Horace Walpole
The Castle of Otranto
UUID: bce57762-3acb-11e5-955b-119a1b5d0361
This ebook was created with StreetLib Write (http://write.streetlib.com)by Simplicissimus Book Farm
Table of contents
INTRODUCTION
PREFACE
SONNET TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE LADY MARY COKE.
CHAPTER I.
CHAPTER II.
CHAPTER III.
CHAPTER IV.
CHAPTER V.
INTRODUCTION
Horace
Walpole was the youngest son of Sir Robert Walpole, the great
statesman, who died Earl of Orford. He was born in 1717, the
year in which his father resigned office, remaining in opposition for
almost three years before his return to a long tenure of power.
Horace Walpole was educated at Eton, where he formed a school
friendship with Thomas Gray, who was but a few months older. In
1739 Gray was travelling-companion with Walpole in France and Italy
until they differed and parted; but the friendship was afterwards
renewed, and remained firm to the end. Horace Walpole went from
Eton to King’s College, Cambridge, and entered Parliament in 1741,
the year before his father’s final resignation and acceptance of an
earldom. His way of life was made easy to him. As Usher
of the Exchequer, Comptroller of the Pipe, and Clerk of the Estreats
in the Exchequer, he received nearly two thousand a year for doing
nothing, lived with his father, and amused himself.Horace
Walpole idled, and amused himself with the small life of the
fashionable world to which he was proud of belonging, though he had a
quick eye for its vanities. He had social wit, and liked to put
it to small uses. But he was not an empty idler, and there were
seasons when he could become a sharp judge of himself. “I am
sensible,” he wrote to his most intimate friend, “I am sensible
of having more follies and weaknesses and fewer real good qualities
than most men. I sometimes reflect on this, though, I own, too
seldom. I always want to begin acting like a man, and a
sensible one, which I think I might be if I would.” He had
deep home affections, and, under many polite affectations, plenty of
good sense.Horace
Walpole’s father died in 1745. The eldest son, who succeeded
to the earldom, died in 1751, and left a son, George, who was for a
time insane, and lived until 1791. As George left no child, the
title and estates passed to Horace Walpole, then seventy-four years
old, and the only uncle who survived. Horace Walpole thus
became Earl of Orford, during the last six years of his life.
As to the title, he said that he felt himself being called names in
his old age. He died unmarried, in the year 1797, at the age of
eighty.He
had turned his house at Strawberry Hill, by the Thames, near
Twickenham, into a Gothic villa—eighteenth-century Gothic—and
amused himself by spending freely upon its adornment with such things
as were then fashionable as objects of taste. But he delighted
also in his flowers and his trellises of roses, and the quiet
Thames. When confined by gout to his London house in Arlington
Street, flowers from Strawberry Hill and a bird were necessary
consolations. He set up also at Strawberry Hill a private
printing press, at which he printed his friend Gray’s poems, also
in 1758 his own “Catalogue of the Royal and Noble Authors of
England,” and five volumes of “Anecdotes of Painting in England,”
between 1762 and 1771.Horace
Walpole produced The
Castle of Otranto
in 1765, at the mature age of forty-eight. It was suggested by
a dream from which he said he waked one morning, and of which “all
I could recover was, that I had thought myself in an ancient castle
(a very natural dream for a head like mine, filled with Gothic
story), and that on the uppermost banister of a great staircase I saw
a gigantic hand in armour. In the evening I sat down and began
to write, without knowing in the least what I intended to say or
relate.” So began the tale which professed to be translated
by “William Marshal, gentleman, from the Italian of Onuphro
Muralto, canon of the Church of St. Nicholas, at Otranto.” It
was written in two months. Walpole’s friend Gray reported to
him that at Cambridge the book made “some of them cry a little, and
all in general afraid to go to bed o’ nights.”
The Castle of Otranto
was, in its own way, an early sign of the reaction towards romance in
the latter part of the last century. This gives it interest.
But it has had many followers, and the hardy modern reader, when he
read’s Gray’s note from Cambridge, needs to be reminded of its
date.H.
M.
PREFACE
The
following work was found in the library of an ancient Catholic family
in the north of England. It was printed at Naples, in the black
letter, in the year 1529. How much sooner it was written does
not appear. The principal incidents are such as were believed
in the darkest ages of Christianity; but the language and conduct
have nothing that savours of barbarism. The style is the purest
Italian.If
the story was written near the time when it is supposed to have
happened, it must have been between 1095, the era of the first
Crusade, and 1243, the date of the last, or not long afterwards.
There is no other circumstance in the work that can lead us to guess
at the period in which the scene is laid: the names of the actors are
evidently fictitious, and probably disguised on purpose: yet the
Spanish names of the domestics seem to indicate that this work was
not composed until the establishment of the Arragonian Kings in
Naples had made Spanish appellations familiar in that country.
The beauty of the diction, and the zeal of the author (moderated,
however, by singular judgment) concur to make me think that the date
of the composition was little antecedent to that of the impression.
