Poems — ’Christmas Eve and Easter Day’ — ’Essay’ on Shelley — Summer in London — Dante Gabriel Rossetti — Florence; secluded Life — Letters from Mr. and Mrs. Browning — ’Colombe’s Birthday’ — Baths of Lucca — Mrs. Browning’s Letters — Winter in Rome — Mr. and Mrs. Story — Mrs. Sartoris — Mrs. Fanny Kemble — Summer in London — Tennyson — Ruskin.
It was during this winter in Paris that Mr. Browning became acquainted with M. Joseph Milsand, the second Frenchman with whom he was to be united by ties of deep friendship and affection. M. Milsand was at that time, and for long afterwards, a frequent contributor to the ‘Revue des Deux Mondes’; his range of subjects being enlarged by his, for a Frenchman, exceptional knowledge of English life, language, and literature. He wrote an article on Quakerism, which was much approved by Mr. William Forster, and a little volume on Ruskin called ‘L’Esthetique Anglaise’, which was published in the ‘Bibliotheque de Philosophie Contemporaine’.* Shortly before the arrival of Mr. and Mrs. Browning in Paris, he had accidentally seen an extract from ‘Paracelsus’. This struck him so much that he procured the two volumes of the works and ‘Christmas Eve’, and discussed the whole in the ‘Revue’ as the second part of an essay entitled ‘La Poesie Anglaise depuis Byron’. Mr. Browning saw the article, and was naturally touched at finding his poems the object of serious study in a foreign country, while still so little regarded in his own. It was no less natural that this should lead to a friendship which, the opening once given, would have grown up unassisted, at least on Mr. Browning’s side; for M. Milsand united the qualities of a critical intellect with a tenderness, a loyalty, and a simplicity of nature seldom found in combination with them.
* He published also an admirable little work on the requirements of secondary education in France, equally applicable in many respects to any country and to any time.
The introduction was brought about by the daughter of William Browning, Mrs. Jebb-Dyke, or more directly by Mr. and Mrs. Fraser Corkran, who were among the earliest friends of the Browning family in Paris. M. Milsand was soon an ‘habitue’ of Mr. Browning’s house, as somewhat later of that of his father and sister; and when, many years afterwards, Miss Browning had taken up her abode in England, he spent some weeks of the early summer in Warwick Crescent, whenever his home duties or personal occupations allowed him to do so. Several times also the poet and his sister joined him at Saint-Aubin, the seaside village in Normandy which was his special resort, and where they enjoyed the good offices of Madame Milsand, a home-staying, genuine French wife and mother, well acquainted with the resources of its very primitive life. M. Milsand died, in 1886, of apoplexy, the consequence, I believe, of heart-disease brought on by excessive cold-bathing. The first reprint of ‘Sordello’, in 1863, had been, as is well known, dedicated to him. The ‘Parleyings’, published within a year of his death, were inscribed to his memory. Mr. Browning’s affection for him finds utterance in a few strong words which I shall have occasion to quote. An undated fragment concerning him from Mrs. Browning to her sister-in-law, points to a later date than the present, but may as well be inserted here.
‘… I quite love M. Milsand for being interested in Penini. What a perfect creature he is, to be sure! He always stands in the top place among our gods — Give him my cordial regards, always, mind… . He wants, I think — the only want of that noble nature — the sense of spiritual relation; and also he puts under his feet too much the worth of impulse and passion, in considering the powers of human nature. For the rest, I don’t know such a man. He has intellectual conscience — or say — the conscience of the intellect, in a higher degree than I ever saw in any man of any country — and this is no less Robert’s belief than mine. When we hear the brilliant talkers and noisy thinkers here and there and everywhere, we go back to Milsand with a real reverence. Also, I never shall forget his delicacy to me personally, nor his tenderness of heart about my child… .’
The criticism was inevitable from the point of view of Mrs. Browning’s nature and experience; but I think she would have revoked part of it if she had known M. Milsand in later years. He would never have agreed with her as to the authority of ‘impulse and passion’, but I am sure he did not underrate their importance as factors in human life.
M. Milsand was one of the few readers of Browning with whom I have talked about him, who had studied his work from the beginning, and had realized the ambition of his first imaginative flights. He was more perplexed by the poet’s utterance in later years. ‘Quel homme extraordinaire!’ he once said to me; ‘son centre n’est pas au milieu.’ The usual criticism would have been that, while his own centre was in the middle, he did not seek it in the middle for the things of which he wrote; but I remember that, at the moment in which the words were spoken, they impressed me as full of penetration. Mr. Browning had so much confidence in M. Milsand’s linguistic powers that he invariably sent him his proof-sheets for final revision, and was exceedingly pleased with such few corrections as his friend was able to suggest.
With the name of Milsand connects itself in the poet’s life that of a younger, but very genuine friend of both, M. Gustave Dourlans: a man of fine critical and intellectual powers, unfortunately neutralized by bad health. M. Dourlans also became a visitor at Warwick Crescent, and a frequent correspondent of Mr. or rather of Miss Browning. He came from Paris once more, to witness the last sad scene in Westminster Abbey.