Letters were then in their most flourishing state in Italy, and
contributed to dispel the empire of superstition, at that time so
forcibly attacked by the reformers. It is not unlikely that an
artful priest might endeavour to turn their own arms on the
innovators, and might avail himself of his abilities as an author to
confirm the populace in their ancient errors and superstitions.
If this was his view, he has certainly acted with signal address.
Such a work as the following would enslave a hundred vulgar minds
beyond half the books of controversy that have been written from the
days of Luther to the present hour.This
solution of the author’s motives is, however, offered as a mere
conjecture. Whatever his views were, or whatever effects the
execution of them might have, his work can only be laid before the
public at present as a matter of entertainment. Even as such,
some apology for it is necessary. Miracles, visions,
necromancy, dreams, and other preternatural events, are exploded now
even from romances. That was not the case when our author
wrote; much less when the story itself is supposed to have happened.
Belief in every kind of prodigy was so established in those dark
ages, that an author would not be faithful to the manners of the
times, who should omit all mention of them. He is not bound to
believe them himself, but he must represent his actors as believing
them.If
this air of the miraculous is excused, the reader will find nothing
else unworthy of his perusal. Allow the possibility of the
facts, and all the actors comport themselves as persons would do in
their situation. There is no bombast, no similes, flowers,
digressions, or unnecessary descriptions. Everything tends
directly to the catastrophe. Never is the reader’s attention
relaxed. The rules of the drama are almost observed throughout
the conduct of the piece. The characters are well drawn, and
still better maintained. Terror, the author’s principal
engine, prevents the story from ever languishing; and it is so often
contrasted by pity, that the mind is kept up in a constant
vicissitude of interesting passions.Some
persons may perhaps think the characters of the domestics too little
serious for the general cast of the story; but besides their
opposition to the principal personages, the art of the author is very
observable in his conduct of the subalterns. They discover many
passages essential to the story, which could not be well brought to
light but by their
naïveté and
simplicity. In particular, the womanish terror and foibles of
Bianca, in the last chapter, conduce essentially towards advancing
the catastrophe.It
is natural for a translator to be prejudiced in favour of his adopted
work. More impartial readers may not be so much struck with the
beauties of this piece as I was. Yet I am not blind to my
author’s defects. I could wish he had grounded his plan on a
more useful moral than this: that “the sins of fathers are visited
on their children to the third and fourth generation.” I
doubt whether, in his time, any more than at present, ambition curbed
its appetite of dominion from the dread of so remote a punishment.
And yet this moral is weakened by that less direct insinuation, that
even such anathema may be diverted by devotion to St. Nicholas.
Here the interest of the Monk plainly gets the better of the judgment
of the author. However, with all its faults, I have no doubt
but the English reader will be pleased with a sight of this
performance. The piety that reigns throughout, the lessons of
virtue that are inculcated, and the rigid purity of the sentiments,
exempt this work from the censure to which romances are but too
liable. Should it meet with the success I hope for, I may be
encouraged to reprint the original Italian, though it will tend to
depreciate my own labour. Our language falls far short of the
charms of the Italian, both for variety and harmony. The latter
is peculiarly excellent for simple narrative. It is difficult
in English to relate without falling too low or rising too high; a
fault obviously occasioned by the little care taken to speak pure
language in common conversation. Every Italian or Frenchman of
any rank piques himself on speaking his own tongue correctly and with
choice. I cannot flatter myself with having done justice to my
author in this respect: his style is as elegant as his conduct of the
passions is masterly. It is a pity that he did not apply his
talents to what they were evidently proper for—the theatre.I
will detain the reader no longer, but to make one short remark.
Though the machinery is invention, and the names of the actors
imaginary, I cannot but believe that the groundwork of the story is
founded on truth. The scene is undoubtedly laid in some real
castle. The author seems frequently, without design, to
describe particular parts. “The chamber,” says he, “on
the right hand;” “the door on the left hand;” “the distance
from the chapel to Conrad’s apartment:” these and other passages
are strong presumptions that the author had some certain building in
his eye. Curious persons, who have leisure to employ in such
researches, may possibly discover in the Italian writers the
foundation on which our author has built. If a catastrophe, at
all resembling that which he describes, is believed to have given
rise to this work, it will contribute to interest the reader, and
will make the “Castle of Otranto” a still more moving story.
SONNET TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE LADY MARY COKE.
The
gentle maid, whose hapless tale
These melancholy pages speak;Say,
gracious lady, shall she fail
To draw the tear adown thy cheek?
No;
never was thy pitying breast
Insensible to human woes;Tender,
tho’ firm, it melts distrest
For weaknesses it never knows.
Oh!
guard the marvels I relateOf
fell ambition scourg’d by fate,
From reason’s peevish blame.Blest
with thy smile, my dauntless sailI
dare expand to Fancy’s gale,
For sure thy smiles are Fame.
H.
W.
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!