The first three years of Mr. Browning’s married life had been unproductive from a literary point of view. The realization and enjoyment of the new companionship, the duties as well as interests of the dual existence, and, lastly, the shock and pain of his mother’s death, had absorbed his mental energies for the time being. But by the close of 1848 he had prepared for publication in the following year a new edition of ‘Paracelsus’ and the ‘Bells and Pomegranates’ poems. The reprint was in two volumes, and the publishers were Messrs. Chapman and Hall; the system, maintained through Mr. Moxon, of publication at the author’s expense, being abandoned by Mr. Browning when he left home. Mrs. Browning writes of him on this occasion that he is paying ‘peculiar attention to the objections made against certain obscurities.’ He himself prefaced the edition by these words: ‘Many of these pieces were out of print, the rest had been withdrawn from circulation, when the corrected edition, now submitted to the reader, was prepared. The various Poems and Dramas have received the author’s most careful revision. December 1848.’
In 1850, in Florence, he wrote ‘Christmas Eve and Easter Day’; and in December 1851, in Paris, the essay on Shelley, to be prefixed to twenty-five supposed letters of that poet, published by Moxon in 1852.*
* They were discovered, not long afterwards, to be spurious, and the book suppressed.
The reading of this Essay might serve to correct the frequent misapprehension of Mr. Browning’s religious views which has been based on the literal evidence of ‘Christmas Eve’, were it not that its companion poem has failed to do so; though the tendency of ‘Easter Day’ is as different from that of its precursor as their common Christianity admits. The balance of argument in ‘Christmas Eve’ is in favour of direct revelation of religious truth and prosaic certainty regarding it; while the ‘Easter Day’ vision makes a tentative and unresting attitude the first condition of the religious life; and if Mr. Browning has meant to say — as he so often did say — that religious certainties are required for the undeveloped mind, but that the growing religious intelligence walks best by a receding light, he denies the positive basis of Christian belief, and is no more orthodox in the one set of reflections than in the other. The spirit, however, of both poems is ascetic: for the first divorces religious worship from every appeal to the poetic sense; the second refuses to recognize, in poetry or art, or the attainments of the intellect, or even in the best human love, any practical correspondence with religion. The dissertation on Shelley is, what ‘Sordello’ was, what its author’s treatment of poets and poetry always must be — an indirect vindication of the conceptions of human life which ‘Christmas Eve and Easter Day’ condemns. This double poem stands indeed so much alone in Mr. Browning’s work that we are tempted to ask ourselves to what circumstance or impulse, external or internal, it has been due; and we can only conjecture that the prolonged communion with a mind so spiritual as that of his wife, the special sympathies and differences which were elicited by it, may have quickened his religious imagination, while directing it towards doctrinal or controversial issues which it had not previously embraced.
The ‘Essay’ is a tribute to the genius of Shelley; it is also a justification of his life and character, as the balance of evidence then presented them to Mr. Browning’s mind. It rests on a definition of the respective qualities of the objective and the subjective poet… . While both, he says, are gifted with the fuller perception of nature and man, the one endeavours to
‘reproduce things external (whether the phenomena of the scenic universe, or the manifested action of the human heart and brain) with an immediate reference, in every case, to the common eye and apprehension of his fellow-men, assumed capable of receiving and profiting by this reproduction’ — the other ‘is impelled to embody the thing he perceives, not so much with reference to the many below, as to the One above him, the supreme Intelligence which apprehends all things in their absolute truth, — an ultimate view ever aspired to, if but partially attained, by the poet’s own soul. Not what man sees, but what God sees — the ‘Ideas’ of Plato, seeds of creation lying burningly on the Divine Hand — it is toward these that he struggles. Not with the combination of humanity in action, but with the primal elements of humanity he has to do; and he digs where he stands, — preferring to seek them in his own soul as the nearest reflex of that absolute Mind, according to the intuitions of which he desires to perceive and speak.’
The objective poet is therefore a fashioner, the subjective is best described as a seer. The distinction repeats itself in the interest with which we study their respective lives. We are glad of the biography of the objective poet because it reveals to us the power by which he works; we desire still more that of the subjective poet, because it presents us with another aspect of the work itself. The poetry of such a one is an effluence much more than a production; it is ‘the very radiance and aroma of his personality, projected from it but not separated. Therefore, in our approach to the poetry, we necessarily approach the personality of the poet; in apprehending it we apprehend him, and certainly we cannot love it without loving him.’
The reason of Mr. Browning’s prolonged and instinctive reverence for Shelley is thus set forth in the opening pages of the Essay: he recognized in his writings the quality of a ‘subjective’ poet; hence, as he understands the word, the evidence of a divinely inspired man.
Mr. Browning goes on to say that we need the recorded life in order quite to determine to which class of inspiration a given work belongs; and though he regards the work of Shelley as carrying its warrant within itself, his position leaves ample room for a withdrawal of faith, a reversal of judgment, if the ascertained facts of the poet’s life should at any future time bear decided witness against him. He is also careful to avoid drawing too hard and fast a line between the two opposite kinds of poet. He admits that a pure instance of either is seldom to be found; he sees no reason why ‘these two modes of poetic faculty may not issue hereafter from the same poet in successive perfect works… . A mere running-in of the one faculty upon the other’ being, meanwhile, ‘the ordinary circumstance.’
I venture, however, to think, that in his various and necessary concessions, he lets slip the main point; and for the simple reason that it is untenable. The terms ‘subjective’ and ‘objective’ denote a real and very important difference on the ground of judgment, but one which tends more and more to efface itself in the sphere of the higher creative imagination. Mr. Browning might as briefly, and I think more fully, have expressed the salient quality of his poet, even while he could describe it in these emphatic words:
‘I pass at once, therefore, from Shelley’s minor excellencies to his noblest and predominating characteristic.
‘This I call his simultaneous perception of Power and Love in the absolute, and of Beauty and Good in the concrete, while he throws, from his poet’s station between both, swifter, subtler, and more numerous films for the connexion of each with each, than have been thrown by any modern artificer of whom I have knowledge … I would rather consider Shelley’s poetry as a sublime fragmentary essay towards a presentment of the correspondency of the universe to Deity, of the natural to the spiritual, and of the actual to the ideal than …’
This essay has, in common with the poems of the preceding years, the one quality of a largely religious and, in a certain sense, Christian spirit, and in this respect it falls naturally into the general series of its author’s works. The assertion of Platonic ideas suggests, however, a mood of spiritual thought for which the reference in ‘Pauline’ has been our only, and a scarcely sufficient preparation; nor could the most definite theism to be extracted from Platonic beliefs ever satisfy the human aspirations which, in a nature like that of Robert Browning, culminate in the idea of God. The metaphysical aspect of the poet’s genius here distinctly reappears for the first time since ‘Sordello’, and also for the last. It becomes merged in the simpler forms of the religious imagination.
The justification of the man Shelley, to which great part of the Essay is devoted, contains little that would seem new to his more recent apologists; little also which to the writer’s later judgments continued to recommend itself as true. It was as a great poetic artist, not as a great poet, that the author of ‘Prometheus’ and ‘The Cenci’, of ‘Julian and Maddalo’, and ‘Epipsychidion’ was finally to rank in Mr. Browning’s mind. The whole remains nevertheless a memorial of a very touching affection; and whatever intrinsic value the Essay may possess, its main interest must always be biographical. Its motive and inspiration are set forth in the closing lines:
‘It is because I have long held these opinions in assurance and gratitude, that I catch at the opportunity offered to me of expressing them here; knowing that the alacrity to fulfil an humble office conveys more love than the acceptance of the honour of a higher one, and that better, therefore, than the signal service it was the dream of my boyhood to render to his fame and memory, may be the saying of a few, inadequate words upon these scarcely more important supplementary letters of Shelley.’
If Mr. Browning had seen reason to doubt the genuineness of the letters in question, his Introduction could not have been written. That, while receiving them as genuine, he thought them unimportant, gave it, as he justly discerned, its full significance.
Mr. and Mrs. Browning returned to London for the summer of 1852, and we have a glimpse of them there in a letter from Mr. Fox to his daughter.
July 16, ‘52.
‘… I had a charming hour with the Brownings yesterday; more fascinated with her than ever. She talked lots of George Sand, and so beautifully. Moreover she silver-electroplated Louis Napoleon!! They are lodging at 58 Welbeck Street; the house has a queer name on the door, and belongs to some Belgian family.
‘They came in late one night, and R. B. says that in the morning twilight he saw three portraits on the bedroom wall, and speculated who they might be. Light gradually showed the first, Beatrice Cenci, “Good!” said he; “in a poetic region.” More light: the second, Lord Byron! Who can the third be? And what think you it was, but your sketch (engraved chalk portrait) of me? He made quite a poem and picture of the affair.
‘She seems much better; did not put her hand before her mouth, which I took as a compliment: and the young Florentine was gracious …’
It need hardly be said that this valued friend was one of the first whom Mr. Browning introduced to his wife, and that she responded with ready warmth to his claims on her gratitude and regard. More than one joint letter from herself and her husband commemorates this new phase of the intimacy; one especially interesting was written from Florence in 1858, in answer to the announcement by Mr. Fox of his election for Oldham; and Mr. Browning’s contribution, which is very characteristic, will appear in due course.
Either this or the preceding summer brought Mr. Browning for the first time into personal contact with an early lover of his works: Mr. D. G. Rossetti. They had exchanged letters a year or two before, on the subject of ‘Pauline’, which Rossetti (as I have already mentioned) had read in ignorance of its origin, but with the conviction that only the author of ‘Paracelsus’ could have produced it. He wrote to Mr. Browning to ascertain the fact, and to tell him he had admired the poem so much as to transcribe it whole from the British Museum copy. He now called on him with Mr. William Allingham; and doubly recommended himself to the poet’s interest by telling him that he was a painter. When Mr. Browning was again in London, in 1855, Rossetti began painting his portrait, which he finished in Paris in the ensuing winter.